A1+
| 14:22:59 | 24-09-2005 | Politics |
PRE-ELECTION KILLING
Today at about 10 a.m. local time Mayor of Armenian town of Nor Hajn Armen
Kelishyan shot dead head of the town electric network Ashot Mkhitaryan.
To remind, the election of the Mayor in Nor Hajn will be held in two weeks.
The incumbent Mayor put in his nomination. Ashot Mkhitaryan supported his
rival.
It should be noted that Kelishyan fired the pistol presented to him by Prime
Minister Andranik Margaryan.
A1+
| 18:14:24 | 23-09-2005 | Regions |
THE DAY OF GYUMRI
On September 24 Gyumri will celebrate its day. A program and schedule have
been formed beforehand. Besides the residents of the city and region, many
guests will participate in the celebration.
According to the tradition, the guests will be met at the city entrance with
songs and dances. Afterwards, the memorial to the Bagratounies will be
solemnly opened. The monument to Shiraz and the Armenian-French Park will
also be opened. The opening ceremony of the park will take place with the
participation of the French Ambassador and the workers of the Embassy.
Aztag” Daily Newspaper
P.O. Box 80860, Bourj Hammoud,
Beirut, Lebanon
Fax: +961 1 258529
Phone: +961 1 260115, +961 1 241274
Email: [email protected]
On the Freedom of Access to the Ottoman Archives: An Interview with Hilmar
Kaiser
By Khatchig Mouradian
Saturday, 24 September, 2005
In recent years, the Turkish government has repeatedly stated that the
Ottoman archives are fully open to researchers studying the Armenian
genocide of 1915. As recently as 16 September, 2005, Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, answering a question regarding two
recent resolutions adopted by the Committee on International Relations
of the US House of Representatives, said: ‘We clearly say that
Turkey’s archives are open and Armenia should open its archives, if it
has. We shall speak on the basis of documents and information. I do
not understand on which basis unrelated countries take decisions about
the so-called Armenian genocide. These decisions are all political in
nature and do not serve world peace.’
To find out about how open the Ottoman archives are at the moment, I
recently spoke to Hilmar Kaiser, a historian who was banned from the
archives in 1996, but was admitted back in July 2005 and was provided
access to archival material he had repeatedly been denied a decade
ago. As the interview reveals, assertions that the Ottoman archives
are open are partly true at most.
Hilmar Kaiser received his Ph.D. from the European University
Institute, Florence. He specializes in Ottoman social and economic
history as well as the Armenian Genocide. He has done research in more
than 60 archives worldwide, including the Ottoman Archives in
Istanbul. His published works – monographs, edited volumes, and
articles- include `Imperialism, Racism, and Development Theories: The
Construction of a Dominant Paradigm on Ottoman Armenians’, `At the
Crossroads of Der Zor: Death Survival and Humanitarian Resistance in
Aleppo, 1915-1917′, `The Baghdad Railway and the Armenian Genocide,
1915-1916: A Case Study in German Resistance and Complicity’,
`1915-1916 Ermeni Soykirimi Sirasinda Ermeni Mulkleri, Osmanli Hukuku
ve Milliyet Politikalari’, `Le genocide armenien: negation a
`l’allemande” and `From Empire to Republic: The Continuities for
Turkish Denial’.
Khatchig Mouradian – In July 2005, almost a decade after being banned
from the Ottoman State Archives, you were given access to the archives
once again. How did you get in?
Hilmar Kaiser- I got to Istanbul on a Sunday. I went to the archives
the next morning. At the entrance, they asked me whether I have a
reader ticket, I said `no’. I was asked to go to the application
office and fill out the usual application form. They scanned in my
data from the passport, when they entered the data I was asked if I
was at the archives before, because they saw there was entry; I
confirmed. Then I was issued my new reader ticket. After a few
minutes, I was in the reading room with the catalogs and the
documents.
It was basically the same procedure as in any archive I worked in.
K.M. – Some scholars who have worked in the Ottoman State Archives
have repeatedly complained that the documents they ask for are first
`cleared’ by a control commission and only then provided to them. Did
you encounter such a problem?
