Author: Tambiyan Samvel

YEREVAN PRESS CLUB WEEKLY NEWSLETTER

SEPTEMBER 21-27, 2007

HIGHLIGHTS:

"PRESS CLUB" CYCLE: NEW PARLIAMENT AND INNER POLITICAL SITUATION AHEAD OF
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

OSCE/ODIHR FINAL REPORT ON PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN ARMENIA

"ARMENIAN PHOTOGRAPHERS" ENCYCLOPEDIA PUBLISHED

CLAUDE-JEAN BERTRAND DECEASED

"PRESS CLUB" CYCLE: NEW PARLIAMENT AND INNER POLITICAL SITUATION AHEAD OF
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

On September 26 another "Press Club" show went on the evening air of "Yerkir
Media" TV company. The guest of the program host, the President of Yerevan
Press Club Boris Navasardian, was the leader of the National Democratic
Union Vazgen Manukian, faced by experts, the Chief Editor of "Azg" daily
Hagop Avedikian and the head of Transparency International-Armenia Amalia
Kostanian. The discussion subject was the start of the new parliament’s work
and the domestic political situation in Armenia before the presidential
elections.

The next program of "Press Club" cycle will be aired by "Yerkir Media" on
Wednesday, October 3 at 21.40.

The "Press Club" cycle is produced under a project of Media Diversity
Institute, with the support of the United Nations Development Program, Open
Society Institute Assistance Foundation-Armenia and the British Council
Armenia.

OSCE/ODIHR FINAL REPORT ON PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN ARMENIA

The OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission published its final report on
the parliamentary elections in Armenia, held on May 12, 2007. Among other
aspects of the election campaign the observers assessed the work of media.

The report notes in particular the high rates for political advertising as
established by broadcasters. As a result, few election contestants used paid
advertising. Besides, in some cases political advertising was aired without
a due title, and sometimes – was broadcast within commercial breaks.
"Neither of these breaches of the broadcasting law prompted any reaction
>From the oversight bodies", the document says. The allegations that the
Mission received regarding the unbalanced coverage of political forces of
the country, in the opinion of the observers, are due to the absence of
provisions, regulating the media work before the official campaign. The
situation, as the report noted, changed with the start of the pre-election
campaign: there was a noticeable increase of media attention to campaign
events and election contestants in their newscasts, current affairs programs
and talk shows. In particular, the observers mention the pre-election TV
debate series, organized by Yerevan Press Club on "Yerkir Media" TV channel.

"Overall, many national media (both in Yerevan and in other parts of the
country) made a visible effort to cover a broad range of political subjects
and thus to comply with legal provisions requiring equal conditions",
observers of OSCE/ODIHR believe.

At the same time, as media monitoring of OSCE/ODIHR showed, most of the TV
channels devoted the highest portion of coverage in the newscasts to
activities of the government and three political parties – the Republican
Party of Armenia, "Prosperous Armenia" and ARF "Dashnaktsutiun". The TV
coverage of government activities included a main focus on Prime Minister
Serge Sargsian. In the opinion of the observers, the not clear
distinguishing of the public appearances of Serge Sargsian as a Prime
Minister and as an election contestant is a reflection of a "broader issue
that legal provisions concerning campaigning by officials and its
presentation by the media are difficult to apply and enforce".

When reporting about election contestants the media paid attention
principally to the positions of leading political personalities towards
actual issues and questions, as well as to their previous achievements,
rather than to the political perspectives or platforms of the political
forces they represented, the OSCE/ODIHR observers believe. At the same time,
TV channels in their main newscasts presented positive and neutral
information, limiting to a minimum critical remarks. The observers also
noted that the media respected the silence period that started 24 hours
before the election day; with the exception for "Hayots Ashkhar" daily that
published materials bearing promotional signs of the Republican Party of
Armenia on May 11.

The First Channel of the Public Television of Armenia and the Public Radio
of Armenia "tried to purse an editorial line that would guarantee equal
conditions for contestants", covering predominantly major parties, those
represented in the parliament and those carrying out an active campaign, the
report says. The coverage in the main evening newscast of the Public Radio
was balanced, and its highest portion was accounted for by Republican Party,
"Orinats Yerkir" and People’s Party of Armenia.

In the opinion of the report authors, the PTA First Channel mostly ensured
the representation of political subjects on its air, yet its coverage of
"Orinats Yerkir" "called into question whether the channel’s qualitative
approach towards that party was really unbiased" (this refers to the almost
verbatim presentation on the air of the article from "Golos Armenii"
newspaper of April 21, 2007, containing the secret recording of the
conversation the leader of "Orinats Yerkir" Artur Baghdasarian had with a
British diplomat). Not withstanding the editorial freedom to inform the
public about important events, the observers think that the First Channel
"did not uphold journalistic standard by not presenting any response from
‘Orinats Yerkir’". The report also notes that the pre-election as well as
post-election coverage by First Channel of some opposition forces, such as
"Heritage" party, "Republic" party, "Impeachment" bloc and "New Times"
party, raises "concern about the channel’s objectivity and impartiality in
presenting different views in an unbiased manner".

