Armenian Church Marks The Commemoration Day Of Holy Martyrs

ARMENIAN CHURCH MARKS THE COMMEMORATION DAY OF HOLY MARTYRS

Aysor
Feb 8 2010
Armenia

Today Armenian Apostolic Church marks the commemoration day of
Bishop St. Mark, Priest St. Pion, Deacons St. Kyouregh (Cyril) and
St. Benjamin and holy martyrs Sts. Abdlmseh, Vormzdana and Sayen.

St. Mark was the Bishop of Aritus in the half of the 4th century.

Famous theological doctrines are ascribed to him. During the period of
reign of the king Julianus the Betrayer he was subjected to torments,
then he was exiled to a remote island, where he passed away dedicating
the last years of his life to Christian preaching.

Priest St. Pion also has been one of the devoted advocates of
Christianity. It is known that he has served in Smyrna, where he has
been martyred for preaching Christianity.

Deacon St. Kyouregh (Cyril) and St. Benjamin have been martyred for
the sake of Christian faith. Accusing Kyouregh (Cyril) in destroying
heathen temples, Julianus the Betrayer allowed the heathen priests
to judge him and the heathen priests subjected him to severe torments.

Deacon St. Benjamin was martyred during the period of reign of the
Persian king Hazkert I for preaching Christianity among the Persians.

Among the victims martyred during the period of reign of the King
Hazkert I were Vormzdana, minister of the Persian royal palace,
and Sayen, a Persian noble. Both of them being deprived of royal and
noble pleasures and privileges continued to remain loyal to Christian
faith and were martyred for the sake of Christian faith.

Abdlmseh was the son of rich Jews living in Persia. While pasturing his
father’s cattle Abdlmseh was acquainted with other Christians of the
same age, who baptized him and renamed Abdlmseh, which means "Servant
of Christ." Becoming aware of his son’s converting to Christianity
and not succeeding to force him to renounce of Christianity, his
father stabbed him in the same place where the saint had been baptized.

Armenia And Turkey: The Truce In Need Of A Rescue

ARMENIA AND TURKEY: THE TRUCE IN NEED OF A RESCUE
By Henri J. Barkey and Thomas de Waal

Los Angeles Times
rkey5-2010feb05,0,1822351.story?track=rss
Feb 5 2010

Opinion

They have a chance to make peace over their troubled past and move
forward — or balk and leave themselves, and their region, worse off
than before.

For a while, it looked like the start of a great reconciliation.

Armenia and Turkey have lived beneath the vast shadow of the mass
murder of Armenians in eastern Turkey during World War I, and to this
day they maintain no diplomatic ties. But in October, the Armenian and
Turkish foreign ministers met in Switzerland and signed two protocols
to set up relations, open their common border — closed since 1993
— and begin addressing the painful disputes that divide them. Each
nation’s governments must still ratify the agreements. The United
States, with its large Armenian American community and strategic
alliance with Turkey, threw its weight behind the deal.

But this great truce is already in need of a rescue, and if it breaks
down, we will end up in a worse place than where we started. In
January, Turkey showed signs of having cold feet. Its foreign ministry
objected to a judgment by the Armenian constitutional court supporting
the protocols on the grounds that they are consistent with the founding
principles of the state, which commit it to pursuing recognition of
the 1915 killings as genocide.

The endorsement of the court, which the U.S. government welcomed,
actually opens the way for the Armenian parliament to ratify the
protocols. Turkey’s move was a fairly transparent device to put the
brakes on the process.

Why is Turkey trying to backtrack? Its government agreed to the
protocols, in part because it wanted to prevent the U.S.

administration and Congress from passing a resolution describing
the Armenian massacres as genocide. But Ankara was surprised by the
vehemence of the opposition the deal generated both at home and in
its ally, Azerbaijan, which lost a conflict with the Armenians over
the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh in the early 1990s.

