Author: Nahapetian Zhanna

Milliyet, Turkey
April 29 2004

TRUMP CARD OF ”WITHDRAWAL OF TROOPS”

Europe closely follows steps that Turkey will take on ”its relations
with Greek Cypriot side” and ”its military existence in Cyprus”
while Ankara discusses the timing of two important decisions.
European diplomats agree with Turkish opinion that Turkish Cypriots
should not be punished after referendums. A European diplomat who
said that Greece and Greek Cypriots were expected to bind their votes
on Turkey in December on the condition of ”decrease in Turkish
military existence in Cyprus” noted, ”we know that also withdrawal
of Turkish and Greek troops was rejected in the referendum. However,
you have a powerful hand if you announce now that some number of
troops would be withdrawn in next six months or one year
symbolically.”

Meanwhile, alternatives of ”withdrawal of troops” discussed in
Ankara are as follows:

1- Whole world stands by us if we immediately announce that symbolic
number of troops like five thousand would be withdrawn. Getting a
date from the EU becomes definite. (especially advisors to Prime
Minister Erdogan and diplomats who defend that solution in Cyprus
would come onto agenda again)

2- It can be considered in October-December period which is the final
stage of Turkey-EU bargaining. (Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and his
ministry’s departments for EU have this opinion)

3- Signal of ”withdrawal of troops” while we are the absolute
winner of referendum shows that we are ready to make more
concessions. Instead of it, if the EU decides to open entry talks
with Turkey, we can withdraw troops as a positive reaction. (Foreign
Ministry Undersecretary Ugur Ziyal and the ministry’s departments for
EU) If pressure of ”recognize Greek Cypriots” from the EU
increases, relations with Greek Cypriots will be carried out in a
similar way as the relations with Armenia. According to it, Turkey
will recognize Greek Cypriot side but they won’t be allowed to open
embassy and representation in Turkey.

Permanent Mission of the Republic of Armenia
to the United Nations
119E 36th street, New York, NY 10016
Tel.: 1-212-686-9079
Fax: 1-212-686-3934
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:

April 26, 2004

PRESS RELEASE

Ambassador Martirosyan speaks at the Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide
in the City Hall, New York

On April 23, 2004, Amb. Armen Martirosyan, Permanent Representative of
Armenia to the UN, made a speech at the New York City Hall gathering
commemorating the Armenian Genocide. In his speech he reflected on various
aspects of genocide as a crime against humanity, and touched upon questions
of the responsibility of the international community to protect people
threatened by genocide and ways to avert the repetition of this crime.

Please find below the text of the speech in full.

