The Feeling Is Mutual: Why Turks Are Growing Disillusioned With Euro

THE FEELING IS MUTUAL: WHY TURKS ARE GROWING DISILLUSIONED WITH EUROPE
By Vincent Boland

Financial Times (London, England)
January 4, 2007 Thursday
London Edition 1

EUROPEAN UNION: As opposition to Ankara’s accession hardens within
the EU, increasing numbers of people in Turkey itself are thinking
twice about the need to join the bloc, writes Vincent Boland

In 1933 Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the father of modern Turkey, threw down
a tantalising challenge to his countrymen on the 10th anniversary
of the founding of the republic: "We shall raise our country to
the level of the most prosperous and civilised countries . . . we
shall raise our national culture above the level of contemporary
civilisation," he said.

Ataturk, who died in 1938, bequeathed many exhortations to the Turks.

Some are pithy, some are apocryphal and one or two are even wise.

They can be found today in school textbooks and engraved on the walls
of official buildings. But the reference to "contemporary civilisation"
is more ambiguous than most. It is generally assumed by Turks that
he meant that Turkey, once the heart of the Ottoman Empire, should
become European. He admired French republicanism and the British
parliamentary system and under his leadership Turkey adopted the
weekend, western dress and an army on the French model, beginning a
journey westward that continues more than 80 years later.

But the ambiguity of the remark, long overlooked, seems prophetic
today. Inside Turkey, the debate about "contemporary civilisation"
is as pertinent now as it was in Ataturk’s time and this year will
be critical in shaping its outcome. Last year Turkey’s long-held
ambition to join the European Union suffered a head-on clash with
reality. The negotiating process is now partly frozen because of a
dispute with Brussels over Cyprus.

Hostility in some EU countries to Turkey’s membership is increasing,
while support for membership among Turks is falling. This year,
two events will have a decisive impact on Turkey’s European ambition.

Turkey’s parliament is due to elect a new president in May in a
process that could change the country’s political dynamic, especially
if Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, seeks the presidency
(he has not ruled out such a move). Also, parliamentary elections
slated for November could usher in a coalition government that lacks
the singlemindedness with which Mr Erdogan’s ruling neo-Islamist
Justice and Development party has pursued EU membership.

By the end of 2007, Turkey’s relationship with Europe will not
be decided but it may be clarified. The elections will take place
against a background of a profound change in public consensus on the
EU. When Turkey began its accession process to join the EU in 2004,
support for membership stood above two-thirds. Now it is about 35
per cent, according to a recent opinion poll in Milliyet, a daily
newspaper. The decline is matched by rising suspicion of the west
more generally. The German Marshall Fund of the United States, in
its 2006 Transatlantic Trends survey, showed that Turkey’s attitude
towards the US, on a 100-point scale, declined from 28 in 2004 to 20
in 2006, and towards the EU from 52 to 45.

This about-turn in perceptions is shaking the faith of even the
truest believers in the country’s European destiny. Umit Boyner,
a businesswoman who heads a corporate initiative to promote Turkey in
the EU, says: "Most of us wanted to believe that the EU meant democracy
and minority rights and women’s rights and fighting corruption. Now
we see this phobia about Turkey, this feeling that we are not wanted
by other Europeans, and we are asking ourselves: ‘Is this really the
Europe we believed in, or were we kidding ourselves?’"

The EU’s failure to honour a commitment to end the isolation of
Turkish Cypriots in northern Cyprus is the most obvious cause of this
change in sentiment. The recent vote in the lower house of the French
parliament to make it a crime to deny that the massacre of Armenians
in 1915-16 was genocide created much bitterness. It also led to a
backlash against France, perceived as the most formidable opponent
of Turkey’s EU membership.

The EU’s constant focus on minority rights and the role of the armed
forces, mixed with the perception among large numbers of Turks of
rising Islamophobia in Europe, has added to the feeling that the
EU is casting around for an excuse to say a final No to Turkey’s
membership. EU officials insist, however, that the human and political
rights of prospective members are always closely scrutinised and that
the door to Turkey remains open.

Cengiz Aktar, a professor and staunch pro-European at Bahcesehir
University in Istanbul, says the tone of the debate in some EU
countries suggests that Turkey is being made to address a question that
no other member state has had to address: whether it is a European
country. "Nobody questions the ‘Europeanness’ even of Cyprus, which
is closer to the Middle East than Ankara, but Turkey’s Europeanness
is under question," he says.

