Europeans
U.S. and E.U.
Deeply Concerned of
Juncker's Plans
To Visit Russia
USA TODAY
May. 30, 2016
E.U. Commission officials claim the trip will only strengthen Kremlin's position.[1]
Both the U.S. and the E.U. are deeply concerned over the European Commission leader's intentions to visit Russia. [1]
Numerous officials claim this will only strengthen the position Russia's President Vladimir Putin ahead of the crucial E.U. decision to prolong sanctions against Moscow.[1]
Additionally, Brussels claims St. Petersburg International Economic Forum is often contrasted by Russian media with the World Economic Forum in Davos.[1]
How Should
Europe
Regulate
CRISPR
New Breeding Technologies ?
Klaus Ammann & Marcel Kuntz
January 14, 2016
The European Commission is set to guide the regulatory fate of new biotechnologies crucial to the future of plant breeding. [2]
To meet such agricultural challenges, we need a product-oriented, flexible and adjustable regulatory system — and a willingness to stand up to the disinformation about crop biotechnology being spread by a determined anti-GMO lobby.[2]
New methods of influencing genetic traits in diverse organisms are set to become available at an increasing speed and low cost. [2]
Before, plant breeding was divided into GMOs and non-GMOs, focusing worldwide (with rare exceptions) on processes. [2]
EU regulation deals with direct DNA transfer creating transgenic organisms, defining it as a legal object called a “GMO”, which is altered in a way which does not occur in nature.[2]
We argue that future inclusion or exclusion of “gene editing” technologies from present day GMO regulation is building on a flawed conception of GMOs.[2]
Generally, the molecular processes of modern technologies are copied from natural ones, a view promoted for many years by Werner Arber, a Nobel Prize recipient. [2]
This is why a separation between plants originating from natural against unnatural breeds has its pitfalls and is basically wrong – since many naturally occurring transgenic plants exist, amongst them the sweet potato.[2]
Another misconception is that crops with herbicide resistance obtained by natural mutation, or by artificial mutation through chemistry or radiation, are excluded from the regulation for political reasons.[2]
While the current EU regulation was meant to allow the use of biotechnology when proven safe, it has encouraged political polemics and stigmatization, disinformation at a massive scale (unprecedented in the democratic world) and ultimately denied farmers the freedom of choice and scientists academic freedom, not to mention the shameless exportation of these problems to poorer countries.[2]
recent years, many important public institutions and researchers called for a new product-oriented regulation. [2]
“Product” should not be understood as the DNA construct, but as the final product which goes on the market (farmers and consumers do not buy “DNA products”).[2]
Globally, dozens of scientists and academies (such as the European Academies, EASAC) and others (e.g. UK House of Commons) are explicitly calling for a shift towards product-based regulation.[2]
What we actually need is a global regulatory system built on the best scientific knowledge (which evolves with time), including a possibility to differentiate according to the magnitude of risk impact related to applied technologies.[2]
The political implication should not always be limited to more regulation, bans and bargaining over modern agriculture.[2]
At a time when many have doubts about Europe, European policy should rather be about lifting political barriers, dropping unscientific stigmatization and shedding light on factors that will allow modern agriculture to meet the agricultural challenges facing the 21st century.[2]
Netanyahu Tells
U.S. Congressmen:
Reconciliation Agreement
With Turkey
Is Very Close
Normalization observed in relations between Israel,Turkey.[4]An Israeli minister close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said June 2 that nearly all outstanding issues for a reconciliation agreement with Turkey had been finalised by both sides.[5]
Barak Ravid
May 30, 2016
In meeting with visiting lawmakers, PM is highly optimistic over normalization of ties with former close ally Turkey, sources say; crucial meeting between negotiating teams expected to be held in Europe next week. [3]
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a delegation of visiting U.S. congressmen on Monday that an agreement on reconciliation with Turkey is very close, said sources involved in the meeting.[3]
However, officials in Jerusalem are still waiting to set the decisive meeting between the two negotiating teams during which the remaining disagreements are meant to be closed. [3]
Netanyahu was very optimistic about relations with Turkey, repeating his statements on the matter three times during the meeting with the congressmen, said the sources.[3]
Netanyahu noted that while relations will not return the level they were at a decade ago, normalization will help both nations in advancing a long list of shared regional interests.[3]
Against People in Azerbaijan
on France 24 TV channel)
The European Powerhouse
Was
The "Last Country"
To Make
Accusations of Genocide
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told Turkish journalists in Kenya:Our history will not change because some passed a decision. Germany is faced with losing a friend like Turkey.[7]
Erdogan: Armenian Issue Used To 'Blackmail' Turkey.[8]
Erdogan: How will German leaders be able, after such a decision, to face me and our prime minister in person? [9]
German parliament’s resolution is political order – Azerbaijani president. [10]
Azerbaijan immediately condemned German parliament’s unfair, biased resolution (UPDATE)[11]
Alaraby.Co.UK
June 04, 2016
Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan:On Saturday during a televised speech, the furious president finally let rip at Germany with typical verbal bellicose.[6]
On June 03, 2016, Zvi Bar'el, in Haaretz : T he Republic of Turkey was not the perpetrator of the massacres of the Armenians between 1915 and 1917. Turkey sticks to its mantra that historians, not politicians, will decide how to define the massacre. [17]
Turkey's Mantra:
The Historical Investigation
Is
The Research Field
For Historians.