Speech of H.E. Ambassador Armen Martirosyan, Permanent Representative of
Armenia to the United Nations at the Armenian Genocide Commemoration in the
City Hall
April, 23, 2004, New York
Your Eminence, Reverend Clergy
Distinguished members of United States Congress,
Your Excellency Ambassador of the Republic of Cyprus, representative of a
country that officially recognized the Armenian Genocide,
I thank all of you for being today among us and with us.
Professor Balakian, Professor Melson,
Dear compatriots,
Ladies and gentlemen,
I would like to thank the organizers for making this important forum and for
granting me the opportunity to address the participants. I am indeed
privileged to speak in this historical hall, which has hosted many
remarkable events of this great city.
We have gathered again, as we do every year, to pay our respect to the
memory of the 1.5 million innocent Armenians that fell victim to the first
genocide of the 20th century. We are looking for the ways to future, but our
thoughts go back again and again to the nearly century-old events of 1915
and we keep asking: “WHY?” Why did it happen to us? Why did the world keep
silent when all the signs of the looming tragedy were there? Why did the
great powers of the time turn a blind eye when the ethnic cleansing was
being carried out in broad daylight? Why did not they bring the perpetrators
to justice? Why are attempts made to try to push the memories of the
Armenian genocide into oblivion, which allows for rejectionist policies not
only to be contemplated but also implemented? Did we, Armenians, learn our
lesson from the tragedy of our grandparents? Did the world learn from the
tragedy of Armenians?
Presumably, one may say that the world has changed today. The international
community adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide in 1948 out of necessity “to prevent from happening again
that what had happened to Armenians during World War I and to Jews during WW
II”, as Rafael Lemkin, who coined the term “genocide” and co-authored the
Convention put it. “Never again”, was the basic message of the authors of
the Genocide Convention. Yet, about 2 weeks ago the world community was
commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide.
It is ironic that the same questions were being asked by the international
community on the reach of the international justice, the roots of violence,
responsibility of the international community to protect people threatened
by genocide and ways to avert the repetition of this crime against humanity.
“If the international community had acted promptly and with determination,
it could have stopped most of the killing. But the political will was not
there,” stated UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in his message to the Rwandan
Forum organized in March. When I read these words, they seemed to echo the
outcry of Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, the then US Ambassador to Turkey: “My
failure to stop the destruction of the Armenians made Turkey for me a place
of horror, and I found intolerable my further daily association with men
who, …were still reeking with the blood of nearly a million human beings.”
During the Armenian genocide the military and political establishment of the
world main actors allowed murder to take place without facing any
consequences. Thus cleansing became part of the political culture, an
“acceptable” way for solving problems.
The Armenian Genocide showed that it could be done: the policy of genocide
by the Ottoman Turkish Government went unchecked by other powers and in time
the possibility of such policy built up new brutalities. The vicious
developments did not stop at Auschwitz. The Holocaust and the tragic events
of WW II did not conclude the “age of genocide.” We, Armenians witnessed
another attempt in Sumgait, Kirovabad and Baku at the end of the 20th
century…
There was one lesson the international community did not learn from the
Armenian Genocide: impunity, indifference and inaction pave the way for
repetition of the most horrible crime against humanity. The world has
witnessed Rwanda, Cambodia, Balkans.
“The silence that had greeted genocides in the past must be replaced by a
global clamor and a willingness to call what has happened by its true name,”
I would gladly subscribe to these words of the UN Secretary General hoping
that this message of remorse for the past inaction and negligence on behalf
of the international community also reflects the resolve and sound
commitment to prevent such a tragedy from ever happening again.
Pursuing this goal the international community during the second half of
20th century has undertaken necessary steps in the field of prevention of
genocide. 50 years after the adoption of the Genocide Convention, the
International Criminal Court was established to prosecute those responsible
for the crime of genocide, individual tribunals were established to punish
the perpetrators. Nowadays the United Nations is contemplating the idea of a
special rapporteur to analyze what further steps could be taken to better
equip the UN and member states to prevent genocide with resolve.
“There was a glaring and tragic lack of political will to intervene to stop
genocide, especially on the part of the UN most powerful members,” is the
resume of the messages repeated over and over by the speakers at the
commemoration of the Rwandan genocide. 90 years after the tragic events in
the Ottoman Turkish Empire we still hear the same words.
It is an awakening call. Unless the international community unanimously
acknowledges the Armenian Genocide, unless it accepts its responsibility for
negligence that allowed about 1.5 million innocent victims slaughtered for
their ethnic belonging, unless historical justice is done and selective and
politically-motivated application of the term of genocide stops, there will
be no guarantee for non-repetition and we may still hear the same words for
future atrocities: “If there was a political will…”
Armenian Genocide is an undeniable and incontrovertible fact. This is
absolutely clear not only for us, but is acknowledged by a large number of
countries that putting aside the sensitivity of their bilateral relations
with Turkey officially recognized and condemned the crime of Genocide
committed against the Armenian people. We are grateful to them.
It is vexing, however, that some states that exemplify democratic standards
and advocate protection and promotion of human rights worldwide, when faced
with the recognition of the Armenian genocide, still pursue their
geopolitical interests at the expense of universal human values. However,
reconciliation starts from the acknowledgement of the crime committed:
avowal is as vital for the victim as it is essential for the perpetrator. I
believe this moral ethics is particularly important for the present Turkey
striving to become a member of the European civilization at the same time
desperately avoiding of culpable pages of its own history.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Armenian legacy counts decades of centuries, during which we often had
to fight against different conquerors, paying a high price for our faith,
our geography, and sometimes our own mistakes. However, we have managed to
come out of all the ordeals and trials of the destiny hardened in their
flames and contributing to the world cultural heritage. And there would be
few nations on this sinful Earth to be as grateful to the Lord as we,
Armenians, for our dramatic but rewarding journey through the history.
We are given much, but the expectations are also high. We are responsible
both to the memory of our ancestors and to the future generations, and we
cannot evade either of them.
We have learned our lesson: We are the guarantee for the tragedy not to
repeat itself. We have to build a strong nation with a competitive economy,
a society based on democratic stability and respect for human rights, which
is actively and constructively engaged in world affairs. The foundation is
there.
For the last three years Armenia has been registering double-digit growth
rates in economy and exports. Notwithstanding the recent turmoil, Armenia is
still the most stable country in the region and is considered to be a
reliable partner. It is steadily moving towards establishment of democratic
and rule-of-law society. It is not easy. There are many challenges ahead.
And as the not-so-past history shows, the most dangerous ones may come from
within. They threaten to shatter the foundations of the country inevitably
affecting internal stability and weakening the country’s bargaining power
internationally. Some would do anything to achieve their narrow personal
gains shrouding it under political stance. They even try to use the
Diasporan sentiments to their advantage by manipulating the public opinion
through negative and sometimes fabricated propaganda.
We have no choice but to be resolved: state-building is not an easy task and
we all learn on the path to democracy. A society based on rule-of-law should
be built through legal and constitutional actions. Following the law is a
thorny path both for the government and the civil society. Nevertheless, it
is the only acceptable and most profound one. We have to take it to build a
prosperous nation to pay a tribute to the memory of the victims of the
genocide and due respect to survivors who suffered through enormous
hardships to lay the foundation for our future. I do think about such a
future with all the hope that can come out of the warmest feelings, deep
commitments and dedication towards our Motherland-Armenia.
Thank you
END

