Armenia-Turkey protocols' announcement and analysis

Armenia and Turkey to sign protocols on relations
But implementation of “roadmap” may be again delayed
by Emil Sanamyan
Published: Tuesday September 01, 2009

President Abdullah Gul of Turkey, left, grabs President Serge Sargsian's hand during their meeting at the EU summit in Prague on May 7, 2009. With them are Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian, center, and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu of Turkey, partly obscured on left.

Washington - The protocols "on the establishment of diplomatic relations" and "on the development of bilateral relations" were released on August 31 by the foreign ministries of Armenia, Turkey, and Switzerland, which has served as host to bilateral talks. The release of the documents was quickly welcomed by France, Russia, and the United States.

The protocols are now expected to be formally signed after six weeks of domestic discussion. The timing of the release and the discussion was hardly accidental. The match between Armenian and Turkish national soccer teams is due to take place in Turkey in exactly six weeks.

For his part, Armenia's President Serge Sargsian made his attendance at the match - which would signify continued viability of Armenian-Turkish dialogue - conditional on tangible progress towards Turkey opening its border with Armenia.

But Turkish leaders have explicitly and repeatedly linked such an opening to satisfaction of at least some of Azerbaijan's demands in the Karabakh conflict.

Shortly after the August 31 release, Turkey's foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, told Turkish media that "a longer process is required" for a border opening. Mr. Davutoglu also pledged to "guard" Azerbaijan's interests as part of talks with Armenia, according to an Associated Press citation.

Judging by the published text, establishment of diplomatic relations is also far from imminent. The two protocols would have to take effect simultaneously and only after ratification by the two nations' parliaments. Since the timing for ratification is not spelled out additional delays are possible.

The timing and success of that ratification is likely to depend on how Turkish leaders interpret the course of Karabakh negotiations.

Meanwhile, as in the past Turkey will use reports of "progress" in talks with Armenia to deter the United States and others from recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

Long-delayed announcement

The documents made public this week are believed to have been agreed and initialed by Armenia and Turkey last April, weeks before the April 22 statement that set out the two countries' intentions to normalize relations.

But Armenian officials have since charged Turkey with dragging its feet on moving forward with the agreement.

In an interview published just hours before the release of the protocols, President Sargsian sounded pessimistic about Turkey's intentions.

"[Armenia and Turkey] have agreements," the Armenian leader told the Russian-language service of BBC. "And I think it is quite normal and right for the sides to implement their agreements.

"Regrettably, I have not seen a great desire or willingness [by Turkey] to implement these agreements."

The first indications that some kind of development on Armenia-Turkey track was afoot came on August 28, when Turkish leader Recep Tayyib Erdogan phoned his Azerbaijani opposite Ilham Aliyev to discuss the issue. The next day, Mr. Erdogan dispatched two senior diplomats to detail Turkey's intentions to Mr. Aliyev in person.

And as was reportedly the case with the April 22 statement, the release of the protocols is likely to have come with some American prodding.

According to a report by Turkey's Sabah daily, co-chair of Turkey caucus in U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) warned Turkish leaders on August 27 that Congress would likely move on adoption of the Armenian Genocide resolution if Armenia-Turkey dialogue is "hindered."

That warning came a week after Armenia's President discussed talks with Turkey in a phone conversation with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on August 20.

Most controversial points kept out of protocol

While the timeframe for implementation of the agreements remains in doubt, the protocols' content seems to mollify at least some of the key Armenian concerns.

Turkey had long conditioned normalization of relations with Armenia on three issues: mutual recognition of borders, end to Armenian Genocide affirmation campaign and satisfaction of Azerbaijani demands as part of the Karabakh dispute.

Armenian leaders have in turn repeatedly stressed they have no claims on Turkey's territory, have no intention or even ability to end the affirmation campaign and would not make unilateral compromises to Azerbaijan.

In reports earlier this year, Turkish media suggested that Ankara was seeking to have Armenia recognize the 1921 Kars Treaty, signed by Turkey and newly Soviet Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Russia. The Treaty established the existing border and among other things absolved Turkish officials of crimes committed during World War I.

Since 2005 Turkey has also demanded the establishment a so-called commission of historians, acquiescing to which could amount to questioning the veracity of Armenian Genocide.

The protocol on bilateral relations makes no mention of the Kars Treaty or the Karabakh conflict. And it contains only watered-down language on a "sub-commission" that would "implement a dialogue on the historical dimension with the aim to restore mutual confidence between the two nations, including an impartial scientific examination of the historical records and archives to define existing problems and formulate recommendations."

Six other sub-commissions would be set up under an inter-governmental commission to discuss everything from political relations to environment along the lines proposed by former President Robert Kocharian in an April 2005 letter to Prime Minister Erdogan.

If in fact ratified and implemented, the protocols would pave the way for normalization of relations "without pre-conditions" as has been advocated by successive Armenian governments.

Strategy, politics, and opportunism
Themes behind Turkey’s surprise move on Armenia
by Emil Sanamyan
Published: Friday September 04, 2009

Washington - Just days ago the Armenian-Turkish talks appeared at standstill. Even the customarily optimistic American diplomats were calling the process "frozen" and progress "not inevitable." The Economist cited a Western diplomat who said the effort was "on its last legs."

Armenian leaders, initially optimistic about the process, likewise became downbeat.

And Turkish leaders continued to link the establishment of relations with Armenia to a resolution of the Karabakh conflict, widely seen as a much more difficult dispute to resolve.

What then is behind the Turkish government's surprise decision to move ahead with the normalization process?

Three sets of reasons can be suggested.

Strategy

The government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan – influenced by the ideas of Ahmet Davutoglu, now the foreign minister – has made considerable progress in improving relations with Turkey's neighbors.

If in the past Turkey had problematic relations with nearly all countries adjacent to it, today ties have improved considerably with Greece, Iran, Russia, and Syria, and efforts are underway to engage the government of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Turkish leaders believe that by having good relations with neighbors, Turkey frees itself from constraints that hinder the growth of its influence globally. Ankara has long wanted to evolve from the role of the Western outpost it was in the years of Cold War and the subsequent American policies in the Middle East, or as a conduit for oil and gas transportation to Europe.

So far only Cyprus and Armenia relations remain problematic. If the Turkish occupation of Cyprus blocks Turkey's accession to the European Union, one-sided Turkish support for Azerbaijan in its conflict with Armenia provides an additional irritant to Turkey's relations with Russia, Europe, and the United States.

"There is a status quo in the Caucasus at the moment which is not useful any of the three countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey," Mr. Davutoglu told Today's Zaman on September 1. And Turkey will continue to challenge the status quo by engaging Armenia and championing the resolution of the dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan, he added.

But for Turkey the issues of Cyprus and Armenia are eclipsed by the magnitude of problems presented by the country's Kurdish population. As often happens, grand long-term visions can come into conflict with an immediate short-term necessity.

Politics

Nigar Goksel, a Turkish analyst of Armenia, points out that the publication of Armenia-Turkey protocols this October is likely to coincide with parliamentary consideration of the government's "democratization initiative" aimed at expanding rights for Turkey's Kurds.

The measure's critics claim it amounts to an amnesty for members of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which has been fighting a 30-year guerrilla campaign against the Turkish government. The Turkish political opposition also sees the effort as the ruling party's grab for Kurdish votes.

"It is a tough time for the Turkish government to make an unexpectedly forthcoming step on [Armenia relations] now, given the amount of political capital the Kurdish initiative is using up," Ms. Goksel told the Armenian Reporter.

As part of political bargaining in parliament, it would not be unreasonable to expect Turkish leaders to use the Armenia protocols as a way to deflect opposition from the Kurdish initiative.

Even if the protocols are submitted for ratification, "ultimately there is no guarantee that the protocols will pass parliament," Ms. Goksel said, suggesting a scenario similar to the 2003 parliamentary vote that refused to allow U.S. land forces' transit through Turkish territory in the war against Iraq.

As in the past, the opponents of ratification will likely cite the lack of progress in the Karabakh talks as justifying their opposition, she said. And the government will have other reasons for stalling on the vote.

Opportunism

Some of those other reasons have to do with Turkey's tactic of using the dialogue with Armenia as a shield against international campaigns for recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

The outright recognition of the Genocide by President Barack Obama would be a major blow to the Turkish government's prestige, leaving Mr. Erdogan vulnerable to his political opposition at home.

In the past U.S. leaders have also used the threat of genocide recognition to mobilize Turkish support for America's foreign policy initiatives. By holding talks with Armenia, Turkey is also trying to shield itself from reopening that vulnerability.

The first Armenian-Turkish announcement on the protocols was conveniently made two days before President Obama's first April 24 statement.

President Serge Sargsian's visit to Turkey at the time when Armenia-Turkey protocols are expected to be signed this October would be a good argument for opponents of the congressional resolution on Armenian Genocide.

At the same time, Turkish leaders would probably believe it in their interest to postpone parliamentary consideration of the protocols, citing a lack of progress in the Karabakh talks and a need to get the Kurdish initiative through the parliament first. Ratification could then be re-launched, say closer to the month of April.

