Month: June 2005

Turkish NGOs protest at German embassy over Armenian genocide vote
Anatolia news agency
21 Jun 05
ANKARA
The National Thinking Platform, comprised of 11 non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), left on Tuesday [21 June] a black wreath in
front of the German embassy in Turkish capital of Ankara.
The NGOs are protesting the resolution adopted by the German Federal
Parliament regarding the so-called Armenian genocide.
Speaking on behalf of the platform, Fethi Bolayir, chairman of the
Social Thinking Association, said that the adoption of this resolution
overshadowed Turkish-German relations.
Bolayir added that Turkish people had never carried out a genocide.

Statehood and Culture
Alvard Petrosian
Armenian National Assembly member, writer
Dear readers,
Between June 8 and 14, 2005, you had an opportunity to address your
questions on the Yerkir’s website to ALVARD PETROSIAN, Armenian
National Assembly member, writer.
Below are the answers to your questions. See the full version of the
interview in Armenian.
Thank you for your active participation: Spartak Seyranian,
editor-in-chief of “Yerkir” Weekly.
Eric – I want to know your opinion about the crowed of bureaucrats
swinging from one party to another just to keep their places in the
Government. Sometimes one gets sick seeing the same faces during
decades ruining the country and still fighting to penetrate into next
dominating political force to secure a place in the
Government. Usually those are people with poor education, no
intelligence whatsoever, and trying to abuse and corrupt the
system. Flashing from the Communist party to Armenian National
Movement and now to some of the parties within the coalition, those
people look for corruption and abuse of the system only. Who knows
where they will end up next. Might be in Dashnaktsutsyun party? What
is the way to get rid of those people services once and forever to let
the knowledgeable and more skilled new generation to come to upfront?
Alvard Petrosian – Eric, who has asked me this question, knows well
that I am neither a chameleon nor mimicry. I am quite stable in my
principles and ideas, and thus my opinion about such people is very
negative. I believe that the worst things in this country are
committed by this type of people, these villains’ conformism gives
birth to all the worst. I consider Ionesko to one of the greatest
writers in the world who has said that such people suffer from rhino
disease. Speaking to the Express newspaper, he brings some examples of
such people and as the best example, he mentions his father. His
father was a mayor of a small Romanian town under the fascist regime,
and when the communists came to power, they realized that his father
was the most suitable person. This is the classic formulation of
Eric’s question: to conform, change colors for a character that is a
political reptile. We have seen many such examples in the past
years. It is they who destroy everything — ethics, system. They stand
in the way of forming civil awareness. Not everybody has been brought
up properly to know what is wrong, and when someone sees that an
individual has been in the office under Communists, Armenian National
Movement (HHSh) and the present regime, he or she thinks “I can live
like them” and they think of honest people to be fools. It is
impossible for a good political party to emerge in such environment,
and this is why political parties in our society have been
discredited.
Eric – The absurd of the policy of the Assets against the Debt to
Russia was obvious from the very beginning. Only people far from the
economic analysis and strategy would believe that Russian Government
is going to make millions of investments in the Armenian companies
handed over to them. The result is now more obvious that people far
from any economics should not jump into conclusions and make fool of
themselves making public announcements in mass media how the economy
of Armenia will develop under the strategic interest of Russia. What
do you think how the misstep by the people who made this groundless
and grossly mistaken decision should be fixed? Thanks
Alvard Petrosian – Dear friend, I consider myself a person who do not
speak of things they do not know. I know about the question you are
asking only to an extent any healthy patriot does. What happened was
not the evidence of our state’s strength and I think there was some
rush in making that decision. But as they say, “the hope dies the
last,” let’s wait and hope we would get out of this trap and we may
realize that the trade should not be based on love but on interest.
Kevork Kalayjian – How would you vote on the issue of dual citizenship
and why?