Feature Article
Tuesday, 04 May 2004

Georgia: Tensions Continue To Rise Between Central Government And Adjaria

By Jeremy Bransten

Violent clashes broke out in Adjaria today as the head of the renegade
Georgian region, Aslan Abashidze, warned that the situation could
explode into a full-blown conflict. Abashidze defended his decision to
blow up bridges linking his region to the rest of Georgia as a
defensive measure against an anticipated offensive from
Tbilisi. Meanwhile, in the capital, Georgian President Mikheil
Saakashvili called on Russia to restrain some of its military
personnel, who he claimed were helping the Adjar authorities in their
rebellion.

Prague, 4 May 2004 (RFE/RL) — Violent clashes erupted in the streets
of Adjaria’s capital of Batumi today, as security forces loyal to
Adjar leader Aslan Abashidze beat back hundreds of protestors with
truncheons and water cannons.

Reports from Batumi say crowds opposed to Abashidze’s policies took to
the streets in separate protests that were violently dispersed by the
security forces.

The demonstrations took place shortly after Abashidze declared a state
of emergency and a curfew in the region and closed all secondary
schools and universities for two weeks. One protestor, who gave his
first name as Achiko, described today’s events.

“They [security forces] were beating people on the head. I saw people
with bleeding heads and some were nearly unconscious. I saw some women
with blood on their faces. After they dispersed our demonstration,
these madmen [security forces] went to the offices of the ‘Our
Adjaria’ [opposition] movement and demolished everything. Not a single
window was left unbroken. The situation in Batumi remains very tense,”
he said.

Another protestor, teacher Khatuna Tavdigiridze, who took part in a
related demonstration, gave her version of events: “We had just
organized a street march and the police tried to block our way. But
then we started a rally in a school next to the university and the
police tried twice to disperse that meeting. They were able to
disperse us into several groups and my group joined a protest
organized by university teachers. One hour later, we saw people from
the special forces and a fire truck, and they used water cannons
[against the protesters].”

Today’s protesters are another sign of the escalation of tensions
around Adjaria and its rebellious leader. Abashidze today appeared on
local television to defend his decision on 2 May to blow up bridges,
including a rail line, connecting Adjaria to the rest of
Georgia. Abashidze said he undertook the move as a defensive measure
to avoid a Georgian military offensive.

Saakashvili, in the opinion of most analysts, cannot afford to back
down in this test of wills without endangering his own hold on
power.In Tbilisi, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili condemned the
move and he accused retired Russian Major General Yurii Netkachov of
being behind the operation. While being careful not to directly blame
Moscow for the bridge explosions, Saakashvili called on the Russian
authorities to do everything in their power to stop Netkachov from
acting to destabilize the situation even further.

