Author: Tadevosian Garnik

Associated Press Worldstream
November 11, 2006 Saturday 7:36 PM GMT

Benedict to meet in Turkey with Islamic cleric who denounced him for
speech

By FRANCES D’EMILIO, Associated Press Writer

Pope Benedict XVI will meet in Turkey later this month with a top
Islamic cleric who denounced the pope’s remarks on Islam and
violence.

During the pope’s Nov. 28-Dec. 1 visit to the predominantly Muslim
nation, he will also visit a symbol of Turkey’s official commitment
to secularism the mausoleum of the Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who is
honored as the founder of the modern Turkish state.

The Vatican on Saturday released details of the trip, which was
originally planned so that Benedict could meet with Ecumenical
Patriarch Bartholomew I, the Istanbul-based spiritual leader of the
world’s Orthodox Christians, as the pontiff pursues closer relations
among Christians.

But the trip quickly turned into a test of Catholic-Muslim relations
after much of the Muslim world reacted angrily to a Sept. 12 speech
in which Benedict quoted a 14th-century Byzantine emperor describing
Islam as a religion spread by the sword.

One of the first to decry Benedict’s speech was Turkey’s president
for religious affairs, Ali Bardakoglu, a top Islamic cleric who said
criticism of Islam threatened world peace. Benedict and Bardakoglu
will meet within hours of the pope’s arrival in Ankara, the Turkish
capital, on Nov. 28. The pope will also deliver a speech during his
encounter with the cleric, the Vatican said.

Benedict has offered his regrets that the quotes from the emperor
caused offense and has stressed they did not reflect his personal
opinion. He has also expressed esteem for Islam.

Immediately after the pope’s arrival at Ankara’s airport, he will
head to the mausoleum of Ataturk, revered as a hero in Turkey by
those who share his fierce dedication to secularism.

Earlier this month, thousands of nationalist Turks rallied at the
mausoleum, vowing to defend Turkey’s secular government.

The pontiff will meet with Turkey’s deputy premier. Turkey’s prime
minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has already said he won’t be meeting
the pope because he will be attending a NATO summit in Latvia.

Erdogan has denied he was trying to avoid an encounter with the
pontiff. His Islamic-rooted party faces elections next year.

Benedict will spend much of his first papal visit to a Muslim country
in ceremonies and meetings with Orthodox leaders. The visit was timed
to coincide with the Nov. 30 feast day of a special saint for the
Orthodox, Andrew, who is considered the father of the patriarchate of
Constantinople, the Byzantine name for present-day Istanbul.

The pope will pray in the patriarchal Church of St. George in
Istanbul on Nov. 29.

On Nov. 30, Benedict will meet with other Christian leaders: Armenian
Patriarch Mesrob II, who is based in Istanbul, and Assyrian
Metropolitan Yusef Cetin.

While in Istanbul, Benedict will meet Turkey’s chief rabbi. Two
synagogues in the city were destroyed in twin suicide bombings in
November 2003.

The pope will also dine on his last evening in Turkey with Catholic
clerics. In February, an Italian priest was slain as he prayed in his
church in the Black Sea town of Trabzon, and a 16-year-old Turk was
charged with the murder.

Benedict will tour the Haghia Sophia, the magnificent ancient church
that became the main mosque of Istanbul when Sultan Mehmet took the
city in 1453. The Turkish government made it a museum in 1935.

Other details of the trip were given previously, including a stop in
Izmir, a port city near Ephesus, which is an ancient Christian
community.

An Algerian intellectual and Muslim scholar, Mustapha Cherif, had a
private meeting with Benedict on Saturday at the Vatican, people
close to Cherif said. Cherif could not be immediately be reached for
comment.

The Vatican press office did not list the meeting, but the daily list
of the pope’s audiences does not always include all the people paying
calls on him.

That was the case of a private audience Benedict granted in 2005 to
Italian intellectual and writer Oriana Fallaci, who said the pontiff
shared her concerns about relations between the Muslim world and the
West.

