Armenian Political News

Hurriyet Daily News , Turkey
July 18 2010
Opening border with Armenia out of question, Turkish minister says
Sunday, July 18, 2010
ALMATY ` Anatolia News Agency

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet DavutoÄ?lu said Saturday that opening
the border with Armenia was out of the question.

DavutoÄ?lu, who visited Kazakhstan for an informal meeting of the
foreign ministers of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe, or OSCE, denied news reports that claimed the border between
Turkey and Armenia would be opened.

"Opening the border is out of the question. These news stories are
completely wrong," he said.

DavutoÄ?lu said he also discussed the issue with Azerbaijan's Foreign
Minister Elmar Mammadyarov and told Mammadyarov in the meeting that no
such thing was planned.

Regarding a meeting between foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and
Armenia on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, DavutoÄ?lu said: "Talks will
continue. I believe that a solution will be achieved."

If requested to do so, Turkey might allow the passage of NATO
equipment through the DoÄ?ukapı crossing in the northeastern province
of Kars for a six-day NATO humanitarian exercise in Armenia's Lori Mar
region, daily Hürriyet wrote, quoting Turkish diplomatic sources as
saying that any border opening would be temporary.


RFE/RL Report
Armenia, Azerbaijan Report No Progress In Fresh Talks
17.07.2010

The foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan appear to have failed
to make any progress during two days of fresh negotiations in
Kazakhstan which international mediators hoped would bring them closer
to the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. (UPDATED)

Edward Nalbandian and Elmar Mammadyarov began the talks late Friday on
the margins of an informal OSCE ministerial meeting in the Kazakh city
of Almaty. They met again on Saturday in the presence of Russian
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, French Foreign Minister Bernard
Kouchner and U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg.

In a joint statement issued afterwards, Lavrov, Kouchner and Steinberg
said that that `the efforts made so far by the parties to the conflict
have not been sufficient to overcome their differences.' They urged
the parties to take `additional actions' to strengthen the ceasefire
around Karabakh and `create a more favorable atmosphere for further
political dialogue and reaching agreements.'

The top diplomats from the three mediating powers also deplored the
recent upsurge in ceasefire violations and bitter recriminations
traded by Yerevan and Baku. The latter has repeatedly threatened to
solve the conflict by force in recent weeks.

`They warned that the use of force created the current situation, and
its use again would only lead to suffering, devastation, and a legacy
of conflict and hostility that would last for generations,' read the
statement. `They urged a greater spirit of compromise to reach
agreement on a common basis for continuing the negotiations.'

Mammadyarov was reported to say that the parties and the mediators
hoped to make `another step forward' during the talks. `Unfortunately,
that issue was not solved, and it can't be said that there was any
breakthrough,' the APA news agency quoted him as saying. `We decided
to continue working with the co-chairs.'

According to Mammadyarov, the five diplomats had planned to release a
joint statement. He claimed it was not issue because Nalbandian
objected to `some issues.' He did not specify them.

Nalbandian denied that, however, saying that it is Mammadyarov who
took a `non-constructive position' at the talks. In written remarks
released by the Armenian Foreign Ministry on Monday, he also reacted
positively to the joint appeal to the warning side made by Lavrov,
Kouchner and Steinberg.

The talks were billed by the mediators as a chance for decisive
progress in the long-running peace process. The U.S, Russian and
French presidents said in a joint statement last month that they are
instructing their foreign ministers to `work intensively to assist the
two sides to overcome their differences' before and during the Almaty
meeting.

The run-up to the meeting was marked conflicting statements made by
the Armenian and Azerbaijani foreign ministers. Mammadyarov caused a
stir in Armenia by claiming that the talks will focus on details of
Armenian troop withdrawal from Azerbaijani territories around
Karabakh.

Nalbandian rejected that as a `complete lie,' saying that no such
pullout can be even discussed before agreement on Karabakh's final
status. The parties also made markedly differing interpretations of
the `basic principles' of Karabakh peace proposed by Washington,
Moscow and Paris.