It Is Not A Business Field
For Politicians
Courtesy of haaretz.com
Turkey would never accept the charge that Ottoman troops were guilty of "genocide", he said.[6]
He hit a raw nerve by highlighting Germany's own genocide of 6 million Jews during the Second World War, saying the European powerhouse was the "last country" to make accusations of genocide.[6]
He also added that the slaughter of indigenous Namibians under the German Empire - which Berlin has yet to officially term as a genocide - should instead be examined by Berlin lawmakers.[6]
Accusations of an Armenian Genocide were an act of "blackmail" against Turkey, he added, which won't do much to repair already badly damaged ties between Berlin and Ankara. [6]
Due to frequent European criticism of the premier, Erdogan threatened to leave Europe "to its own worries" if accusations of genocide were to continue.[6]
"The issue here is not the Armenians.... The Armenian issue is used all over the world as a convenient blackmail against Turkey and has even started to be used as a stick," he said.[6]
"I am addressing the whole world. You may like it, you may not. Our attitude on the Armenian issue is clear from the beginning. We will never accept the accusations of genocide."[6]
Like many Turkish nationalists, Erdogan believes the Ottoman Empire was "under siege from all sides" between 1915 and 1917 - when the killings took place - and it is hard to judge what happened during the hazy days of world war. [6]
Although some accuse Armenians of also being guilty of killing Turks, the president went a step further during Saturday's speech:"Of course, a number of measures were taken to restore order in Anatolia".[6]
Germany appears to be resolute in blocking Ankara's continued attempts to join the European Union. Meanwhile Turkey has used its hosting of at least a million Syrian refugees as a potential weapon against Europe, which is coping with its worst refugee crisis in decades.[6]
"Our history will not change because some passed a decision. Germany is faced with losing a friend like Turkey," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told Turkish journalists in Kenya.[7]
He said he will discuss this issue with the prime minister and foreign minister in Turkey and take a decision after discussion: “Germany’s decision does not bode well. [7]
Interestingly, there is superior mind in this issue. One MP voted against, one was neutral. Is this issue so important for Germans? [7]
Last year, it was commemorated the 100th anniversary of the 1915 events, why did not they pass this decision at that time? [7]
These are thought-provoking. They might receive such an instruction from the superior mind. Now, I wonder how the German leaders will act when they meet with me or our prime minister after this decision?”[7]
Erdogan said there is no any similarity between Holocaust and 1915 events: “Decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) about 1915 events is clear. [7]
The decision clearly reports that Armenians’ version on these events is untrue and discussable, opinions against Armenian version must be approached within the freedom of speech, and it’s wrong to say 1915 events and Holocaust are similar”.[7]
Erdogan also noted that the issues on migrant crisis and visa freedom is not between Turkey and German, but between Turkey and EU and Bundestag’s decision will not affect this issues: “The issue in Germany must be accepted as Germany-related issue, not Turkey-EU issue. [7]
Our position regarding this is clear. I told this Angela Merkel at the World Humanitarian Summit too. Both issues must be solved at the same time.[7]
If it does not happen so, we may take necessary steps. We kept the promises made to EU. But they did not keep their promise in neither material nor other issues”.[7]
Human Germline
Gene Editing
EUROPEAN GROUP ON ETHICS IN SCIENCE AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES, Statement on Gene Editing.[13]
European Commission Fails to Regulate New GMOs after Intense US Lobbying.[14]First in European Debate on Germline Gene Editing.[15]
Center for Genetics and Society
"Human germline modification" means deliberately changing the genes passed on to children and future generations – in other words, creating genetically modified people.[12]
Human germline modification has for many years been widely considered off-limits, for both safety and social reasons. It is formally prohibited in more than 40 countries. [12]
In recent years, a new generation of genetic engineering techniques, known as "gene editing" or "genome editing," has prompted speculation about their use in human embryos or gametes.[12]
In 2014, rumors intensified about researchers in the US and China working on human embryos with the inexpensive, easy-to-use gene-editing tool CRISPR.[12]
In April 2015, a research team at Sun Yat-sen University in China published a report of an experiment in which they used CRISPR to edit a gene associated with the blood disease beta- thalassemia in non-viable human embryos. [12]