HOW CAN ARMENIAN-KAZAKH RELATIONS IMPACT THE KARABAKH CONFLICT SETTLEMENT?

Public Radio. Armenia
Nov 9 2006

We want Armenian-Kazakh relations to have positive impact on the
settlement of the Karabakh conflict, said Azerbaijani Deputy Foreign
Minister Khalaf Khalafov, "Trend" agency reports. At the same time
the source does not clarify how the Armenian-Kazakh relations can
impact the process of peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict.

RA FM RECEIVED UK DELEGATION

PanARMENIAN.Net
09.11.2006 13:37 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ November 7 Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan
Oskanian received the British delegation led by Sir Brian Fall,
the UK Special Representative for the South Caucasus, RA MFA press
office told PanARMENIAN.Net. The delegation included UK Ambassadors
to Armenia and Georgia, who are in Yerevan to participate in the
conference initiated by the RA Foreign Ministry jointly with the
Wilton Park. The sides expressed satisfaction with the high level
and efficiency of the conference and discussions and remarked that
an event of the kind was organized in the South Caucasus for the
first time. The meeting participants also referred to the regional
problems including the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement talks
and the Russian-Georgian relations.

RA GOVERNMENT GOING TO SELL ITS 10% ARMENTEL STOCKS

PanARMENIAN.Net
08.11.2006 17:35 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian Minister of Transport and Communications
Andranik Manukian does not rule out that the RA government can sell its
10% of ArmenTel’s stocks to VympelCom Russian company. The Minister
remarked that one of the terms of the bargain will be VympelCom’s
refusal from monopoly rights. In Manukian’s words, VympelCom showed
a positive attitude about the proposal of the Armenian side. To
remind, November 3 VympelCom announced that it reached consent with
OTE Greek company on the purchase of ArmenTel’s package, reports
Mediamax news agency.

ARMENIAN COMMUNISTS CELEBRATE 89TH ANNIVERSARY OF OCTOBER REVOLUTION

ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Nov 7 2006

Armenian communists held a number of events devoted to the 89th
anniversary of the Great October Revolution on November 7.

By tradition, about 200 activists and supporters of the Communist
Party of Armenia (CPA) visited the monuments for one of the first
heads of the Armenian Soviet Government Alexander Myasnikyan and Head
of Baku Commune Stepan Shahumyan.

First Secretary of CPA Central Committee Ruben Tovmasyan said at a
mini-rally near the monument for A. Myasnikyan: "One can see oligarchs
and their hangers-on instead of ordinary working people in Armenia
and understand how urgent are the ideals of the Great October that
secured the right to education, rest and labor to the workers and
peasants, and to the working intellectuals".

After the events in Yerevan, CPA leadership left for the village
of Lernamerdz, Armavir region, to visit the bust of Vladimir Ilyich
Lenin. The local pioneer organization presented a small literature
party in the village center.

"THE ROLE OF OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INFORMATION SOCIETY" CONFERENCE IN ARMENIA

Metamorphosis, Macedonia
Nov 6 2006

The conference "The Role of Open Source Software for the Development
of Information Society" was held in Yerevan, capital of Armenia from
October 31 to November 1, 2006. The conference aimed at exchange of
experience in open source promotion policy and in the use of open
source software in specific areas such as public administration
and education.

The Conference was organised by Center for Information Law and Policy
(CILP) and was attended by representatives of non-governmental
organizations from Eastern Europe (Macedonia and Bulgaria), CIS
countries (Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and
Tajikistan), and Armenian officials responsible for the development
of information policies.

Ms. Larisa Minasyan, director of Open Society Institute Assistance
Foundation – Armenia noted that "EU integration is a big open source
project" in which member countries consider the ways for changing
the way they function.

Presenting the Free and Open Source Software situation in Armenia,
Ms. Taguhi Tumayan, CILP noted that one of the main issues is lack
of comprehensive applied policies. Good news is that international
donors ask for use of licensed software and 79% of the universities in
Armenia use Free and Open Source Software for e-learning applications.