And after April 24, 2010, is done with, what can prevent another postponement?

"This kind of delaying would clearly not be transparent conduct [by the Turkish government], if that is in fact the plan," said Ms. Goksel. And while it is hard to guess the plan and predict what the ultimate outcome will be "there are enough reasons to be suspicious."

Vartkes Yeghiayan interview

In Armenian insurance case, lawyers to ask for rehearing
Appeals panel ruling misinformed, lawyer involved argues
by Emil Sanamyan
Published: Friday August 28, 2009

At a May 11, 2006, press conference, attorney Mark Geragos, California State Treasurer Phil Angelides, and attorneys Brian Kabateck and Vartkes Yeghiayan announce a class action lawsuit on behalf of descendants of Armenian Genocide victims, against Deutsche Bank and Dresdner Bank for assets belonging to descendants of Armenian Genocide victims. Damian Dovarganes / AP

Washington - On August 20, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down a California law that allows the descendants of Armenian Genocide victims to sue in state courts for unpaid insurance benefits, as we reported last week. The majority in the 2-1 ruling argued that the statute interfered with the president's prerogative to conduct U.S. foreign policy.

Vartkes Yeghiayan, a lawyer based in Glendale, Calif., has spearheaded lawsuits against major U.S. and European insurance companies that did business in Ottoman Turkey. These efforts led to settlements with New York Life for $20 million and with the French AXA insurance company for $17 million in 2004-2005.

On August 27 Mr. Yeghiayan discussed last week's court ruling with Washington Editor Emil Sanamyan.

Armenian Reporter: What is the meaning and what are the ramifications of the ruling of the Appeals Court panel on August 20?

Vartkes Yeghiayan: We were surprised by this decision. The District Court had previously ruled that this [lawsuit against German insurance companies] is valid and that our clients have a right to continue with the lawsuit.

When we got to the Ninth Circuit court [to which the insurance companies had appealed], three judges listened to us, and two out of three decided that there is a conflict between state and federal power.

This decision basically rested on the fact that the [California] statute . . . said that the killings that took place [in Ottoman Turkey] are called the Armenian Genocide; because the words "Armenian Genocide" were used, [the majority found that] they were in conflict with federal policy. . . .

We disagree with that. The federal government has never taken a stand against the Armenian Genocide. And [as part of its decision making,] the court did not [cite] any statute, executive order, or statement saying that this [state law] interferes with the foreign policy of the United States.

They are just speculating, and their speculation is drawn from the fact that in the last decade there were three resolutions placed before Congress and these resolutions didn't pass because of opposition from the administration.

But the administration did not dispute the validity of what resolutions said. Rather they spoke of bad timing and impact on the war in Iraq or whatever other developments were taking place at the time.

The arguments the court cited were only half-true. For example, President Ronald Reagan used the term "Armenian Genocide," as did the Congress in two resolutions that passed in the 1970s and 80s. And they did not cite those facts at all, focusing on the last decade alone.

But our issue here is not with Turkey. We are suing private insurance companies that owe money to Armenians and are in breach of contract. But everything [in the court decision] seems to turn around the words "Armenian Genocide." Had those "toxic" words not been used in California legislation, the court would have no problem with the statute.

AR: Has the federal government ever expressed opposition to the California law?

VY: Absolutely not. In fact they have never objected to any of the resolutions passed in the 40-odd states. They have never formally made a statement. Apparently, they did not feel those resolutions interfered with the conduct of foreign policy. And it seems obvious to me [that they did not].

In making its decision the [Appeals] court cited past decisions in the Jewish Holocaust cases [to deny the victims' rights to sue]. But that situation is different because there was a formal agreement between the United States and Germany that said that [following German agreement to pay reparations,] no additional lawsuits could be filed in U.S. courts.

[There is no such agreement in the Armenian case.]

AR: What could be the immediate consequences of this ruling? Do you plan to appeal? Could there be new legislation passed in California?

VY: The first thing we will do is petition for a rehearing. And because we only had 14 days to do that, we just requested an extension and we were granted an additional seven days. So, our brief for a rehearing will be filed on September 10.

Basically, we are asking for a larger panel of judges to listen and review our arguments. It could be up to ten judges hearing the case.

If, for some reason, the judgment is not reversed, we will appeal to the Supreme Court.

And, of course, we can amend our lawsuit and remove the words "Armenian Genocide," while describing all of the killings, deprivations, deportations, etc.

But first we will be appealing, because "Armenian Genocide" is the appropriate term for the events that occurred and the U.S. government does not have the policy that says that Armenian Genocide did not take place. In fact, I would like the U.S. government to come out and declare its policy once and for all.

AR: As part of your petition do you plan to invite testimonies and briefings from the state of California and other interested parties?

VY: Yes. We don't want to make announcements yet, but we have asked three organizations to file amicus briefs [as "friends of the court"] and [we expect that] they will do it.

AR: What has been the immediate repercussion of the ruling so far?

VY: We have a separate case with the British insurance company Aviva and the judge has just given us until September 12 to dismiss the case because of the Ninth Circuit Court ruling. Now we are talking with attorneys to see if we can stipulate the continuance of the case or if we have to do a dismissal, make sure it is a dismissal without prejudice, so that we could re-file the minute there is a new statute.

AR: Are you receiving public feedback following the ruling?

VY: Yes, we are hearing from a lot of lawyers and law-school professors at some of the top universities, who see this ruling as part of a pattern of continuous infringement by the federal government in powers of the states. On most domestic issues, such as insurance, family law, property, and tort, it is up to the states to regulate, and these issues must not be affected by the rhetoric of federal officials.

I read the Turkish press and I noticed they are celebrating [this ruling] and reading things into it that don't exist. I don't think it's a victory [for Turkey].

It's an issue of balancing powers of the state and federal governments. If necessary, we Armenians will be ready to pursue it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Ted Kennedy passing, Doug Frantz, Marc Grossman updates

First published in August 29, 2009

Washington Briefing
by Emil Sanamyan

Senator Kennedy’s leadership on Armenian issues recalled

Armenian-Americans this week remembered the longstanding leadership and support of Senator Edward Kennedy (D.-Mass.). Senator Kennedy died on August 26 after months of battling with cancer. He was 77 years old.

Throughout more than four decades in the U.S. Congress, Senator Kennedy actively supported Armenian-American concerns, including U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide and independent Armenia's security and development, the Armenian National Committee of Massachusetts recalled in a press statement.

These efforts included securing the Senate Judiciary Committee's passage in 1989 of an Armenian Genocide resolution; Senator Kennedy worked together with, among others, Vice President Joe Biden, who at the time was a senator and chairperson of the committee.

Senator Kennedy championed the 1991 passage of a resolution that condemned Azerbaijan's anti-Armenian pogroms that resulted in the expulsion of more than 300,000 Armenians and was followed by Azerbaijan's aggression against Nagorno-Karabakh.

In later years, Senator Kennedy played a key role in the passage and maintenance of U.S. sanctions against Azerbaijan, known as Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act, as well as the 1994 passage of the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act, which came in response to Turkey's closure of its border with Armenia. [The same year, he hosted a reception for the president of Armenia at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum in Boston.]

Speaking on April 21, 1999, at the annual commemoration of the Armenian Genocide held on Capitol Hill, Senator Kennedy argued that "if people here in the United States had paid attention to the Genocide in the early part of this century, we would not have had, perhaps, the tragedies in World War II" and later genocidal campaigns in former Yugoslavia and Africa.

During the April 24, 2000, commemoration at Trinity Church in Boston, Senator Kennedy stressed that while "the persecution of the Armenian people and the atrocities committed against them will never be forgotten . . . the continuing leadership of the Armenian people throughout the world today, and the birth of the Armenian republic provide an example to us all of what the human spirit at its best can achieve."

In a June 5, 2006, letter, signed together with Senator John Kerry (D.-Mass.), Senator Kennedy raised concerns with the Bush administration's early recall of Ambassador John M. Evans from Armenia over the ambassador's comments on the Armenian Genocide; the letter demanded an explanation for the move.

A member of America's most prominent political family, Edward Kennedy will be remembered as a strong and effective champion of liberal values. In the 2008 presidential campaign, Senator Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama came at pivotal moment in a tough primary race.

Senator Kennedy will be buried beside his brothers at the Arlington National Cemetery on August 29.

Former editor Doug Frantz probing nuclear smuggling for Senate committee

The former Los Angeles Times editor who stirred up controversy in the Armenian community is now working for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee led by Senator John Kerry (D.-Mass.) According to the committee website, Douglas Frantz was hired by the committee early this year as chief investigator to probe financing of nuclear smuggling and other illegal activities.

Mr. Frantz caused controversy in April 2007 after he reassigned a major story on the Armenian Genocide resolution, initially assigned to Times journalist Mark Arax, to another writer. In an e-mail that was later made public, Mr. Frantz alleged that Mr. Arax had a "position on this issue" that caused a "conflict of interests." (Mr. Frantz's new boss, Senator Kerry, is a strong supporter of Armenian Genocide affirmation.)