The experiments were largely unsuccessful. But as gene editing tools are refined in labs around the world, they are expected to allow easier, cheaper, and more accurate insertion or deletion of genes than ever before.[12]
This controversy marks a new chapter of a profoundly consequential debate about the future of gene editing in humans. If perfected, somatic gene editing (or "gene therapy") holds promise for helping people who are sick, affecting only an individual consenting patient.[12]
But editing the genes of human embryos in order to create genetically modified people is very different, and raises grave safety, social, and ethical concerns.[12]
These range from the prospect of irreversible harms to the health of future children and generations, to concerns about opening the door to new forms of social inequality, discrimination, and conflict.[12]
Europe’s genetically edited plants stuck in legal limbo.Scientists frustrated at delay in deciding if GM regulations apply to precision gene editing.(Alison Abbott )[16]
Plant geneticist Stefan Jansson is champing at the bit to start field trials on crops tweaked with powerful gene-editing technologies. He plans to begin by using edits to study how the cress plant Arabidopsis protects its photosynthetic machinery from damage in excessively bright light.[16]
But the future of his work depends on the European Commission’s answer to a legal conundrum. Should it regulate a gene-edited plant that has no foreign DNA as a genetically modified (GM) organism?[16]
Jansson, who works at Umeå University in Sweden, says that he will drop his experiments if the plants are classed as GM, because Europe’s onerous regulations would make his work too expensive and slow.[16]
He and many others are anxiously awaiting the commission’s decision, which will dictate how they approach experiments using the latest gene-editing techniques, including the popular CRISPR–Cas9 method.[16]
The commission has repeatedly stalled on delivering its verdict, which will apply to edited animals and microorganisms as well as plants.[16]
It now says that it will make its legal analysis public by the end of March. Swedish authorities, meanwhile, have told Jansson that unless the commission specifies otherwise, they will not require his cress to be subject to GM regulations.[16]
At issue is the interpretation of a 2001 European Commission directive on releasing GM organisms into the environment, which covers field trials and cultivation. [16]
It defines GM organisms as having alterations that cannot occur naturally, which were made by genetic engineering.[16]
What is unclear is how this relates to experiments, such as Jansson’s, in which researchers introduce foreign DNA to direct a precise edit in a plant’s own genetic material but then use selective breeding to remove the foreign gene.[16]
The final plant has a few tweaked nucleotides, but cannot be distinguished from a wild plant that might have acquired the same mutation naturally — so it cannot be traced in the environment as EU regulations require.[16]
Many EU member states — including Sweden — have conducted their own analyses of the directive, and argue that it should not apply to edited plants that do not contain foreign DNA. But some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) hostile to genetic manipulation have produced analyses that conclude the directive should apply because genetic engineering is involved.[16]
(brief history)
The Parliamentary Assembly
of
The Council of Europe (PACE)
Has Called For
The Withdrawal
of
Armenian Armed Forces
& Other Irregular Armed Forces From
Nagorno-Karabakh
The Political Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
November 04, 2015
In a draft resolution approved today, the Political Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has called for “the withdrawal of Armenian armed forces and other irregular armed forces from Nagorno-Karabakh and the other occupied territories of Azerbaijan, and the establishment of full sovereignty of Azerbaijan in these territories", in the framework of the OSCE Minsk process.[18]
The committee also called for "the convening of a plenary meeting of the Minsk Group to establish an interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh guaranteeing security and internal self-governance, with an agreed corridor linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh, and other confidence-building measures, including an access corridor to Nakhchivan".[18]
Strongly condemning the deliberate targeting of civilian settlements close to the line of contact, the committee said it regretted that the Nagorno-Karabakh problem has been side-lined by other major international crises. "Further procrastination only complicates the settlement of this 'un-frozen' conflict which has claimed over a hundred human lives since the beginning of 2014, and which may escalate into a real war between two Council of Europe member States", it added.[18]
Recalling that both Armenia and Azerbaijan committed themselves, when joining the Council of Europe in 2001, to use only peaceful means for settling their conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region, the committee urged both governments to refrain from using armed force.[18]
