Turkish Forum

Category: Asia and Pacific

  • U.S. Lawmakers Pressure Obama On Armenian Issue

    U.S. Lawmakers Pressure Obama On Armenian Issue


    By Susan Cornwell, Reuters

    Several U.S. lawmakers have written to President Barack Obama urging him to follow up on campaign statements and label the 1915 massacre of Armenians as genocide.

    The pressure on Obama comes ahead of an expected presidential trip to Turkey, which has warned that such declarations by the United States would damage relations. Turkey denies that up to 1.5 million Armenians suffered genocide at the hands of Ottoman Turks during World War One. Turkey accepts many Armenians were killed, but denies they were victims of a systematic genocide.

    Ronald Reagan was the only U.S. president to publicly call the killings genocide. Others avoided the term out of concern for the sensitivities of Turkey, an important NATO ally.

    Four members of the House of Representatives urged Obama to make a statement ahead of the 94th anniversary of the killings on April 24. “As a presidential candidate, you were … forthright in discussing your support for genocide recognition, saying that ‘America deserves a leader who speaks truthfully about the Armenian genocide and responds forcefully to all genocides.’ We agree with you completely,” the letter said.

    It was signed by Democrats Adam Schiff of California and Frank Pallone of New Jersey, and Republicans George Radanovich of California and Mark Kirk of Illinois.

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, on a visit to Turkey last week, said Obama would visit “within the next month or so” in his first trip as president to a Muslim country. During Clinton’s visit, Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said Turkey would consider mediating between the United States and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program.

    The foreign minister also said in a recent television interview that he saw a risk that Obama would describe the Armenian deaths as genocide, because Obama had done this during his campaign. But Babacan said the United States needed to understand the sensitivities in Turkey.

    Another consideration for Obama will be that both Turkey and Armenia say they are close to normalizing relations after nearly a century of hostility.

    Other members of the administration, including Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden, have in the past supported calling the Armenian killings genocide. Democratic aides said they also expected several lawmakers to reintroduce a resolution branding the massacre of Armenians as genocide. Armenian-Americans have been pushing for passage of similar proposals in Congress for years.

    Two years ago, a resolution was approved in committee but dropped after Turkey denounced it as “insulting” and hinted at halting logistical support for the U.S. war effort in Iraq.

  • All problems will be solved as a whole

    All problems will be solved as a whole

    Istanbul. Mayis Alizadeh-APA. Turkish MP from National Movement Party (MHP), Professor Midhad Melen’s exclusive interview with APA Turkish Bureau

    – Are you satisfied with the meetings in Washington? What is Washington’s reaction towards so-called “Armenian genocide”?

    – The congressmen were more restrained. Armenian Diaspora also takes proper steps. As a matter of fact, Armenian Diaspora tries to keep Armenia under pressure not to establish relations with Turkey. In spite of Obama’s pre-election promises to Armenians, I could say that the Congress does not approach this question as closer as it was before.

    – What is the reason of this?

    – 70 members of the Congress have signed a bill on recognition of “Armenian genocide”. I don’t believe that these signatures will be enough. The US new government started a new cooperation stage with Turkey in the region. Everything will be solved as a whole. That’s why, Turkey will never retract from Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh problem for normalization of relations with Armenia. As the problems will be solved entirely in the regions, solution of Karabagh conflict cannot be left aside either. Furthermore, the United States is very busy with the economic crisis at present. I don’t believe that so-called “Armenian genocide” issue may assume importance in such crisis days.

    – May the opening of borders be realized on the government’s initiative only? Will this issue be on the parliament’s agenda in the end?

    – I don’t believe that the government will take any steps secretly from the people and the parliament. In one of the meetings in Washington, our Azerbaijani brother said if Turkey opened its borders with Armenia I would break all the windows of Turkish Embassy in Baku. This objection is his just right. But I want everybody to be sure that such issue is not on the agenda. We are brothers and Turkey will never sacrifice Azerbaijani brothers for its personal interests.