Mr. Arax had in turn alleged that Mr. Frantz himself may have had a bias on the issue, having spent years working as a reporter in Turkey and that he was "heavily involved and invested in defending the policies of Turkey."

In subsequent months, a number of Armenian-Americans, including the Armenian Reporter's editorial page, called on the Times to take "decisive action" in the case. Mr. Frantz resigned in June 2007.

Mr. Frantz was initially expected to become the Istanbul-based Middle East bureau chief for the Wall Street Journal. But he instead joined the then newly launched (and since closed) Condé Nast Portfolio magazine as senior writer and authored a book on the black market in nuclear technology.

For his part, Mr. Arax also left the Times in June 2007. Last April he published his third book, this one about life in California.

Former U.S. official: Karabakh settlement up to Armenia and Azerbaijan

The Karabakh "conflict should be solved in Baku and Yerevan, not in Washington or Moscow," Marc Grossman, former U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs told Azerbaijani officials on August 24, Azerbaijan's APA news agency reported. Mr. Grossman was speaking at an event organized by Azerbaijan's president's office in Baku.

Mr. Grossman suggested that as mediators all third countries could do was to organize venues for Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders to meet, as they have.

According to an Azerbaijani government statement on August 22, the former senior American diplomat arrived in Azerbaijan for a five-day tour that included meetings with senior officials and visits to colleges and the main oil terminal.

Since leaving the government in 2005, Mr. Grossman has been a board member for Turkey's Ihlas Holding and vice-chair of the Washington-based Cohen group, a lobbying firm. He was the State Department's number-three official between 2001 and 2005 and ambassador to Turkey before that.

Interview with Congressman Pallone

Frank Pallone: U.S. recognition of NKR will be difficult
Veteran member of Congress discusses Armenian-American agenda
by Emil Sanamyan
Published: Thursday August 20, 2009

Rep. Frank Pallone during a meeting with NKR officials at his office on Capitol Hill. NKR Office in the United States photo.

Washington - A member of Congress for more than 20 years, Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr., a New Jersey Democrat, is a national leader on Armenian-American issues and a founding co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues; he also chairs the Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Health.

The interview that follows is based in large part on questions we solicited from the Armenian Reporter readers last week. Washington Editor Emil Sanamyan put them to Rep. Pallone on August 14.

Karabakh policy

Armenian Reporter: Kosovo, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia have recently set precedents of international recognition without the consent of countries that claimed sovereignty over them. Should friends of Armenians in the United States initiate Nagorno-Karabakh's recognition instead of deferring to talks with Azerbaijan? What work can be done in Congress to achieve this goal?

Rep. Frank Pallone: I believe personally that the United States should recognize Nagorno-Karabakh. I certainly would be willing to do whatever I can to have that happen.

But I will say that it will be difficult, because a lot of members of Congress are not that familiar [with the subject], I assume that the State Department would be against it, and I am not sure how much Armenia itself would be pushing for it. So it would probably be hard to do.

And while I support recognition of NKR, I do not know if the Armenian community wants to prioritize that. The community has to prioritize the issues and spend their time on things that are more likely [to be successfully accomplished]. And [since] this issue would be difficult, I would not recommend that they prioritize it.

AR: There has been quite a bit of criticism in Armenia of the outgoing U.S. envoy for Karabakh, Matt Bryza, as biased in favor of Azerbaijan and Turkey. What can Congress do to have a Karabakh envoy who would better reflect U.S. respect for Armenians' self-determination and democratic choice, and appreciation of security challenges Armenians are facing?

FP: Matt Bryza is only reflecting the policy of the State Department. The State Department takes a position that Nagorno-Karabakh doesn't have the status of a state. And they have traditionally highlighted territorial integrity over self-determination.

But they are wrong in this case because they do not realize that Nagorno-Karabakh has every right to be an independent nation. So, what you really need to do is to have the State Department change its position.

They have to realize that according to the Soviet legal framework, Nagorno-Karabakh had self-government and certain rights, including holding a referendum and becoming an independent country, which is what had happened.

So it's not simply an issue of territorial integrity versus self-determination. Nagorno-Karabakh is a successor state to the Soviet Union, and no different from Armenia or Russia in that respect.

AR: Armenia has been historically carved up by imperial powers and the current state occupies only a fraction of its historic homeland. Today, Armenians are urged to make substantial territorial concessions as part of a Karabakh settlement with no such concessions by the other side. How can Armenian-Americans get their pre-history and their interests to be better appreciated in the United States?

FP: Simply because Nagorno-Karabakh is a small area with a relatively small population, it is difficult for the State Department, and any administration to focus on it.

The argument that should be made is that this a powder keg. In other words if you do not work to solve this situation and come up with a compromise, there is a potential for another major war in the Caucasus that would have major implications for several neighboring countries, Turkey and Russia especially. And that this strategic concern must be appreciated.

The war between Russia and Georgia [in August 2008] is a recent example of the volatility in the Caucasus region.

Relations with Turkey

AR: Speaking of community priorities, how have you handled occasional disagreements between Armenian-American priorities and those of the Republic of Armenia? There were clearly divergent positions on the Armenia-Turkey "roadmap" announced on April 22.

FP: Most people in the community that I talk to are in favor of normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey. And of course I would like to see more normal relations between the two countries, including significant trade between them.

But Armenian-Americans also want genocide recognition and they felt that the Obama administration was trading the roadmap for genocide recognition. I believe that these two issues should be separated. The president should make a public statement recognizing the Armenian Genocide and Congress should pass its resolution. We should proceed with the roadmap as well; one should not be in lieu of the other.

The Armenian government was very supportive of the roadmap, but they did not want it to be an excuse not to recognize the Armenian Genocide. And after April 24, Turkish leaders began to step back from the "road map," and going back to their preconditions related to the Karabakh conflict.

These are all separate issues. Normalizing Turkish-Armenian relations should not be linked to the Karabakh conflict.

AR: Three or more administrations have been blocking congressional resolutions on Armenian Genocide. Have Armenian advocacy groups ever asked the administration for something in lieu of a congressional resolution that would both show respect for the genocide's victims and also benefit the Armenian-American agenda? In your mind, what could be such an alternative?

FP: I would note that the Obama administration is not opposed to the resolution, I have not heard that. And President [Barack Obama]'s position is that the Genocide occurred and should be recognized. But [because] all the emphasis was on the "road map" in April, the issue of the genocide was sort of put aside.

I do think that a presidential statement and a resolution by Congress are necessary to memorialize the Armenian Genocide. And while genocide recognition needs to remain a priority, the diaspora should spend time to prioritize other issues as well. These would include a settlement with regard to Nagorno-Karabakh as well as U.S. support of Armenia economically and militarily. We have the two Armenian republics and they need to be protected.

AR: Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds recently repeated her allegations about the Turkish government's attempts to bribe and even blackmail U.S. officials into supporting their agenda. Do you support a congressional inquiry based on these troubling allegations?

FP: I am not familiar enough with her to express an opinion.

Armenia aid and trips

AR: On the subject of aid to Armenia, the Obama administration's first aid request differed markedly from promises candidate Obama made in his campaign. Was that a reflection of the administration's lack of interest in Armenia, inertia from the Bush administration, or both? Can you explain how the budget request process works?

FP: The request comes out of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), but the figures basically reflect the recommendations of the State Department.

The Obama administration believed that their request was generous because it was above President Bush's request the previous year. They ignored the fact that Congress appropriated significantly more and that the Bush administration was not a friend.

So I told them that they cannot make their budget request based on the previous administration because Bush was not a friend of Armenia and they are. So, they have to be more generous and request more than Congress appropriated the previous year.

There is also this tendency to expect that Congress would always add aid to Armenia, and therefore the administration can request less. I have told them that that's the wrong approach for a friend.

Next year, we expect the administration to request at least as much as Congress put in the previous year or make a more robust request.

AR: In the last several years there have been markedly fewer visits by U.S. lawmakers to Armenia. What is the reason for that?

FP: That is totally a function of changes in the congressional ethics rules. I used to go to Armenia every year, and I haven't been back for a few years now because when the ethics rules were changed about four years ago, that precluded any trips being paid by advocacy groups or individuals associated with them.

The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) or the Armenian Assembly of America (AAA), and other Armenian groups can no longer pay for the trips.

Government-funded congressional delegations are still available, but those are normally subject to committee jurisdiction. So if you are not a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, you may not be included. And if they have a trip, they are more likely to go Iraq or Afghanistan or some of the major trouble spots.

Armenian Americans in 2010 campaign

First published in August 22, 2009

Armenian-Americans to challenge congressional incumbents in 2010
Running in Senate race in Nevada, House races in Michigan, Ohio
by Emil Sanamyan

Washington - At least three Armenian-Americans have launched electoral campaigns to take on incumbent members of Congress in the 2010 elections.

Danny Tarkanian, a Las ­Vegas businessperson of Armenian descent, is seeking the Republican Party nomination to challenge Senate Majority leader Harry Reid in the 2010 elections, Mr. Tarkanian's office reported on August 9.