Abashidze has long counted prominent Russian officials among his
friends. But according to Robert Parsons, director of RFE/RL’s
Georgian Service, Moscow’s leverage may be limited in this particular
crisis, especially if Abashidze — feeling threatened by Saakshvili’s
drive to reimpose central authority — feels war is the best way for
him to preserve his personal power. And although relations between
Tbilisi and Moscow are improving, Saakashvili will likely be reluctant
to accept Russia’s mediation efforts, if offered.

“Russia certainly does have leverage with Adjaria, in particular with
Aslan Abashidze. Traditionally, he’s had close ties with certain
sections inside the Russian military and with a number of businessmen
and also the mayor of Moscow, Yurii Luzhkov. These are people who
certainly have influence and certainly they’re interested in a
peaceful resolution of the situation in Adjaria. It’s a different
matter, though, whether the Russians now will be prepared or willing
or able even to persuade Aslan Abashidze to back down. Certainly it’s
unlikely that they’re prepared to use the Russian military forces that
are in Batumi at the moment — about 2,000 men in the garrison there,”
Parsons said.

Parsons noted that Abashidze’s decision to cut road and rail links
with the rest of Georgia significantly aggravates the situation. If
the links are not restored soon, the economic impact for the region as
a whole could be grave.

“The cutting of the road links and the cutting of the rail links are
critically important for everybody in the region, not just for the
Georgians but also the Armenians as well. Armenia is dependent on the
port of Batumi for imports and exports. Without it, the situation in
Armenia, which is critical enough as it is, could become
catastrophic. In Georgia, too, the incipient economic recovery of the
last few months could well be jeopardized if this standoff between
Adjaria and the central authorities is allowed to continue,” Parsons
said.

Saakashvili now finds himself in a very difficult position. Since
coming to power, he has staked his reputation on reimposing law and
order throughout the country and issued a series of ultimatums to
Abashidze, who continues to flout his authority.

Saakashvili, in the opinion of most analysts, cannot afford to back
down in this test of wills without endangering his own hold on
power. Although today’s demonstrations in Batumi are clear evidence of
opposition in the region to Abashidze’s authoritarian rule, Parsons
does not believe Adjaria’s leader will be toppled from within.

“I think at the moment the opposition in Adjaria is not strong enough
to depose Aslan Abashidze from within. He has ruled the province by
fear for the last few years and that still is a very potent force for
him in Adjaria. Some people have been protesting, we’ve seen it on the
streets today and they’ve paid a heavy price. A lot of them have been
beaten, we’ve seen pictures of bloodshed on the streets of Batumi
today. It’s unlikely I think that the people of Adjaria will rise
against Aslan Abashidze to try and overthrow him,” Parsons said.

Ironically, unlike the other separatist conflicts that have rocked
Georgia in recent years, Adjaria’s rebellion is not fueled by ethnic
or religious motives, according to Parsons. “There is no ethnic
component to the situation in Adjaria,” he said. “Approximately 90
percent of the population is composed of ethnic Georgians. The
remainder are a mix of Armenians, Russians, Greeks, and others. There
is a minor religious factor in that a relatively large minority of the
population are Muslims. Traditionally, this has been a Muslim part of
Georgia. However, these days, the greater part of the population is
either atheist or Christian.”

The future of Georgia now appears to be in the hands of two
strong-willed and angry leaders — Mikheil Saakashvili and Aslan
Abashidze, with few venturing to predict how the crisis will end.

(RFE/RL’s Georgian Service contributed to this report.)
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty © 2004 RFE/RL, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

ARKA News Agency
May 4 2004

NEWLY APPOINTED AMBASSADOR OF IRELAND TO ARMENIA HANDS CREDENTIALS TO
RA PRESIDENT ROBERT KOCHARIAN

YEREVAN, May, 4. /ARKA/. Newly appointed Ambassador of Ireland to
Armenia Justin Harman (residence in Moscow) handed credentials to RA
President Robert Kocharian. The parties discussed perspectives of
development of Armenian-Irish interstate links. According to
Kocharian, both parties have lots of common and Irish experience of
transition period and eurointegration can be useful for Armenia. L.D.
–0–

Kathimerini, Greece
April 26 2004

Armenian genocide

Government and parliamentary officials yesterday attended a ceremony
in Athens to honor the memory of the estimated 1.5 million Turkish
Armenians massacred by the Ottoman Empire in 1915. In Thessaloniki,
hundreds of Armenians marched on the Turkish consulate to demand that
Ankara recognizes the genocide.