Turkey is different from other aspiring EU member states in crucial
respects. Most of the formerly communist countries that have joined
the EU since the end of the cold war saw their destiny in Europe or
were seduced by Europe’s famed "soft power" – its ability to persuade
countries to transform themselves, with the promise of membership, into
stable democracies. This is not the case with Turkey, a country with
an embedded sense of identity based on a distinctly hard nationalism
inherited from Ataturk and the founders of the republic through an
ideology known as Kemalism.

Among its tenets are an unwavering belief in the soundness of Turkey’s
constitutional arrangements – which dictate a delicate balance
between the state and the citizen and parliament and the military –
and fidelity to the founding myths of the republic. These tenets are
perceived, in some cases, to be antithetical to European norms as
set out in the Copenhagen Criteria – a set of political objectives
that aspiring EU members must achieve to get in.

One of the most serious ideological clashes between Turkey and the EU
concerns the role of the military. Since 1923, Turkey’s armed forces
have seen themselves as the guardians of the republic and have staged
four coups d’etat since the second world war (the fourth, in 1997,
was a "post-modern coup" without actual tanks in the streets) as if
to prove the point.

Turkey’s armed forces, a popular and monumentally self-important
institution, have agreed to greater civilian control of military
affairs, including budget supervision, as part of the EU process. But
whether Turkey is institutionally ready to accept a complete
subordination of the military to civilian authority, as the EU would
require, is one of the central ambiguities of the country’s European
ambition. There are occasional signs that the ostensibly pro-EU
general staff is unconvinced that its vision of a strong, centralised,
sovereign Turkey is consistent with the country’s EU membership.

If the military is undecided, so is the broad spectrum of public
opinion. For Turkey, joining the EU is a choice rather than
a destiny. Because they view it as a choice and see the decks
increasingly stacked against them, many are starting to rediscover
their inner Kemalist. Turks are openly questioning whether European
norms or values are in any way superior to those they already hold.

Kemalism may merely be a grander name for hard Turkish nationalism,
suffused with a strong sense of republicanism, sovereignty and
self-reliance. But whatever it is called, it is posing a direct
challenge to the EU’s soft power.

Sedat Laciner, director of the International Strategic Research
Organisation, a think-tank in Ankara, says -Turkey’s experience of
its EU accession process is of a piece with its experience of other
western-inspired developments in Turkey’s neighbourhood in the past
five years – especially the invasion of Iraq, which remains hugely
unpopular among Turks, and the plight of the Palestinians. "All of
these have changed Turkish attitudes to the EU, with the result that
the EU is losing the most important tool in its arsenal, which is
its ability to persuade Turkey to do as it asks," Mr Laciner says.

Suat Kiniklioglu, director of the Ankara office of the German Marshall
Fund of the United States, sees a direct historical parallel between
Turkey’s most recent bout of suspicion of Europe and a similar attitude
provoked in the late 19th century by the agitation of foreign powers
for minority rights in the Ottoman Empire – which in practice would
have given European citizens living there almost colonial-style
privileges.

The dynamic of Turkey’s relationship with the EU, where every aspect
of its modern identity and history appears to be a legitimate target
for European scrutiny and criticism, "is almost a replay of a time
that invokes Turkey’s worst fears about disintegration, about our
unity being broken, about an undue emphasis on minorities and people
of non-Turkish stock," Mr Kiniklioglu says. By "hitting Turkey on its
most sensitive issues," he adds, "the EU has overplayed its hand as
far as the impact of its soft power is concerned."

The EU accession process has stimulated important reforms in Turkey
– such as changes to the country’s penal code and abolition of the
death penalty. But some commentators say the accession agreement
between Turkey and the EU contains the seeds of its own failure,
because it does not offer Turks a guarantee of membership. It is the
first time such a pledge has been withheld from a candidate country.

Ahmet Evin, director of the Istanbul Policy Centre at Sabanci
University, says this fact compromises the EU’s ability to use moral
suasion to encourage Turkey to reform in the way that would satisfy
European public opinion. "The ability of the EU to Europeanise Turkey
is fatally undermined by this lack of commitment," he says.