The text of the protocols does not explicitly mention Nagorno-Karabakh,
but the dispute looms large in the background.

Turkey originally shut the border with Armenia in 1993; the Armenians
captured an Azerbaijani province during the Nagorno-Karabakh war. When
the accord was signed last year, the Turks hoped that there would be
a breakthrough in the peace talks over the conflict, but that hope is
fading. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has boxed himself
in by proclaiming that the protocols will not be implemented until
Armenia withdraws from occupied Azerbaijani territory.

A rapprochement would be good news for Armenia, which would see
its main border to the West opened and an end to years of regional
isolation. Yet Armenian President Serge Sarkisian also faces
unexpectedly strong opposition. In the diaspora, there are loud
complaints that the provisions to confirm the existing Armenian-Turkish
border and set up a joint historians’ commission on the massacres
relieve pressure on Ankara to own up to the Armenian genocide.

Yet the world would never tolerate a redrawing of Turkey’s borders —
even Josef Stalin failed to accomplish that in the flush of victory
over the Nazis in 1945 — and the Turkish government is unlikely to
recognize the Armenian genocide with a gun pressed to its head.

Turkey’s own growing internal debate about the crimes of 1915 is
a much surer road to their eventual acknowledgment than political
lobbying from abroad.

On the Armenian side, it would be political suicide for Sarkisian to
make a major concession over Nagorno-Karabakh — such as a unilateral
withdrawal from occupied Azerbaijani land. Yet it is not unreasonable
for the Turks to expect some progress. After all, they closed the
Armenian border in solidarity with their Azerbaijani brethren, who
would be furious if it were reopened without any move forward on the
Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. At the very least, Azerbaijan could retaliate
by charging the Turks higher gas prices and favoring Russian export
routes over the Nabucco gas pipeline projected to traverse Turkey en
route to Europe.

Allowing these protocols to fail would unleash a destructive chain
of events. An aggrieved U.S. Congress might press ahead with a
genocide resolution, a move that would provoke a strong anti-American
backlash in Turkey. The already faltering peace process over the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict — the major issue impeding peaceful
development in the South Caucasus — would be hit hard, and calls
for war could resume in Azerbaijan.

But Armenia can take smaller steps to break the deadlock. Owing to
the geography of this region, everyone suffers. Azerbaijan also has
an isolated territory that suffers economically — the exclave of
Nakhichevan, separated from the rest of Azerbaijan by an unfriendly
Armenia, its road and rail links severed. As a gesture of goodwill,
the Yerevan government could take steps to ease the blockade of
Nakhichevan in parallel with the opening of the Armenian-Turkish
border. The Armenians could also begin work on rehabilitating the
long-defunct railway line that once connected Azerbaijan, Armenia,
Nakhichevan and Turkey. It is a sad symbol of the closed borders and
suspicions that cripple this region, but one day it could be a major
east-west transport route. The Turks would be wise to hail such an
initiative as a success and move on with ratifying the protocols.

More broadly, better relations with Armenia offer Turkey a chance
to lift the burden of history from its shoulders. Turkey’s ambitious
foreign policy, with its goal of "zero problems with its neighbors"
and becoming the central power in its region, will come to nothing
if its enmity with Armenia endures. Tiny Armenia may be dwarfed by
Turkey’s size and clout, but it can lay claim to a moral imperative.

Henri J. Barkey is a professor of international relations at Lehigh
University and a visiting senior scholar at the Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace, where Thomas de Waal is a senior associate
on the Caucasus.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ba

Ambassador Oleg Yesayan Presents His Credentials To Medvedev

AMBASSADOR OLEG YESAYAN PRESENTS HIS CREDENTIALS TO MEDVEDEV

Aysor
Feb 5 2010
Armenia

Newly appointed Armenia’s Ambassador to Russia Oleg Yesayan has
presented today his Credentials to Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev,
a spokesperson to Foreign Ministry reported.