Making the announcement, Mr. Tarkanian acknowledged he was facing long odds.

"I have no illusions about what I'm up against, but I also know I am doing the right thing," he said in a statement, adding that he would run on mainstay Republican issues, such as opposition to growth in government spending and regulation.

According to the Reno Gazette-Journal, six other individuals are seeking the GOP nomination in addition to Mr. Tarkanian, and Nevada Republicans were also reportedly seeking to recruit others.

But Sen. Reid, who is running for a fifth term in the Senate, is believed to be a strong favorite. His campaign expected to raise $25 million in campaign cash.

Nevada's other senator is John Ensign, a Republican who has recently admitted to an extramarital affair; he is not up for re-election until 2012.

Son of the nationally renowned basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian, Danny Tarkanian previously ran for the Nevada State Senate in 2004 and Nevada Secretary of State in 2006, both times unsuccessfully. In the latter run he received votes of more than 230,000 Nevadans.

Both incumbent Nevada senators - Democrat Reid and Republican Ensign - have been supportive of Armenian-American issues.

Armenian Caucus member challenged in Michigan

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R.-Mich.), an active member of the Armenian Congressional Caucus, in his fourth term in Congress, is facing a challenge from an Armenian-American Democrat.

An educator and community activist, Natalie Manoogian Mosher is seeking the Democratic nomination in the 11th congressional district, which includes northwestern suburbs of Detroit, in the 2010 election. The district has elected Republican members of Congress since 1967.

As part of her campaign announcement earlier this year, Mrs. Mosher pledged to "make certain the Armenian-American community has an active and effective advocate" in Washington.

Michigan is one of the U.S. states most affected by the recession and Rep. McCotter is believed to be vulnerable. Mrs. Mosher has strongly criticized the incumbent Republican's opposition to the Obama administration's economic stimulus programs and healthcare reform proposal.

According to CQ Politics, the Michigan Democratic Party was seeking to recruit additional candidates to run against Rep. McCotter.

Armenian-Turkish debate in Ohio

David Krikorian is another Armenian-American seeking the Democratic Party's nomination ahead of the 2010 elections. Unlike the other two challengers, he is running against an incumbent who is opposed to the Armenian-­American agenda and is supported by the Turkish lobby.

Republican incumbent Jean Schmidt is in her third term and represents Ohio's 2nd congressional district that includes parts of Cincinnati; the district has been under GOP control since 1983.

Last April Ms. Schmidt filed a complaint against Mr. Krikorian over his charges that she took money from Turkish government interests to oppose the congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide. As part of the complaint, Ms. Schmidt is represented by Turkish American Legal Defense Fund, an organization linked to the Turkish lobby. Mr. Krikorian in turn retained the help of Mark Geragos, a prominent attorney of Armenian-American descent.

The Ohio Elections Commission is expected to rule on the complaint on September 3.

connect:
www.dannytarkanian.org
www.mosherforcongress.com
www.krikorian2010.com

Tina Kaidanow appointment, Russia-Turkey summit

This was first published in August 22, 2009 Armenian Reporter

Washington Briefing
by Emil Sanamyan

State Department’s Caucasus manager names his successor

Ambassador Tina Kaidanow will serve as the next U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state in charge of relations with the Caucasus, Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus. Matt Bryza, who currently holds the job, made the announcement in Georgia on August 10, Civil.ge reported. Amb. Kaidanow's has not yet been formally named by the State Department.

Speaking in Azerbaijan on August 12, Mr. Bryza said it was unclear whether Ms. Kaidanow would also succeed him as U.S. envoy for the Karabakh peace process, Turan news agency reported. The State Department has combined the two previously separate responsibilities in one official since 2004.

Embarking on a farewell tour of the South Caucasus earlier this month, Mr. Bryza indicated to Azerbaijani media that he remains hopeful about being appointed ambassador to Azerbaijan. The previous U.S. ambassador there, Anne Derse, completed her posting earlier this summer.

When reports first surfaced that Mr. Bryza was being considered for the job in Azerbaijan, several critics raised concerns about close personal relationships Mr. Bryza reportedly enjoyed with leaders in both Baku and Tbilisi. In various capacities at the State Department and the National Security Council, Mr. Bryza has been dealing with Caucasus issues without interruption since the mid-1990s.

Ms. Kaidanow has been focused on the Balkans for a similarly long period. From July 2008 until last June, she was U.S. ambassador to Kosovo, the first person to hold that position in a country that the United States recognized a year and half ago. Ms. Kaidanow served as U.S. chief of mission in Kosovo from 2006 to 2008 and was deputy ambassador in Bosnia from 2003 to 2006.

According to RFE/RL, while in Kosovo Ms. Kaidanow was known for "getting things done," but also - and very much in contrast to Mr. Bryza - appeared to avoid publicity and rarely gave interviews.

In her earlier assignments, Ms. Kaidanow served as special assistant to Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage (2001-3) and before that as special assistant to the U.S. envoy for the Kosovo crisis, Christopher Hill. She also worked at U.S. embassies in Belgrade and Sarajevo and as an official managing U.S. policy in the Balkans at the President's National Security Council.

Russia says it wants Karabakh settlement; mulls use of military force abroad

"Russia is interested in the [Karabakh] conflict settlement and we are not interested in any conflicts in the Caucasus," Russian premier Vladimir Putin said on a visit to Turkey on August 6. He also praised the "great positive work" undertaken by Russian president Dmitry Medvedev "in connection with Karabakh conflict settlement," the Russian state-funded RIA Novosti reported.

Mr. Medvedev has helped organize several meetings between leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan since last fall. Russia along with the United States and France, mediates in the dispute.

That the comments were made during Mr. Putin's visit to Ankara indicated that Turkish leaders were continuing to raise Armenian issues with third countries.

Like in Sochi earlier this year, Mr. Putin reiterated Russia's position that it would not force a settlement and would only serve as a "guarantor of the [peace] process and agreements made." He added that Moscow would continue to "help" the parties in the effort to "achieve agreements and find compromises that would lead to a complete and final settlement."

Writing for RIA Novosti on the day of Mr. Putin's visit to Ankara, commentator Andrey Fediashin suggested that only Russia could try to compel Armenia to compromise in Karabakh. But he also added that for Russia it would be both "stupid and dangerous" to try something like that "especially after [Russia's] recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia."

Meanwhile, on August 10 Mr. Medvedev asked leaders of the Duma, the Russian parliament, to modify the federal law on defense to specify when Russian military force could be used abroad.

According to the president's website, Mr. Medvedev recalled last year's war with Georgia, when Russia justified its intervention on the grounds that its peacekeeping forces deployed in South Ossetia, as well as local civilians with Russian citizenship, were attacked by Georgian forces. Both circumstances - an attack on Russian forces or citizens abroad - would now be spelled out in legislation.

The new legislative language would also allow the Russian leadership to authorize the use of force to "defend or preempt" aggression against another state, as well as to fight piracy.

Russia, Turkey reach fresh energy, trade agreements

Turkey agreed to transit Russian gas to third countries and will continue to consider the Russian bid to build Turkey's first nuclear power plant, the two nations' leaders agreed earlier this month. Russia in turn agreed to ease customs regulations for Turkish imports.

The agreements were announced during Russian premier Vladimir Putin's visit with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara on August 6, the New York Times and regional media outlets reported soon after.

The gas deal complements Turkey's efforts to become the hub for Europe's gas imports. Last month, Turkey agreed to transit natural gas from Russia's potential competitors in Central Asia – the so-called Nabucco project supported by the European Union and the United States, which are seeking to lessen Russia's dominance in the European gas market.

Turkey already imports most of its natural gas from Russia, through what is known as the Blue Stream pipeline that crosses the Black Sea and was built by Italy's Eni corporation. The Russian-Turkish summit was joined by Italy's prime minister Silvia Berlusconi, reflecting the Italian business interests.

But Russian-Turkish cooperation appeared to be driven in equal measure by economic and political interests. RFE/RL cited a commentator for Hurriyet Daily News noting Mr. Putin's popularity in Turkey because he was seen as seeking to challenge America's global dominance.

Sibel Edmonds tells all

Sibel Edmonds offers details of Turkey’s covert operations in U.S.
Testimony part of Ohio Rep. Schmidt complaint
by Emil Sanamyan

Published: Monday August 10, 2009

Sibel Edmonds answering questions after her deposition on August 8, with her lawyer Michael Kohn on right. Armenian Reporter photo

WASHINGTON - Operatives allegedly acting at the behest of the Turkish government used evidence of an extramarital affair to blackmail a sitting Democratic member of Congress, while paying off others in Congress and the executive branch to support Turkey's agenda, a former translator privy to federal investigations of the activities said in a deposition for the Ohio Elections Commission.

The scandalous details were part of testimony by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds heard at the National Whistleblowers Association office in Washington on August 8 by representatives of incumbent Rep. Jeanne Schmidt (R.-Ohio) and David Krikorian, a candidate for the Democratic Party ticket in that district, who requested Ms. Edmonds' deposition.