A dialogue of the deaf would therefore appear to be preordained
between Turkey and Europe. A curious side-effect has been the manner in
which Turkish people are now turning on the EU with the message that
"without Turkey, the EU is doomed". Mr Erdogan has transformed his
argument for Turkey’s membership from one of civil rights, economic
stability and greater democracy to one couched in religious and
"civilisational" terms.

Businesspeople are also increasingly likely to lecture the EU – as
they did at a recent World Economic Forum conference in Istanbul –
about how Europe needs Turkey’s young workforce, which is mainly
unskilled, and its market, which is large but relatively poor. Some
observers say this argument is indicative of the sometimes overblown
notions Turks harbour about their country’s strategic importance and
urge a little modesty. "We have to remember that we are the ones who
want to join the club," Ms Boyner says.

Others say the basis of Turkey’s engagement with and understanding of
the EU needs to adapt to today’s realities. "The pro-EU argument in
Turkey is overstated by its supporters," says Ercan Uygur, professor
of economics at Ankara University. He says it was shaped initially
by a lack of information about the EU and now by a misunderstanding
of what the EU might mean for Turkey.

The EU is a choice for Turkey that should not be based on a
misunderstanding. "When it comes to a choice – an informed choice –
most Turks would still choose the European Union," Prof Uygur says.

Iran gas ready for Armenia

AME Info, United Arab Emirates
Jan 6 2006

Iran gas ready for Armenia

Iran: Saturday, January 06 – 2007 at 11:48
Iran has completed setting up the facilities required for the
exportation of natural gas to Armenia, reported the Iran Daily.
Although Iran is prepared to export the gas at any time, Armenia is
not yet ready to receive it and a meeting is scheduled between both
sides in late March. As part of the deal, Armenia will also export
power to Iran.

Turks Drifting Away From EU

TURKS DRIFTING AWAY FROM EU
By Christopher Wade

Gulf Times, Qatar
Dec 26 2006

ANKARA: When Turkey began official negotiations to join the European
Union in October 2005 hopes were high that after years of wrangling
Turkey had a clear target, albeit one far off in the future: membership
of the club it has wanted to join for decades.

By the end of 2006, however, that target seems as far away as ever
with the EU having suspended negotiations on eight out of 35 policy
areas thanks to a dispute over Cyprus.

Turkey’s refusal to open its ports and airports to EU-member Cyprus
until embargoes on northern Cyprus are lifted was the reason behind
the suspension, but Turkey’s relationship with the EU and individual
European countries has been stretched on a number of issues throughout
2006.

One of the biggest outcries from liberals and human-rights activists
both in Turkey and Europe was the trial of novelist Orhan Pamuk on
charges of "insulting Turkishness." Pamuk was charged after telling a
Swiss newspaper that "30,000 Kurds and a million Armenians were killed
in these lands and nobody dares to talk about it." Pamuk was eventually
found not guilty on a technicality, but that hasn’t stopped a group
of nationalist lawyers from bringing charges against other novelists,
writers and journalists whom they perceive to have insulted Turkey.

The cases are embarrassing for Turkey and attract huge criticism,
but by the end of 2006 the government still hadn’t made any move to
get rid of Article 301, the vague law under which Pamuk was tried.

Pamuk’s words on the Armenian issue continued to echo throughout the
year, especially when it was announced in October that he had won
the Nobel Prize for literature.

In a country where any international achievement by a Turk is
normally celebrated by all, there was a certain lack of enthusiasm
for Pamuk’s award with many saying Pamuk had won it for political,
not literary reasons.

On the same day that the award was announced the French parliament
passed a bill that would make it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide.

Turkey officially denies that a genocide against Armenians during World
War I took place, and it is still a very touchy subject to bring up,
as the charges laid against Pamuk prove.

While the French bill has no chance of becoming law, the move was
seen in Turkey as a direct affront. Anti-France demonstrations took
place and the military cut off ties with its French counterparts.

Turkey is also criticised for its failure to implement further reforms
regarding the Kurdish minority.

Moderate Kurdish political groups claim they are harassed by
prosecutors and complain that it is against the law to address
political gatherings in Kurdish.

Despite calling a unilateral ceasefire during the year, guerrillas
from the Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK) have continued to clash with
security forces in the south-east.