The committee also called for the establishment by the OSCE of an international peacekeeping force to maintain security within Nagorno-Karabakh and the other occupied territories and to ensure the safe return and resettlement of displaced persons, as well as the creation of a mechanism to investigate ceasefire violations.[18]
The draft resolution, based on a report by Robert Walter (United Kingdom, EC), is due to be debated by the Assembly at its January 2016 session.[18]
Nagorno-Karabakh
Isn't Disputed Territory
It's Occupied
Kamal Makili-Aliyev
Part 8. Dr. Kamal Makili-Aliyev
May 10, 2016
It's actually very simple. Contrary to the statements made in the mass media when it covers the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, this mountainous region of Azerbaijan is not disputed in any way; it is occupied.[19]
So says the international judicial body the European Court of Human Rights. [19]
Despite the allegations of Armenia (that have in fact occupied sovereign territory of Azerbaijan) that the remaining ethnically Armenian population of the region has exercised the right to self-determination, it has been proven false again and again. [19]
For once, Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh are not "people" in the sense of rights that are provided by a UN Charter. Armenians have already exercised that right in Armenia, where they have an internationally recognized state.[19]
Thus, making them a national minority on the territory of Azerbaijan and not "Nagorno-Karabakh people". Otherwise, Armenians would have a right to self-determination in U.S., Russia, France and other countries where they have large communities, creating a horde of small states. This is simply illogical.[19]
No state, including Armenia, has recognized the separatist entity in Nagorno-Karabakh, nor has Armenia laid claim to it. [19]
So there is no dispute on the attribution of the region, and the European Court of Human Rights has actually incorporated these facts into international jurisprudence. [19]
On June 16, 2015 Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights passed two judgments on the reciprocal cases Chiragov and Others v. Armenia and Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan. [19]
Both cases seemed to have very close and even balanced judgments and that Court intended not to stir political side of the dispute. However, closer examination shows that this is far from reality and it was impossible for the Court to escape some very serious issues related to the status quo in Nagorno-Karabakh.[19]
For example, in the Chiragov v. Armenia case, Court addresses the separatist entity "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" specifically to show that it is not in any way recognized officially. [19]
It also establishes the fact that there are no Azerbaijanis left in the occupied territories of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast as well as in the adjacent seven regions, essentially acknowledging that Armenians could legally to carry out complete ethnic cleansing within those territories. [19]
Those ethnic cleansings resulted in around 750,000 internally displaced persons living in Azerbaijan now and additional 250,000 refugees of Azerbaijani origin expelled from Armenia itself.[19]
Moreover, the Court recognizes Armenian military and financial control over so-called "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" and comes to the opinion that Armenia has “effective control” in Nagorno-Karabakh.[19]
Thus, Armenia have been found in violation of the corresponding articles in the aforementioned case, due to the effective control it has over Nagorno-Karabakh. [19]
So if one state has a "effective control" over the recognized territory of the other state, there cannot be any doubt that the state is occupied; thus, there cannot be any dispute over the attribution of the Nagorno-Karabakh region. Occupation of someone's sovereign territory does not make that territory disputed in anyway.[19]
Part 13. Yegana Salman
The conflict itself being a territorial dispute can be resolved. Ethnic complications can be resolved if the right attitude is employed.[19]
The rights of the Armenian minority to culture, language and religion can be guaranteed without violation of Azerbaijan's territorial integrity.[19]
Armenians can be equal citizens of Azerbaijan enjoying minority rights and enjoy autonomy. Azerbaijanis have already expressed this proposal many times through its government.[19]
However, mass media is somehow twisting the real discourse and disregarding all of the international legal data on the subject in an attempt to be "neutral" when reporting on the conflict.[19]
However, neutrality does not necessarily mean objectivity. And objectivity is what the image of the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict really lacks today. So the discourse that mass media shapes now, instead of playing in favor of conflict resolution actually helps the hostilities escalate.[19]