Having studied the work of private broadcasters, the OSCE/ODIHR observers
arrived at the conclusion that in the news programs of all nationwide
private television channels the government was given the highest share of
coverage – almost exclusively positive and neutral in tone. Apart from the
authorities the largest part of the attention of private broadcasters was
focused on three parties – Republican Party, "Prosperous Armenia" and
"Dashnaktsutiun". Critical information about these parties was almost
completely absent. Critical viewpoints were aired only by radio stations,
mainly the programs of the Armenian Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty.

As to print media, they offered readers a diversity of views, including
critical comments and presented a diversity of political forces and
majoritarian candidates. However, they often displayed an unbalanced
approach. More balanced and analytical reporting was noticed in "Aravot"
daily, the final report of the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission says.

"ARMENIAN PHOTOGRAPHERS" ENCYCLOPEDIA PUBLISHED

"Armenian Photographers" biographical reference book was published. It
author, a well-known Armenian photographer Vahan Kochar gathered together
over 500 photographers of Armenian origin that worked or still work in
Armenia and abroad since later 19th century to this day. The 450-page
encyclopedia presents biographies, facsimiles, and the works of the
photography professionals of the past and present, many of whom are also
photojournalists. The book is produced at "Tigran Mets" publishing house
with a print run of 1,000 copies.

CLAUDE-JEAN BERTRAND DECEASED

On September 21 Claude-Jean Bertrand, Professor Emeritus of University
Paris-2, passed away in Paris. Claude-Jean Bertrand devoted his professional
life to studying the media ethics, media accountability systems and their
deontology. Having authored numerous works, he contributed greatly to the
introduction of norms of professional conduct in different countries of the
world, including Armenia. In 2000 in "Journalist Library" series of Yerevan
Press Club the Armenian translation of Claude-Jean Bertrand’s book was
published – titled "Saving Press Freedom the Safe Way. Media Ethics and
Accountability Systems". Claude-Jean Bertrand made numerous visits to
Armenia to share his vast experience with Armenian colleagues. He was not
only our many-year partner, but also a good friend.

Yerevan Press Club expresses its sincere condolences to the wife, the
children, the grandchildren, all the friends of Claude-Jean Bertrand.

When reprinting or using the information above, reference to the Yerevan
Press Club is required.

You are welcome to send any comment and feedback about the Newsletter to:
[email protected]

Subscription for the Newsletter is free. To subscribe or unsubscribe from
this mailing list, please send a message to: [email protected]

Editor of YPC Newsletter – Elina POGHOSBEKIAN
_____________________________________ _______
Yerevan Press Club
9B, Ghazar Parpetsi str.
0002, Yerevan, Armenia
Tel.: (+ 374 10) 53 00 67; 53 35 41; 53 76 62
Fax: (+374 10) 53 56 61
E-mail: [email protected]
Web Site:

THE ICE IS MELTING?
By R. Hayrapetian

AZG Armenian Daily
27/09/2007

Getting acquainted with the readers’ reaction of to the interview of
Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian to Editor-in-Chief of "Azg" newspaper
Hagob Avedikian, one comes to conclusion that the entire Armenian
people, both in homeland and in Diaspora, were greatly impressed by the
emotional and homelike speech of the high-ranking official. Probably
this is the first time when such a statesman tried simply to speak
with the people, and, surely, the people needed it.

It would be inconsistent to analyze the content of the conversation,
as it contained no professional comments on the ways of development
of economy (it is impossible to improve the economy by sending the
rich to the Heavens or to Hell). On the other hand, nobody can blame
Avedikian for flattering the Prime Minister.

Mr. Avedikian always wrote that there is a huge gap between the people
and the authorities of Armenia, there is no conversation between them,
and the protest of the people has become "vox clamantis in deserto", as
the Latin phrase goes. Who can argue that Vladimir Putin’s popularity
with the masses is also explained by his readiness to speak with his
people with the most common, understandable language. No, Avedikian
was not staggered by Serge Sarkisian, as some readers say. He just
gave way to his emotions and tried to establish a link between the two
"parties", the authority and the people.

The highest Armenian officials have indeed become daemons for the
people. No, they are not infernal creatures, as the dictionary
explains, but they seem inaccessible, insensible, egoistic,
self-determined and self-willed (I guess this is too much, but let
it be). Now it comes out that they are quite ordinary men, who are
able to speak heartily to the people. If the candidates for the Chair
afford themselves to share their thoughts with the people from time
to time, many things will go much better. If their speeches are not
to become pre-election vain outpourings, of course.

RUSSIA AND ARMENIA TO BOOST ECONOMIC TIES

RosBusinessConsulting, Russia
Sept 25 2007

RBC, 25.09.2007, Moscow 11:51:22.Russia’s Prime Minister Viktor Zubkov
considers economic partnership and the development of contract law
as a priority in Russian-Armenian relations, he stated at a meeting
with his Armenian counterpart Serge Sarkisian today. In addition,
Zubkov said that he was confident of continued relations between the
two countries after the 2008 presidential elections in both Russia
and Armenia. The Russian PM also noted that the countries have enjoyed
productive bilateral relations with an annual 70 percent increase in
trade, as the two countries have also been strengthening business ties.