In a blow to Turkey’s image, and to its tourism reputation, a shadowy
Kurdish group known as the Kurdish Freedom Falcons carried out a
number of bomb attacks during the summer in various tourist resorts
that injured a number of Turkish and foreign tourists.

Turkish tourism bodies are hoping though that the bombings will be
forgotten and are instead now going to use the good publicity that
Turkey received from the visit in November of Pope Benedict XVI.

Fears that the visit would be marked by huge protests proved false,
with the visit going a long way to heal Muslim-Christian relations.

At the end of the year Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that
while Europe seemed to be turning its back on Turkey his government
would continue to implement reforms, and that if the EU completely
spurned Turkey, he had a "plan B and plan C." What those plans are,
the prime minister did not elaborate.

While Turkey’s deficiencies concerning human rights, minority rights,
the role of the military in politics are certainly problems for
Turkey’s EU bid, it remains the issue of Cyprus and the matter
of opening ports and airports that is still the major obstacle in
Turkey-EU relations, and with neither side looking like making any
concessions, it will no doubt continue to be a stumbling block.

The Turkish public may not care in any case: support for EU membership
has fallen in just a year from over 80% to under 30% according to
some polls. Turkey and Europe seem to be drifting apart.

"Nairit" Suffered No Losses

"NAIRIT" SUFFERED NO LOSSES

ArmRadio.am
25.12.2006 15:56

"Nairit" suffered no losses as a result of fire on December 24,
Director on Production Issues of "Nairit Factory" Company Ruben
Saghatelyan informs.

According to him, only the remnants, which the factory burns in special
ovens, were burnt. Ruben Saghatelyan said also that the amount of
carbonic acid emissions to the atmosphere is equal to the amount that
would be produced if the remnants were burnt in a special oven.

Let us remind that this morning firemen managed to completely
extinguish the fire in "Nairit." Adviser to the Head of the Rescue
Service of Armenia, Colonel Nikolay Grigoryan informed "Radiolur" that
the fire in one of the stores of the factory was extinguished yesterday
at 11:30 p.m. his morning fire in the second store was extinguished.

BAKU: Azeri paper urges government to stand up for compatriots in Ge

AZERI PAPER URGES GOVERNMENT TO STAND UP FOR COMPATRIOTS IN GEORGIA

Hurriyyat, Baku, Azerbaijan
Dec 19 2006

The Azerbaijani opposition newspaper Hurriyyat has urged Baku to
use its influence on Tbilisi to resolve problems faced by ethnic
Azerbaijanis living in Georgia. The paper said that pressure was
being exerted on them to make them leave the country. Azerbaijanis
are not represented properly in local government and do not benefit
from Georgia’s land reforms, Hurriyyat went on to say. The paper
contrasted this with the situation in the Armenian-populated regions
of Georgia. The following is an excerpt from Avaz Qurbanli’s report
by Azerbaijani newspaper Hurriyyat on 19 December headlined "The
truth about Borcali… Silence is a historical crime" and subheaded
"The problems of Azerbaijanis living in Georgia have reached the
maximum level of tension". Subheadings as published:

The incumbent government of Azerbaijan has stressed more than once
that establishing relations with neighbouring states is a priority
in its foreign relations. But in fact, no real steps are being taken
to secure the establishment of these relations. If this were not the
case, the problems of our compatriots in neighbouring Georgia would
not have reached the current level.

True, Georgia is not Armenia, but the state of Azerbaijanis there
is also very bad. Problems that have accumulated for many years are
growing day by day instead of being tackled. If we do not solve those
problems in a timely manner, Georgia will become like Armenia for us.

Some may reproach me for these words, but as the saying goes – never
buy a pig in a bag. Regrettably, our failure to demand our rights
often leaves us face to face with injustice. For this reason, we
should not turn a blind eye to the fate of our compatriots in Georgia,
shed light on their problems instead of hiding them by any means and
discuss ways of solving them. We wonder what those problems are? We
shall try to focus on some of them.