Guardian, UK
April 24 2004

Greek Cypriot voters set to derail UN plan for island’s reunification

President and church accused of whipping up bitterness ahead of
today’s referendum

Helena Smith in Nicosia

Greek Cypriots are today expected to resoundingly reject a UN peace
plan that presents a historic opportunity to reunite their divided
island. After 30 years of conflict the bitterness whipped up by the
president and the Greek Orthodox church shows no signs of ebbing –
nor do the accusations of intimidation sponsored by the government in
Nicosia.
The Greek choice looked set last night to mar Cyprus’s May 1 entry to
the EU, entrenching the partition of the island, and barring entry to
the bloc of its ethnic Turkish minority. Mounting anger in Brussels
at the prospect of the union’s borders ending at the heavily
militarised “green line”, rather than the waters of the
Mediterranean, was reflected in a rare outburst by the EU’s
enlargement commissioner, Günter Verheugen.

Mr Verheugen blasted the Nicosia government for “cheating” its way
into the union by reneging on promises to do its utmost to bring
about a solution.

Despite the public dressing down – and the obvious disappointment of
the minority Turkish Cypriots who have enthusiastically endorsed the
UN plan – President Tassos Papadopoulos stuck firmly to his guns. He
described the UN’s 9,000-page plan for a power-sharing arrangement,
envisaging a federated bizonal, bicommunal country, as “neither
workable nor viable”.

Hogging the airwaves as the campaign ended on Thursday night, the
hardline leader rejected suggestions that today’s referendum was the
last chance to solve the Cyprus conundrum. The US secretary of state,
Colin Powell, had joined the UN in describing the vote as a “golden
opportunity” that will not be repeated.

But in a two-hour interview broadcast by all four of the island’s
television channels, Mr Papadopoulos told the nation: “From my
experience, such proposals or plans do not disappear, they are
revived and reproduced.”

As the Greek Cypriot president spoke, tens of thousands of Turkish
Cypriots took to the streets in their part of the island. Most shared
the view of Mustapha Cirakli, who sees reunification as the key that
will unlock decades of international isolation and crippling economic
deprivation. “Say yes and you connect Cyprus to the world,” he said.

“We’re really upset with the Greek Cypriots, we were expecting
different things from them. After all, a dove of peace can’t fly with
one wing.”

Although around 1,000 Turkish nationalists arrived in the
impoverished north from the Turkish mainland to try to scupper a yes
vote, the referendum has been met with relief by most Turkish
Cypriots.

The scenes of optimism in the self-declared mini-state contrasted
deeply with the climate of fear that has taken hold of the much
wealthier Greek south.

The vehemence of Mr Papadopoulos’s opposition to the plan has been
matched only by the heavy handedness of the tactics to which the
authorities have allegedly resorted in the run-up to the poll.

Media manipulation and outright bullying by government-appointed
campaigners determined to see civil servants vote oxi (no) have
reportedly been rife. On the orders of the education minister,
schoolchildren were told to abandon the classroom on Thursday to
distribute as many oxi leaflets and stickers as they could. In the
process those bold enough to say nai (yes) were branded “traitors” or
“Turk lovers”. Many yes supporters have been heckled or reprimanded
by police for defacing no signs.

EU diplomats said the way the campaign had been conducted would sour
the island’s EU entry and raise questions about the nature of its
democratic values.

“Its embarrassing and absolutely shameful,” said the former president
George Vassiliou. “What we have seen is an industry of misinformation
at work – a special kind of police state where people have been told
what to vote and indirectly threatened.”

Until last April, when the veteran Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf
Denktash opened the “green line” under domestic popular pressure,
most Greek Cypriots had no memory of “the other side”.

Since 1974, when Turkish troops invaded in the wake of an
Athens-backed coup to unite the island with Greece, cross-ethnic
contact has been kept to a minimum. On either side of the
UN-patrolled “dead zone” the two communities have led different
lives: Greeks performing an economic miracle to make up for the loss
of territory and 180,000 refugees, and the Turks proclaiming
independence in an enclave that is recognised by Turkey but no one
else.