H.K.- In the early nineties when I was there, there existed an
unofficial – not acknowledged, even denied – so called `control
commission’ that read everything I got. I don’t have any evidence that
this happened this time.
K.M. – The media, especially the Turkish and Armenians news sources,
often speak about the Ottoman archives being open or closed. However,
what is meant by Ottoman archives is rarely explained. Can you shed
some light on this issue?
H.K. – The Ottoman archives are the abbreviation of `the Turkish Prime
Minister’s Ottoman Archives’ located in Istanbul. The Turkish national
archives (devlet arshivleri) have 2 main branches: the Ottoman
archives (until 1923) and the republican archives (after 1923), but of
course there is some overlap.
K.M. – What about the military archives?
There are the military archives that are attached to an institution of
the General staff.
K.M. – And these archives aren’t open, are they?
H.K. – I don’t know. I applied once in 1991s and I was not allowed in,
so my experience is limited to the Ottoman archives, as explained
earlier, not to the republican archives or the military archives.
K.M. – What about the archives of The Committee of Union and Progress
(CUP)?
H.K. – I do not think the archives of CUP have been cataloged anywhere
as such.
K.M. – Were they destroyed?
H.K. – I doubt it. I do not know. We should be really careful about
not mixing information. Anything about the CUP archives is sheer
speculation. We don’t have any indication that they have been
destroyed.
K.M. – Can you comfortably say that the Ottoman archives are open?
H.K. – I can go to the archives, I can see the catalogs and get the
documents that are in the catalogues. I don’t get documents that
aren’t catalogued; this isn’t something special. In all archives,
there’s a constant cataloguing process as long as the archives take in
new material and it’s working on files that have been
processed. However, I know of some important collections at the
Turkish Prime Minister’s Ottoman Archives that have been cataloged but
these catalogs are not at the reading room. So there are material that
have been processed and catalogued but are still withheld. One such
collection is the Armenian collection of the Ottoman Directorate for
Public Security (2nd Division), which is a subdivision of the Ministry
of the Interior.
What is available, for instance, are the Ottoman Ministry of Interior
Cipher Bureau files which contain a large number of deportation orders
and other orders connected to the deportation of Armenians. For
example, direct orders concerning the deportation of Zohrab and
Vartkes Efendis, and direct orders concerning individual ARF (Armenian
Revolutionary federation) members. However, the responses to these
orders, are, as far as I can see, contained in the second Division
(see above) of the Ministry of the Interior and we don’t have those
documents available. So we know what the orders were, but we don’t
know the response. Other orders are contained in the Ministry of the
Military archives. To get the whole picture, we need the cipher
department, second department, plus the military archives. This is
what we know now. According to some sources, there are other
collections in these archives which are not available yet and are very
important, but since I don’t have any printed information on this, I
cannot say anything.
We want now to have access to those documents that have been
catalogued but are not available. To put it in the political
perspective, PM Tayyip Erdogan said the Archives are open. Yes, they
are open, and he made a true statement, but the further implication,
what people assume that everything they have you can see, doesn’t
apply. So Mr. Erdogan made a true statement, I hope other documents
will also be made available. The Turkish government is on an excellent
path now.
K.M. – Taking into consideration the denial policy of the Turkish
government, how realistic is the hope that some documents that shed
light on the `sensitive’ aspects of the Armenian genocide will be made
available?
H.K. – I cannot comment on documents I haven’t seen. Some people ask
me if there are documents that have been cleansed. That would mean
there are materials I have seen before, but they have
disappeared. What I can say is this: I was there; I got material I had
been repeatedly denied ten years ago. So this is a major step
forward. I can also say that back then I had troubles with
photocopying. There was a file with 54 pages I got 36 back and 18
pages had disappeared in the process. This time, I got my photocopies
very quickly and there was not the slightest reason for any kind of
complaint; they did a very professional job. Obviously, the Turkish
government has enough control over the archives to enforce its
political will over the administration, which is very important, if we
keep in mind that the Turkish government represents the political
movement that has been in the opposition for decades and now for the
first time it is in power.