Lavrov, Kouchner and Steinberg did not shed more light on key details
of the proposed settlement. Their statement says only that `any
attempt to select some elements over others would make it impossible
to achieve a balanced solution.'

In Nalbandian's words, this warning as well as the mediators' call for
the strengthening of the ceasefire regime was primarily addressed to
Azerbaijan. He argued that the Azerbaijani leaders single out the
principle of international territorial integrity and gloss over the
Karabakh Armenians' right to self-determination also upheld by the
mediators.

`They [the Azerbaijanis] pick out one of six [peace] provisions and
exploit it,' Nalbandian said. `The co-chairing countries stated in a
very simple and open manner that this is a non-constructive approach,
that it is wrong to discriminate between these principles and
provisions, and that it wrong to take a selective approach.'


RFE/RL Report
Monday, July 19, 2010
Armenia, EU Launch Association Talks
19.07.2010
Ruben Meloyan

Armenia began on Monday the first round of negotiations with the
European Union over an `association agreement' that would
significantly upgrade its political and economic ties with the bloc.

The agreement stemming from the EU's Eastern Partnership program for
six former Soviet republics, including neighboring Azerbaijan and
Georgia, would entitle the country to a permanent free trade regime
with the EU and facilitate visa procedures for its citizens traveling
to Europe. It also envisages a harmonization of Armenian laws,
regulations and government policies with the EU standards.

`This is an ambitious, far-reaching agreement,' Gunnar Wiegand, the
head of an EU negotiating team for Armenia, told journalists in
Yerevan. `This will have a lasting effect on the way this country
organizes its economy and the way we drive forward the reform process
together in order to get Armenia ever closer to the European Union.'

The chief Armenian negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Karine
Kazinian, confirmed that the negotiating process will take years. `We
have already identified the areas from which we will start, and it is
difficult to stay how long the process will take: three years, four
years or five years,' Kazinian told a joint news conference with
Wiegand.

`But the important thing is that negotiations have started and we are
prepared for that path,' she said. `We are also ready to make every
effort to follow the guidelines that we have with the EU and bring the
process to a successful end.'

Wiegand also declined to speculate about time frames for signing the
agreement. `This is ambitious, and ambition needs time in order to get
things right,' he said. `We would certainly be wrong now to fix an
artificial deadline. We want to get a good agreement with lasting
effects for all citizens.'

Separate teams of EU negotiators launched similar talks with the
Georgian and Azerbaijani governments late last week. In a statement
issued ahead of the talks, Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy
chief expressed confidence that the association agreements `will be a
catalyst to the domestic reforms' in all three South Caucasus states.

In Armenia, the association talks are expected to run parallel to a
reform of state agencies, most of them dealing with external trade and
immigration, as well as changes in various Armenian laws. The EU's
executive European Commission has already earmarked at least 32
million euros ($40 million) for financing those reforms.

Democratization, human rights protection and a stronger rule of law
are another stated condition for Armenia's participation in the
Eastern Partnership. Yet just how aggressively the bloc plans to press
for political reforms in the country is still an open question.

Speaking to RFE/RL's Armenian service, Wiegand insisted that the EU
will closely monitor political developments in the country and the
Armenian authorities' respect for human rights. He dismissed claims by
local opposition politicians that the EU has been lenient towards
President Serzh Sarkisian's government because of his Western-backed
policies on Turkey and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

`We look at the democratic standards and human rights separately from
the manifold regional and foreign policy challenges which Armenia
has,' the EU official said.

An EU policy paper on Armenia released earlier this year underlined
the need for an `improved quality of the electoral process and
administration in line with international standards.'

A senior European Commission official dealing with the Eastern
Partnership told RFE/RL's Armenian service in May that this means the
next Armenian presidential and parliamentary elections should
`definitely' be more democratic than the previous ones. The EU has not
officially made such a linkage, though.