History

For decades Greek history books have been fixated with Turkey’s
crimes: the genocide of the Armenians, the Asia Minor catastrophe,
the sacking of Constantinople, the “cleansing” of the Greeks, the
Cyprus invasion and the killing of the Kurds.

Confronted with a solution for the first time – and the reality of
its attendant compromises – insidious nationalist fever, nurtured in
classrooms, has erupted with a vengeance.

This week, for the first time since the 70s, the motto “A good Turk
is a dead Turk” appeared daubed across the walls of Nicosia’s English
school, founded when Cyprus was a British crown colony.

Mr Vassiliou, who negotiated the island’s EU accession, apologised
profusely to a top aide of Mr Verheugen.

“I am very upset for my country,” he told her. “No one expected such
a virulent no campaign from Papadopoulos. He has deliberately played
on peoples’ fears by talking about the plan’s negative rather than
positive aspects. Even if it’s late we still hope to salvage the
situation.”

Unlike the no camp, which has been able to rent giant billboards and
print leaflets thanks to donations from banks and business, the yes
supporters have been largely self-funded. Some have resorted to using
bed sheets as banners.

But while the latest polls have shown at least 70% of Greeks oppose
the UN plan, many in the silent yes camp hope they could yet reduce
their lead at the polls.

The undecided vote is said to have increased lately, not least since
Bishop Pavlos of Kyrenia warned Greek Cypriots that they would face
damnation if they approved the accord. If those favouring a
settlement exceed 35%, senior local EU diplomats and political
figures told the Guardian that they hoped a second referendum could
be held soon, possibly in the autumn.

Armenian Assembly of America
122 C Street, NW, Suite 350
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: 202-393-3434
Fax: 202-638-4904
Email: [email protected]
Web:
 
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 22, 2004
CONTACT: David Zenian
E-mail: [email protected]

ASSEMBLY PRAISES KERRY STATEMENT

Washington, DC – The Armenian Assembly of America Thursday praised
Democratic presidential candidate Senator John Kerry (D-MA) for his
statement of support on the occasion of the 89th anniversary of the Armenian
Genocide.

Kerry, a long time supporter of Armenian issues, in a statement said, “By
keeping the memory of this tragedy alive, the Armenian Americans remind us
all of our collective responsibility to insure that such horrors are not
repeated.”

The statement came two days after a group of 20 Armenian-American activists,
led by Assembly Massachusetts State Chair Herman Purutyan and Regional Chair
LuAnn Ohanian, met with senior members of Kerry’s staff during the
Assembly’s National Conference which was held in Washington April 18-21.

“Senator Kerry has always been an ardent supporter and a true friend of the
Armenian community and we appreciate his solid commitment on issues of great
importance to Armenian-Americans,” said Assembly Board of Trustees President
Carolyn Mugar. “We will never forget all that he has done and continues to
do as a leading advocate for our cause.”

Following is the text of Senator Kerry’s statement:

“April 24th marks the 89th anniversary of the beginning of the Armenian
Genocide. Between 1915 and 1923 the rulers of the old Ottoman Empire killed
or deported over 1.5 million Armenian men, women and children in a
systematic policy of ethnic extermination.

“I thank Armenian Americans for their persistence in the struggle to gain
international recognition of this atrocity. By keeping the memory of this
tragedy alive, Armenian Americans remind us all of our collective
responsibility to insure that such horrors are not repeated. I am proud of
my work with the Armenian American community to gain broader recognition of
the Armenian Genocide, including fighting alongside Senator Robert Dole in
1990 for designation of April 24 as a national day of remembrance for this
tragedy.

“I have been an unwavering supporter of many other important Armenian
issues. In 1992 I authored an amendment to the Freedom Support Act making
U.S. aid to Azerbaijan conditional on it taking steps to end its blockades
against Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. I supported the Humanitarian Aid
Corridor Act in 1996 which prohibits U.S. assistance to any country that
restricts the delivery of U.S. humanitarian aid to another country. In 2003
I cosponsored legislation to extend “permanent normal trade relations”
(PNTR) to Armenia. And this January, I joined Senators Barbara Boxer,
George Allen, Paul Sarbanes, Russ Feingold and Jon Corzine in asking the
President to urge Turkey to lift its embargo of Armenia.