  • POOR RICHARD’S REPORT

    POOR RICHARD’S REPORT

    Poor Richard’s Report                                                                        

     

                                                                                                    Over 300,000 readers

    My Mission: God has uniquely designed me to seek, write, and speak the truth as I see it. Preservation of one’s wealth while providing needful income is my primary goal in these unsettled times. I have been given the ability to evaluate, study, and interpret world and national events and their influence on the future of the financial markets. This gift allows me to meet the needs of individual and institution clients. 

    March 10, 2000 the stock market topped out.

    March 10, 2009 the stock market bottomed. 

    This does not mean it is going to run back up. The leaders of past bull markets do not lead the charge in new bull markets. This bear market has been the second worst in our history and probably the worst ever in other countries. It will be 5, 10, maybe 15 years before the averages make new highs- that is, if they do not change the components too much. Stocks bottom when the future looks the bleakest. So I believe we are near or at the bottom of a major cycle. It is a market of stocks not a stock market.

                 I have written that the market has bottomed, but the recovery is going to be long and painful for some. We have to institute new global regulations and retrain ourselves to be more frugal. We buy a home because we love it and want to live in it, not to turn a quick profit. We buy a stock because the company has a good product, provides a necessary function for the good of the community, and over a period of time will grow.

                Countries and consumers are tapped out. The ratio of household debt to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rose from 66% in 1997 to 100% in 2007. We are not alone. In the United Kingdom it was an even bigger jump.

                In the US the overall debt reached 350% of GDP. Only 85% is private. This figure was 180% in 1980. The next bubble to burst will be credit cards and then, if we are unlucky, we will have a debt implosion. Individuals and corporations will do their best to reduce debt. They will be shut out from borrowing because of the massive borrowing the US Government will have to do. This will be true for many other countries also.

                Today there is a debate between Socialists and their foes that want less government intervention in their daily lives. I believe the truth lies in the middle. We can not be all things to all people. In the past we have borrowed on the future and it is now pay back time. We have to downsize our dreams and expectations or we could find ourselves in the same straight jacket that the Germans found themselves in 1930’s. The American spirit is that of a “can do will try for it” attitude. Today, while you are reading this letter, there is someone trying to figure out a cheaper source of energy. Until the discovery is achieved we will have a slow recovery. I believe that day will come from an area we least expect. Have faith.

                    With a slow recovery major corporations will wallow in the mud. Medium size companies that can move and change quickly and do not have a built in bureaucracy will become the new leaders. It has been my observation that the pinnacle of leadership lasts about 10 years. That leadership is attained because the new hires believe in the company. Later hires join because of the name and it’s safety. Competitors multiply and the growth rate slows down. As Andrew Carnegie was fond of saying “shirt sleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations” can apply to this corporate sequence.

                If you want to participate in this new bull market you must change your thinking. The averages mean nothing today. The market is made up of individual securities. You will want to know how your stock is doing. Not the market. Some stocks are going to drift lower because they are still over priced or because they have had a good run in the past and accounts are now overloaded with a past leader. These stocks should be sold. Taking a loss is really a good deal. First you limit your loss and you have given yourself liquidity. Liquidity means you have constant funds for your next purchase. The losses you accumulate can be used to reduce your taxes by $3,000 per year. This applies, as of 3/10/2009, before Obama changes the system. 

                Now lets say you have taken $25,000 in losses. Smile! You have just set yourself for the future. I am not referring to the next 8 years of  $3,000 worth of deductions. Let’s say two years from now that you have taken $20,000 gains in various trades and you face a monster tax bite. You can now use the remainder of your tax loss carried forward, which could be $19,000. Now your tax bite is only $1,000. This is why taking a loss is smart. More money has been lost by investors not doing a trade because of “taxes”.