Turkey has no Right to Interfere In Armenian Patriarch's Election
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
22 July 2010

Although the Treaty of Lausanne is supposed to protect the rights of
non-Muslim minorities in Turkey - Armenians, Greeks, and Jews- these
rights are routinely violated by the Turkish government.

Armenians in Turkey,fearing the government's wrath, rarely dare to
object to the repeated violations of their civil rights. Worse still,
Istanbul Armenians sometimes invite Turkish officials to intervene in
their community's affairs in order to settle their internal and
personal disputes.

The latest example of such blatant interference was the selection of
Archbishop Aram Ateshyan, as Deputy Patriarch, after doctors had
diagnosed the current Patriarch of Turkey, Mesrob Mutafian,as suffering
from incurable dementia.

Six months ago, after a two-year delay during which the Patriarchal
seat was practically vacant due to Patriarch Mesrob's incapacity, the
Patriarchate's Religious Council wrote to the Turkish government
seeking permission to elect a coadjutor (co-Patriarch). The
Council then set up an Election Committee in order to organize such an
election once Ankara gave its permission.

To complicate matters, the Election Committee, exceeding its
authority, sent its own letter to Turkish officials, asking for
permission to elect a new Patriarch rather than a co-Patriarch.
Both initiatives made the serious error of inviting the interference
of the Turkish government into the Armenian community's internal
religious affairs. Furthermore, both requests contradicted the
Patriarchate's almost 600-year tradition and practice of not having a
co-Patriarch, unlike the Holy See of Etchmiadzin, the Catholicosate of
Cilicia,and the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem. The request to
elect a new Patriarch was also improper, since a new Patriarch can not
be elected, while the existing Patriarch is still alive, as Patriarchs
are elected for life.

Taking advantage of the dissension within the Armenian community, the
Turkish government finally responded on June 29, allowing the election
of a Deputy Patriarch, but not a co-Patriarch or a new Patriarch. By so
doing, Turkish officials violated the Armenian community's religious
rights, ironically, at the community's own request!

In authorizing a Deputy Patriarch to represent the Patriarchate, the
Turkish government has in effect weakened the status of that historic
institution. Since Patriarch Mesrob is mentally but not physically
incapacitated, he may live for many years, while the Patriarchate is
led by a mere Deputy Patriarch. Such an eventuality would serve
Turkey's interests which has always sought to assimilate the Armenians
by bureaucratic obstructions, and depriving it of a freely elected and
capable religious leader.

Within 48 hours of the government's edict, Archbishop Ateshyan, who de
facto the Patriarchate as Chairman of the 26-member Religious
Council, convened a meeting which unanimously elected him Deputy
Patriarch. No other clergymen were given a chance to submit their
candidacies for that post.

While Armenians worldwide remained silent, with the exception of
Primate of Germany, Archbishop Karekin Bekciyan,a few courageous
Armenians in Istanbul dared to raise their voices in protest. The
Election Committee, which the Turkish government disbanded, filed a
lawsuit against Ankara's decision, demanding the election of a new
Patriarch, not just a Deputy.

Where do we go from here?Armenian religious and lay leaders outside
Turkey should protest the undue interference of the Turkish authorities
in the internal affairs of the Armenian Church in violation of the
Lausanne Treaty.

More importantly, Armenians in Turkey should come together and declare
that the office of the Deputy Patriarch is a temporary arrangement, not
a long-term solution. Without asking for Ankara's permission,
the Armenian community should organize a new election to elect a
co-Patriarch, who would then become Patriarch after the demise of the
presently incapacitated Patriarch Mutafian.

Whether the Armenian community decides to elect a new Patriarch or a
co-Patriarch is its own business, and not that of Turkish officials. It
is important that the Istanbul Armenian community coalesces around a
common position and avoids further dissension. If the local Armenian
community becomes united and enjoys the backing of Armenians and others
around the world, the Turkish government, which prides itself as a
secular and democratic regime, would be more reluctant to politicallly
interfere in the Armenian minority's religious affairs.