“I join Armenian Americans and Armenians worldwide in mourning the victims
of the Armenian Genocide and I call on governments and people everywhere to
formally recognize this tragedy. Only by learning from this dark period of
history and working to prevent future genocides can we truly honor the
memories of those Armenians who suffered so unjustly.”

The Armenian Assembly of America is the largest Washington-based nationwide
organization promoting public understanding and awareness of Armenian
issues. It is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt membership organization.

NR#2004-044

ABCNEWS
International
April 22, 2004

Canadian Parliament Recognizes Armenian Genocide

April 21 – By David Ljunggren
OTTAWA (Reuters) – The Canadian Parliament on Wednesday ignored
long-standing government policy and angered Turkey by formally declaring
that Ottoman Turks committed genocide against Armenians in 1915.

The House of Commons voted 153-68 to support a motion declaring the events
of 90 years ago as genocide, despite a plea from Foreign Minister Bill
Graham not to aggravate NATO ally Turkey.

Armenians say some 1.5 million of their people were deliberately slaughtered
by Ottoman Turks between 1915 and 1923. Turkey denies the charges of
genocide, saying the Armenians were among the many victims of a partisan war
raging during World War One as the Ottoman Empire collapsed.

Graham quickly issued a statement after the vote stressing the motion would
not alter Ottawa’s official policy, which is that while the events of 1915
were a tragedy, they did not constitute genocide.

Our “position on this issue … has not changed. Canada has had friendly and
cooperative relations with Turkey and Armenia for many years. The Canadian
government is committed to make these relationships even stronger in the
future,” he said.

But the result looked certain to harm ties with Turkey and represented a
sound defeat for the government, which had instructed Cabinet members to
vote “no.”

Before the vote, Graham sent a letter to Liberal lawmakers saying he was
“deeply concerned that it (the motion) could have far-reaching negative
consequences” for Turkey and the region.

“We must recognize we must have good relations with our NATO colleague in
Turkey … (which) is a very important NATO ally that we work with closely
in many areas, including Afghanistan,” he told reporters.

Despite his efforts, no less than 75 Liberal legislators voted for the
resolution. In recent years, parliaments in more than a dozen countries —
including France, Russia and Switzerland — have adopted similar motions.

Ankara has fought hard to block attempts to press for international
recognition of the events as a genocide.

“Certainly, relations with Canada will suffer as the result of adopting such
a motion,” Turkish Embassy counselor Fazli Corman told Reuters, citing the
example of Canadian companies seeking to sign contracts in Turkey.

France’s parliament backed the Armenian case in 2001, prompting Turkey to
freeze official visits to France and temporarily block French companies from
entering lucrative defense contracts.

The U.S. Congress dropped a similar resolution in 2000 after the White House
warned it would harm U.S. security interests in the Middle East. (Additional
reporting by Randall Palmer in Ottawa)

Copyright 2004 Reuters News Service. All rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Armenian opposition leaders meet US envoy to discuss political situation

A1+ web site
21 Apr 04

US ambassador to Armenia John Ordway met the leader of the Justice
bloc, Stepan Demirchyan, and the leader of the National Unity Party,
Artashes Gegamyan, today.

The details of the meeting have not been disclosed. However,
Demirchyan said that they mainly discussed the country’s internal
political situation.

Tacy Ltd., Israel
April 20 2004

ANGOLAN AMBASSADOR CALLS FOR STRENGHTENED RELATIONS WITH ARMENIA

General Roberto Leal Ramos Monteiro “Ngongo”, Angola’s Ambassador to
Armenia, has called for the strengthening of relations between the
two countries in the areas of economy and commerce at a ceremony
where his credential letters were handed over to the local President
Robert Kotcharian.

The ambassador met with the Deputy Foreign Minister, Fatou Markarian,
the Deputy President of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
Andranik Aleksayan, and visited the diamond polishing firm Dca, which
is owned by Gagik Abrahamyan.

Monteiro, who is also Ambassador to Azerbadjan, Belorussia, Ukraine,
Moldavia and the Russian Federation, says that the President of
Armenia revealed that Armenia, the ninth global player in diamond
lapidation, is open to initiatives of bilateral cooperation at
company-related level.