                Now initially in this new market preferred stocks that have the 85% tax credit should do well, especially if it is selling below its call price. If they call it from you, you stand to make a gain. Corporate debt that is selling below par of strong companies will represent good value. Companies that hired a key person for the future while others have been downsizing is a big tip off.

                Gold is an investment for caution. The President’s strategy is to have a little inflation to support the housing market. Incidentally, the European Union and world leaders are debating over what should happen.  Some of the foreign politicians that carry a big stick are as follows: Wen Jiabao, 66, the Chinese prime minister who is under fire at home because he “put the brakes on too fast”. Angela Merkel, 54, the Chancellor of Germany who favors a “new global constitution” for financial markets. Nicolas Sarkozy, 54, President of France who regards himself as de facto leader of Europe given Gordon Brown’s domestic, political, and economic woes and Angela Merkel’s cumbersome coalition.  Gordon Brown, 58, UK prime minister who was the former Chancellor of the Exchequer and believes he is ideally equipped to tackle the crisis. He will host the Group of 20 summit of industrial and developing nations in London on April 2.

                Central bankers include the following: Jean-Claude Trichet, 66, President, European Central Bank who believes politicians and central bankers must do their utmost to shore up economic confidence. Zhou Xiaochuan, 61, Governor, Peoples Bank of China who has held that position since 2002 and is considered a principal supporter of faster market reforms. Fluent in English he can hold his own among economists. A sleeper is Mario Draghi, 61, Chairman, Financial Stability Forum and governor, Bank of Italy who is a US educated economist, former Goldman Sachs executive, and a respected transatlanticist.

                Regulators of note are: Adair Turner, 53 of the UK. Sheila Blair, 54 Chairman of the FDIC. Mary Shapiro, 53, Chairman of the SEC.

                Economists include: Robert Shiller of Yale. Montek Singh Ahuwalia, 65, Deputy Chairman, Indian Planning Commission. Robert Zoellick, 55, President, World Bank. Pascal Lamy, 61, who is Director General of the WTO. Paul Volcker, 81, Chairman, Economic Advisory Board. Fed Chairman in 1979-1987. He warned early and powerfully about subprime mortgages. Paul Krugman, Professor at Princeton University and columnist, NY Times. He has carved out a niche as the democrats’ liberal conscience. Then we have Leszek Balcerowicxz, 62, Professor of economics, Warsaw School of Economics.  

                Bankers to watch are: Lloyd Blankfein, 54, Goldman Sachs chief executive. Jamie Dimon, 52, Chairman of JP Morgan. Stephen Green, 60, Chairman of HSBC since 1962. He has voiced strong views about the need for reform of banking.  A lay preacher and author of a book about reconciling religion with free markets, he has criticized the industry’s excesses during the boom along with Peyton Patterson, Chairman, President, and Chief Financial Officer of NewAlliance Bank.  

                At the top of the list is President Barack Obama, 47, the revues on his economic rescue plan are mixed, but much detail is awaited.  In the meantime, the president is pressing ahead with radical domestic reform agenda encompassing healthcare, the environment, and education. As promised, it has a strong whiff of both audacity and hope. Then we have Ben Bernanke, 55, Chairman of the US Federal Reserve who is a scholar of the Great Depression. He has knowledge of measures that the central banks can use at times of great crisis and he has had ample opportunity to put his theories into effect, using an expanding range of tools too try to arrest the slide.”

                With this list of partial names one can see that this is a global problem; global problems need global answers. This will take time and patience. This is why I recommend the sales mentioned above and a hefty cash position. Sure, the market is trying to bottom, but the prudent way in the 21st century is to wade in step by step. One should also check in with a professional – like me.

     Cheerio !!!

    Richard C De Graff

    256 Ashford Road

    RER       Eastford Ct 06242     

    860-522-7171 Main Office  

    800-821-6665 Watts

    860-315-7413 Home/Office

    rdegraff@coburnfinancial.com

     

    This report has been prepared from original sources and data which we believe reliable but we make no representation to its accuracy or completeness. Coburn & Meredith Inc. its subsidiaries and or officers may from time to time acquire, hold, sell a position discussed in this publications, and we may act as principal for our own account or as agent for both the buyer and seller.