BUSH’S NEXT BLIND LEAP?
By Charles Tannock

The Japan Times
September 24, 2007, Monday

Russia and the Kosovo card

TBILISI – Look before you leap is as sound a principle in foreign
policy as it is in life. Yet, once again, the Bush administration is
preparing to leap into the unknown.

Even though lack of foresight is universally viewed as a leading cause
of its Iraq debacle, the United States (with British backing probable)
is now preparing to recognize Kosovo’s independence unilaterally –
irrespective of the consequences for Europe and the world.

Kosovo has been administered since 1999 by a United Nations mission
guarded by NATO troops, although it remains formally a part of
Serbia. But, with Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian majority demanding its
own state, and with Russia refusing to recognize U.N. mediator Martti
Ahtisaari’s plan for conditional independence, the U.S. is preparing
to go it alone.

Instead of thinking what Ahtisaari deemed unthinkable, a partition
of Kosovo with a small part of the north going to Serbia and the rest
linked to the Kosovars ethnic brethren in Albania or a separate state,
the U.S. plans to act without the U.N.’s blessing, arguing that only
an independent Kosovo will bring stability to the Western Balkans.

That argument is debatable – and the record of the Kosovar government
suggests that it is wrong. But the U.S. position is unambiguously
misguided in not foreseeing that the "Kosovo precedent" will incite
instability and potentially even violence elsewhere.

Why the rush to give Kosovo independence? Many serious disputes have
gone unresolved for decades.

The Kashmir question has lingered since 1947, the Turkish occupation
of Northern Cyprus since 1974, and Israel’s occupation of the West
Bank from 1967. Yet no one is suggesting that unilateral solutions
be imposed in these potential flash points.

Nevertheless, the U.S. – and most European Union members – argue that
Kosovo’s situation is sui generis and will set no legally binding
international precedent. But Russia sees things very differently.

Indeed, it may seek to use this precedent to re-establish its
authority over the nations and territories that were once part of
the Soviet Union.

Spain and Cyprus, with their worries over secessionist-minded regions,
are worried by any possible precedent. Romania fears the fallout from
Kosovo’s unilaterally gaining independence on neighboring Moldova. The
worry is that Russia will unilaterally recognize the breakaway Moldovan
territory of Transdnistria, which Russian troops and criminal gangs
have been propping up for 16 years.

Ukraine – the great prize in Russia’s bid to recapture its former
sphere of influence – is also deeply anxious. It fears that Russia
will encourage separatist tendencies in Crimea, where the ethnic
Russian population forms a majority. (Crimea was ceded to Ukraine by
Nikita Khrushchev only in 1954).

Russia may decide to abuse the Kosovo precedent further to divide
Ukraine’s population between Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers.

But the biggest risks posed by unilateral recognition of Kosovo’s
independence are in the South Caucasus, a region that abuts the
tinderbox of today’s Middle East. Here, there is a real danger that
Russia may recognize breakaway regions in the South Caucasus, –
and back them more strongly than it does now.

Even before Vladimir Putin became Russia’s president, the Kremlin was
making mischief in Georgia, issuing Russian passports to citizens
of Abkhazia (the largest breakaway region) and pouring money into
its economy. Russia’s supposed "peacekeeping troops" in Abkhazia and
South Ossetia, Georgia’s other secession-minded region, have in fact
protected their rebel governments. Russia has also been enforcing
a complete trade embargo on Georgia in the hope of weakening the
resolve of its pro-Western president, Mikhail Saakashvili.

Should Russia recognize Abkhazia’s independence, Saakashvili might be
tempted to respond militarily to prevent his country from unraveling.

Renewed conflict in Abkhazia would not only bring the risk of open
warfare with Russia, but strain relations with Armenia, as there
are near to 50,000 Armenians in Abkhazia who support the breakaway
government.

Another risk in the South Caucasus is that Russia (with Armenian
support) will recognize Nagorno-Karabakh’s self-proclaimed independence
from Azerbaijan. Nagorno-Karabakh, historically Armenian, endured
a secessionist war between 1988 and 1994, with 30,000 killed and
14 percent of Azerbaijan’s territory occupied by Russian-backed
Armenian forces.

Since then, oil has fueled an Azeri military buildup. So the government
in Baku is far more prepared to respond to renewed warfare than it was
in the 1990s. Moreover, it has neighboring Turkey on its side. Turkey
is already enforcing a punitive economic embargo on Armenia, including
closure of its border.

Military projections by the U.S. have repeatedly suggested that
Azerbaijan would lose such a battle, even with newly purchased
equipment and Turkish military support. Armenian forces are well dug in
and have received a significant boost from Russia’s diversion of heavy
weaponry to Armenia from some recently closed Georgian military bases.

Iran also must be factored into this equation, as it is becoming a
strategic investor by building an oil refinery just across its border
in Armenia, partly as a security measure in case of a U.S. attack
and partly to relieve its gasoline shortages. Moreover, Iran remains
eager to contain Azerbaijani revanchist claims over the large Azeri
minority in northern Iran.

The conflicts in Transdnistria and the South Caucasus are usually
called "frozen conflicts," because not much has happened since they
began in the early 1990s. Any unilateral move to give Kosovo its
independence is likely to unfreeze them – fast and bloodily. And such
potential bloodshed on Russia’s border may give Putin the pretext he
may desire to extend his rule beyond its constitutionally mandated
end next March.