I do not expect Mr. Erdogan to look at all the items in the archives,
this is a process that has to be brought to his attention and after
that, no doubt things will improve. Will they make material available
that will damage their position? I think the Turkish position is
evolving now; I spoke to people who were accepting that there were
massacres of Armenians including participation orders by government
officials, but not officials at the central government. So the
position has evolved to acknowledge the participation of local and
provincial authorities, but also to stress that the central government
was not in line with those authorities. This makes there position more
defendable; it means the Turkish position and the Armenian position
become closer, but it means also that people who would deny the
Armenian genocide are in a much more comfortable position
themselves. While applauding Turkey for becoming open, it means also
that the political debate becomes more complicated.
K.M. – You said you spoke to `people’. Were they government officials?
H.K. – I talked to very high ranking officials who turned up at a tea
house; these include leaders from the ruling AK party, people who are
concerned with security in Turkey, and also academics.
K.M. – Is this evolution you are talking about regarding the Turkish
government’s position a new strategy of denial or is it a step towards
facing past?
H.K. – It’s both. We have to understand that the Turkish government
has to represent Turkish interests; that’s what their job is. What’s
happening right now is that we see a policy which is more of the
making of Mr. Erdogan’s government. Definitely, it’s part of a
strategy that has to do with Europe. Obviously, if you want to join
the European Union you need to have open archives. The Ottoman
Archives contain other issues like Lebanon and Macedonia; the Armenian
issue is only one part of the whole thing.
There’s a discussion going on in Turkey. As I talked, I was quite
clear with government officials, but while in previous years they
responded with a personal attack, this time around, they made their
point clear and also asked questions. I also published an article in
Turkey on Armenian abandoned property –the headline of the article
reads `Armenian genocide’– I was surprised to hear that the article
was read and discussed in various universities. I also received a call
for paper from the Turkish Historical Society and they asked me to
send an application for next year. Which is also remarkable because it
means the Turkish Historical Society believes now that I’m a scholar
and not just a propagandist. These are all steps in the right
direction.
Nowadays, there is a very strong interest in Turkey towards the other
position. The number of publications in Turkey has increased
tremendously and there are a number of publications which I find very
helpful. I mean its not just crap they produce now. The printed books
used to be a waste of trees, just reiterations, recycling of the
recycled.
Where all this will end, I don’t know. But at the moment I’m pleased
by what’s going on.
K.M. – You mentioned the issue of `abandoned property’. Some scholars
who have studied that aspect of the Armenian genocide consider the
theft of fixed and moveable assets as an integral part of the genocide
and maintain that that theft was organized by the leadership of the
CUP.
H.K. – It was the state. It was from the top of the government, from
Talat and Ali Munif Bey. The Armenian genocide is the Ottoman
government’s answer to the Armenian Question: Deportations can only be
analyzed in terms of expropriation. It was grand theft. It was the
surgical separation of Armenians from their movable and immovable
property. The Ottoman government was very careful of not wasting any
assets while being not concerned about the fate of the Armenians.
To make the expropriation permanent, you have to replace the
Armenians. The expropriation was part of a settlement program; this
process created a surplus population and this surplus population was
taken care of. The Armenians were mathematically a surplus
population. Killing or, in the case of children and women,
assimilating them solved that problem. What took place was genocide,
not massacres.
In 1990, I spoke about the `so-called Armenian genocide.’ I was a
student in Germany and the library wasn’t good enough and for that
reason, I wasn’t good enough myself. After I started my archival
work, in one month, I spoke about the genocide, not the `so- called
genocide’. I’m not just a believer in the Armenian genocide; I’m
someone who has acquired that knowledge from his own work. No one
taught me the Armenian genocide and no one taught me to use the
word. It’s a result of my own work. I use the word because it’s the
appropriate term that covers the phenomenon. The more I study the
Armenian genocide, its various aspects and its systematic nature, the
more it becomes evident that there is only one word. It’s not a
question of having preferences; if you want to present yourself as a
scholar, you have to use the word. If you want to talk about the
massacres of Armenians in one village or the deportations in another
village, you don’t have to use genocide, but the moment you want to
put the wider perspective, you have to use the word. And every scholar
that wants to play games, like some people going to Yerevan and
telling everyone `don’t use the `G’ word’, have a political agenda.