President Dmitry Medvedev congratulated Oleg Yesayan on appointment
and wished successful working, stressing the friendly relations and
cooperation between the counties. He pointed that Armenia and Russia
have been solving many issues in fields of economy, security and
regional stability by joint efforts and said that the current level
of relations must be kept and developed.

Newly appointed Armenia’s Ambassador to Russia Oleg Yesayan has
presented today his Credentials to Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev,
a spokesperson to Foreign Ministry reported.

President Dmitry Medvedev congratulated Oleg Yesayan on appointment
and wished successful working, stressing the friendly relations and
cooperation between the counties. He pointed that Armenia and Russia
have been solving many issues in fields of economy, security and
regional stability by joint efforts and said that the current level
of relations must be kept and developed.

CC Ruling Is Untouchable

CC RULING IS UNTOUCHABLE

A1Plus.am
02/02/10

Serzh Sargsyan still hasn’t sent the Turkey-Armenia Protocols to
the National Assembly for ratification. "A1+" asked head of the
NA committee on state-legal issues David Harutyunyan whether the
Protocols would be ratified taking the ruling of the Constitutional
Court as a basis or not.

"The National Assembly ratifies the Protocols, but by ratifying the
Protocols, the NA takes into account the court’s position from the
legal angle. Each legal text can be interpreted in different ways. The
Constitutional Court presented how the texts should be perceived. From
that angle, I believe that although the NA ratifies the Protocols,
it definitely takes into account the legal position of the CC",
said David Harutyunyan.

David Harutyunyan said that he considered Turkey’s claims according to
which the content of the Protocols has been distorted by the CC ruling
and that certain preconditions have been added as absurd. "The CC has
not changed anything in any way. It has specified why it considers
these Protocols constitutional. I view Turkey’s claims as a phony
means of explaining why they are delaying the ratification."

Some say that the CC has exceeded its powers by including
clarifications in the preamble of the decision. David Harutyunyan
tends to differ: "I view the CC ruling as untouchable in terms
of legality. I read the ruling very carefully and I think it is
untouchable in terms of the law, international obligations and that
it corresponds to the spirit of international treaties. The CC has
not taken any step toward exceeding its powers. I think the CC has
applied a very legal technique and I would truly be happy for all
acts to be untouchable at this level."

British Gangster Ran Criminal Activities Through Facebook

BRITISH GANGSTER RAN CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES THROUGH FACEBOOK

News.am
10:10 / 02/01/2010

British criminal sentenced to 35 years’ imprisonment used Facebook
to issue threats and ran criminal activities from jail. According
to lenta.ru, 42-aged Colin Gunn, considered to be one of the most
dangerous criminals in Britain had 565 "friends" on Facebook.

Gunn’s profile was closed January 29 after it became known that the
publication in Times would appear.

Colin Gunn was jailed four years ago for ordering the murders of John
and Joan Stirland, The Times reports.

Though it is forbidden to use mobile phone or similar devices in
British prisons, Gunn managed to post new photographs on his page.

TBILISI: We Will Have To Choose Between Orthodoxy And Liberalism

WE WILL HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN ORTHODOXY AND LIBERALISM

Daily Georgian Times
2010.02.01 13:29

Community

As swine flu took hold in the West, many countries reportedly installed
holy water sterilising machines in Catholic Churches.

Scientists have not yet explained the miracle of holy water, which
has unique properties it maintains for a whole year. The question is,
if a person is so irreligious that he is afraid of catching "Pig Flu"
from holy water what purpose do his visits to church serve?

Faith does not obey the laws of reason. Nor does arguing about
which religion is better than another. This is a matter of belief,
and you can never explain to anyone else why your belief is better
than theirs. This is why people of other faiths peacefully co-exist
with the Orthodox in Georgia.

