Author: Vardapetian Ophelia

PRESS OFFICE
Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern)
630 Second Avenue, New York, NY 10016
Contact: Jake Goshert, Coordinator of Information Services
Tel: (212) 686-0710 Ext. 60; Fax: (212) 779-3558
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:

December 20, 2004
___________________

Following is the Christmas message from Archbishop Khajag Barsamian,
Primate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern).
Attached is the same message, in both English and Armenian.

* * *

TIDINGS OF JOY TO ALL PEOPLE

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field,
keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord
came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and
they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, “Fear not: for,
behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all
people.” (Luke 2:8-10)

The angel promised that his “good tidings of great joy” would one day be
known by all people. But the announcement itself, on that glorious
night 2,000 years ago, was made to only a few, humble shepherds, in
fields removed from any city or village. To reach the ears of the
entire world, the announcement would have to be repeated, from person to
person, from heart to heart, from generation to generation.

And yet through all those numberless repetitions, down to the present
day, these “good tidings” have never lost their freshness. They have
never lost their ability to inspire wonder and love. They are eternally
young, and yet contain the wisdom of the ages.

It is a paradox exemplified by the church itself. Though very old by
human standards, the church at its best has never lost the ability to
inspire, delight, and awaken souls of every age with the wonderful,
surprising, “good tidings” of God’s miraculous gift to mankind. The
gift of Jesus Christ has inspired the Armenian people to the heights of
creativity and heroism, and has sustained us through every trial. At
every critical juncture of our history, we have been able to refresh
ourselves in the knowledge that our destiny lies with Him — through
whom death is vanquished, sacrifice redeemed, and despair transfigured
into winged hope.

Perhaps that ability to refresh — to renew — explains why the idea of
the youthful heart and spirit figures so prominently at Christmas. Not
“youthful” in the superficial sense of immature age, but in a broader
sense suggesting energetic vigor, unspoiled innocence, optimistic
wonder, and openness to the vast horizon of possibility. Certainly,
those are the characteristics of youth we associate with the Christmas
season. But they need not be limited to a single time of year — nor
even to the merely young in age.

This is the message our Diocese will explore in the coming year, whose
theme will be “The Year of the Youth: Passing the Torch.” While our
main objective will be to reach out to our younger generation —
inspiring and preparing them to be leaders of our church — we also want
to remind all our people, of every age, of Christ’s power to refresh the
heart and renew the spirit, to make us all worthy to accept and carry
His torch for our generation.

What is that torch? For Armenian Christians, it is the flickering flame
of our heritage and tradition, fueled by generations of creativity,
sacrifice, and simple faith. Its luminescence is the light of Christ:
the light that guided the wise men to Bethlehem; the light that shined
on our homeland 1,703 years ago; the light that illuminates, warms, and
nourishes us to this day. Always new. Ever-youthful. Unquenchable.

That is the torch we have been given: the torch we must ultimately pass
on to others, when our own day is done. In the meantime, it is ours to
tend and care for; to respect, cherish, and replenish with the energy of
our own faithful labor. Above all, the torch is meant to inspire us, to
guide our steps, to help us press on in the dark of night; to comfort
our hearts with those “good tidings of great joy” — first announced
2,000 years ago, but as fresh, new and youthful as tomorrow.

In this holy season, let us rejoice again in those good tidings, as we
proclaim:
Krisdos dzunav yev haydnetzav! Orhnyal eh haydnootiunun Krisdosee!
Christ is born and revealed! Blessed is the revelation of Christ!

With prayers,
Archbishop Khajag Barsamian
Primate
January 2005

SPIEGEL ONLINE – 17. Dezember 2004, 17:43

URL: ,1518,33331 5,00.html

DEBATTE

“Hrt auf, den Vlkermord an den Armeniern zu leugnen”

Von Henryk M. Broder

Die einzige Bedingung, welche die EU den Trken fur eine Aufnahme in die
Gemeinschaft stellen sollte, ist die Anerkennung des Vlkermordes an den
Armeniern. Aber genau dies wird die EU nicht tun.

Berlin – Jetzt wird alles gut. Nachstes Jahr werden die Verhandlungen uber
einen EU-Beitritt der Turkei beginnen, sie werden nicht “ergebnisoffen”,
sondern “zielorientiert” sein, und dann wird es nur zehn bis zwanzig Jahre
dauern, bis die Turken werden sagen knnen: “Wir sind auch Europaer!”