K.M. – Some Turkish scholars refrain from using the `G’ word because
they say that it’s highly politicized and that they do not want to get
involved in the war between Turkish and Armenian nationalists.
H.K. – I don’t care about the Armenian and Turkish nationalist, no
matter who my friends are and who are not my friends. I use the word
`genocide’ because it adequately describes the phenomenon. It’s the
only term we have that describes it. If one day we have a better word,
fine. The English, German, and Turkish languages have only one word to
describe. That this has a negative consequence on the Turkish
government is something I can’t change; I can’t change history. I’m
not prepared to haggle over it. If a Turkish scholar says it too
politicized and he or she doesn’t want to use the word, then let
him/her take a different subject. If you want to be part of this
debate, apply proper terminology and if you don’t want to do it, you
aren’t a scholar. I don’t like the fact that I get trouble from some
Turkish quarters because I use proper terminology; but you have to
face the music. If you don’t want to face the music then don’t
play. That certain people living in Turkey had to take certain
precautions at least in the past is unfortunate, that’s why I don’t
provoke them, but I’m not dealing with people who have no academic
knowledge on the issue suddenly turning up and trying to renegotiate
academic terminology.
K.M. – You have published a number of papers on the German role in the
Armenian genocide. What is reflected in your papers is that talking
about a `German complicity’ is going too far.
H.K. – Our knowledge of the German role is still limited because
allied bombing destroyed the military archives in 1945. At least 99
percent of the chunk is gone. To make it worse, quite a bit of the
German embassy archives were also lost. Fortunately, most of the
Armenian files of the embassy have survived. Having said this, we have
a pretty good idea what the German Foreign Office was doing and I have
just described this in a new publication. The policy was helping
Armenians when it wouldn’t hurt their interests and at the same time
deeply resenting the Turks. That’s what they did. Their hands were
tied, because the Turkish alliance was important. The private
companies like the Baghdad railway company assisted the Armenians.
Then you have the missionaries, some very good, and some, like
Lepsius, making themselves more shiny afterwards. Not everything was
as nice as certain researchers recently claimed. Then you have the
officers; there was an officer, Boettrich, who actively assisted the
deportation, there was another officer, Wolffskeel, who killed
Armenians with his own hands, but he was recalled in punishment.
I have no evidence that the German government was supporting the
Armenian genocide or even taking part in the killing, The evidence
points more directly to the contrary. To get to a better
understanding, we need to access the Turkish military archives which
also contain German files. That’s why I’m saying that at the present
moment everything is preliminary. But the real debate about Germans,
especially the assumption that the Ottoman government was too stupid
to know how to commit genocide and had to get Germans to tell them how
to pull it off, and the attempts of comparing the role of the Germans
in the Armenian genocide with the role of the Germans in the Holocaust
is a kind of inferiority complex. The Armenian genocide can stand on
its own. It doesn’t have to match the Holocaust to be validated.
There are major and structural differences. The whole issue of German
involvement is a kind of sidetrack. The real way forward is access to
the Turkish archives.
The complicity of the Germans in the Armenian genocide is a political
invention and does not withstand scrutiny.
NTV MSNBC, Turkey
Sept 23 2005
Deans to challenge court ruling on conference
The deans said that the ban threatened the autonomy of Turkey’s
universities and harmed scientific freedoms.
Güncelleme: 11:23 TSI 23 Eylül 2005 CumaISTANBUL – The deans of two
of Turkey’s leading universities said they would challenge a court
ruling Thursday banning a conference that was to discuss allegations
that the Ottoman Empire massacred large numbers of its Armenian
community.
Speaking after a meeting of University deans in Istanbul Thursday
evening Bosphorus University Dean Professor Dr Ayse Soysal said that
although they would abide by the court’s ruling forbidding the
conference to take place, they would pursue their legal right to
protect scientific freedoms and the autonomy of the country’s
universities.
The Dean of Sabanci University, Professor Tosun Terzioglu, warned
that Turkey was loosing prestige due to such decisions and also
stressed the threat to the autonomy at universities.