In Georgia people did not only uphold their own values but took the
same attitude towards the values of others. When King David the Builder
prohibited the slaughtering of pigs in Moslem districts this was not
a gesture of tolerance. It was an acknowledgment of the legal culture
and principles of that community. King of Kartli Vakhtang VI included
the traditional laws of the Jewish, Armenian and Greek inhabitants
of Georgia in his collection of laws (these had been practiced well
before the King wrote these laws between 1705 and 1709). This move gave
Georgians the opportunity to judge cases according to laws appropriate
to the community offended against by the alleged lawbreaker.

"We have collected noble books and chosen from them the parts we
believe are appropriate for the sake of justice," Vakhtang VI stated.

He added, however, that foreign laws should not likewise extend to
the people of Kartli as the "rules and behaviour of Georgians are not
similar to those of other countries." Georgians do not force others
to live against their beliefs and values and do not do so themselves.

Today local liberals often talk about the Orthodox Church ‘interfering’
in political life, saying this is inadmissible. They often cite the
principle of secularism – separating State and Church from each
another, with neither interfering in the other’s affairs. No one
disputes that this is a valid idea. But despite this no one condemned
Pope John Paul II when he interfered in the political affairs of Poland
in support of democracy, although as a direct result of his action
the public threw their support behind Solidarity and the political
system there changed. When the West wanted to win, the principle of
non-interference went out of the window. The same double standard
was also applied to Georgian nationalism. The West thought this was
a good thing when it could use it to dismantle the USSR, but building
an independent state on this basis was declared inadmissible.

Sometimes it is difficult to understand the aggression Georgian
liberals show towards "Motherland, Language, Faith", but this is
another expression of their double standards. They do not condemn the
State interfering in the affairs of the Georgian Orthodox Church, only
the other way round. Furthermore they expect the Patriarch to justify
his actions but not the State. They ask naively, "Do we not have the
right to ask questions?" Of course, everyone has that right, but no
liberal questioned the Government’s zero tolerance of opposition, or
indeed valid questions. They did not question how many millions had
been spent on building the President’s residence. They do not question
the increased number of shootings of young people, why the number of
prisoners has increased to 30,000, nor the strategic facilities of
the country being sold off. Where did Kakha Bendukidze disappear to
during the August 2008 war? He who says he does not know what strategic
facilities are? If they don’t exist why the Government tell us during
the war that the Russians were deliberately bombing them?

While they see no need to comment on these issues, they are concerned
about the Government supporting the Church from the Budget. Not long
ago a priest told me that when he was studying at the seminary in
the 1970s he was sitting on the windowsill and saw Patriarch David
V being driven into the yard and said – His Holiness has come by
car! The Patriarch called him over during a break and said, "My son,
consider this and then answer me – if Our Saviour had had a car would
he have entered Jerusalem on foot?"

We are reminded of double standards every day. As the Georgian proverb
goes: you can put a handle on a pot on whichever side you like. An
expensive concert is given in Guria "to attract investment", in
Ukraine a group of Georgian election observers, entirely unqualified
for this job, behaves lawlessly, farces are held under the name of
elections which are then declared an indisputable victory for the
Government, and this all passes without comment. Does all this happen
by chance? Are these double standards unconscious or wilful? What good
is a liberalism which allows a narrow circle to do what it wants but
abuses everyone else?

Today the phrase "true Orthodox believers" is often used
sarcastically. Talking about religious fundamentalism and "ignorance"
as the same thing has become very fashionable in liberal circles.

People say that reform of the Orthodox Church is inevitable and its
theology needs to be updated but these statements are purely political,
they are not the product of a desire to help the Church. In the West
the Protestant work ethic is regarded as the "machine of capitalism",
so it is said that if you want to build a capitalist country you should
adopt Protestant ethics. It is clear that an Orthodox believer cannot
do this. That is why attempts to "modernise" Orthodoxy do not stop.