If the mass media continues to shape its "neutral" discourse and does not lean on the facts, it will only embolden the Armenia's position of staying on their grounds of occupation and preservation of status quo.[19]
This destructive stance on violence as opposed to the compromise would allow Armenia to ensure the rights of its minority in Azerbaijan as true caring kin-state. [19]
As American author and renowned though Bryant McGill very astutely points out: "Where wise actions are the fruit of life, wise discourse is the pollination.” [19]
In order for the resolution of the conflict to bring some fruits, the discourse should first of all turn to the wise one. While the Nagorno-Karabakh is not a disputed region of Azerbaijan, the discourse around it should become the subject to a very profound change.[19]
Dr. habil. Kamal Makili-Aliyev is a Leading Research Fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies (SAM) in Azerbaijan. He is an expert in international law and conflict resolution. He is a graduate of Lund University (Sweden) and previously worked for Ministry of Defense and Constitutional Court of Azerbaijan.[19]
Armenians Committed Genocide
Against Azerbaijani People
31 March Genocide
against Azerbaijanis
-Witnesses telling their stories
Against Azerbaijani People
against Azerbaijanis
-Witnesses telling their stories
The Fourth Congress of World Azerbaijanis
BAKU, Azerbaijan
June 7, 2016
In the wake of increased hostilities in the Azerbaijani region of Nagorno-Karabakh and other territories occupied by Armenia, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev accused Armenian officials of a hostile "campaign of propaganda".[20]
Speaking at the Fourth Congress of World Azerbaijanis held in Baku, Aliyev said the aim of the campaign is to "blacken Azerbaijan, portray it as an anti-democratic state and circulate false and fictitious information about the history of Nagorno-Karabakh."[20]
He stressed that Nagorno-Karabakh is historical and native Azerbaijani land. "Armenians were resettled to Karabakh from Eastern Anatolia and Iran in the early 19th century," he said. "In 1978, even a monument was erected in Nagorno-Karabakh to mark the 150th anniversary of the resettlement of Armenians to Nagorno-Karbakh."[20
The Azerbaijani region of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven surrounding provinces were occupied by Armenia during the post-Soviet power vacuum, resulting in about 30,000 deaths and nearly one million refugees and internally displaced people. [20]
Many international bodies, including the United Nations, European Parliament, OSCE and most recently the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe have called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Armenian troops from the Azerbaijani territories.[20]
Aliyev also addressed remarks by Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan at a recent summit of the Eurasian Economic Union, in which he suggested that Azerbaijan was responsible for starting the recent hostilities. [20]
"Seeing that pressure on them to resolve the issue peacefully is mounting and statements are made about the need to change the status quo - which would mean a withdrawal of occupying from our lands - they resort to provocations," Aliyev added.[20 ]
The Azerbaijani President also questioned the existence of "Nagorno-Karabakh army". [20]
"It is a myth intended to mislead the international community," he said. According to Aliyev, "The people serving in the Armenian armed forces in Nagorno-Karabakh are citizens of Armenia, 80% of them are citizens of Armenia, born in Armenia."[20]
Days of heavy fighting in the region erupted in April between Azerbaijani and Armenian forces, resulting in hundreds of casualties. The halt in hostilities is fragile.[20]
THE DAY OF GENOCIDE OF THE AZERBAIJANIS
31 March Genocide against Azerbaijanis
The Armenian Leadership
IS TRYING
To Misinform Their People
&
The International Community
President Aliyev also added that the Armenian leadership is trying to misinform their people and the international community.[22]
President Aliyev: “I had not seen a president who tells four lies in one sentence. Serzh Sargsyan with his lies could enter the Guinness Book of Records, and that will be an anti-record."[24]
They first claimed they had not lost any territory but had won the fighting, and then they said some territory had been lost but that territory was insignificant. [22]
Later on, they said Azerbaijan must return the areas liberated. They are in a ridiculous situation.[22]
“I had not seen a president who tells four lies in one sentence,” President Aliyev said noting that Serzh Sargsyan with his lies could enter the Guinness Book of Records, and that will be an anti-record.[24]
Sargsyan's statements about "Karabakh army" controlling the situation on the frontline is a lie, since there no "Karabakh army", only Armenian servicemen, said President Aliyev.[24]
Fourth, statements about Azerbaijan asking Russia to provide ceasefire regime is a complete lie, since it was Armenia who appealed to Russia, Azerbaijan’s president stressed.[24]
No comments:
Post a Comment