     

     

    This analysis is courtesy of the Financial Times and this assessment is by Lionel Barber, editor.  March 11,2009 page 7

  • ARMENIA: HEADING TOWARDS CRISIS?

    ARMENIA: HEADING TOWARDS CRISIS?

    By Alexander Jackson, Caucasian Review of International Affairs (www.cria-online.org),
    Caucasus Update No. 24, March 9, 2009
    Caucasus Update can also be viewed at

    On March 3, Armenians scrambled to the shops to stock up on supplies as the government declared that Armenia’s currency would no longer be pegged to the dollar. Within a single day, the dram lost up to 30% of its value. The Central Bank made the move in an effort to preserve its shrinking currency reserves, which it had been spending in an attempt to stabilise the dram.  But the multiple effects of the financial crisis are now beginning to bite, and the costs of the fixed exchange rate became greater than the benefits. The dram has now stabilised, and some analysts think that the price readjustment was necessary, if painful.

    As well as relieving pressure on Armenia’s reserves, the decision has also opened the way for a bailout by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF had been insisting that Armenia float its currency in exchange for financial assistance, and Yerevan could now be on track to receive up to $540 million. However, the bailout is not guaranteed, and the IMF is allegedly concerned by Yerevan’s plans to privatise its pension funds, arguing that not only does Armenia lack the administrative capacity, but that the middle of a severe recession is a dangerous time to do so.

    Armenia is, clearly, not the only country in financial difficulty right now. But few other countries are in the middle of a domestic political stalemate and a delicate geopolitical peace process, as well as relying on remittances from a scattered diaspora and migrant workers who are rapidly losing their jobs. These elements could, given a certain set of circumstances, combine to lead Armenia to the edge of crisis.

    March 1 saw the one-year anniversary of clashes which left ten dead, dozens wounded, and hundreds detained. The violence, between police and opposition supporters, followed a disputed presidential election in which Levon Ter-Petrosian, Armenia’s first post-independence president, came second to Serzh Sarkisian, the protégé of President Robert Kocharian. Claiming fraud, Mr. Ter-Petrosian and tens of thousands of supporters camped out in Yerevan until, after ten days, they were attacked by security forces. Since then, Armenian politics has been divided and fractious: Mr. Ter-Petrosian continues to lambast the government. However, at the anniversary rally he disappointed supporters by denouncing ‘radical action’ and the possibility of a revolution. He cited the financial crisis as a reason to hang back, claiming that the government would soon crumble anyway and ask his Armenian National Congress (ANC) to form ‘a national rescue government’.

    Is this confidence real, or a bluff to hide fading support? Similar questions were asked after he halted his street protests in October 2008, declaring that the government, whatever its shortcomings, needed support in its discussions with Turkey and Azerbaijan over Karabakh. Then, as now, Mr Ter-Petrosian may simply feel that his opposition lacks the energy to force President Sarkisian into a showdown, especially when people are more concerned with exchanging currency than exchanging governments. The Sarkisian administration has been reaching out to the opposition in recent months, partly to avoid sanctions by the EU and the Council of Europe over political prisoners held since the March demonstrations.

    However, it is plausible that Mr Ter-Petrosian genuinely expects the country’s government to collapse as the economic crisis intensifies, and is anticipating a wave of popular anger which he can appropriate. That depends on how badly you think the prospects for the economy are. In late 2008, Armenian officials repeatedly insisted that the country’s relative isolation from world financial markets was an asset, shielding it from the worst of the credit crunch. But with Russia -Armenia’s biggest trade partner – sliding deeper into economic turmoil, the slump in commodity prices slashing revenue from mining exports, and remittances from the diaspora and migrant workers heading for a decline, Armenia’s recent economic growth looks very fragile. GDP growth is likely to be stagnant this year, and unemployment is set to rise considerably – a major blow in an economy with such a small labour force (just 1.2 million in 2007).