Weber’s ‘Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’
demonstrates that this work ethic leads to an extreme vulgarism
which will never become part of the Georgian consciousness and cannot
replace Orthodoxy. A world of extreme social inequalities, desperate
poverty and excessive luxury, moral relativism, a Darwinist fight
for survival, sacrificing other people for your own prosperity and
a complete lack of principle is the monster disguised by the labels
of Liberalism and Capitalism.

The complete neglect of national values in the education system is
another problem and to satisfy the demands for these the Orthodox
Church is welcoming increasing numbers of people. The Patriarch’s
epistles are increasingly becoming the guidebooks for people who have
lost everything and are now afraid of losing even their graves. Under
capitalism, if you are a poor person it is your own fault and not
the fault of the person who has grabbed your property, and only
the rich can achieve justice; it is a world where competition must
be maintained but not the Orthodox principles which should underpin
social relations and where an aggressive minority sets rules to suit
itself using the majority’s name, thus displaying there is no actual
good and moral principle they can refer to.

Some think that religion and faith are purely a means of cultural
identification. In fact they provide a firm system of values,
and trying to dismantle this is far more dangerous than changing
political ideologies. The word ‘ideology’ has become discredited,
like many other words, since the collapse of the USSR. When this
happened people really thought that the era of non-ideology had come
but in fact one ruling ideology has simply been replaced by another.

It took us years to realise that Liberalism and Marxism are two
sides of the same coin, both eroding the historic character of
nations. In Marxism history is the ultimate arbiter, in Liberalism it
is the individual. Marxism is openly atheistic, liberalism hides its
attitude towards religion but also tries as hard as Marxism to oppress
it. You are allowed to be religious yourself but must not tell anyone
else about it, ‘imposing’ its restrictive values in a world where,
allegedly, anything goes. What is worse – openly declared war or
pharisaic "freedom" of faith?

Both Marxism and Liberalism seek to destroy nation states and create a
global universe. Georgia is a country from the old universe, which has
restored its state after the collapse of the USSR. Our country cannot
adjust to either of these two ideologies. Opposing the Orthodox Church
is an ideological trick which serves to inculcate into this country
values which are as alien to Georgians as Communism. The difference
between the two is that we know Communism from experience, but have
not yet seen what the full flowering of a liberal state will subject
us to, thus making it appear the lesser evil.

The saying "an idle mind is the playground of demons" is very well
known and its truth is manifest in the minds of fundamentalists of
any ideology. Liberalism absorbed unthinkingly from other models
during two months in the West is a demon we should immediately resist.

By Nana Devdariani , translated from the Georgian edition of The
Georgian Times newspaper 2010.02.01 13:29

Ahmet Davudoghlu: In 19th century Armenians and Turks lived together

Ahmet Davudoghlu: In 19th century Armenians and Turks lived together
30.01.2010 18:42 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkey’s minister of foreign affairs Ahmet
Davutoghlu want Armenians and Turks, irrespectively where they live,
have good relations. `Will we worry about the history or construct our
future? We do not accept Genocide, since Armenians and Turks lived in
the same towns and villages, without any tensions,’ Turkey’s foreign
minister said at the International Institute of Strategic Studies in
London. According to him, Ankara, by signing Protocols on
normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, want to settle the
relations with Armenia and see peaceful Caucasus, Hurriyet Avrupa
reported.

The Protocols aimed at normalization of bilateral ties and opening of
the border between Armenia and Turkey were signed in Zurich by
Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and his Turkish
counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu on October 10, 2009, after a series of
diplomatic talks held through Swiss mediation.

The Armenian Genocide (1915-23) was the deliberate and systematic
destruction of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire during
and just after World War I. It was characterized by massacres, and
deportations involving forced marches under conditions designed to
lead to the death of the deportees, with the total number of deaths
reaching 1.5 million.