Presenting the applied policies in Eastern Europe, Ms. Julia Velkova,
ISOC Bulgaria , noted that publishing laws licensed under free licenses
can be considered as a step towards development of appropriate applied
policies. She stressed the high value of Free and Open Source Software
in education and in creating added value in local economy.

She presented State ICT Agency in Bulgaria as an example. The ICT
Agency creates registry of open source projects that can be used
by the governmental bodies. The municipalities use Linux due to the
outdated hardware, despite the fact that the Government has bought
MS Windows XP licenses. Ms. Velkova said the Extremadura region in
Spain developed its own Linux version for the project within which
a computer for each two students in primary school is provided.

Mr. Filip Stojanovski, Metamorphosis Foundation representative
presented the Macedonian experience in applied policies development
through the example of National Strategy for Development of Information
Society , situation in local self-government units in Macedonia with
the research conducted in May and June 2006, as well as innovative
ways for raising awareness for free and open source software, and
Get Your Job Done CD that has notable public reaction.

Speaking of Governmental OSS Policies, Mr. Asomiddin Atoev, Director of
the Civil Initiative on Policy of Internet from Tajikistan referred to
CSIS report Global Policies on OSS , adding that "a major difference
between FOSS and proprietary software (PS) is in the way they provide
access to the benefits of information society." While PS promotes
consumption and passivity of the users, FOSS turns the users into
developers. He mentioned the examples of Tajikistan, whose e-Strategy
considers FOSS as a tool to narrow the growing digital divide, and
Singapore, where the state provides tax incentives for organizations
using FOSS.

Comprehensive public debates on use of the free and open source
software in education and public administration, as well as related
legal framework and implications were organised at the second day
of the conference. Major issues were discussed through concrete
experiences: training and retraining of users, which depends on whether
they are thought to use technologies, and not individual products
(Mr. Atoev); lack of individual motivation of government employees,
especially teachers, to increase their skill levels in Kazakhstan
(Mr. Alexader Borovitsin from Information Initiatives Foundation);
need for increased usability (Mr. Vyacheslav Baharev from Kiberkultura
Kazakhstan); example of extensive use of localized FOSS in Armenian
Army, aimed at untrained recruits who don’t know English (Mr. Ruben
Muradyan of Public TV Company of Armenia); and copyright and/or
patenting of software and algorithms in the legal framework session.

In the closing session of the conference, Mr. David Sandukhchyan
from CILP affirmed the general impression of the effect of productive
knowledge exchange and basis for networking of stakeholders from the
wider region of Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

ption=com_content&task=view&id=786&Ite mid=26&lang=en

"ZERKALO": "WE WILL CONTINUE TO ENDEAVOR TO PROTECT FREEDOM OF PRESS"
M. Mamadov

Ïðaâî Âûaîða, Azerbaijan
Democratic Azerbaijan
Nov 7 2006

Participants of "round table" made such statement November 3,
"round table" dedicated to pressure now being actively made on
independent press was held on initiative of political parties’ bloc
"Azadlig". Human right defenders also joined the event.

Ali Kerimli, chairman of Popular Front Party, opened the event. He
declared that attacks against independent press in Azerbaijan always
took place. "However, today we faced the pressure of invincible force
and scale. Today it is of systematic nature, realized accordingly to
several directions. Intention of authorities to destroy independent
press is felt", party leader said.

In turn, director of the Institute of Peace and Democracy, Leyla Yunus,
noted that activity of authorities is directed to eliminate freedom
of press from social life by 2008, when Presidential elections will
be held in Azerbaijan. With the purpose of protection of independent
press, she proposed to unite efforts of everyone – politicians,
mass media representatives, human right defenders.

Editor-in-chief of "Yeni Musavat", Rauf Arifoglu, is convinced that
authorities made a list of over 50 journalists who will be made
pressure on with the help of close relations working in different
organizations. "I worry about life of my colleagues that is why
I introduced internal censorship in newspaper – I dismissed some
journalists from making sharp publications", he underlined.