Charles Tannock is a member of the European Parliament, where he is
spokesman on foreign affairs for the British Conservative Party.

Copyright Project Syndicate 2007 ()

TORCH RELAY CAMPAIGN AGAINST GENOCIDES REACHED ARMENIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
24.09.2007 16:26 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Armenian Assembly of America (AAA) is organizing
a special commemorative event to take place at the Tsitsernakapert
Genocide Memorial on Tuesday, September 25 at 10.30 AM in Yerevan.

In collaboration with "Olympic Dream for Darfur" the AAA will organize
an Olympic-style torch relay, as Armenia is the third stop on an
international symbolic Olympic Torch Relay campaign that calls for
an end to the genocide currently unfolding in Darfur. Special guests
in attendance will consist of survivors of the Armenian Genocide,
Rwandan Genocide and Darfur Genocide as well as His Holiness Garegin
II, Catholicos of All Armenians, and The Archbishop of Canterbury
Rowan Williams.

The torchlight procession that started in Eastern Chad today will
march through the states which suffered from genocide in different
times. In a couple of months the action participants will cross Rwanda
and Cambodia and reach Armenia. Afterwards they will head for Sarajevo.

The purpose of the procession is to attract attention of the
international community to the problem of genocide, specifically to
the situation in Darfur. The action was initiated by UNICEF goodwill
ambassador, actress Mia Farrow, who is dealing with the Darfur problem.

"We constantly speak of prevention of genocides.

However, they are repeated again and again. The activities of the
Sudanese government in Darfur can be described as the first genocide
of the 21st century.

It should be stopped," Ms. Farrow said.

The procession started August 8. On this very day the Summer Olympic
Games will kick off in Beijing next year. China, as Sudan’s major
economic partner, was chosen as one of the targets of the action.

"The Sudanese government empowered Chinese oil companies to use
nature resources of the country while 80% of the income is spent on
military operations in Darfur. Cooperating with China, we support
the perpetrators of the genocide in Darfur," Ms. Farrow noted.

WHITE HOUSE REMEMBERS ABOUT APPOINTING AMBASSADOR TO ARMENIA, AMERICAN DIPLOMAT SAYS

ARMENPRESS
Sept 24 2007

YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 24, ARMENPRESS: The U.S. Charge d’Affaires in
Armenia, Rudolph Perina, said today the State Department in Washington
has not forgotten about nominating an ambassador to Armenia.

Speaking to reporters in Yerevan after signing a memorandum with
Armenian office of prosecutor-general Pernia said the candidate is
to be picked by the president and approved by the Senate.

"This issue is being discussed. However, I am not aware when and who
will be nominated. One thing I can say for sure: it won’t be me,"
Perina said.

On August 3, following a year of Armenian American organizations’
opposition the White House announced the withdrawal of the nomination
of Richard Hoagland, whose appointment was twice blocked by Senator
Robert Menendez.

"A genocide denier must never represent the U.S. in Armenia,"
Menendez argued.

THE FUTURE OF U.S.-TURKEY RELATIONSHIP

States News Service
September 13, 2007 Thursday
USA

WASHINGTON

The following information was released by the U.S. Department of State:

I am pleased to be back at the Atlantic Council to discuss what is one
of the most critical relationships for America in the world today —
the relationship between the United States and Turkey. Fred, thank
you for hosting me tonight. I appreciate the invitation by Fred Kempe
and the Atlantic Council Board to be here. Thank you to Henry Catto,
Chairman emeritus of the Atlantic Council. Thanks to Ambassador
Marc Grossman for his warm introduction. It is a pleasure to see
the Ambassador of Turkey, Nabi Sensoy, the Ambassador of Armenia,
Tatoul Markarian, Ambassador Mark Parris and Jim Holmes here tonight.

This is an important moment for the relationship between the United
States and Turkey. Turkey has just elected a new government. Our
countries now need to enter into a new era of our relationship and
to commit to a revival of our very close friendship and alliance.

I will visit Ankara and Istanbul soon to bring a strong and clear
message from our leadership — the United States is committed to
revitalize this critical partnership. Restoring a sense of strategic
partnership in the broad range of U.S.-Turkish relations — extending
beyond government-to-government cooperation to a flowering of private
sector ties between our people — will be a major priority for the
United States in the coming months. It is indeed time to rejuvenate
and restore America’s relationship with Turkey.

The Turkish people have just concluded important, even historic
elections. These elections demonstrated the strong health of Turkey’s
democracy, the most impressive in the Moslem world. The result was
a decisive and Turkey can now expect a period of renewal and growth
at home and responsibility and challenge in its foreign policy. The
United States government looks forward to a very close relationship
with President Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister Erdogan. President
Bush and Secretary Rice respect both of these men. We have worked
very well and productively with them in years past and know that
will continue in the years to come. We would like to agree with the
newly-elected Turkish leadership on a period in the coming months of
high-level visits, discussions and joint commitment to face together
the challenges of stability and peace in the Middle East.