    Yerevan’s economic hopes rest on three things. Firstly, the IMF bailout and additional assistance from the World Bank. Secondly, an anticipated $500 million loan from Russia, announced in February. The nature of this loan remains murky, and some observers expect it to come with strings attached: similar financial assistance from Moscow in the past has involved the takeover of Armenian state assets by Russian companies. There is, however, no guarantee that Russia can even afford to help Armenia, as its own economic situation declines almost weekly. 

    Thirdly, there is hope that negotiations with Turkey could lead to the opening of the land border between the two countries, which would give Armenia a major new export route and trading partner. The formal re-opening of the border is expected to take place, according to this week’s Economist, sometime in late April or early May. However, it is plausible that new obstacles to the border opening could crop up between now and then, and in any case the restoration of ties with Ankara will not solve Yerevan’s problems. Turkey’s own economy is slowing, and Armenia may have very little to sell by that time, especially if commodity prices remain low.

    The conflict with Azerbaijan over Karabakh remains an unpredictable quantity in Armenian politics. Concessions in the peace talks by Armenia, which look likely, will embolden nationalists and give the opposition another stick with which to beat the government. But if the gamble pays off – leading towards a durable peace, with tangible benefits for Armenia – the Sarkisian administration may be able to defuse some of the popular anger by arguing that political turmoil would undo all the delicate work of the negotiations and that, whilst the government may have been unable to stop economic turmoil, it can at least let Armenians live in peace.

    Mr. Ter-Petrosian will no doubt be watching carefully. His next move could make all the difference: seizing on popular anger and nationalist disaffection, he could be able to re-mobilise the opposition and provoke political turmoil. Although he has rebuffed calls for revolution for now, he may soon start to feel that the government is not collapsing quickly enough for his liking. President Sarkisian, for his part, is relying on his gambles – with Turkey, with Azerbaijan, with the economy – paying off. If they do not, Armenia could be facing a serious crisis.

    www.cria-online.org

  • Nazarbayev Embarks on Foreign Intelligence Reform

    Nazarbayev Embarks on Foreign Intelligence Reform

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 46
    March 10, 2009 11:02 AM
    Category: Eurasia Daily Monitor, Military/Security, Kazakhstan , Home Page, Featured
    By: Farkhad Sharip

    Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev

    On February 17 Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev issued a decree ordering the government to set up the Syrbar foreign intelligence agency. The presidential press service told journalists that Syrbar would be directly subordinate to the president. By the same decree, the Barlau foreign intelligence service created in 1998 was dissolved. In essence, the creation of the new intelligence organization, Syrbar, amounts to a radical reform of Barlau under an entirely new guise and the total control of the president. Nazarbayev removed Omirtai Bitimov, the long-serving director of Barlau and an experienced intelligence officer, from his post. Early on, Barlau was considered an independently operating intelligence body, which played a crucial role in attracting foreign investment into the oil sector of the Kazakh economy and in stemming the spread of religious extremism from Kazakhstan’s Central Asian neighbors. Barlau was later placed under the strict control of the National Security Committee (KNB) and lost most of its independent decision-making authority.

    Presumably, Nazarbayev was frustrated by Barlau’s repeated failure to show its effectiveness within the KNB structure. Barlau intelligence officers made futile attempts to obtain the extradition from Austria of Rakhat Aliyev, the former deputy chief of the KNB and Nazarbayev’s son-in-law, who fled the country in 2007 after making scandalous public statements about Nazarbayev and his family. Then Alnur Musayev, the former KNB chief, followed Aliyev’s example and sought political asylum abroad (Aikyn, February 5).