Our placenames are being betrayed

One of the painful problems is the change of ethnic placenames. The
process of changing Azerbaijani placenames in Georgia started during
the Soviet period, i.e. in the 1950s. Our compatriots save geographical
names only orally. For example, Dmanisi is a self-styled name, we
all now that this district’s previous name was Baskecid which means
Azerbaijan’s last entrance to Turkey from the west. The names of 35
villages were changed under the rule of Eduard Shevardnadze. His
successor Saakashvili pledged to redress the injustices done to
Azerbaijanis, but he also failed to take steps in this direction.

Azerbaijanis are not being promoted

The removal from power of our intellectual countrymen has led to
bitter consequences. It is no secret to anyone that there are serious
obstacles to the adequate representation of ethnic Azerbaijanis
in Georgia’s local government. There are 48 government agencies in
Gardabani [southeastern Georgia] alone. Although the district has
the biggest population of ethnic Azerbaijanis in Georgia, none of the
government agencies is headed by an ethnic Azerbaijani. Telman Hasanov,
an Azerbaijani, has been imprisoned on charges of separatism for asking
"why none of those agencies is headed by an Azerbaijani?", even though
the question was fair and the Georgian government had to answer it. The
answer to this question belies many vital issues for our countrymen.

Unfair land policy

"The land policy that was very unfair to Azerbaijanis", to quote
Georgian President Saakashvili, was carried out in 1996. During
those reforms a vast majority of Azerbaijanis lost their land. The
districts where many ethnic Azerbaijanis lived – Dmanisi, Bolnisi,
Marneuli and Gardabani – produced 38 per cent of Georgia’s agricultural
produce in the 1970s. This is another indicator that our compatriots
are productive workers. For locals, land is not a profession, it is
a source of life because no manufacturing facilities were set up
here under the Soviet government. Locals depend on land for their
livelihood. In these conditions, very wealthy individuals come to
the region, buy thousands of hectares of land and lease it to ethnic
Azerbaijanis. Can you imagine what it means? Naturally, this increases
the cost of the produce and makes life more difficult for the locals.

However, similar problems are nowhere to be seen in the
Armenian-populated Javakheti region. It is because Armenians resorted
to pressure during the land reforms. They ended up being on a par
with Georgians in terms of land ownership. But Azerbaijanis are
treated as the lowest category ethnic group. True, some progress
has been made on the matter since Mikheil Saakashvili came to power.
Ethnic Azerbaijanis started voicing their concerns at rallies. Rallies
proved that democracy existed only in terms of freedom of speech,
but little was actually done. What is most important, a new law on
land was not adopted. According to the Saakashvili government’s bill,
preference had to be given to those who used the land, but the law
was not implemented. On the contrary, it gave rise to some problems.

Fighting smugglers, or …

Georgian TV shows the country’s security agencies and masked
men carrying out an "operation against drug smugglers" in the
Azerbaijani-populated villages. Are these operations and TV footage
from them so necessary? Is this not stoking fears and disturbing the
public? Naturally, this irritates Azerbaijanis who watch it on TV
and certainly has no positive impact on relations between Georgia
and Azerbaijan. If this is indeed a fight against smugglers, then
why is it waged in villages rather than on the border? This forms a
perception that the Georgian border troops guard the national borders
poorly. A more serious question: are all smugglers Azerbaijanis? How
come there is no fight against smugglers in Javakheti? The border with
Armenia in Javakheti Region is porous and there is plenty evidence
of smuggling there. How many people in Javakheti have been charged
with smuggling drugs? Why is this not publicized?

Are Azerbaijanis being deported?

In this matter, the state and national interests need to be
coordinated. Deportation from Georgia is different from the deportation
of our countrymen from Armenia as it is not carried out on the same
mass scale. Our countrymen have been deported [from Georgia] for a
period of time and in a planned way. For instance, various methods
were used to force ethnic Azerbaijanis to leave the districts densely
populated by them. Conflicts between Georgians and our countrymen were
engineered and implemented. We have already described the pressure
exerted through "the fight against smugglers".

For the reasons we have described, as well as for the ones we have
not, ethnic Azerbaijanis in Georgia, especially the well-to-do ones,
leave their native land. This paves the way for the deportation of
Borcali [Azerbaijani name for the Azerbaijani-populated northeastern
part of Georgia].

The Azerbaijani authorities have to monitor the deportation of our
countrymen more closely.