Turkey, after all, has been one of our closest friends for over 50
years, dating back to the Truman Doctrine and the Korean War, and
anchored by our Alliance in NATO. Throughout this long period, Turkey
has always been among the United States’ most dependable and important
allies in an otherwise turbulent region. We look to Turkey, with its
160-year legacy of modernizing reform, as the most successful example
in the world today of a secular democracy within a Muslim society
that can inspire reformers in the greater Middle East and beyond.

Turkey’s importance to the United States is even more pronounced at
a time when the Middle East in the 21st century has replaced Europe
in the 20th century as the most critical region for America’s core
national security interests. Turkey is the only country in the region
that can work effectively with all of the others in the Middle East.

Turkey’s influence is substantial and unique. In this very important
sense, Turkey is an indispensable partner to the United States in
the Middle East.

Our history of close relations, shared interests, and common values
makes Turkey one of the most important Allies of the United States
anywhere in the world. That is not to say that our relationship has
been perfect: we have certainly endured our share of difficulties,
misunderstandings, and miscommunications in recent years. From our
perspective, 2002-2005 were particularly difficult, but we believe
we have turned the corner together with the Turkish leadership. We
now have a moment of opportunity to build stronger ties at all
levels between our governments. For the past two years, especially,
our leaders have worked with considerable energy to revive the
relationship and to address more effectively the common challenges
and opportunities before us.

One glance at the map demonstrates why it is so important to strengthen
the ties between our two countries. Turkey is influential in the
Balkans, in the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and in the greater Middle
East. In this vitally important arc of countries where so much of our
foreign policy attention now lies, Turkey is the vital link for the
United States and our European allies in addressing common economic,
security, and political challenges and opportunities in these critical
regions.

On perhaps the most dynamic international issue of 2007 — energy
— we share a common interest with the Turks. Turkey is the gateway
for exports of oil and natural gas from the Caspian region and Iraq
to Europe. Building on our successful cooperation in the 1990’s to
develop the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the South Caucasus
gas pipeline, we now seek to expand this critical energy infrastructure
into a Southern Corridor to help our European allies — Greece, Italy
and into Western Europe — create a free market for energy supplies
in Europe. These efforts can also help Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and
Turkmenistan bolster their own independence by providing them access
to European energy markets.

We hope it will be possible for Turkey to arrive at a swift agreement
with Azerbaijan on transit terms. Turkey should also strive to find
a pricing formula for future exports to Turkey from the Caspian
Sea natural gas field of Shah Deniz, a necessary step to complete
the inter-governmental agreement for the Turkey-Greece-Italy gas
pipeline. Over the longer term, Turkey should continue to cooperate
with the United States and our friends in Iraq, Turkmenistan, and
Kazakhstan to expand gas production and exports to Turkey and onward
into Europe.

In South Asia, Turkey is helping NATO to bolster regional security
in Afghanistan, having twice commanded the International Security
Assistance Force (ISAF) and now leading a Provincial Reconstruction
Team (PRT) in Wardak Province. Turkey has been an important arbiter
between Afghanistan and Pakistan, providing a welcoming, neutral
venue for Presidents Karzai and Musharraf to discuss issues of mutual
significance.

It is in this area that we feel Turkey could make even more of an
impact. Turkey could offer assistance to repatriated Afghan refugees
from Pakistan, help both sides improve border management and customs
collection, or support the emergence of Afghan-Pakistani Reconstruction
Opportunity Zones, as the U.S. plans to do.

Turkey has also played a key role in Kosovo, where it has 660 personnel
in KFOR and took over command of Multinational Task Force-South in
May. The Turkish government is playing a similarly constructive role
in the extended Black Sea region, where Turkey’s Operation Black
Sea Harmony cooperates with NATO’s Operation Active Endeavor in the
Mediterranean Sea to deter terrorism and bolster maritime security
along NATO’s southern and eastern flanks. Turkey should encourage
its neighbors to undertake democratic reform, fight corruption and
organized crime, as well as look for ways to improve market economies
in the region. The U.S. would like to work with Turkey, Romania,
and Bulgaria to take greater advantage of opportunities to expand
NATO’s activities in the Black Sea region.

And, Turkey is playing a regional leadership role in the Middle East.

Turkey’s common borders with Iraq, Iran, and Syria provide an
opportunity to advance peace and stability, fight proliferation
of nuclear weapons, and defeat terrorists in a region that is now
the epicenter of U.S. foreign policy. Turkey can help deepen our
understanding of strategic trends in the Middle East, while reinforcing
our efforts to advance political and economic freedom and fight terror
to advance peace and prosperity.

It is not only geography and common interests that make Turkey a
key U.S. partner; it is our shared values of democracy, diversity,
and tolerant faith that make us friends and allies. The United States
and Turkey share a deep appreciation for the importance of separating
civic and religious life. In Turkey, reform movements during the
late Ottoman period aimed to balance the claims that religion makes
on personal lives with the exigencies of a modern state. One of the
most famous waves of reforms, the so-called "Tanzimat" movement of
the mid-19th Century was an attempt to give all residents of the
empire the same rights, whether they were Muslim, Christian or Jewish.

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk rejuvenated Turkey’s modernizing reforms,
as he granted political rights to women, laid the foundation for
Turkey’s industrial rise, and established the Turkish Republic as a
secular democracy. Turkey’s commitment to secular democracy makes it
a natural ally for the United States.