    On February 6, in a move highly embarrassing for the Nazarbayev regime, more than 200 Kazakh asylum seekers in the Czech Republic staged a protest demonstration in Prague. They opposed the Czech government’s intention to extradite them to Kazakhstan, fearing that they would be persecuted and jailed on charges of religious extremism. Followers of unorthodox Islamic religious groups came to the Czech Republic from Kazakhstan, allegedly fleeing persecution for their beliefs.

    Obviously, by thoroughly reforming the foreign intelligence service and making it fully under his control, Nazarbayev is trying to ward off dangers from dissidents abroad and to consolidate his power. At a recent session of the Security Council Nazarbayev made clear his plans to introduce changes in the National Security Strategy for the 2007 to 2012 five-year plan, “taking the current situation into consideration.” That, it seems, was a prelude to setting up the new intelligence agency independent of the National Security Committee, which was discredited by Aliyev and his associates. Sat Tokpakbayev, the former head of the KNB and a member of parliament, believes that Syrbar should focus primarily on counterterrorism activities rather than persecution of the regime’s political opponents abroad (Aikyn, February 20).

    Nazarbayev’s foreign intelligence reform triggered a mixed reaction in Moscow. Russian foreign policy analyst Yevgeni Voiko thinks Nazarbayev’s decision was prompted by Kazakhstan’s growing rivalry with Russia for European energy markets, while other experts hope that Kazakhstan will expand cooperation with the Russian Federal Security Service (Vzgliad, February 18).

    There has never been trust between the Russian and Kazakh security and defense bodies. Nevertheless, there are hopes for closer cooperation between the two intelligence services. In fact, all the structures within the National Security Committee of Kazakhstan, including the Arystan (Lion) special task force, the military intelligence group, and similar Interior Ministry units, were modeled after Russian security forces. Formally operating independently, the Kazakh security services have actually been influenced by Russia’s foreign intelligence policy since the early 1990s. Meeting in Almaty in 1993, the heads of the intelligence services of Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries signed an agreement that included sharing intelligence information and prohibiting the gathering of intelligence on the other signatories’ territories. Nazarbayev did not miss an opportunity to demonstrate his willingness to foster a partnership with Russia in the security area. At the Dushanbe summit of the CIS in October 2007, it was Nazarbayev who pushed Sergei Lebedev, the chief of Russia’s foreign intelligence agency, to the post of executive secretary of CIS states.

    The security partnership between Kazakhstan and Russia may be regarded as part of their traditionally strong military ties. Moscow is likely to use this relationship to press Nazarbayev for a security alliance against the West. However, Kazakhstan, concerned over the vulnerability of its own security, has gradually begun to squeeze Russian-speaking officers out of the security services, while expanding its ties with educational centers in the United States and Turkey for training Kazakh security officers.

    It remains to be seen whether the new-born foreign intelligence agency will come up to standard. Amanzhol Zhankuliev, 57, the director of Syrbar, is a career diplomat who has served as Ambassador to Turkey, France, Switzerland, and the United Nations. The enigmatic Zhankuliev faces a Herculean task of reforming the Kazakh foreign security service. He will undoubtedly use his diplomatic skill and knowledge of the countries where he served; but will the intelligence service under his guidance serve the real security interests of the country or merely become a tool in the hands of the president?

  • What Were Armenian Officials Thinking, If They Were Thinking at all?

    What Were Armenian Officials Thinking, If They Were Thinking at all?

    sassoun@pacbell.net

    Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:25 AM


    Two shocking announcements made by Yerevan officials have deeply troubled Armenians worldwide.

    The first statement was made by Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan in Tsakhkadzor, Armenia on February 21, during an international economic forum — “Outlook for International Economic Cooperation: Problems and Solutions.” The conference was attended by high-ranking officials and businessmen from Russia, Bulgaria, Iran and many other countries.

    In his speech titled, “International Economic Cooperation: New Policy,” the Prime Minister invited the participation of Russia and Turkey in the construction of a new nuclear power plant in Armenia. He said that the multi-billion-dollar project had not only economic but also political significance. The existing power plant, located near Yerevan, was commissioned in 1976. Several international organizations as well as neighboring Turkey have been pressing for the closure of the Medzamor power plant for several years, citing safety concerns. The new power plant is expected to be operational in 2016.