With a full video of Ms. Edmonds' deposition anticipated to be released at a later time, Mr. Krikorian told journalists about some of the charges presented.

One case concerned "a current female member of Congress who [is] apparently bisexual and [Turkish operatives] bugged her apartment," Mr. Krikorian said. "She's married with children, and they set up a relationship with another female who went in and had sexual relationships with her. And they had all the episodes bugged within this current representative's home and they blackmailed her."

While Ms. Edmonds did not name the member of Congress, she later told Brad Friedman blog that the congresswoman in question is a Democrat.

Mr. Krikorian also confirmed that charges of taking bribes and engaging in other illegal activity were heard against sitting Rep. Dan Burton (R.-Ind.), ex-Speaker Dennis Hastert (R.-Ill.), and other current and former members of Congress.

Other charges of collusion with Turkish officials were made against Marc Grossman, a former undersecretary of state and ambassador to Turkey, and other former U.S. officials.

Since leaving government both Mr. Hastert and Mr. Grossman, who have in the past denied any wrongdoing, joined Washington lobby groups with ties to Turkish government contracts; reaction from Rep. Burton, one of the few members of Congress to engage in outright denial of Armenian Genocide, was not available as of press time.

The deposition came as part of the Ohio Elections Commission's consideration of a complaint filed by Ms. Schmidt, who alleged that Mr. Krikorian made "false statements" that she took "blood money" from Turkish interests to oppose a congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide.

By summoning Ms. Edmonds, Mr. Krikorian sought to establish a pattern of efforts on the part of the Turkish government and affiliated entities to induce U.S. policy makers into opposing the genocide resolution.

The Ohio Elections Commission is expected to rule on Rep. Schmidt's complaint on September 3.

Charges corroborated and ignored

The former FBI translator's testimony is based on her past access to wiretap recordings made as part of investigations of Turkish government activities in the United States from 1996 to 2002. After being fired from the FBI, Ms. Edmonds took evidence of federal mismanagement and corruption to Congress and sought reinstatement through the courts.

Ms. Edmonds' allegations – covered at the time by U.S. mass media – took on added weight when the Justice Department's internal investigation issued in early 2005 confirmed many of them and did not dispute others.

But no congressional investigation or prosecutions based on her charges ever followed.

Her deposition last Saturday came despite warnings from the Department of Justice that she "has not complied with the procedures for obtaining authorization from the FBI, her former employer, prior to making any disclosure relating to information that she acquired in the course of her work for the FBI."

Lawyers for Ms. Edmonds argued that without renewing the state secrets privilege first invoked by the Bush administration against the former FBI translator to prevent her from testifying, the current Department of Justice could not prevent Ms. Edmonds from offering her testimony.

Clinton on Iran, Biden, others on Russia & Georgia

This was first published in August 1, 2009 Armenian Reporter

Clinton indicates shift in U.S. thinking on Iran nuclear program

With chances for a new government in Tehran quickly receding, American leaders have renewed warnings over Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program, news agencies report.

The Obama administration is unhappy with the lack of Iranian response to its offer of dialogue, with the president and secretary of state hinting that the offer might expire before the end of the year. U.S. officials also insist that they find a nuclear-armed Iran "unacceptable."

Secretary Hillary Clinton has in the past threatened fresh "crippling sanctions" as a form of pressure on Iran should it continue policies that bring it close to acquiring nuclear weapons.

But in an apparent verbal slipup, Mrs. Clinton referred last week to a "defense umbrella" that the United States might extend to its Middle East allies, The Associated Press reported. Although Mrs. Clinton denied it indicated U.S. acceptance that Iran will eventually become nuclear-armed, that is how the comment was taken by most observers.

During her presidential election campaign, Mrs. Clinton used the term to describe a policy that would call for a U.S. commitment to retaliate against Iran should it use nuclear weapons against Israel or other regional allies of the United States, and thus theoretically deter Iran.

The concept had been articulated by the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy, including its former senior staff member Ambassador Dennis Ross, who is now the Obama administration's point man on Iran.

The apparent shift in U.S. thinking has worried Israel, whose officials argue that deterrence cannot be effective against Iran. In recent weeks, Israeli leaders from the right-wing government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have renewed claims Israel might launch a military strike against Iran in an attempt to postpone its progress toward nuclear weapons.

U.S. reaction to Israeli threats has been mixed.

Vice President Joe Biden said in early July that the United States could not tell Israel what it could do to safeguard its security; but President Barack Obama then denied that the comments were a "green light" for an Israeli attack on Iran.

Biden comments on Russian economy, Georgian politics

Then-Senator Joe Biden in Tbilisi with Pres. Saakashvili and his spouse, August 17, 2009. U.S. Embassy in Georgia

Russia will be forced to cooperate with the United States because Russia will grow economically and politically weaker, Vice President Joe Biden told the Wall Street Journal at the end of his trip to Georgia last week.

Mr. Biden made the comments when asked why he thought the U.S. policy of reaching out to Russia would succeed while the United States continues to oppose a Russian "sphere of influence" in the former Soviet space. Mr. Biden also predicted a Russian banking collapse in the next 15 years.

Speaking to NBC's Meet the Press last Sunday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sought to address Russia's irritation at Mr. Biden's comments.

"Every country faces challenges. We have our challenges, Russia has their challenges," she said, but "we view Russia as a great power."

The vice president also expressed doubts about future of democracy in Georgia.

"What worries me most is they don't understand how to establish democracy," Mr. Biden said.

President Mikheil Saakashvili "has the impulses of what was the Rose Revolution. It was: 'We're in the street, you get your a** out of office, or we're going to do something.'

"It was a cry for freedom, and it was a demonstration of a total rejection of the other government. It's a leap from there to say, 'Here's how democratic institutions work.'"

U.S. officials, Congress members debate relations with Russia

In testimony before the House Subcommittee on Europe on July 28, Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Celeste Wallander discussed the aftermath of President Barack Obama's visit to Moscow in early July.

The two officials agreed that concerns over Iran's nuclear program also dominate U.S. thinking in its efforts to engage the Russian government.

Members of the subcommittee appeared split on the likelihood of a successful engagement with Russia, with subcommittee chair Robert Wexler (D.-Fla.) and others appearing skeptical.

On the other side of the debate, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R.-Calif.) was most upbeat on Russia and dismissive of U.S. support for the former Soviet republics.

To address, what Rep. Rohrabacher described as two overarching U.S. foreign policy concerns - radical Islamism and communist China - the United States needed the support of "giant" Russia rather than an "alliance of Lilliputians." Rep. Rohrabacher also suggested that it was Russia rather than its smaller neighbors that should be brought into NATO.

Rep. Bill Delahunt (D.-Mass.) expressed concerns over reports that Georgia was seeking to acquire weapons from the United States and said he was strongly opposed to such a move.

In a response, Ms. Wallander noted that the United States believes Georgia is "not ready" to receive U.S. weapons, but did not rule out such supplies in the future. For now, U.S. military support for Georgia will continue to focus on military training programs.

Russia, Turkey to hold fresh high-level talks

Russian premier Vladimir Putin will visit with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara on August 6, the Russian and Turkish governments announced on July 30.

According to media reports, cooperation on nuclear energy as well as Russian oil and gas exports to and through Turkey will dominate the agenda. Earlier this year, a Russian company was the only bidder for the Turkish nuclear-energy tender. Preliminary talks have been held by Turkish and Russian officials overseeing energy issues.

Russia is Turkey's biggest trade partner, with bilateral trade surpassing $33 billion last year.

Reflecting the intensity of high-level contacts, Mr. Putin's visit will become his ninth meeting with the Turkish leader; they previously met in Russia last May.

Congressmen to Obama re: Armenia-Turkey

President Obama is urged to correct course on Armenia-Turkey policy
In letter, 81 members of Congress call on president to recognize Genocide
by Emil Sanamyan

Published: Thursday July 30, 2009

Some of the 81 signatures of members of Congress on a letter to President Obama urging him to separate the normalization of Turkey-Armenia relations from recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

WASHINGTON - The United States should "separate the issues" of the normalization of Armenia-Turkey relations and the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, 81 members of Congress said in July 30 letter to President Barack Obama. The president was urged to uphold his repeated campaign pledges to recognize the Armenian Genocide, while continuing efforts "to nurture the Armenia-Turkey normalization process without preconditions."

The letter was initiated on July 10 by Reps. Frank Pallone (D.-N.J.), Mark Kirk (R.-Ill.), Adam Schiff (D.-Calif.), and George Radanovich (R.-Calif.), who are also the lead co-sponsors of House Resolution 252 affirming U.S. record on the Armenian Genocide. Seventy-seven other members of Congress signed on to the letter in the last three weeks.

Co-signers include Rep. Howard Berman (D.-Calif.), who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where H. Res. 252 was referred since it was introduced in March.

The congressional recommendation came as Western officials acknowledged that Turkey has not followed through on its April 22 pledge to implement the so-called roadmap toward normalization of relations with Armenia.

"An effort to block"

The members of Congress argued in the letter that Turkey, "in an effort to block U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide, agreed to a roadmap it did not intend to uphold."