Turkey may now be at a new historical turning point, with a real
opportunity to invigorate political and economic reforms that will
anchor it in the European Union and bolster its ability to inspire
reformers in the greater Middle East region. Parliamentary elections
on July 22 and the election of Abdullah Gul as president on August
28 demonstrated once again that Turkey is a robust and ever-maturing
democracy, one that is defined by respect for constitutional processes,
with the country’s political future determined by elections. We
welcome Mr. Gul’s election as President. President Bush and Secretary
Rice have good relationships with President Gul, and Prime Minister
Erdogan, and look forward to developing these relationships.

The Justice and Development Party, or AKP, now controls the government,
parliament, and presidency. At the same time, Turkish voters sent a
message of moderation during the recent elections.

While the AKP won a resounding victory, opposition parties received
over 50 percent of the vote, and with more parties crossing the 10
percent electoral threshold the new parliament is more representative
of Turkey’s diverse voter sentiment. Turkey’s voters thus appear to
have signaled their desire for Prime Minister Erdogan and President
Gul to deepen Turkey’s secular democracy by rejuvenating political
and economic reforms, but in the context of Turkey’s Muslim society.

As Turkey’s democratic institutions strengthen and as its reforms
proceed, Turkey grows in importance to the U.S. as a strategic
partner. Realizing the full potential of this partnership poses
several immediate challenges to both of our countries. In the Middle
East, Turkey can play a regional leadership role that could help the
U.S. achieve some of its most pressing foreign policy goals, but which
will require careful coordination to prevent our two countries from
operating at cross-purposes.

At the top of the list is Iraq. Our decision to liberate Iraq
from Saddam Hussein’s brutality triggered an unprecedented wave of
anti-Americanism in Turkey. Our official relations have recovered
from the low-point of the Turkish Parliament’s vote on March 1, 2003
to reject our request to move U.S. forces into Iraq via Turkey. Since
then, Ankara has been a strong supporter of our efforts to stabilize
Iraq, and has asked us not to abandon our goals, particularly
safeguarding Iraq’s territorial integrity. Turkey represents a
critical logistical lifeline for our troops in Iraq and has made
important contributions to Coalition operations there.

Turkey is similarly helpful in diplomatic efforts to bolster support
for Iraq among its neighbors. The United States appreciates Turkey’s
willingness to host the next Extended neighbors ministerial in
October, an important follow-up to the work begun at Sharm el-Sheikh
last May. Secretary Rice announced this week that she plans to attend
this meeting in Istanbul.

Turkey’s willingness to help the international community address Iraq
is all the more appreciated given the difficulties it is suffering as
a result of attacks from PKK terrorists in Iraq. Let me assure you,
the United States condemns the PKK as a vicious terrorist group. We
mourn the loss of innocent Turkish lives in these attacks.

We remain fully committed to working with the Governments of
Turkey and Iraq to counter PKK terrorists, who are headquartered
in northern Iraq. We are making progress in putting in place the
mechanisms required to produce such concrete results against the
PKK. We will also follow up our success in working with Turkey and
our other European partners to interdict PKK terror financiers in
Europe and bring them to justice.

Turkey and the United States also face a challenge in Iran. We have
worked well together to support of the clear international consensus
demanding that Iran cease its nuclear weapons development programs.

Turkey has also proven to be strong partner in countering Iran’s
support for terrorists in the Middle East.

But the United States and Turkey still need to work out some tactical
differences in handling Iran. We understand that Iran is a neighbor of
Turkey and key trading partner, which sends over a million tourists
to Turkey each year. Turkey’s recent conclusion of a memorandum on
energy cooperation with Iran, however, is troubling.

Now is not the time for business as usual with Iran. We urge all
of our friends and allies, including Turkey, to not reward Iran by
investing in its oil and gas sector, while Iran continues to defy the
United Nations Security Council by continuing its nuclear research
for a weapons capability

The United States and Turkey share a common interest in working
toward a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. President Bush’s
vision is of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living
side-by-side in peace and security. The Palestinian Authority under
President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is the most
capable Palestinian government since Oslo and is committed to being a
partner for peace. As we work to develop the economy and institutions
of governance that will form the foundation of a Palestinian state,
Turkey understandably can see opportunities to draw on its historical
experience from the Ottoman era and its modern economic might to help
restore prosperity to the Palestinian people, while drawing on its more
recent experience in forging a close security partnership with Israel.

Turkey is unique in its dual identity as both a Middle Eastern and
European country. We thus face important challenges in U.S.-Turkish
relations with regard to deepening Turkey’s integration in Euroatlantic
institutions.

We are among the strongest supporters of Turkey’s EU aspirations. We
call on Europe’s leaders to signal clearly and unambiguously that
Turkey will have a voice in the European Union in the future. We
believe both Turkey and the Euroatlantic community will benefit as
Turkey advances toward EU membership. We wish to see an even more
democratic and prosperous Turkey, which will make Turkey a stronger
partner for the United States in Europe. The prospect of full
membership in the EU is the right goal for Turkey and the future of
the European Union.