Alle sind zufrieden, vermutlich auch CDU-Chefin Angela Merkel, die bis zum
Schluss wie ein Kerl gegen eine solche Regelung gekampft und den Turken
eine “privilegierte Partnerschaft” angeboten hatte, wohl wissend, dass es
diese bereits gibt und dass man auf der Ebene von Staaten nicht das
praktizieren kann, was bei Randgruppen moglich ist: eine Art von “Ehe
light”, mit einem “Vertrag” statt einem Trauschein. Denn Merkel wusste
auch, dass sie verlieren wrde, und da konnte sie sich risikolos als
Verteidigerin von Werten inszenieren, die bei uns immer dann beschworen
werden, wenn eine fremde Gefahr abgewehrt werden muss.

[Picture: Trkei um 1915: Hinrichtung armenischer Mnner in Alep. AFP]

Sogar Altbundeskanzler Helmut Kohl, “ein Freund der Turkei” und
Schwiegervater einer Turkin, schaltete sich in die Debatte ein und
erklarte, er sei immer dafur eingetreten, “die Turkei so nah wie moglich
unterhalb der Schwelle der Mitgliedschaft an die EU heranzufhren”.

Das klang so, als wurde ein Pfarrer Petting im Autokino statt richtigen
Sex im Bett empfehlen, um eine kritische “Schwelle” nicht zu berschreiten.

Bisher war uns vieles an der Turkei recht

Was haben wir uberhaupt im Laufe der Debatte fr irre Argumente gehrt. Die
Turkei sei “so gross” und “so unterentwickelt” und so “ganz anders” als
wir, sie passe nicht zu uns. Abgesehen davon, dass die Verhaltnisse in
Sudanatolien sich nicht allzu sehr von den Verhaltnissen in Ostpolen
unterscheiden durften, waren das alles recht spate Einsichten.

Bis jetzt sind wir sehr gerne in die Turkei gefahren – vier Personen, vier
Wochen, vierhundert Euro, all inclusive – und haben schamlos das
Lohngefalle zu unseren Gunsten ausgenutzt. Umgekehrt waren Turken als
Mullmanner, Bauarbeiter und Reservisten auf dem Arbeitsmarkt herzlich
willkommen, die man bei Bedarf einberufen und wieder nach Hause schicken
konnte.

Auch dass die Turkei innerhalb der Nato die Ostflanke bewachte, war uns
sehr recht. Und als in Istanbul Terror-Bomben losgingen, da haben wir
Beileidstelegramme geschickt und waren erleichtert, dass die Turken etwas
abbekamen, was eigentlich uns gegolten hatte. Wir sind fr einen “Wandel
durch Dialog” mit den Mullahs in Iran, haben grosste Muhe, eine sakulare
Ordnung bei uns zu etablieren, wissen aber nicht, ob wir der Turkei trauen
konnen, der einzigen muslimischen Demokratie, die zwar nicht vollkommen
ist, aber grosse Anstrengungen unternimmt, die Voraussetzungen fr eine
“Europaisierung” zu erfullen.

Die Turken haben die Todesstrafe und die Folter abgeschafft, es gibt freie
Wahlen, eine funktionierende Gewaltenteilung und Eliten, die auf Bildung,
Erziehung und Mobilitat setzen. Naturlich gibt es auch ein kulturelles
Gefalle zwischen den Milieus in den Stadten und auf dem Lande,
Parallelgesellschaften sozusagen, aber die gibt es in Spanien, Portugal
und Griechenland ebenso.

Turken fuhlen sich verschaukelt

Die einzige Frage, auf die es ankommt, ist die, ob sich langfristig die
Sakularisten in den Stadten oder die Traditionalisten auf dem Lande
durchsetzen werden. Und da konnte man in der Tat den Sakularisten helfen,
aber nicht, indem man ihnen sagt: “Kinder, Ihr seid noch nicht so weit!”

Kein Wunder, dass sich die Turken verschaukelt fuhlen und auf schrage
Gedanken kommen. Konnte es sein, dass die christlichen Europaer unter sich
bleiben wollen, wie fruher die feine Gesellschaft, die ihren Dienstboten
eine “privilegierte Partnerschaft” im Stall und am Kuchentisch anbot?

Konnte es sein, dass der einzige gravierende Fehler, den die Trken nicht
beheben konnen, um den Europaern entgegen zu kommen, der ist, dass sie
Muslime sind?