President Obama failed to use the term genocide in his April 24 remembrance message, referring to efforts to normalize relations between Armenia and Turkey. Congressional leaders have also held up the progress of H. Res. 252 in apparent deference to the president's choice.

Since April Turkish officials have reverted to their policy of conditioning normalization of relations on unilateral Armenian compromises vis-à-vis Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Nevertheless, hosting her Turkish counterpart on June 5, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton provided an upbeat take on Armenia-Turkey relations, suggesting that there has been "no flagging of commitment" by Turkey toward normalization, while also counseling "patience and perseverance."

Process is "frozen"

A few weeks later, however, U.S. ambassador to Armenia Marie Yovanovitch was much less upbeat. In remarks at the Library of Congress on June 30, she acknowledged that while Armenia-Turkey normalization was "possible," it was also "not inevitable."

On July 23, the Economist cited an unnamed Western diplomat, who said Turkey's would-be "rapprochement with Armenia" was "on its last legs."

Even Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matt Bryza, who is typically optimistic in his public statements, this week described the Armenia-Turkey process as "frozen," Armenian Public Radio reported citing RFE/RL.

But the implications of these developments for a correction in the U.S. course on Armenian Genocide recognition remained unclear.

Citing Secretary Clinton's recent description of Turkey as "an emerging global power," the Economist summarized the expectations with the words of the Western official: "When it comes to Turkey and Armenia, Turkey wins every time."

Text of the letter to the president
July 30, 2009

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We write to you with our concerns about Turkish backpedaling on the agreed upon roadmap to normalize relations between Turkey and Armenia.

On April 22, 2009, just two days before the 94th commemoration of the Armenian Genocide, the Department of State released the following statement:

The United States welcomes the statement made by Armenia and Turkey on normalization of their bilateral relations. It has long been and remains the position of the United States that normalization should take place without preconditions and within a reasonable timeframe. We urge Armenia and Turkey to proceed according to the agreed framework and roadmap. We look forward to working with both governments in support of normalization, and thus promote peace, security and stability in the whole region.

Two days later, instead of recognizing the Armenian Genocide, the Administration opted to focus on this new roadmap to Armenian-Turkish normalization. "I also strongly support the efforts by Turkey and Armenia to normalize their bilateral relations," you wrote. "Under Swiss auspices, the two governments have agreed on a framework and roadmap for normalization. I commend this progress, and urge them to fulfill its promise."

While the Government of Armenia remains committed to this roadmap and has long offered to establish ties with Turkey without preconditions, Turkey's public statements and actions since April 24th stand in sharp contrast to this agreement and undermine U.S. policy that normalization take place without preconditions.

On May 13, 2009, Prime Minister Erdogan publically conditioned normalization of relations with Yerevan on Azerbaijan's approval of a future settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict that fully meets Baku's satisfaction. "I want to repeat once more that until the occupation ends, the border gates [with Armenia] will remain closed," Erdogan told the Azeri Parliament.

On June 17, 2009, EU South Caucasus Envoy Peter Semneby said Turkey had taken "tactical steps backwards" in the normalization process with Armenia.

It would appear that Turkey, in an effort to block U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide, agreed to a roadmap it did not intend to uphold. Therefore, we urge your Administration to separate the issues of normalization and genocide recognition. We hope that renewed efforts and focused resources from the Administration can be utilized to nurture the Armenia-Turkey normalization process without preconditions and within a reasonable timeframe, and continue to remain strongly supportive of your stated campaign policy to officially recognize the Armenian Genocide.

Sincerely,

Frank Pallone, Jr. (D.-N.J.)
Mark Steven Kirk (R.-Ill.)
Adam Schiff (D.-Calif.)
George Radanovich (R.-Calif.)
Gary Ackerman (D.-N.Y.)
Joe Baca (D.-Calif.)
Michele Bachmann (R.-Minn.)
Shelley Berkley (D.-Nev.)
Howard Berman (D.-Calif.)
Gus Bilirakis (R.-Fla.)
Bruce Braley (D.-Iowa)
John Campbell (R.-Calif.)
Lois Capps (D.-Calif.)
Michael Capuano (D.-Mass.)
Dennis Cardoza (D.-Calif.)
Jim Costa (D.-Calif.)
Jerry Costello (D.-Ill.)
Joe Courtney (D.-Conn.)
Joseph Crowley (D.-N.Y.)
Peter DeFazio (D.-Ore.)
Steve Driehaus (D.-Ohio)
Anna Eshoo (D.-Calif.)
Chaka Fattah (D.-Pa.)
Bob Filner (D.-Calif.)
Barney Frank (D.-Mass.)
Elton Gallegly (R.-Calif.)
Scott Garrett (R.-N.J.)
Raul Grijalva (D.-Ariz.)
Maurice Hinchey (D.-N.Y.)
Rush Holt (D.-N.J.)
Michael Honda (D.-Calif.)
Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D.-Ill.)
Patrick Kennedy (D.-R.I.)
Dale Kildee (D.-Mich.)
Leonard Lance (R.-N.J.)
James Langevin (D.-R.I.)
Barbara Lee (D.-Calif.)
Sander Levin (D.-Mich.)
Daniel Lipinski (D.-Ill.)
Frank LoBiondo (R.-N.J.)
Daniel Lungren (R.-Calif.)
Stephen Lynch (D.-Calif.)
Carolyn Maloney (D.-N.Y.)
Edward Markey (D.-Mass.)
Betty McCollum (D.-Minn.)
Thaddeus McCotter (R.-Mich.)
James McGovern (D.-Mass.)
Jerry McNerney (D.-Calif.)
Candice Miller (R.-Mich.)
Walt Minnick (D.-Idaho)
Grace Napolitano (D.-Calif.)
Richard Neal (D.-Calif.)
Devin Nunes (R.-Calif.)
John Olver (D.-Mass.)
Donald Payne (D.-N.J.)
Gary Peters (D.-Mich.)
Collin Peterson (D.-Minn.)
Mike Quigley (D.-Ill.)
Peter Roskam (R.-Ill.)
Steven Rothman (D.-N.J.)
Edward Royce (R.-Calif.)
Bobby Rush (D.-Ill.)
Paul Ryan (R.-Wis.)
Loretta Sanchez (D.-Calif.)
John Sarbanes (D.-Md.)
James Sensenbrenner (R.-Wis.)
Brad Sherman (D.-Calif.)
Chris Smith (R.-N.J.)
Mark Souder (R.-Ind.)
Zack Space (D.-Ohio)
Jackie Speier (D.-Calif.)
John Tierney (D.-Mass.)
Dina Titus (D.-Nev.)
Paul Tonko (D.-N.Y.)
Niki Tsongas (D.-Mass.)
Chris Van Hollen (D.-Md.)
Tim Walz (D.-Minn.)
Henry Waxman (D.-Calif.)
Anthony Weiner (D.-N.Y.)
Frank Wolf (R.-Va.)
Lynn Woolsey (D.-Calif.)

Los Angeles consular corruption charged

U.S. charges two former Armenian consular staff members in Los Angeles (updated)
Obstruction of immigration proceedings alleged
by Emil Sanamyan

Published: Wednesday July 29, 2009 at www.reporter.am

WASHINGTON - Two former employees of Armenia's Consulate General in Los Angeles were among five individuals charged by the United States in four separate criminal complaints with "conspiracy to obstruct proceedings" before the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.

The complaints were unveiled on July 28 after a two-year ICE investigation and were made available to the Armenian Reporter and other media outlets the same day. The charges filed carry a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

Armenia's Consul General Grigor Hovhannissian, who was posted to Los Angeles earlier this year, said he was shocked by the news.

"These allegations affect the standing of our country, something which we cannot compromise," Mr. Hovhannissian said. He added that he expected the issue would also be investigated in Armenia.

On July 29 the Consulate General issued a statement expressing “readiness to cooperate with the U.S. law enforcement agencies” to achieve a “prompt investigation of circumstances of the criminal case.”

“The Consulate General expects to receive from the American side all relevant information pertinent to the criminal case, most notably details of the [allegedly] falsified official documents and stationery,” the statement added.

The alleged scheme

Upon establishing that individuals are present in the United States illegally, U.S. immigration officials seek to determine these persons' nationality to be able to deport them to their countries of citizenship.

To organize the deportation, U.S. officials request formal confirmation from the likely country of citizenship that an individual in question is in fact its citizen.

In Armenia, such determinations are made by the Department of Passports and Visas, known by its Russian acronym as OVIR, which is part of the national police service, a former Foreign Ministry official told the Armenian Reporter. The Foreign Ministry's consular officials act as a conduit between Armenian and U.S. law-enforcement officials.

In cases, when a citizenship cannot be officially substantiated by the likely country (or countries) of citizenship, deportation proceedings are halted and individuals are allowed to stay in U.S. legally.

The federal complaints alleged that the defendants conspired with Armenian officials to proffer so-called "Letters of Refusal" that declined to substantiate certain persons' Armenian citizenship even when that information may have been available in state records.