Present campaign of pressure on press R. Arifoglu connects with the
wish of authorities to remove resistance centers, to compromise in
connection with Garabagh issue and to give permission for creation of
the second Armenian state on Azerbaijani territories. "Achievement
of goal in defending of freedom of press is possible if opposition
unites. "If there is no unity of opposition, our activity to protect
democratic institutions of society will fail", he explained.

Pressure on "Azadlig" newspaper, ANS, "Turan" information agency,
advocate, Aslan Ismailov, evaluated as aggression against symbols of
independence of Azerbaijan.

"The time has come when citizens should express their position. As
for "authority-opposition" relation the balance is violated. It may
lead to destruction of society. A war not a fight is waged between
authority and opposition. If authorities start resistance, opposition
follows it", he underlined and called opposition press to be correct
with regard to representative of intellectuals. "If someone is not
near it does not mean that he is enemy. Society should have as many
independent persons as possible", A. Ismailov underlined.

Accordingly to deputy chairman of Popular Front Party, Fuad Mustafayev,
not only "Azadlig" is targeted by authorities. "Today fights proceeds
against people not thinking like authorities do. It is necessary to
protect independent press, freedom of activity, freedom of assembly. We
do not duly partake in this work. It is necessary to coordinate
actions at least within the frames of what we can do. Azerbaijani
society is craving for changes; it votes against authorities during
elections, it is ready to support democracy. The action proved it (the
matter concerns unapproved meeting at "Baki Soveti" subway station,
November 2)", but people cannot resist armed attacks of authorities,
– he answered.

Chairman of Citizens’ Party and development, Ali Aliyev, advocated
necessity of realization of actions. "Azerbaijani authorities are
weak, they have no force, they have only money. They hope for people,
however not trusting them. International structures should be also
informed that not everything is sold and bought in Azerbaijan. To
support press is the case of all conscientious citizens", he declared.

Deputy chairman of Democratic party of Azerbaijan, Sardar Jalaloglu,
called to resort to all ways to support freedom of press. Current
attack against press he takes as demonstration of weakness of
authorities. At the same time he blamed journalists for being not
active in defending their freedom. Leader of Movement of National
Unity, Lala Shavket, declared that free press is the fundament of
democracy. "Authorities are striving for improvement of democracy in
the country and to establish dictatorship. We should fight with all
our might to prevent it. Only weak authority sets hopes upon force",
she underlined. L. Shovket called opposition not to pay attention to
authorities only, but also to itself. "Sometimes we fight with one
another more cruelly that with authorities", she underlined.

While making conclusions, A. Kerimli declared about intention of
"Azadlig" bloc to continue fight to protect freedom of press. "We
will go out for meeting if necessary", he said.

–Boundary_(ID_Dpp9Un0v2aknqmYvfaIJag)–

MORE MONEY TO BE RELEASED FOR NATURE PROTECTION

Panorama.am
18:18 06/11/06

Nature protection minister, Vardan Aivazyan, happily noted that the
state budget will release 1 bln 482 million more money to environment
totaling 3 bln drams.

The state will release 10 million dram for fish protection in
Sevan. The minister said this money is not enough and he would like
to receive some 30-40 million for that purpose.

The state will release 39 mln drams for geological studies. Another
401 mln is appropriated for special areas of nature protection.

Aivazyan said also international organizations provide money for
nature protection totaling 1 bln 3358 million drams.

TURKEY OFFERS TO AMEND LAW TO AVOID EU CRISIS

Gulf Times, Qatar
Nov 6 2006

ISTANBUL: Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said yesterday that
he is ready to amend a law used to prosecute writers, including Nobel
prize winner Orhan Pamuk, apparently aiming to head off a crisis with
the EU.

The European Commission is expected to sharply rebuke Ankara over
judicial action against journalists, scholars and writers for
expressing peaceful opinions in a progress report on November 8 on
Turkey’s European Union accession process.