Der Witz dabei ist, dass wir uns mit den Muslimen umso schwerer tun, je
liberaler und sakularer sie sind. Die SPD organisiert ein Seminar mit der
Hisbollah in Beirut, weil die Genossen gerne wissen mochten, wie die
Radikalen ticken. Unser Aussenminister legt am Grab des Terroristen Arafat
einen Kranz nieder und wurdigt dessen historische Rolle. Ein
Nobelpreistrager mochte eine Kirche in eine Moschee verwandeln und ein
gruner Fundi einen islamischen Feiertag in der Bundesrepublik einfuhren.

Nur gegenuber der Turkei, die keine Terroristen produziert und im Begriffe
ist, einen sakularen Islam zu entwickeln, sind wir kritisch bis
misstrauisch: Die meinen es nicht, die tun nur so!

Nein, wir sind es, die es nicht so meinen, wir tun nur so als ob.

Einzige Bedingung: Anerkennung des Genozids

Es gibt allerdings eine Bedingung fur den Beitritt der Turkei in die EU,
die wir nicht stellen wollen und die in den Debatten so gut wie nie
genannt wird: die Anerkennung des turkischen Volkermords an den Armeniern.

Es war der zweite Volkermord des 20. Jahrhunderts, nach den Massakern der
Deutschen an den Hereros in Deutsch-Sudwest.

Wie viele Armenier bei der ethnischen Sauberung der Turkei von 1894 bis
1923 getotet wurden, weiss man bis heute nicht genau, die Schatzungen
reichen von 600.000 bis 1,5 Millionen ermordeten Menschen. Aber nicht auf
die Zahl kommt es an, sondern darauf, dass die Turken bis heute behaupten,
es habe keinen Volkermord gegeben, die Armenier seien im “Zuge von
Kriegshandlungen ums Leben” gekommen, wie der Pressesprecher der
turkischen Botschaft behauptet, nachdem sie “mit den Russen und den
Franzosen paktiert” hatten. Es habe damals “viele Massaker gegeben”, auch
an Turken, begangen von Armeniern. Das ist reine Geschichtsklitterung.

Schlimmer noch: Es ist die offizielle Position einer Regierung, die auch
von der turkischen offentlichkeit ubernommen wurde. Turken, die von der
amtlichen Linie abweichen, wie der Grunen-EU-Parlamentarier Cem ozdemir,
gelten als Nestbeschmutzer und Verrater.

Es habe keinen Massen- und keinen Volkermord gegeben. Alle Berichte uber
das Massaker vom 24./25. April 1915, bei dem die Fuhrung der Armenier
ausgerottet wurde, uber die Todesmarsche in die Wuste, bei denen
Hunderttausende von Menschen starben, sind Erfindungen und antiturkische
Propaganda.

Sogar Franz Werfel, der mit seinem Roman “Die 40 Tage des Musa Dagh” den
Armeniern ein Denkmal gesetzt hat, habe spater bedauert, dass er auf
“falsche Dokumente” reingefallen ist – sagt der Pressesprecher der
turkischen Botschaft in Berlin. Und geht davon aus, dass sein Wort uber
jeden Zweifel erhaben ist.

Deswegen sollte die EU den Turken sagen: “Alles, woruber wir verhandeln,
sind technische Details. Es gibt nur eine Forderung, die Ihr vor der
Aufnahme der Verhandlungen erfullen musst. Hort mit dem Leugnen des
Genozids an den Armeniern auf, bittet die Armenier um Vergebung, sagt:
“Wir waren es!”

Aber genau das wird die EU nicht machen. Nicht weil sie es vermeiden
mochte, die Turken zu kranken, sie in eine peinliche Situation zu bringen,
sondern weil ihr ein paar Hunderttausend Armenier, die seit 80 Jahren tot
sind, wurscht sind. So wie ihr ein paar Millionen tote Ruander, Sudanesen
und Kongolesen wurscht sind. So wie ihr alles wurscht ist, was die
gemeinsame Handelsbilanz und die Stabilitat des Euro nicht tangiert.