According to U.S. officials, in two dozen cases known to the investigators, the defendants had sought and in most cases received payments of between $15,000 and $35,000 for each such letter.

But as Mr. Hovhannissian, the current consul general, explained, more often than not there are legitimate reasons for the letters to be issued.

"The refusal to allow a ‘subject' back is not an extraordinary decision," Mr. Hovhannissian told the Armenian Reporter. "Up to 90 percent of deportees have no passports and refuse to provide the U.S. investigators with their personal details."

According to Mr. Hovhannissian, so far this year 16 deportation cases were referred to the Consulate General in Los Angeles, of which three were refused.

Investigation findings

The U.S. investigation was led by Vardan Grigoryan, an ICE Special Agent in Charge and a native speaker of Armenian.

In the complaints, Mr. Grigoryan described four separate investigations that involved undercover informants who were also native Armenian speakers, with Mr. Grigoryan himself going undercover and posing as an individual seeking to prevent someone's deportation – in contravention of U.S. laws.

Based on evidence gathered from audio- and video-taped conversations and surveillance, Mr. Grigoryan built a case against five individuals, and U. S. Attorney Thomas P. O'Brien filed indictments against them.

The individuals charged include Norair Ghalumian, 52, a resident of Burbank and, from 1999 to 2002, consul at the Armenian Consulate General in Los Angeles. (The position of consul is below that of consul general, who leads the Armenian mission.) Mr. Ghalumian, who established permanent residence in the United States in 2003, allegedly acted together with Elvis Madatyan, 47, a Glendale businessperson.

Three separate complaints were filed against Hakop Hovanesyan, 54, a Glendale resident since the late 1980s and a U.S. citizen who worked as an aide to Armenian consuls general in Los Angeles from 1995, when the consulate was first established, until 2007; Margarita Mkrtchyan, 41, an immigration attorney practicing since 2004 and also a Glendale resident; and Oganes Nardos, 36 (also known as Hovanes Harutiunian), a substance-abuse counselor and resident of Valencia, Calif., who received refugee asylum in the United States in 2001.

According to The Associated Press, Mark Werksman, a lawyer for Mr. Hovanesyan, said his client intended to challenge the charges in court.

Reactions from other defendants were not available at press time.

The complaints also mentioned Arthur Madoyan and inferred that he was one of at least two Armenian officials the defendants allegedly dealt with to secure the letters. The other official was not identified and Mr. Madoyan has not been charged with any wrongdoing.

Mr. Madoyan is currently the acting head of the Migration Division in the Consular Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, according to the ministry's website. From 2004 to 2008, he worked as an aide to consuls general in Los Angeles.

Defendants plead “not guilty” in alleged consular scam
by Emil Sanamyan

Published: Friday August 28, 2009

WASHINGTON - Five individuals, including two former staff members at the Armenian Consulate in Los Angeles, have entered "not guilty" pleas in four separate cases in which they are charged with conspiracy to obstruct U.S. immigration proceedings.

The pleas were entered at the federal court in Santa Ana, Calif., on August 24, The Associated Press reported the same day citing Assistant U.S. Attorney Sandy Leal.

All defendants have been released on bail, pending trial, which is due to begin on October 6 following a status conference in late September.

The story of Armenian blogs

This was first published in July 25, 2009 Armenian Reporter


On the Armenian blogosphere
by Emil Sanamyan

Washington - The so-called Madrid proposals for settlement of the Karabakh conflict that were published on July 10. Armenian officials initially welcomed them; they were quickly rejected, most publicly by the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation.

In addition to that, within hours, more than 150 bloggers joined a petition that denounced the proposals as contradicting Armenian interests. The petition demanded that President Serge Sargsian pull out of negotiations, dismiss foreign minister Edward Nalbandian, and "act henceforth only for the interests of the Armenian statehood and with valor typical to the Armenian people."

In recent years, bloggers in Armenia have taken an increasingly prominent role as activists and reporters, complementing and sometimes sidelining established politicians and journalists.

From the days of web logs

In its basic form, blogging has been around as long as personal websites have. In the early 1990s individuals - mostly students and academics with access to the Internet - first began to establish such sites and post their and others' writings in the form of personal journals on the web.

The word blogging, though, was not coined until 1999, after the original term "web log" first morphed into "we blog" and then contracted into a "blog"; the term "blogosphere," referring to the community of bloggers, came soon after.

As with most Internet technologies, blogging spread from the United States. Not surprisingly, some of the first Armenian blogs were started by Internet users from the diaspora.

Raffi Kojian, who launched one of the first comprehensive sites on things Armenian, was perhaps also the first Armenian blogger. Two years after moving to Armenia, he launched the Life in Armenia blog in April 2001, attracting fellow repatriates. This was still at the time when neither personal web sites nor blogging platforms were yet readily available, especially in Armenia.

Blogging has become a mainstream phenomenon in the last few years. By now, many if not most public figures, activists, writers, and other individuals seeking publicity have their own online blogs.

Many English-language bloggers use platforms such as www.blogspot.com or www.wordpress.com, while Russian- and Armenian-language bloggers prefer www.livejournal.com.

These platforms provide even the least technically savvy among Internet users with an opportunity to establish a free outlet for their ideas that is accessible anywhere in the world.

Armenian activism

Many Armenians appear to have embraced blogging as a uniquely fitting vehicle for individual expression, networking, and community organization.

Blogger Tigran Kocharian, who writes in Russian and Armenian under the screen name Pigh (elephant in Armenian), was the initiator of the Karabakh petition last week.

Pigh has more than 1,400 followers, which is more than the regular readership of many of Armenia's veteran media outlets. This week he was ranked 340th in popularity among 1.2 million LiveJournal blogs. (Chess champion and Russian opposition activist Garry Kasparov was just ahead at the 325th spot.)

Last week's bloggers' action was not the first to deal with the Karabakh conflict.

Pigh and several fellow bloggers first made mainstream impact in December 2007, when they staged a protest during the "Days of Azerbaijan," a cultural event held at a Yerevan school.

Last December they visited Armenian TV stations to promote the use of maps that accurately represent the extent of Armenian control in and outside Karabakh.

For a country where only about six percent of population regularly use the Internet, bloggers in Armenia seem to punch well above their weight.

Presidential blogging

Perhaps the highest exposure for bloggers in Armenia came last year, following the contentious presidential elections in Armenia.

President-elect Serge Sargsian established his own LiveJournal blog to take questions from bloggers. Hundreds of questions were forwarded, of which dozens were asked during a subsequent Q&A with the president-elect that was then uploaded to YouTube; other questions were answered in writing online.

The initial launch had no follow-up, however. The president's blog has not been updated since that press conference.

But as many veterans will tell you, and this quasi-blogger knows from personal experience, it takes a special kind of dedication to keep one's blog going.

Congressmen on NK, Kirk to Senate, Chevron v. Armenians, Biden in Georgia

This was first published in July 25, 2009 Armenian Reporter

Washington Briefing
by Emil Sanamyan

Members of Congress reiterate support for Armenia, Karabakh

Four key congressional supporters of Armenian-American issues released a joint statement denouncing Azerbaijan's threatening rhetoric and reiterating support for Karabakh peace.

Reps. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D.-N.J.), Mark Kirk (R.-Ill.), Adam Schiff (D.-Calif.), and George Radanovich (R.-Calif.) said in a July 23 joint statement that "Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev's bellicose statements undermine [the Karabakh peace] process."

Last month Mr. Aliyev boasted that his country had spent $6.5 billion on its military over the last five years, including $2 billion planned for 2009; earlier this month he again threatened military action against Armenia and Karabakh.

"We stand in strong support of the people of Nagorno Karabakh's right to decide their own future," the members of Congress went on to say in their statement. "The citizens of Nagorno Karabakh have remained committed to respecting human rights and democracy and have made significant progress toward peace and prosperity. No solution is possible without Nagorno Karabakh's consent."

Meanwhile, an Azerbaijani news agency quoted Ambassador Yuri Merzlyakov, the Russian mediator for the Karabakh talks, as saying on July 22 that both he and his U.S. counterpart Matt Bryza are likely to be replaced in the coming months.

Mr. Bryza, who was not available for comment at press time, has been rumored as a potential nominee for U.S. ambassador to Azerbaijan.

Congressional Armenian Caucus co-chair to run for Senate

Rep. Mark Kirk (R.-Ill.) who last January became co-chair of the congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues will run for the U.S. Senate, he announced on July 20.

In the 2010 congressional elections, Mr. Kirk will be running for the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama after he was elected president. The seat is currently held by a temporary appointee of the former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich. That appointment was preceded by a national scandal when wiretaps of Gov. Blagojevich allegedly scheming to sell the vacant seat were made public by prosecutors.

In his announcement, Mr. Kirk pledged to make "ethics" and "integrity," along with economy and foreign wars, centerpieces of his campaign. According to the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), Mr. Kirk also thanked Armenian-Americans for their support during his service in Congress.