The EU says article 301, which makes it a crime to insult Turkish
national identity, unfairly restricts freedom of expression and must
be changed.

It has recently been used to bring charges against Pamuk, later
dropped, and to convict journalist Hrant Dink for articles about the
mass killing of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey.

"We are ready for proposals to make article 301 more concrete if
there are problems stemming from it being vague," Erdogan was quoted
by state-run Anatolian news agency as saying.

"In order to prevent a violation of freedoms … we are studying
several options for how we can handle article 301 in harmony with
the spirit of the (EU-oriented) reforms," he said, without elaborating.

Only last week, Erdogan indicated there would be no movement on
301 after earlier this year promising to look into amending it. The
article has raised questions in Europe about the predominantly Muslim
country’s commitment to freedom of speech.

The government has been split, some fearing an amendment would
lessen the centre-right government’s chances of harnessing the rising
nationalist vote in general elections next year.

The Commission, the EU executive body, is about to issue a list of
criticisms of Turkey for failing to carry out reforms as promised,
particularly over Cyprus.

"Turkish-EU relations are based on such common values as democracy,
freedoms and supremacy of law and mutual interests of our peoples. I
therefore believe that our EU process has a depth that will not be
disrupted…" Erdogan said.

The EU has warned that membership talks could be badly damaged if
Ankara continues to refuse to open its ports and airports to traffic
from EU member Cyprus.

The government says the EU must first lift trade restrictions against
the breakaway Turkish Cypriots in northern Cyprus, who are backed
by Ankara.

Efforts to break the deadlock failed last week when EU president
Finland called off talks.

With elections in November 2007, Erdogan’s scope for more reforms has
narrowed, especially given rising euroscepticism among Turks weary
of EU demands and suspicious that the bloc does not really want ever
to take in their large Muslim nation.

One in four Turks is now opposed to EU membership and only 7% trust
the EU, one recent opinion poll indicated.

Talking turkey about Armenian history
By Christopher Atamian

dition_ID=10&article_ID=76503&categ_id=5

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Few issues in recent memory have incited as much fervor, debate,
applause and concomitant outrage as the recent bill passed by the
French Lower House, which proposes making denial of the Armenian
genocide punishable by law. Not surprisingly, Armenians around the
world have supported the initiative almost unconditionally, while
most Turks have opposed it on historical grounds – i.e. they still
refuse to label the massacres of 1915-1923 as genocide. A few Turkish
scholars accept the genocide label, but along with many in the West,
oppose the bill as an encroachment on free speech. Should the bill
pass and become law – an unlikely event given political realities
such as Turkey’s EU bid – it would mirror the existing Loi Gayssot,
which criminalizes the public denial of the Jewish Holocaust.

Ordinarily, the right to free speech should be protected with only
limited constraints and exceptions. For example, if an American citizen
wants to insult the United States, it is his or her right to do so,
as it is his or her right to desecrate the American flag. The first
amendment is clear on these and other issues of free expression. In
certain instances, however – for example, when national security
is endangered – it is acceptable for the state, after the proper
consultations and votes, to step in to (hopefully momentarily) curtail
certain rights. The fact that George W. Bush has now shamelessly
abused this right on more than one occasion should not mean that
the French government should not, conversely, use its full powers to
protect its Armenian citizens from continued insults and affronts –
by Turks or anyone else. Similarly, the French state ought to protect
its Turkish citizens from anti-Turkish or anti-Muslim attacks as well.