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
December 17, 2004, Friday

ORGANIZATION OF THE CIS COLLECTIVE SECURITY TREATY: MEETING IN
YEREVAN[]

SOURCE: Voyenno-Promyshlenny Kurier, No 48, December 15 – 21, 2004,
p. 2

by Samvel Martirosjan

For a whole assortment of reasons the Russian media made but scant
reports on the 10th meeting of secretaries of Security Councils of
the Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty that took
place in Yerevan not long ago. Meanwhile, representatives of Belarus,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan that met in the
capital of Armenia did not restrict discussion to current problems of
military political and military economic co-operation.

Armenian defense minister and secretary of the Security Council
announced that the meeting was taking place against a complicated
political background in the zone of responsibility of the
Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty. “Global and
regional threats, and first and foremost international terrorism, are
becoming undeniably more serious,” Serzh Sarkisjan said. He also
mentioned the negative effect of political instability in Afghanistan
and traffic on the situation in Central Asia. Secretaries assembled
in Yerevan discussed ways and means dealing with traffic.

Operation Channel-2004 in countries of the Organization of the CIS
Collective Security Treaty was summed up. According to General
Secretary Nikolai Bordyuzha, the involved countries set up a security
belt along the northern borders of Afghanistan. The operation
included two phases. Law enforcement agencies of countries of the
Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty were involved in
phase one; they were joined by security structures of Azerbaijan,
Iran, and Uzbekistan in phase two. Over 5 tons of drugs were
confiscated, several thousand criminal proceedings instigated, new
traffic routes uncovered. The meeting in Yerevan discussed ways of
traffic neutralization. Decisions were made to improve co-operation
between countries of the Organization of the CIS Collective Security
Treaty. Establishment of a special coordinating body within the
framework of the Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty
was discussed.

Since Defense Minister of Azerbaijan Safar Abiyev had urged NATO to
express its opinion on Karabakh and Armenian “policy of occupation”,
Igor Ivanov of Russia was asked about the possibility of using the
Alliance to settle the old territorial dispute. “Dialogue – including
dialogue on the highest level – has already been established as a
means of solving the Karabakh problem,” Ivanov replied. “I do not
think we need any changes that may complicate development of the
dialogue.” The problem is handled by the OSCE Minsk Group, Ivanov
said, and the Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty had
no intention of interfering with the process. It has different
objectives, and the matter of Karabakh was not discussed at the
Yerevan meeting; neither were other regional conflicts.

All the same, the meeting did discuss official Baku’s recent attempt
to have the UN General Assembly discuss a resolution “On the
situation on the occupied territories of Azerbaijan”. Kazakhstan and
Kyrgyzstan backed the Azerbaijani initiative at the General Committee
that forms the agenda of the UN General Assembly. Bordyuzha called it
“a certain malfunction of the system of coordination of the
Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty.” The matter was
discussed and the debates ended in the agreement to improve
coordination in the matters affecting security of members of the
Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty.

Speaking of contacts with international organizations, Ivanov said
that the Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty alone
could not hope to successfully cope with international terrorism,
trafficking, or illegal immigration. The Organization of the CIS
Collective Security Treaty will therefore expand co-operation with
the UN, NATO, and the European Union.

It should be mentioned as well that the Constitutional Court of
Armenia voted to postpone discussion of legitimacy of the accord to
send a national humanitarian contingent (50 men) to Iraq because
Sarkisjan was at the meeting with his counterparts from members of
the Organization of the CIS Collective Security Treaty. In fact, his
schedule had been set long ago. It follows that the decision to set
the Constitutional Court meeting for November 30 was a political move
on the part of Armenia. It was a message to Russia that Armenia did
not contemplate any serious deviations from the course for
military-political integration with Russia.

This assumption is also confirmed by results of the meeting of the
parliamentary commission set up by the Federal Assembly of the
Russian Federation and the National Assembly of the Republic of
Armenia. Its protocol emphasizes that political and military
co-operation between Russia and Armenia answers their national
interests and that their military alliance is an instrumental element
of security in the Caucasus.

Turkey Armenian’ Patriarch Mesrob II: “We Fully Support Turkey’s EU Membership”

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Dec 17 2004

ISTANBUL -Mesrob II, Patriarch of Turkey’s Armenians, says Turkey
Armenians fully support Turkey’s EU membership.

Mesrob II said “Turkey’s region, the EU, Turkey and the whole of
the world will benefit from Turkey’s EU membership… The EU is not a
Christian club”. Mesrob II further argued that the 1915 events is very
suitable to abuse and the foreigners use these events against Turkey.