Azerbaijanis abide by the law better than others

Azerbaijanis have always recognized Georgia’s territorial integrity
and given priority to the principle of citizenship. Never in the
history of Georgia have Azerbaijanis engaged in separatism. They form
an ethnic group that abides by the law better than others. Azerbaijan
has always called on the ethnic Azerbaijanis living in Georgia to be
good citizens in order to keep relations with Tbilisi warm. We have
never made calls similar to those urging autonomy for the Armenians
in Javakheti. It is the result of such calls that the Armenians
now demand autonomy. Yerevan is behind this demand and the Georgian
government knows this very well.

When ethnic Armenians in Tbilisi asked the Armenian foreign minister
[Vardan Oskanyan] whether he had raised the question of autonomy for
Javakheti, he said that it was their business and they had to decide
it for themselves. But behind the scenes, Yerevan encourages them
to make demands for autonomy all the time. It is easy to see that
neither the ethnic Armenians in Georgia, nor the Armenian authorities
want to think about Georgia’s territorial integrity.

What issues do Azerbaijani officials raise with regard to our
countrymen when they go to Georgia? We do not have enough evidence
in this regard.

Special government care for Armenian-populated districts

The meeting between the Armenian and Georgian foreign ministers in
late June revealed that as much as 200m dollars from US assistance
received by Georgia from the Millennium Challenge programme will be
spent on Javakheti. How much will be spent on the Azerbaijani-populated
areas? This question has yet to be answered, although these districts
need funds as badly as Javakheti. The 25-km road connecting Marneuli
with the Red Bridge [on the Azerbaijani-Georgia border] is in such
a bad condition that locals are forced to go to the Red Bridge via
Tbilisi. The locals have to choose the road which is much longer only
because the short one has not been repaired.

[Passage omitted: Georgian textbooks say Azerbaijanis came to the
area in the 16th century, much later than Armenians]

What should Azerbaijanis do?

We would like to note in conclusion that in this report, we only
scratched the surface of the problems facing ethnic Azerbaijanis in
Georgia. However, there are some issues which would, however painful
they are, be interpreted as an "attempt to damage bilateral relations"
if we raised them. Therefore, such issues must be resolved at the
state level.

It is a fact that Georgia is our strategic ally and we are linked by
many economic projects of international importance. In all of those
projects Georgia is a transit country. This means that Azerbaijan has
all kinds of leverage vis-a-vis Georgia. At least in exchange for the
profit we bring them Azerbaijan could raise the question of resolving
the problems of our countrymen with Georgia. Unfortunately, action
and inaction on the part of some inept Azerbaijani state officials
has almost made Azerbaijan dependant on Georgia.

We should not forget that if we do not care about the problems of our
countrymen, no-one else will. Times have changed and Azerbaijan has
made some economic progress. Baku has to pay more attention to the
problems of our countrymen living abroad and in many cases, must help
tackle those issues. Azerbaijan should not remain indifferent to them.

Russian military withdraw from Tbilisi, hand HQ building over to Geo

RUSSIAN MILITARY WITHDRAW FROM TBILISI, HAND HQ BUILDINGS OVER TO GEORGIA

RTR Rossiya, Moscow,
Dec 23 2006

[Presenter] Russia has practically completed the withdrawal of its
military from Tbilisi. The last military facility – buildings of
the headquarters of the Group of Russian Forces in the Transcaucasus
[GRVZ] – was handed over to the Georgian Defence Ministry today. The
country’s military police have already arrived at the location and
taken it under control.

Some 40 Russian officers and their families are leaving Tbilisi today
and moving to the Russian military base in Gyumri [in neighbouring
Armenia]. Just 15 officers of the GRVZ command staff will stay in
Georgia to manage the withdrawal of the Russian forces from the bases
in Akhalkalaki and Batumi.

[Maj-Gen Andrey Popov, captioned as the GRVZ commander] We can say that
today the Tbilisi garrison of the Russian forces ceased to exist. It
is yet another step in the implementation of the agreement on the
withdrawal of [Russian] military bases from Georgian territory. Now
we have only to evacuate the remaining part of weapons and military
hardware from the 62nd military base [in Akhalkalaki] to complete
its withdrawal in 2007 and, by the end of 2008, withdraw the 12th
military base from Batumi.