The French bill, as already mentioned, follows legal precedent,
namely the existing Loi Gayssot. Le Monde and other publications have
claimed that the two laws are different because the latter essentially
serves as a bulwark against existing and future anti-semitism. Yet the
Armenian genocide law, nay-sayers to the contrary, would function in
exactly the same way, given the existing racism and discrimination
against Armenians in France. Armenian genocide monuments in the
country have recently been desecrated, while Armenians have been
subject to all sorts of vile abuse – physical and otherwise –
including violent attacks by French Turks at a recent Armenian
genocide commemoration. The question then becomes: Do Armenian
citizens of France (and other countries who have passed similar
anti-Holocaust denial laws) not deserve the same protections as their
Jewish compatriots? Is the suffering of one people to be placed above
that of another? When push comes to shove, what applies to one group
should also apply to the other. Furthermore, the French quite rightly
consider historic memory to be a basic human right, and thus denial of
historic events that incite or abet racism a violation of that right.

The positive human rights reforms that have occurred within Turkey
in recent years (discussion of the Armenian genocide in newspapers
and certain intellectual circles, the opening of a Kurdish-language
television station etc.) have been cosmetic at best: anti-semitism and
anti-Armenianism are in fact rampant in the land of the Moon and Stars,
and Islamic fundamentalism on the rise. And although Elif Shafak, the
noted Turkish novelist, and Armenian journalist Hrant Dink have been
acquitted of charges of "insulting Turkishness" under the nefarious
Article 301 of the Turkish criminal code, they have both been harassed
to a degree beyond the norms of any civilized country. Dink has now
been accused five times by the Turkish state, each time under the
same ludicrous law that smacks of the worst in state fascism. His
life has been threatened and he has become persona non grata almost
everywhere he goes – within Turkey where nationalists want his head,
as well as within the Armenian diaspora, where he is alternately
seen as an accommodationist or a traitor for his views on the issue
at hand and the Armenian genocide in general.

The problem, then, is not just that Turks deny the Armenian genocide
within Turkey, but that they have exported this denial to European
countries. To deny the deaths of 1.5 million Armenians, as well
as another 1.5 million Christian Pontic Greeks and Assyrians, is
malevolent and in and of itself a denial of Armenians’ basic human
dignity. France has every right to tell Turks: "You can spew your
venom in Turkey, but leave your denialism at home." The degree to
which France acknowledges its own colonialist past in Algeria is
beside the point, although one would hope that it does so as well.

Turkey has threatened to "retaliate" against the French by passing
laws about the "Algerian genocide," further polluting the historical
debate. Algeria may have been many things – colonialist, insulting,
invasive – and French dominion there may in fact have visited
wide-scale killings on a foreign population of differing religion and
language, but genocide it was not, according to accepted definitions.

Armenians endured the loss of lands, property and self-respect during
the Armenian genocide. From 1915 to 1923, they watched their men
slaughtered outright, and their children and women raped, tortured
and sent to their deaths in the most inhumane ways, including the
torching of sulfur caves and churches, where practitioners seeking
refuge were burned alive. Mass drownings in the Black Sea, hangings
and crucifixions were commonplace. Billions of dollars of goods,
property and lands were expropriated.

Unlike the Germans vis-Ë~F-vis the Jews, the Turks have not only
failed to apologize or compensate Armenians, but they continue
their vile campaign of denial, which they now export all over the
globe. As Elie Wiesel has accurately pointed out, denial is the last
stage of genocide and a symbolic re-enactment of the crime itself. In
this case, the French have said: Enough! You cannot kill the victims
again, at least not within our borders. It is disingenuous to suggest
that because of a French law, Turks will now have an added excuse to
continue what they have been doing for 90 years – i.e. finishing off
the complete annihilation of its native Christian populations. The
correct response from Turks should be shame and an acknowledgment that
yes indeed, these sad events took place, rather than the bombastic
nationalism that has kept the country on the margins of the civilized
world for the better part of the 20th and 21st centuries.

As Jacques Chirac rather pompously declared in his recent speech in
Yerevan: Vive la France! Vive L’ArmŽnie!

Christopher Atamian is a New York-based writer and journalist of
Lebanese origin who writes frequently on culture and politics for
the The New York Times, Gourmet, New York Press and more. He wrote
this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.

–Boundary_(ID_wFQx3yp3Ds9Hd9+vHRbvDQ)–