On Thursday, an Istanbul court banned the staging of the conference,
entitled `Ottoman Armenians of an Empire in Decline’ on the grounds
that permission had not been granted for it to be held.
The conference, which was to have started on Friday at Istanbul’s
Bosphorus University, had already been postponed from May due to
public and official pressure.
Delegates at the conference were to discuss claims that the Ottoman
Empire had committed acts of genocide against its Armenian citizens
during the years of the First World War. Turkey denies that there was
any genocide but concedes that as many as 300,000 Ottoman Armenians
died during the war years, a result of civil unrest, famine and
disease.
BARONESS CAROLINE COX IS AWARDED A MEDAL “MKHITAR GOSH” FOR HER INPUT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARMENIAN -BRITISH RELATIONS
ARKA News Agency, Armenia
Sept 19 2005
YEREVAN, September 19. /ARKA/. By the RA President Robert Kocharyan’s
decree from September 16, Baroness Caroline Cox, the Vice -Speaker of
the House of Lords of the GB Parliament, is awarded a medal “Mkhitar
Gosh” for her input in the development of the Armenian-British
relations, as well as for fruitful and self-denying humanitarian work
of many years. According to the President’s Press Service, during
the awarding ceremony Kocharyan highly appreciated the consistent
and goal-oriented work of the Baroness. Caroline Cox in the framework
of the mission “Pilgrimage to Artsakh ” visits Nagorno-Karabakh for
the 60th time. In this regard she told the President of Armenia her
impressions from her visits. According to her, after each her visit
she sees more progress both in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. By the
request of the Baroness, Kocharyan told about his meeting with the
President of Azerbaijan in Kazan and introduced the present process
of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement. A.H.-0–
A1+
18:58:41 | 16-09-2005 | Politics |
FROM THE RETURN OF DEPOSITS TO FUNERALS
«The deposits must be returned with dignity», said Galoust Sahakyan
justifying the present idleness of the Government. And Viktor Dallakyan
considers it natural that the NA session did not start with the discussion
of the draft about the return of the deposits, but finished it with that of
the Law on «Funerals».
Member of the fraction «Democratic Deputy» Rafik Petrosyan speaking about
the draft on «Funerals» mentioned that the Church is not against crematoria
and that the process is optional. «By the wish of the relatives of the
dead», he commented.
And the Secretary of the Justice Bloc Viktor Dallakyan made an interesting
observation. Reading the Governmental conclusion about a draft presented by
the Orinats Yerkir and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation invited
attention on the fact that the draft presented by the majority is rejected
by the Government formed by the majority reasoning that the budget cannot
allot money for that purpose. «That is, they do not know what they want and
what they are doing», said the deputy.
Cyprus News Agency, Cyprus
Sept 16 2005
Cypriot FM discusses Cyprus and EU with counterparts in US
CNA – NEW YORK-USA – 16/9/2005 08:11
—————————————————————-
0815:CYPPRESS:02
Cypriot FM discusses Cyprus and EU with counterparts in US
by Maria Myles
New York, Sep 16 (CNA) – Cypriot Minister of Foreign Affairs George
Iacovou had a series of meetings here yesterday with counterparts,
during which he talked about the question of Cyprus and other matters
of mutual interest relating to Cyprus’ role as a member of the
European Union.
The Minister, in New York for the World Summit and the UN General
Assembly, met a delegation of the American Jewish Committee, led by
its president Robert Goodkind, and his counterparts from Armenia,
Vartan Oskanian, and San Marino, Febio Berardi.
Kazinform, Kazakhstan
Sept 15 2005
Doing business in 2006: CIS economies pick up the pace of reform
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 15. KAZINFORM – The economies of the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) are increasing the pace of
reform to help small and medium businesses generate more jobs – with
Georgia among the top global reformers. But reformers in the region
lag behind their Eastern European neighbors, and heavy legal burdens
on business remain in most countries, according to a new report from
the World Bank Group.
Doing Business in 2006: Creating Jobs, cosponsored by the World Bank
and the International Finance Corporation, the private sector arm of
the World Bank Group, finds that such reforms, while often simple,
can create many new jobs, Kazinform refers to press release of the
Bank.