BAKU: Sergey Lavrov: Talks On NK Conflict At Presidential Level Shou

SERGEY LAVROV: TALKS ON NG CONFLICT AT PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL SHOULD CONTINUE NEXT YEAR

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Dec 20 2006

"The talks on the settlement of Nagorno Garabagh conflict between
Baku and Yerevan should continue in 2007," Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov said at the press conference held on annual results,
APA reports.

The minister said Russia being OSCE Minsk Group co-chair considers the
direct relations at presidential level important for the settlement
of the conflict.

"They say, the relations between Baku and Yerevan will continue in
2007. The main thing is to create conditions concerning the stage
and period of the talks at presidential level," the minister said.

Corruption Starts From Schools

CORRUPTION STARTS FROM SCHOOLS

A1+
[03:49 pm] 19 December, 2006

Quizzes and exams have their "fixed prices" in Higher Educational
Establishments (HEE) of Armenia. For example, the price of a quiz in
elitist HEE is 100 – 200$, the price of exams is logically higher.

The prices of non- elitist establishments are comparatively lower
and milder; the quiz is about 20$ and the exam is 30 – 100$.

These data were revealed after the polling initiating by "Sargis –
Tkhrouni" Youth – Students’ Union in various establishments. Over
2000 students were asked the same question; "Is there any corruption
in educational establishments?"

1821 students gave positive answer to this question.

By the way, the classification of HEE into "elitist" and "non- elitist"
ones was done by the students.

Judging by their answers, we can qualify these establishments as
"elitist" ones; Medical University after Mkhitar Heratsi, Yerevan
State Economy University and Yerevan State Linguistic University
after Brusov.

Yerevan State Agricultural University and Yerevan State Pedagogical
University are among the "non- elitist" establishments.

To note, nearly all the students offered the same methods of corruption
combat and its further elimination. 93% of those surveyed suggested
increasing lecturers’ salaries, 87% claim that interior discipline
must be strengthened inside the establishments.

Despite Everything Turkey Intends To Continue EU Integration Process

DESPITE EVERYTHING TURKEY INTENDS TO CONTINUE EU INTEGRATION PROCESS

PanARMENIAN.Net
19.12.2006 16:57 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey will continue the EU integration process,
despite European Union’s decision to partially freeze the talks with
Ankara, stated Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul. In his words,
EU’s decision to freeze the talks with Ankara contradicts the spirit
of Turkey-European Union relations.

"We have not refused from the goal to enter the EU and are full of
determination to move forward through this way. We are aware of our
shortcomings and do all necessary things to remove them," underlined
Gul. On his opinion, the EU experiences crises and some of its members
have ‘confusion in the head’.

"The Cyprus issue, which is a stumbling block in Turkey-EU relations,
must be solved in UNO and not in the European Union. The universal
solution of the Cyprus issue is possible to ensure only in UNO,"
underscored the Turkish Foreign Minister, RIA Novosti reports.

Garnik Margarian: They Will Try To Exert Influence Upon Sefilian And

GARNIK MARGARIAN: THEY WILL TRY TO EXERT INFLUENCE UPON SEFILIAN AND MALKHASIAN
BY CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL METHODS AT NATIONAL SECURITY SERVICE

Noyan Tapan
Dec 19 2006

YEREVAN, DECEMBER 19, NOYAN TAPAN. A committee for protection
of political prisoners will be created soon within the framework
of the Anti-criminal Movement. Nor Zhamanakner (New Times) Party
Chairman Aram Karapetian declared this at the movement’s December
19 sitting. In the words of Homeland and Honor Party Chairman
Garnik Margarian, it is planned to hold the committee’s constituent
assembly in Shirak region and then the meetings and rallies of the
committee’s regional structures will be held in another regions of
the country. In G.Margarian’s words, the Coordinator of the Defence of
Liberated Territories public initiative, Zhirayr Sefilian and member
of the Homeland and Honor Party Political Board, Head of the party’s
Aragatsotn region’s branch, Vardan Malkhasian will have the same
fate as 21st Century Party leader Arkady Vardanian, i.e. they will be
exposed to tactical methods of psychological influence in the isolator
of the National Security Service. In G.Margarian’s words, these
methods can be chemical, biological or physical. In his words, such
policy of the investigation group has the goal to break Z.Sefilian’s
and V.Malkhasian’s patriotic spirit, as this was done with A.Vardanian.