The date of the onset of the genocide is conventionally held to be
April 24, 1915, the day that Ottoman authorities arrested some 250
Armenian intellectuals and community leaders in Constantinople.
Thereafter, the Ottoman military uprooted Armenians from their homes
and forced them to march for hundreds of miles, depriving them of food
and water, to the desert of what is now Syria. Massacres were
indiscriminate of age or gender, with rape and other sexual abuse
commonplace.

To date, twenty countries and 44 U.S. states have officially
recognized the events of the period as genocide, and most genocide
scholars and historians accept this view. The Armenian Genocide has
been also recognized by influential media including The New York
Times, BBC, The Washington Post and The Associated Press.

The majority of Armenian Diaspora communities were formed by the
Genocide survivors.

Construction Of Armenian Church Complex In Moscow To Be Completed Th

CONSTRUCTION OF ARMENIAN CHURCH COMPLEX IN MOSCOW TO BE COMPLETED THIS YEAR

PanARMENIAN.Net
29.01.2010 20:22 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov has attached particular
importance to the signing of several agreements with friendly Yerevan,
he said during his meeting with reporters at the City Hall. "The
leaders of our states have defined the relations between Armenia and
Russia as strategic partnership," Yuri Luzhkov emphasized.

He said relations between Moscow and Yerevan, as well as Moscow and
various Armenian firms are the most intense in the former Soviet
space. He agreed with Gagik Beglaryan that in recent years much has
been done. "We are working together to create a wholesales center,
a strategic element for trade and economic ties," Luzhkov said.

"I hope this year we are together not only to complete the construction
of the Armenian church complex in Moscow, but the Moscow City
Government has agreed to ensure cultural services for the Armenian
Diaspora within the monastery complex, Mayor Luzhkov said.

ANKARA: Sledgehammer’s Economic Paradigm

SLEDGEHAMMER’S ECONOMIC PARADIGM

Hurriyet
Friday, January 29, 2010

In the "Balyoz" (Sledgehammer) Operation Plan revealed last week,
we read plenty of measures, opinions and suggestions related to how
an economy should work. I underlined the following views, first in
terms of economic history:

"Mustafa Kemal Ataturk emphasized the importance of economic
independence for an independent state and abolished capitulations. By
organizing the Economy Congress in Ýzmir in 1923, he determined that
there could be no compromise in the principle of national independence
and development of the country. The national development model applied
in the establishment days of the Republic became quite successful
in a few areas. With this model, Turkey reached a level of exporting
airplanes to Belgium. After 1945, however, our country was besieged
again politically, culturally and economically. Although they failed
in implementation during Ataturk’s period, Western states put the
Sevres Treaty in action via the European Union, the International
Monetary Fund, and the World Bank."

The Ataturk era was certainly a period of overall mobilization in
economic and other terms. It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that
due to wars, Ottomans and then Turks engaged in a vast geography from
1912 to 1923, and due to the deportation and massacres of Armenians,
as well as the population exchange with Greece, there left only few
people in Anatolia who understand how to execute a simple task let
alone run businesses. Turkey was not only an underdeveloped economy
then, the economy was devastated in those days. Although there
was progress here and there, the real economic performance of the
country is the product of the last 25 years, which is mentioned as
the Sevres Project in the Sledgehammer Plan. How pathetic indeed, to
underestimate performance of the date and to dream about the atypical
economic development of the early republican era.

Regarding the airplanes exported to Belgium, the Airplane
Manufacturing Factory built in the Central Anatolian province of
Kayseri in partnership with the Junkers Co. was entirely due to German
technology and brainpower. It is ridiculous to reflect the export
of airplanes manufactured here to Belgium or any other country as
success of Turkey. Though it is totally against the national model
described by our bright military strategists, the Turkish Aviation
Authority, later on, got engaged in similar "non-national" deals
with the United States’ Curtiss, German Gothaer, Polish Panstwowe,
and British Philip&Powis companies to develop aircraft industry.