`Jobs are a priority for every country, and especially the poorest
countries. Doing more to improve regulation and help entrepreneurs is
key to creating more jobs–and more growth. It is also a key to
fighting poverty. Women, who make up three quarters of the work force
in some developing economies, will be big beneficiaries. So will
young people looking for their first job. The past year’s diverse
range of successful reformers – from Serbia to Rwanda – are showing the
way forward. We can all learn from their experience,’ said Paul
Wolfowitz, President of the World Bank Group.
The annual report, which for the first time provides a global ranking
of 155 economies on key business regulations and reforms, finds that
every country in the CIS improved at least one aspect of the business
environment – among the highest rate of reform of any region. But the
pace of reform is slower than with the new entrants to the European
Union, which are aggressively courting entrepreneurs with
far-reaching reforms that streamline business regulations and taxes.
The report tracks a set of regulatory indicators related to business
startup, operation, trade, payment of taxes, and closure by measuring
the time and cost associated with various government requirements. It
does not track variables such as macroeconomic policy, quality of
infrastructure, currency volatility, investor perceptions, or crime
rates.
Georgia was the top reformer in the region and the number 2 reformer
globally – making it easier to start a business, cutting the number of
activities licensed from 909 to 159, easing the cost of firing
redundant workers, cutting the time and cost to register property,
and introducing a new tax law with fewer and simplified taxes.
Other notable reforms in CIS countries in the past year:
– Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan made it easier for entrepreneurs to
start a business – in Russia’s case, for the second year in a row.
– Armenia introduced case management into courts, streamlining
contract enforcement. Kazakhstan cut 20 days from the time to enforce
a contract by allowing approved private firms to execute court
judgments. Belarus streamlined the court appeals process.
– Armenia increased the flexibility of employment law.
– Ukraine improved the regulations of credit markets with a new
collateral law, allowing entrepreneurs to use a broader range of
assets as collateral, and allowing creditors to enforce collateral
privately, without a lengthy court trial. Creditors now have first
priority to the collateral if the debtor defaults.
– A new credit bureau was established in the Kyrgyz Republic, making
it easier for lenders to evaluate creditworthiness. Public credit
registries were established in Armenia and Azerbaijan.
– Russia and Kazakhstan introduced new laws to encourage sharing of
credit information.
– Moldova and Uzbekistan cut the corporate tax rate by 3 and 2
percentage points respectively.
Overall, European nations were the most active in enacting reforms.
The top 12 reformers in the past year, in order, were Serbia and
Montenegro, Georgia, Vietnam, Slovakia, Germany, Egypt, Finland,
Romania, Latvia, Pakistan, Rwanda, and the Netherlands.
Doing Business in 2006 updates the work of last year’s report on
seven sets of business environment indicators: starting a business,
hiring and firing workers, enforcing contracts, registering property,
getting credit, protecting investors, and closing a business. It
expands the research to 155 countries and adds three new indicators:
dealing with business licenses, trading across borders and paying
taxes.
The new indicators in this year’s report further reinforce the
overwhelming need for reform, especially in poor countries. The
report finds that poor countries levy the highest business taxes in
the world. These high taxes create incentives to evade, driving many
firms into the underground economy, and do not translate into higher
revenues.
The analysis also shows that reforming the administrative costs of
trading can remove significant obstacles to exporting and importing.
Contrary to popular belief, customs paperwork and other red tape
(often called `soft infrastructure’) cause the most delays for
exporting and importing firms. Less than a quarter of the delays are
caused by problems with `hard infrastructure’ such as poor ports or
roads. In Azerbaijan, for example, an entrepreneur would have to
submit 18 documents and obtain 55 signatures to import goods. For
manufacturers in developing countries, the administrative burdens of
trading can pose larger costs than tariffs and quotas.
The annually published report gives policymakers the ability to
measure regulatory performance in comparison to other countries,
learn from best practices globally, and prioritize reforms. Now in
its third year, the report has already had an impact on business
environment reforms around the world.
`The Doing Business benchmarking has inspired and supported reforms
in more than 20 countries, and since last year, nine governments have
asked for their countries to be included in the Doing Business
analysis,’ said Caralee McLiesh, an author of the report.