    Turkish leaders have not yet responded to Mr. Sargsyan’s invitation. However, according to Russian sources, Ankara is said to be interested. An unidentified Turkish spokesman was quoted by Nezavisimaya Gazeta as stating: “The government of Turkey is anticipating an official appeal on participation in the atomic power plant from Armenian official circles. Only after that, the Turkish side may consider the prospect of participating in the project and announce its decision. If all the issues involved are complied with, Yerevan’s proposal may be accepted.”

    Several Armenian analysts have raised serious concerns about involving Turkey in such a sensitive project. Some pointed out the risk to Armenia’s national security, given Turkey’s historical enmity. Other commentators brought up the total lack of experience of Turkish companies in constructing nuclear power plants. Ara Nranyan, an Armenian parliament member representing the ARF, a junior member of the governing coalition, stated that his party opposes Turkey’s participation in the new nuclear power plant and views it as “damaging to Armenia’s interests.”

    How can Armenian officials offer a role in constructing a nuclear power plant to a country that denies the Genocide, refuses to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, sets up a blockade to destroy its economy, and provides political and military support to Azerbaijan in the Artsakh (Karabagh) conflict?

    The second disturbing development is an invitation by Armenian officials to Turkey’s Foreign Minister to attend the Black Sea Economic Conference (BSEC) on April 16-17, just days before the 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. Armenia’s six-month rotating chairmanship of BSEC ends on April 30.

    Armenians were further irritated by a report in the Turkish newspaper “Today’s Zaman” that “Armenia has rescheduled a foreign ministerial meeting of Black Sea countries, apparently as a goodwill gesture to ensure Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babajan will be among the participants.” Zaman reported that Armenian authorities had moved the date of the BSEC meeting “from the previously announced April 29 to April 16. The shift is significant because April 29 is only a few days after April 24.”

    To add insult to injury, Zaman quoted unnamed Turkish officials as stating that Babajan has not confirmed his attendance, and that his participation depended on “Armenia’s commitment to the ongoing rapprochement process and the course of closed-door talks with Armenia.”

    Turkish officials make frequent statements about “rapprochement” with Armenia in order to give the false impression that the two countries are reconciling with each other, thus hoping that the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress would not take any action on the Armenian Genocide.

    While Ankara officials are constantly bombarding Washington with such fake messages, the Armenian side stays astonishingly silent, giving credence to Turkish misrepresentations which are intended to undermine the prospects of any U.S. declaration on the Armenian Genocide.

    In a rare display of responsiveness, Tigran Balayan, the acting spokesman of the Armenian Foreign Ministry, issued a statement denying that the BSEC conference was rescheduled to accommodate Turkish concerns. Mr. Balayan, however, provided no explanation as to why the conference was not held before the month of April.

    It is hard to believe that the Armenian government would invite the Turkish Foreign Minister to Armenia just one week before April 24. Mr. Babajan, a Genocide denialist and high-ranking official of a hostile country that is blockading Armenia, should never be welcomed in Yerevan, unless he intends to place a wreath at the Armenian Genocide Memorial Monument and offers an apology to the Armenian people!

    0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    2009 MEMBERSHIP DUES AND YOUR DONATIONS ARE NEEDED TO CONTINUE OUR POSTED PROGRAMS WITH OUT INTERUPTION

    THE FOLLOWING LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE DUES AND DONATIONS PAGE
    https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/2009/02/14/2009-yili-uye-aidatlari-ve-bagislariniz/
    Turkish Forum — Biz Kimiz? — Bize Ulaşın — Projelerimiz — Yardımlarınız

    Hakkımızda (About Us) | Kayıt Ol (Subscribe) | Bize Yazın (Contact Us) | Bağışlarınız (Donations) | Güncelle (Update)