Let me give the following information, though I am not sure if the
drafters will be pleased by that:

Together with the giants of the airplane sector such as Airbus,
CASA, EADS, the Turkish Aviation and Space Industry, or TUSAÞ, on
behalf of Turkey, joins in design and feasibility studies of the
A400M Program, which aims to meet the next generation tactical,
logistic needs of military air transportation. Seven European
countries, including Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Luxemburg,
Spain and Turkey participate in the program. A total of 184 planes
will be manufactured in the initial stage. TUSAÞ’s partners are the
Turkish Aviation Authority, the Defense Industry Undersecretariat,
and the Turkish Armed Forces Foundation! While some national-minded
militaries make simulations on coup attempts, others are building
airplanes with foreigners!

Economic independence!

Let’s now consider the economic policy choices of our drafters.

"Economic independence everyday determines more and more the
independence of states. Some countries are dominated by others that
provide them credits. Through financial debiting economic, political,
social and cultural compromises occur; in short, a new unarmed war
period begins. Development policies, based on external aids and
borrowing, were put into effect following World War II, and these
turned the country’s efforts into void. Achieving economic independence
and defending the nation-state is a must for an independent state."

In Turkey there is a widespread opinion that the military is
well-educated and trained, and thanks to an in-depth knowledge,
they form the top elite of the country.

I am not familiar with military’s military education or training. I
hope they are good in that, considering the technical and financial
resources they possess. However, it is impossible for one not to be
horrified by the military’s views in other areas of their interest.

Issues they try to explain to us have nothing to do with the world
we live in. "Economic independence" for instance is a farce. Even the
most independent – and the poorest for the matter – North Korea depends
on rice support for being unable to feed its population. Not to have
the drafters ashamed, let’s say, "All this nonsense is because the
plan was just a simulation." Or in other words, bullshitting was free.

But at the end of the day, economic views of the drafters reflect the
non-economic world in which they live. Hairdressing for 3.5 Turkish
Liras and a full menu for 6; a huge budget that is spent without
serious external auditing; and, except for those in the field duty,
countless idle staff who apparently kill time with politics.

Eastern Provinces On A Map Of Turkey Marked As Historic Armenia

EASTERN PROVINCES ON A MAP OF TURKEY MARKED AS HISTORIC ARMENIA

Noyan Tapan
Jan 28, 2010

WASHINGTON, JANUARY 28, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. During a seminar
recenly held at the George Washington University, a map of Turkey,
on which the Eastern provinces were marked as Historic Armenia,
was used, Marmara reported, citing Milliyet.

The George Washington University Law School hosted the seminar entitled
"The Armenia-Turkey Protocols: Reality and Myths". Maps with the
Eastern provinces marked "Historic Armenia" were distributed to the
speakers. An official from the Turkish embassy in Washigton made
a protest in this connection, saying that the map contradicted the
seminar’s subject. The Turkish official also complained that no Turkish
representative had been invited to the seminar in order to express
the viewpoint of Turkey. In his words, during the seminar the 1915
events were presented from the Armenian point of view. He presented
the Turkish viewpoint, reminding that Turkey had proposed establisihing
a commission of historians, but Armenia rejected that proposal.

One of the seminar organizers – Professor Sean Murphy said he had
taken the map from Google. True, the Eastern provinces were shown as
Historic Armenia on the map, but the map was used to demonstrate why
Turkey is concerned about the border issue. "I wish we had not used
this map, but my purpose was to draw the speakers’ attention to this
issue and encourage them to speak about it. I apologize for causing
confusion," Prof. Murphy said, adding that the seminar is open to
all those wishing to make a report. Some territories of Azerbaijan,
Georgia, and Iran were shown as Historic Armenia on the map.

Among the speakers was Prof. Catherine Kessedjian of the Pantheon-Assas
Univeristy, Paris. She said: "The history will show whether the
Armenia-Turkey protocols were a shame, or a source of hope". In her
opinion, a committee of arbiters can be created to help with solition
of the existing problems between the two countries.