The top 30 economies in the world in terms of the report’s
ease-of-doing-business index, in order, are New Zealand, Singapore,
the United States, Canada, Norway, Australia, Hong Kong/China,
Denmark, the United Kingdom, Japan, Ireland, Iceland, Finland,
Sweden, Lithuania, Estonia, Switzerland, Belgium, Germany, Thailand,
Malaysia, Puerto Rico, Mauritius, the Netherlands, Chile, Latvia,
Korea, South Africa, Israel, and Spain.
The ranking of the Baltic countries – Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia – in
the top 30 countries is a remarkable achievement, as only a decade
has passed since they first began reforms. But the rankings highlight
significant obstacles in CIS countries, with Armenia ranked at 46,
Russia at 79, Moldova at 83, Kyrgyz Republic at 84, Kazakhstan at 86,
Azerbaijan at 98, Georgia at 100, Belarus at 106, Ukraine at 124, and
Uzbekistan at 138.
Particular obstacles in the region are rigid employment laws and high
and complex taxes. For example, 80 percent of countries require women
to retire at a younger age than men – a rule that hurts women’s career
opportunities and pay. In Belarus, if a business paid all of its
taxes, it would amount to more than gross profits, and it would take
113 tax payments a year to 3 different agencies and 1,188 hours to do
so. Such high taxes create incentives for evasion. In Uzbekistan,
evading 20 percent of business taxes could increase gross profits by
60 percent.
All the top countries regulate businesses, but they do so in less
costly and burdensome ways. The Nordic countries, all of which are on
the top 30 list, do not regulate too little. Instead, they have
simple regulations that allow businesses to be productive and focus
intervention where it counts – protecting property rights and providing
social services.
Just 8 percent of economic activity in Nordic countries occurs in
unregistered (informal sector) businesses. The reason is that
regulations are simple to comply with and businesses receive
excellent public services for what they pay in taxes. For example,
Denmark has the world’s best infrastructure. Norway ranks highest on
human development indicators, with Sweden right behind it.
`In the Nordic countries, as well as the other top 30, reformers do
not have to choose between making it easy to do business and
providing social protection. They can do both,’ said Simeon Djankov,
an author of the report.
The Doing Business project is based on the efforts of more than 3,500
local experts – business consultants, lawyers, accountants,
government officials, and leading academics around the world – who
provided methodological support and review. The data, methodology,
and names of contributors are publicly available online.
ARMENIA’s VICE SPEAKER TO REPRESENT ARMENIA’s POSITION ON
ISSUE OF TURKEY’s ACCESSION TO EU
YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 14. ARMINFO. “December 2004 – October 2005: has
Turkey changed?” conference organized by the Armenian federation of
Europe and supported by Christian-Democratic party will take place at
the Euro-Parliament (EP) in Brussels, Sept 22-23, Vice Speaker of
Armenia’s NA, ARFD member Vahan Hovhanissyan informed in an interview
to ARMINFO.
Armenia’s representatives also will participate there. Hovhanissyan
will represent Armenia’s position on issue of Turkey’s accession to
the EU. The conference will be conducted under the aegis of the EP
Vice-Chairman Ingo Fridrikh. The conference aims to estimate
reforming processes in Turkey, required for the accession to the EU.
It is expected that former Foreign Minister of France Michele Barnier
will participate at the conference. Chairman of the EP socialist
group, EP member, christian democrat from France Jacque Turbon, known
by his anti-Turkish views, also will participate there.
AZG Armenian Daily #165, 15/09/2005
Neighbors
RINO HARNISH: CONVERSATIONS THAT NAKHICHEVAN BELONGED TO ARMENIA ARE
RIDICULOUS
US ambassador to Azerbaijan, Rino Harnish told yesterday Regnum that the
conversations that Nakhichevan belonged to Armenia are ridiculous.
Commenting on the Azeri press according to which the US Embassy’s website
presents Nakhichevan and Nagorno Karabakh as historical lands of the
Armenians, Harnish said that it’s the result of “an elementary mistake”.