“I support PM Tayyip Erdogan’s approach to the Armenian issue. A
dialogue process should be started between Turkish and Armenian
peoples” added Mesrob II.

–Boundary_(ID_sDZzMhRHiBorogYuChmIRQ)–

PRESS RELEASE
Council of Armenian Non-Governmental Organizations
of the Samtskhe-Javakheti Region in Georgia
Akhalkalak, Samtskhe-Javakheti
Georgia
Contact: Khatchatur Stepanian
Tel: (+995 99) 93-75-61
E-mail: [email protected]
Web:

Integration, not Assimilation:
Samtskhe-Javakhketi NGOs hold their first public forum

AKHALKALAK (A-Info) – The first public forum organized by the Council of
Armenian non-governmental organizations (NGO) of the Samtskhe-Javakhketi
region, was held on December 11 in Akhalkalak to discuss the
socio-economic issues of the region. The subsequent public forums are to
discuss issues related to culture and self-governance.

The public forums are titled “Integration, not Assimilation,” as the
Armenians of the region do not oppose the integration within Georgia,
but defy the “integration” policy of Georgia’s central government
leading to assimilation.

Representatives of the United Nations, the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe, the European Commission, the Council of Europe,
foreign ambassadors, ethnic Armenian and Georgian members of the
Georgian parliament as well as Georgian government officials were
invited to attend the public forum. Most of those high-ranking
officials, however, did not attend the public forum. Only Beatrice
Schulterier, the representative in Georgia of the OSCE High Commissioner
on National Minorities, and Michael Hertoft, the Akhalkalak project
manager of the European Centre for Minority Issues were present. Also
attending were members of local self-governing bodies, local
intellectuals and representatives of NGOs from the region, as well as
from Tbilisi and Yerevan,

Georgian parliament’s ethnic Armenian members, elected from the region,
also did not attend the public forum. Instead they chose to attend a
convention of one of the Armenian political parties in Yerevan.

Nevertheless, the public forum vividly discussed the issues on its
agenda.
Two reports were presented by experts on the socio-economic issues of
the region, Azat Shipaktsian and Artashes Palanjian, who stated that the
region has found itself in a difficult socio-economic state due to the
discriminatory policies of the central government of Georgia. They also
noted that the funds donated by international donors were not evenly
dispersed when it comes to the Armenian population of the region.

Following the reports, the participants expressed their opinions
regarding the socio-economic problems of the region, in fact asserting
the opinions expressed by the rapporteurs.

At the end of the discussions, the public forum adopted a resolution on
the socio-economic situation of Samtskhe-Javakhketi (the resolution is
attached), and recommended to the Council to establish a commission to
work out a program for socio-economic development of the
Samtskhe-Javakhketi region.

RESOLUTION

Adopted by the “Integration, not Assimilation” Public Forum on
Socio-economic Issues of Samtskhe-Javakhketi, Akhalkalak, 11 December
2004

Aiming:

* To contribute to resolution of the socio-economic issues of
Samtskhe-Javakhketi;
* To contribute to the improvement of the socio-economic situation of
Georgia through improvement of the socio-economic situation in
Samtskhe-Javakhketi and mitigation of the demographic problems, and to
emphasize the necessity of reforms and their equal implementation on the
basis of regions and ethnicity;
* To contribute to Georgia’s internal integration, internal political
stability and strengthening of democratic values through socio-economic
reforms in Samtskhe-Javakhketi;
* Based on a number of factual factors, such as the demographic picture
of the region and the common borders with Armenia, to contribute to
perceive the resolution of Samtskhe-Javakheti’s socio-economic problems
as the best possible model for regional integration and friendship
between the nations;
* To contribute to the real process of Georgia’s and South Caucasus’
integration into Europe, to participate in the fulfilment of Georgia’s
commitments before the international (European) community, and to make
sure that every citizen gets a share of the positive results of the
process;

Taking into consideration the opinions and ideas expressed in reports
and debates, the Public Forum states that:

* Samtskhe-Javakhketi falls considerably behind the country’s other
regions in its human development indicators;
* The unemployment rate is way too high, resulting in emigration. There
are no equal conditions in filling job vacancies; the region, and
especially the Armenian-populated areas, are not included in any
realizable social and employment projects;
* The health system is deteriorated. There are no functioning medical
ambulatories in the villages. The few district hospitals are poorly
equipped and are far from satisfying the minimum needs of the
population;
* The population’s social security is on a low level. Salaries and
pensions, which are significantly less than the consumer’s basket, are
not paid on time;
* The escalating poverty is accompanied by rising social inequality;
there is a sharp polarization of income;
* There is no functioning stable system (fuel, heating, drinking water
and other utilities) to support the population’s livelihood. The issue
of heating is especially acute in Akhalkalak and Ninotsminda;
* Roads connecting the region with Tbilisi, with the coastal and other
regions of Georgia, as well as with Armenia are damaged and in desperate
shape. In even worse shape are the local and village roads. This
situation creates insurmountable difficulties for the socio-economic
development, as well as for the economic integration of the region;
* The country’s energy crisis is felt especially harsh in the region;
the burden of these difficulties is not equally spread and Javakheti is
again penalized. The fact that the region is distant and mountainous is
neglected;
* Except for one or two cases, there are no telephone networks in the
villages. The situation is not much different in the towns. The
situation is the same for the spheres of electronic communications and
TV broadcasting;
* The agricultural and the industrial sectors are paralyzed. In the
economic and especially in the agricultural sector, many development
possibilities are neglected, even though the region’s agriculture plays
an important role in Georgia’s economy. The almost entirely agricultural
region has no irrigation network. The break up of the economic
infrastructure, the rarity or unavailability of fuel and energy supplies
seriously hinder the processing and selling of natural resources and
agricultural provisions.
* The corruption that exists in the whole country is accentuated in the
region. The reforms proclaimed in the country have not reached the
region yet. As a result there is a public perception that corruption is
not only allowed, but also encouraged;
* The region is pushed to artificial demographic changes which could
result in escalation of tension in ethnic relations and instability. It
is odd, that the authorities organize the immigration of other ethnic
groups to the region and provide them with socio-economic assistance,
while the locals are deprived of such assistance;
* The participation of national minorities in the public-political life
of the country and in formulating socio-economic policies is not
ensured.

The Public Forum, being concerned that:

* The policies being realized by the authorities in the spheres of
state-building, economy, social issues, national minority rights and
demographic issues could undermine Georgia’s image in the international
arena and the development of democracy in the country;
* Unresolved socio-economic and other issues could hinder the
integration of the ethnic minorities;
* The delay in resolving the accumulated problems could raise new and
undesirable tensions;
* The existing tense and explosive situation is aggravated by the
nationalistic and intolerant propaganda by some media outlets and
public-political organizations;

Considers it essential:

* To regard job creation, development of transportation and other
infrastructure (gas pipelines, water lines, irrigation systems,
telecommunications, etc.) as the main route to resolve the region’s
socio-economic problems;
* To completely repair – with internal and external resources — all
highways connecting the region to the coastal areas of Georgia, to
Tbilisi and to Armenia, as well as the internal roads connecting the
villages;
* To equally distribute the burden of the energy hardships between the
regions; to resolve the energy problems using local resources
(Taparvan);
* To expand the telephone network in the villages, ensure quality and
affordable telecommunications;
* To build a modern telecommunications transmitter;
* To create conditions for processing the agricultural products in the
region, implementing of new technologies in agriculture, resolving the
irrigation problems;
* To establish branches of large (including foreign) banks, financial
and credit institutions and to extend loans by them to small and
medium-sized businesses;
* To restore the health system (hospitals, emergency rooms, village
medical ambulatories);
* To renovate and operate the Akhalkalak airport;
* To take steps to create, empower and sustain a tolerant inter-ethnic
environment;
* To take measures to avert the artificial alteration of the demographic
picture of the region, which would endanger the stability of the region;
* To engage the local residents, workforce and potential in the
international economic processes underway in the region;
* To cooperate with international organizations dealing with democracy,
human rights, human development and economic integration; to involve
them actively in resolving the fundamental problems of
Samtskhe-Javakhketi, to ensure fair distribution between regions of
credit and grant funds provided by international organizations;

The Public Forum resolves:

* To recommend to the Council of Armenian non-governmental organizations
(NGO) of the Samtskhe-Javakhketi region to form an expert group in
charge of elaborating and presenting a comprehensive program for the
region’s socio-economic development based on the abovementioned
imperatives;
* To appeal once again to the Georgian central authorities and to the
relevant local self-governing bodies, expecting a multilateral
discussion of the issues in question and their resolution with state
solicitude;
* To appeal to international institutions, donor countries and
organizations, expecting their input in drawing up and implementing
concrete projects aimed at completely or partially resolving the issues
raised;
* To appeal to the Georgian non-governmental organizations and mass
media expecting them to focus on the mentioned issues, to develop
relevant public opinion, to contribute to the efficiency of the
governmental bodies, as well as to assist in engaging the business
community and individual businessmen in resolving the problems raised;
* Based on the centuries-long friendship between the Armenian and
Georgian peoples as well as the good neighbourly high-level relations
between the two states, and aiming at furthering those relations with
practical steps, to appeal to the Armenian non-governmental
organizations to assist in involving the Armenian business community, as
well as individual businessmen and other interested structures in
resolving the issues raised.

libération, France
mardi 14 décembre 2004

La Turquie en marche vers l’Union européenne

Par Jean QUATREMER

(à Bruxelles)

trois jours du Conseil européen qui doit décider de l’ouverture de
négociations d’adhésion avec la Turquie, les derniers risques de
crise s’éloignent. Hier, à Bruxelles, le ministre des Affaires
étrangères de Chypre a écarté l’idée que son pays utilise son droit
de veto s’il n’est pas reconnu rapidement par Ankara. Georges Iacovou
espère simplement que la Turquie manifestera sa volonté de
«normaliser» ses relations avec la République de Chypre avant mars
2005. De son côté, Michel Barnier a annoncé que la France demanderait
que, «dans le courant de la négociation», Ankara s’engage à
reconnaître le génocide arménien. Enfin, à Strasbourg, le débat au
Parlement européen a montré qu’une large majorité de députés était
favorable à l’ouverture de négociations avec Ankara.

Turkiye, Turkey
Dec 14 2004

FRENCH FM URGES TURKEY TO RECOGNIZE SO-CALLED ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier yesterday asked Ankara to
recognize so-called Armenian genocide in return for the European
Union beginning its accession talks. At a press conference, Barnier
said that there was no consensus yet on the statement on Turkey for
this week’s historic EU summit, adding that negotiations could begin
at earliest in the second half of 2005. Stressing that there was no
guarantee of a positive result and that steps should be patiently
taken one at a time, Barnier said talks might be suspended at any
point and that the French people would say the final word through a
referendum. He added that during the accession talks, France would
also urge Ankara to recognize the past Armenian tragedy. /Turkiye/

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Dec 14 2004

PRESIDENT ILHAM ALIYEV MEETS MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN
RELATIONS AND DEFENSE OF BRITISH PARLIAMENT
[December 13, 2004, 12:45:10]

On 13 December, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev
has met members of the Committee on Foreign Relations and Defense of
Parliament of the Great Britain.

Heads of both Committees and about ten MPs attended the meeting.

Opening the meeting, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations
Donald Anderson welcomed the president of Azerbaijan and underlined
that his visit to London has great importance. He asked head of the
Azerbaijan State to inform the participants of meeting on the ongoing
processes in Azerbaijan, regional cooperation and its prospects.

President Ilham Aliyev highlighted the visitors on the socio-economic
processes in the Country, on regional cooperation, on the
Armenia-Azerbaijan, Nagorny Karabakh conflict and connected with it
questions.

Then, Members of Parliament addressed Head of the Azerbaijan State
with numerous questions. President of Azerbaijan answered questions
on impediments caused by the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, for the
regional cooperation, prospects of settlement of the conflict, on the
Oil Fund, international links of the country and its relations with
neighboring countries.

***

The same day, Head of the Azerbaijan State met representatives of
Azerbaijan community residing in the Great Britain.

***

In the evening, the England-Azerbaijan Society has arranged a banquet
in honor of the Azerbaijan President.

Official visit of the Azerbaijan President to the Greta Britain is in
progress.

Court: Bishop may sell church
By ALBERT McKEON, Telegraph Staff
[email protected]

Nashua Telegraph, NH
Dec 8 2004

Published: Wednesday, Dec. 8, 2004

NASHUA – Addressing a contentious argument surfacing throughout
American Catholicism, a judge ruled that a bishop and not parishioners
have direct control of a church.

Bishop John McCormack thus can sell St. Francis Xavier Church to the
Armenian Orthodox Church because the transaction observes restrictions
in the French Hill property’s 119-year-old deed, according to a
Hillsborough County Probate Court judge.