Moreover, Europe’s full embrace of a reformed Turkey will send a
powerful signal to Europe’s other Muslim populations that Islam and
democracy are compatible, and that integration into mainstream European
society is possible without surrendering one’s Islamic identity. This
could be a crucial factor in defeating Europe’s extremist recruiters,
who prey on alienated Europe’s Muslim populations. Those Europeans who
oppose Turkish membership in the EU should keep in mind that it is not
the Turkey of today, but an even more democratic Turkey of tomorrow
that would that would join the EU after several more years of reform.

To reach this transcendent strategic objective, we hope Turkey will
repeal Article 301 of the Penal Code, which restricts freedom of
expression and has led to outlandish legal cases against private
citizens and global figures such as Nobel Laureate Orhan Pamuk. We
also hope Turkey will help make its own case with the EU by allowing
the Ecumenical Patriarch’s religious school at Halki in Istanbul to
reopen decades after it closed.

We must also work with Turkey to strengthen NATO. Turkey has been
a cornerstone of the Alliance since the 1952, serving as a barrier
to Soviet expansion throughout the Cold War. Several generations of
Turkish military officers enjoyed formative professional experiences
while serving in NATO commands. Today, Turkey is a key NATO partner
in Afghanistan and Kosovo, and is emerging as a critical potential
partner in the vast majority of NATO’s future contingencies, which
lie to the southeast of Europe.

An important focus of Euroatlantic security cooperation is developing
ways for the EU and NATO to work together in bringing their respective
capacities to bear in strengthening stability and security in Kosovo,
Bosnia, Afghanistan and elsewhere. We appreciate the difficulties
that such cooperation poses for Turkey given the still-evolving
Turkey-EU relationship, the circumstances of Turkey’s participation
in activities within the European Security and Defense Policy, as well
as the complications resulting from the lack of a Cyprus settlement.

Yet it is vital for all of us, including Turkey, that NATO and the
EU are indeed able to work together in crisis areas around the world.

For this and many other reasons, we call on all relevant parties to
reinvigorate UN-brokered efforts to reach a comprehensive Cyprus
settlement that reunifies the island into a bi-zonal, bi-communal
federation. We welcome last week’s meeting of President Papadopoulos
and Mehmet Ali Talat, and look forward to future such meetings to
implement last year’s July 8 agreement.

I intend to travel to Cyprus this autumn and will communicate to the
Cypriot government leadership and the Turkish leadership, as well,
the strong wish of the United States that we might all contribute to
a breakthrough for peace after decades of crisis. The time has come
for the United Nations and all of us to achieve a just solution to
the long-festering problem of Cyprus.

Finally, the U.S. and Turkey face a serious challenge with regard
to Armenia. Each year on April 24, Armenian Remembrance Day,
President Bush has issued a public statement lamenting the mass
killings and forced deportations of up to 1.5 million Armenians by
Ottoman authorities at the end of World War I. The United States
condemnation of this tragedy is not at issue; the question is how
best to facilitate reconciliation of all concerned parties with each
other and with their painful and shared past. We believe passage
of the U.S. House of Representative’s Resolution 106, which would
make a political determination that the tragedy of 1915 constituted
genocide, would undercut voices emerging in Turkey for dialogue and
reconciliations concerning these horrific events. We therefore have
recommended to Congress that it not pass such a resolution.

We strongly encourage Turkey to normalize its relations and reopen its
border with Armenia, steps that will help bring peace, prosperity and
cooperation to the Caucasus. Now, in the wake of the AKP’s resounding
electoral victories, is the time for Ankara to make a bold opening
toward Armenia. And we hope that Armenia will respond in kind.

In conclusion, the United States and Turkey have enjoyed a relationship
of Allied friendship for over half a century of enormous complexity,
success, and promise. We have weathered a difficult period over the
past four years. We now stand at the edge of a potentially new era in
Turkish politics that offers a chance to restore a sense of strategic
partnership in U.S.-Turkish relations.

I will be traveling to Ankara soon to bring this message to the new
government personally. The United States is determined to seize this
opportunity to renew and strengthen our strategic partnership with
Turkey. We look forward to working together with Turkish leaders who
share this vision and determination to build this strong, vital and
irreplaceable Turkish-American alliance for the 21st century.

Fossils Reveal Clues on Human Ancestor
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD

New York Times
September 20, 2007

The discovery of four fossil skeletons of early human ancestors in
Georgia, the former Soviet republic, has given scientists a revealing
glimpse of a species in transition, primitive in its skull and upper
body but with more advanced spines and lower limbs for greater
mobility.

The findings, being reported today in the journal Nature, are
considered a significant step toward understanding who were some of
the first ancestors to migrate out of Africa some 1.8 million years
ago. They may also yield insights into the first members of the human
genus, Homo.

Until now, scientists had found only the skulls of small-brain
individuals at the Georgian site of Dmanisi. They said the new
evidence apparently showed the anatomical capability of this extinct
population for long-distance migrations.

`We still don’t know exactly what we have got here,’ David
O. Lordkipanidze, the excavation leader, said Monday in an interview
on a visit to New York. `We’re only beginning to describe the nature
of the early Dmanisi population.’

Other paleoanthropologists said the discovery could lead to
breakthroughs in the critical evolutionary period in which some
members of Australopithecus, the genus made famous by the Lucy
skeleton, made the transition to Homo. The step may have been taken
more than two million years ago.