Mr. Kirk was first elected to Congress in 2000 with the ANCA's endorsement. Earlier in his political career, he was a senior staff member for Rep. John Porter (R.-Ill.) who was founding co-chair of the Armenian Caucus in 1995. A Navy veteran, Mr. Kirk has also worked in the World Bank, the State Department, and private legal practice.

As a member of the House Foreign Operations Subcommittee, Mr. Kirk supported increasing aid levels to Armenia and Karabakh. Earlier this year, he became one of four original co-sponsors of the latest congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide.

During his nearly one decade in Congress, Mr. Kirk has also been a proponent of U.S. support for Albania and Georgia, and took a keen interest in U.S. policy toward Iran, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.

Chevron lobbied against Genocide resolution as it sought Turkey oil concession

A major U.S. oil company engaged in lobbying against a congressional resolution that affirms the U.S. record on the Armenian Genocide as it negotiated to win an oil concession in Turkey.

"As a major energy producer in the region, we support the integrity of multiple energy transportation routes and a diplomatic relationship between Turkey and Armenia," Chevron spokesperson Justin Higgs was quoted by the Armenian Youth Federation (AYF) as saying, adding that the Genocide resolution, "would have hurt, not helped, relations between Turkey and Armenia."

The statement came as the AYF, the youth organization of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, launched a nationwide campaign calling attention to the lobbying.

While Chevron is not directly involved in Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, the region's major oil pipeline, the company has recently received Turkish government permission to prospect for oil near the country's border with Iraq.

According to its formal disclosure, Chevron's lobbying efforts coincided with its negotiations with the Turkish state company for the concession.

The Associated Press reported last month that Chevron was among the U.S. companies that paid for lobbying against the resolution. Other companies involved were manufacturers of weapons systems BAE Systems Inc., Goodrich Corp., Northrop Grumman Corp., Raytheon Co., and United Technologies Corp. connect: http://www.anca.org/chevron

U.S. pledges continued military support for Georgia

Vice President Joe Biden toured Ukraine and Georgia this week in a visit that sought to underscore U.S. support for the two countries after President Barack Obama, on a visit to Moscow earlier this month, had declared a new, more cooperative stage in relations with Russia.

In a speech to the Georgian parliament on July 23, Mr. Biden said that the United States "fully supports" Georgia's desire to join NATO and will continue to provide military aid to the country; both are policies that Russia has publicly protested. The vice president's visit was preceded by U.S.-Georgian naval exercises in the Black Sea.

Georgian leader Mikheil Saakashvili told the Washington Post on July 21 that he expected the United States to supply Georgia with advanced defensive weapons, but that delivery was taking a long time.

"We want the country to still be around when those things start to arrive here," he said.

Separately, on July 20 the Wall Street Journal quoted Mr. Saakashvili as saying that his hopes of Georgia joining NATO are "almost dead. It's tragic. If they manage to kill [Georgia's hopes of joining] NATO it means the Russians fought for the right reasons."

According to news reports, Mr. Biden received a warm welcome in Tbilisi. President George W. Bush Street, which links the capital Tbilisi with its airport, was lined with people waving American flags and appealing for U.S. help; the vice president was awarded Georgia's highest state order.

According to media reports at the time, it was Mr. Biden, as chairperson of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who first made the suggestion to provide Georgia with $1 billion in U.S. aid in the aftermath of the Russian military intervention that followed Georgia's failed bid to regain control of South Ossetia.

In his parliamentary speech, Mr. Biden recalled his visit to Tbilisi last year and the pledge he made to support Georgia while he "sat on a rooftop of a restaurant with President Saakashvili, as the sound of artillery fire and fighter aircraft punctuated the night."

Mr. Biden visited Georgia on August 17 nearly a week after major fighting in Georgia had ended.

Clinton, Congressmen and ANCA re: Turkey, Erdogan v. China, Turkey and Nabucco

This was first published in July 18, 2009 Armenian Reporter

Washington Briefing
by Emil Sanamyan

"America's mission in the world today [is] to exercise American leadership to solve problems in concert with others," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared as she outlined U.S. foreign policy priorities in a July 15 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Mrs. Clinton suggested that the United States was not concerned by what many U.S. experts see as the growing influence of regional powers, and she argued, "just as no nation can meet these [global] challenges alone, no challenge can be met without America."

"We will also put special emphasis on encouraging major and emerging global powers - China, India, Russia, and Brazil, as well as Turkey, Indonesia, and South Africa - to be full partners in tackling the global agenda," Mrs. Clinton said.

Last month, leaders of Brazil, China, India, and Russia, the so-called BRIC countries, held an inaugural gathering in the Russian city of Yekatirinburg and pledged cooperation in challenging U.S. dominance in the world politics.

Turkey, the only NATO member among the countries listed by Mrs. Clinton, has increasingly promoted policies that are frequently at odds with U.S. goals. Underscoring Washington's interest in Ankara, both Secretary Clinton and President Barack Obama paid visits to Turkey within months of coming to office.

"These states are vital to achieving solutions to the shared problems and advancing our priorities - nonproliferation, counterterrorism, economic growth, climate change, among others," Mrs. Clinton went on. "With these states, we will stand firm on our principles even as we seek common ground."

Members of Congress raise concerns with Armenia-Turkey “road-map”

In a proposed letter to President Barack Obama, leading congressional advocates of Armenian-American issues charged Turkey with reneging on a commitment to normalize relations with Armenia and urged the administration "to separate the issues of normalization and genocide recognition."

The text of the letter, co-authored by Reps. Frank Pallone (D.-N.J.), Mark Kirk (R.-Ill.), Adam Schiff (D.-Calif.), and George Radanovich (R.-Calif.) was circulated on July 10 to secure additional congressional co-signers, according to an electronic copy shared with the Armenian Reporter. [See editorial, "Ask your representative to sign the letter on Armenia-Turkey relations."]

Citing preconditions that Turkish leaders have repeatedly reiterated since the "road-map" for normalization was first announced on April 22, members of Congress argued that "Turkey, in an effort to block U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide, agreed to a roadmap it did not intend to uphold."

The letter concluded with an expression of "hope that renewed efforts and focused resources from the Administration can be utilized to nurture the Armenia-Turkey normalization process without preconditions and within a reasonable timeframe, and continue to remain strongly supportive of your stated campaign policy to officially recognize the Armenian Genocide."

Mr. Obama avoided using the term genocide in his April 24 statement, citing the joint statement by Armenia and Turkey made public two days earlier.

ANCA denounces “pressure” on Armenia regarding Karabakh

In a sign of further disappointment with the Obama administration's policy on Armenian issues, the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) has expressed "profound disappointment" over what it termed "undue and unreasonable pressure being applied in a heavy-handed manner upon Armenia" by the United States, along with France and Russia, "to force unilateral and dangerous concessions by Armenians regarding the Nagorno Karabagh conflict."

The July 14 letter by ANCA chairperson Kenneth Hachikian was the second such communication by the ANCA within two months. On May 18, Mr. Hachikian charged Barack Obama with a "grave offense" against Armenian-Americans over his failure to fulfill pre-election promises to recognize the Armenian Genocide and maintain U.S. support for Armenia.

This week's letter was in reference to a joint statement by the presidents of France, Russia, and the United States, issued on July 10, which called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to agree to "basic principles" of a settlement, on terms that have been met with widespread criticism in Armenia.

Erdogan sees “nearly genocide” in China

Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan characterized recent clashes in China's northwestern Xiniang province as "nearly genocide," news agencies reported.

The apparently ethnically motivated clashes between Han Chinese and Turkic Uighurs there last week left at least 156 people dead.

Mr. Erdogan's choice of words at the July 10 press conference contrasted with his repeated denials that deaths of more than a million Armenians in Ottoman Turkey could constitute genocide. The comments came as Turkish nationalists held daily anti-China protests.

The Turkish leader also promised to raise concerns over what many Turks see as Chinese oppression of Uighurs at the United Nation Security Council, where Turkey is currently a member.

The comments have elicited criticism by Chinese officials.

People's Daily, the newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, charged Mr. Erdogan with "twisting facts" and making an "irresponsible and groundless accusation."

A Chinese Foreign Ministry official was quoted as saying that the government was "following up on the reactions" from Turkey.

Turkey agrees with Europeans over gas transit

After months of disagreements, Turkey signed a deal with Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, and Austria to serve as a transit point for natural gas supplies to Europe, news agencies reported.

The July 13 agreement removed a major roadblock toward the construction of what is known as the Nabucco gas pipeline, championed by the United States and the European Union as a way to ease Europeans' reliance on natural-gas supplies from Russia.

By agreeing to the project in principle, Turkey is seen as favoring the West over the Russian-proposed South Stream pipeline.

The gas is expected to come initially from Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan, as well as Iraq, whose energy sector was recently opened to foreign companies. Russia has in turn been seeking to buy up Central Asian gas to keep its dominant share of European markets.

Russia is the world's largest gas producer. Iran is the second-largest, but it has been largely shut out of European markets due to Western sanctions.

U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matt Bryza, who was present at the signing in Ankara, argued that the Nabucco line can be filled by Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Iraq, without Iran taking part.