But former parishioners of St. Francis Xavier disagree, and hold hope
that a civil court judge will soon favor their side. The parishioners
filed a civil suit in Hillsborough County Superior Court contending
they are beneficiaries of the church, and that McCormack essentially
manages the property in trust for them.

Attorney Randall Wilbert, who represents the group of parishioners,
said the probate court ruling – handed down Nov. 23 – does not affect
his clients, and that they still await a decision in the civil court.
They believe a state law cements their rights, and that the proposed
sale defies their interests, he said.

But those involved in the potential sale, while also awaiting a
decision in the civil court, express satisfaction with the probate
ruling. McCormack, as leader of the Diocese of Manchester, has a $1
million purchase-and-sale agreement with local real estate developer
Vatche Manoukian.

Manoukian intends to donate the property to the Armenian Orthodox
Church because he has identified a potential parishioner base for the
church, his attorney, Gerald Prunier, said Tuesday. A sale, however,
is based upon the final approval of Archbishop Torkom Manoogian,
the Armenian Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem. The matter is now
before church hierarchy, and all interested parties hope a decision
will come early next year, Prunier said.

“It’s a good use of the church,” he said.

That use was the focus of the probate argument, one initiated by the
Catholic diocese, and it also lies at the heart of the civil case.

The diocese closed the century-old Norman basilica-style building
last year and merged the parish with St. Louis de Gonzague Church.
Diocesan officials maintain the Armenian church’s use of the building
would follow the precepts of an 1885 deed granted by The Jackson Co.,
a textile manufacturer that donated the hilltop land on which the
building sits. That stipulation is the land must always hold a place
of religious observance.

“If the donor had wanted the property to be used for a Roman Catholic
church, the donor would have written that,” diocesan attorney
Ovide Lamontagne said Tuesday. “But the donor said public religious
purposes.”

Probate Court Judge Raymond Cloutier agreed, ruling that the
transaction would be in accordance with the deed. Cloutier also ruled
that McCormack holds “legal title” for the Diocese of Manchester.

“Individual parishioners of Saint Francis Xavier do not have standing
in the matter before the court as it relates to . . . the sale of
the property,” Cloutier wrote.

But Wilbert said the former parishioners, in fact, do have standing.
A legislative bill enacted in 1901 recognizes them as beneficiaries,
and the bishop who leads the diocese only holds the property in trust
on their behalf, Wilbert said. This argument was presented in the
civil case.

The issue of who has controlling interest in a church – a bishop
or parishioners – has risen to the forefront of several challenges
involving the closing of parishes throughout the country. Several
dioceses have, as part of a restructuring program, closed old churches
that have significant spiritual and sentimental value to parishioners.

St. Francis Xavier opened in 1898 after French-Canadian immigrant
mill workers funded its construction with their own nickels and
dimes. But the diocese closed the building last year and merged the
parish with St. Louis de Gonzague, citing a dwindling parishioner
base and collection coffers, and the prevailing clergy shortage.

The diocese points to a clergy-and-parishioner-driven task force
as proof that church leaders thoughtfully considered options before
selecting St. Francis and two other inner-city churches for closure.
But many St. Francis parishioners protested all efforts to close the
Chandler Street church; some of them are plaintiffs in the civil suit.

“As unfortunate, as difficult as it is for parishes to be closed and
consolidated, it’s the necessary evolution for the church,” Lamontagne
said. For that work to carry forward, the bishop must have authority
to act on behalf of parishioners, he said.

Lamontagne had noted in his probate argument that Catholic canon
law governs the organization of the church, and that a parish falls
under this jurisdiction. Parishioners “cannot and do not speak for
the parish,” he wrote.

He hopes the civil court will recognize this organizational structure.

But the parishioners hope the civil court will view the matter
differently: that state law does give them a voice.

Deux églises chrétiennes attaquées en Irak, à Mossoul

Libération, France
mardi 07 décembre 2004

MOSSOUL, Irak – Des hommes armés ont fait irruption dans deux églises
de Mossoul, une arménienne et une chaldéenne, en faisant sortir les
occupants avant de faire exploser des engins qui ont endommagé les
édifices religieux, sans faire de victimes, rapportent des témoins.

La ville du nord de l’Irak est principalement peuplée d’Arabes sunnites
et de Kurdes, qui ont du mal à cohabiter, mais également de nombreux
chrétiens, qui forment une minorité forte de 3,0% au niveau national.

–Boundary_(ID_oMuz9vmhd/i2+8W5PEpSmg)–