`The Australopithecus-Homo transition has always been murky,’ said
Daniel E. Lieberman, a paleoanthropologist at Harvard
University. `The new discoveries further highlight the transitional
and variable nature of early Homo.’

The international team led by Dr. Lordkipanidze, director of the
Georgian National Museum in Tbilisi, found several skulls and stone
tools at Dmanisi in the 1990s. They were dated to 1.77 million years
ago and resembled Homo erectus, the immediate predecessor of Homo
sapiens. The fossils were tentatively assigned to the erectus species.

But erectus had been considered a species with more affinities to
modern humans, with large bodies and long faces, smaller teeth and
larger brains than predecessors. A young erectus man in Africa, dating
to 1.5 million years ago, had a modern body and was almost six feet
tall.

The Dmanisi specimens were quite different. Their skull sizes
indicated that their brains were not much larger than the brain of a
chimpanzee. Their brains were closer in size to those of Homo habilis,
a poorly understood earlier ancestral species.

In the last few years, however, the researchers collected more
extensive, well-preserved skeletal remains of an adolescent and three
adults. Some of the fossils resembled those of later erectus specimens
in Africa. The lower limbs and arched feet reflected traits `for
improved terrestrial locomotor performance,’ the team reported.

Over all, the fossils were `a surprising mosaic’ of primitive and
evolved features. The small body and small craniums, the upper limbs,
elbows and shoulders were more like the earliest habilis specimens.

`Thus, the earliest known hominids to have lived outside of Africa in
the temperate zones of Eurasia did not yet display the full set’ of
evolved skeletal features, the scientists concluded.

In an accompanying article in Nature, Dr. Lieberman said the new
findings, with other recent research on erectus and habilis fossils in
Africa, showed that `early Homo was less modern and more variable than
sometimes supposed.’

A possible explanation, he said, was that the Dmanisi specimens `were
simply smaller than their African relations.’ Or they may be a
different species.

`My hunch,’ Dr. Lieberman wrote, `is that the Dmanisi and early
African H. erectus fossils represent different populations of a
single, highly variable species.’

Ian Tattersall, a paleoanthropologist at the American Museum of
Natural History, said that when the Dmanisi skulls came to light some
scientists thought they represented a distinct species, which they
called Homo georgicus. But others settled on an erectus designation.

`By tradition, erectus is the hominid in the middle, between earlier
habilis and later Homo sapiens,’ Dr. Tattersall said. `This mind-set
prevailed.’

But more significant, he said, the Dmanisi skeletons may reveal how
early human ancestors could move out of Africa. Once larger brains,
better tools and evolved limb proportions were the probable
explanations. Previous discoveries ruled out the first two, but
provided no direct evidence for the third.

`It seems the limb proportions to traverse environments out of Africa
were there at least 1.8 million years ago,’ he said.

0fossil.html

See fossil location shown on map of area in southern Georgia near Armenia:
09/19/science/FOSSILmap.jpg

Panorama.am

19:27 21/09/2007

Mayor of Nice satisfied with visit to Yerevan

Relating to the recognition of the Armenian Genocide in France, Serge
Sargsyan expressed his thanks on the subject to the mayor of Nice,
Jacque Peyray. As we learned from the ministry’s press service, the
prime minister noted his satisfaction in the progress of
Armenian-French relations. In that progress he noted especially the
importance of good relations of the governmental bodies of the two
countries. Prime Minister Sargsyan welcomed the establishment of
brotherly ties between Yerevan and Nice, which will assist the cities
to expand their cooperation to other fields. The mayor of Nice
underlined that the main purpose of his visit was to establish the
importance that besides relations between state and government bodies,
relations between cities and regions of countries is also important
for cooperation between countries. He expressed satisfaction with the
various meetings the delegation had taken part in, expressing hope
that the cooperation between the two cities would give positive
results in the near future.

Source: Panorama.am

Can’t beat quality of life in Scandinavia, says world ranking

Thu Sep 20, 11:18 AM ET

Nordic countries take the greatest care of their environment and their
people, according to a ranking published on Thursday by the
publication Reader’s Digest.
Finland comes top of the 141-nation list, followed by Iceland, Norway
and Sweden, and then Austria, Switzerland, Ireland and Australia. At
the bottom of the list is Ethiopia, preceded by Niger, Sierra Leone,
Burkina Faso and Chad.
The United States comes in 23rd, China 84th and India 104th. The
ranking combines environmental factors, such as air and water quality,
respect for biodiversity and greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as
social factors, such as gross domestic product, access to education,
unemployment rate and life expectancy.
The statistical basis is the UN’s Human Development Index and the
Environmental Sustainability Index drawn up by Yale and Columbia
universities and the World Economic Forum.
European countries — again, led by Scandinavia — also top the
Reader’s Digest assessment of 72 cities for their quality of life. The
criteria for this include public transport, parks, air quality,
rubbish recycling and the price of electricity.
The winner is Stockholm, followed by Oslo, Munich and Paris. Asia’s
mega-cities fare the worst. At the bottom is Beijing, preceded by
Shanghai, Mumbai, Guangzhou and Bangkok.

Copyright © 2007 _Agence France Presse_
( 3D122dhv7qk/** d=3Dcopyright) .