Alvard Petrosian – There are several questions regarding the dual
citizenship. I will vote for the dual citizenship by all means, and so
will my faction. But this is not a simple issue. An Armenian should
have a passport of his or her homeland. But homeland and state are
different things. A state, and especially this state, has many things
to watch out for. I believe that the realizing of these problems has
delayed this issue. But I think that anyone living in Armenia wants
this issue to be settled. People, who resist it, do so because of
these problems. At least, I wish that were the case. We use the
Diaspora factor whenever needed or not. We say Georgia has the sea,
Azerbaijan has the oil, and we have the Diaspora; but the sea and the
oil have not God’s living creatures. Our assets are bigger but also
more complicated. Every individual is a whole world, a whole
universe. It is not a Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline to be directed
the way we wish. They are citizens of various countries, and we must
help each other to unite Armenians in their countries to direct their
visions toward the homeland. This requires a lot of efforts. We should
not forget the national security issues and besides, there is the
objective to not break down the Diaspora. I believe that when the
repatriation of 1947 was organized, it was also Stalin’s policy to
deprive us from the Diaspora. They were brought to Armenia, and then
many of them were sent to Siberia. We cannot have such goal now, but
we also do not want the Diaspora to be perceived as a pocket. We want
the Diaspora’s talents, their political will, and, yes, the
investments, and we want them to direct their businesses to Armenia. I
don’t want us say ‘American Armenian writer William Saroyan, or French
Armenian singer Charles Aznavour,’ I want to say only ‘Armenian.’ We
have all these ambitions as well, and I am an optimist, I believe we
would overcome these problems.
Kevork Kalayjian – There are many different secondary schools in
Armenia, with Russian, English, and French orientation. Are there
similar schools with: Turkish Language Focus Western Armenian Focus,
and Classical Armenian Focus? Thank you
Alvard Petrosian – Yes, schools with Armenian (and Western Armenian)
orientations are well due in Armenia. As for Turkish, I believe we
should establish an academy; otherwise, the coming generation would be
fighting against windmills like Don Quixote. Or maybe it has no
demands or memory? If we have schools with Armenian orientation, we
would realize we need such with Turkish orientation, too.
Armen – Dear Ms. Petrosyan, It is evident that the current generation
of state leaders and politicians do not view social and economic
changes as a policy priority for the country. It is also evident that
the processes of economic development could be realized much faster
than they are being implemented now. This has resulted in a enormous
gap in income distribution in Armenia. Do you think the people should
wait, leave Armenia or take the matter into their own hands? Thank
you.
Alvard Petrosian – I believe everybody realizes that social and
economic changes should be a priority but the system to implement them
has not been yet worked out. Let us hope that the apprehension — the
diagnosis — is the halfway to treating the disease. The social
polarization has reached an unacceptable size and is destroying
classical perceptions of ethics, belief and hope of our
nation. Leaving the country is not the solution; it is a tragedy for
both those leaving and the country. Who should we leave this country
to? We are the masters of this land. A mansion or a car is not the
land. We have to change the situation through our awareness and the
will. If we recall the elections, we will see that the awareness is
not big enough. We have what we have.
Nareck – Asking how free is Armenian press or does the real freedom of
the press exist in Armenia is in my humble opinion useless, the press
isn’t free neither Armenia nor neighbouring countries. First and
foremost, the society must embrace the core moral values of the
Enlightenment and democracy which is a gradual process. For Armenia –
a country that has been scrambling for freedom since its creation – it
is particularly difficult in comparison with some eastern European
countries that gained autonomy after the Soviet Union collapsed. As
regards the opposition I must say they will do nothing but follow the
example of Georgia, attempting to forge a close friendship with Bush
for their own sake. To note, Georgian parliament prospers getting
their monthly salary from Bush administration, quite the contrary,
ordinary Georgians eke out an existence. As I scrutinize the current
situation in Armenia and its neighbouring countries, I come to a
conclusion that Armenia is currently the best place among those
countries in terms of freedom, democracy and liberty. In Georgia for
instance the government claims to be democratic but unfortunately
Georgian people don’t think so. In Azerbaijan demonstrators can be
jailed for an unofficial demo no matter how loudly Americans call
Aliev to democratize the country. I hope Armenia continue its
development towards democracy and freedom and one day match European
and American standards. Yours Sincerely, Nareck from Germany
Alvard Petrosian – Europe or America. I want us create standards
according to our national character. For thousands of years we have
traveled through history and our national pride should prevent us from
copycatting like zombies everything we are currently offered as
Western standards. Globalization scares me. We are not a big nation
but are not small either. We cannot resist like Russians, Japanese or
Chinese because due to the numbers. I believe we should preserve our
pure roots. As for Georgians, God save them. For 70 years, the crater
of the USSR deceived us with the Communism ghost, now let us not be
deceived by the democratization ghost. Let’s not be deceived by the
ghost. By the way, my son’s name is also Narek.
Rafael Oganesyan – Since the collapse of the USSR, the flow of
western-style media and culture has dominated and influenced the
Armenian youth. Do you see this as a threat to the preservation of the
Armenian Culture?
Alvard Petrosian – It is a threat as long as we are badly educated and
have lost our moral values. When educated, we are not vulnerable. This
does not mean we have to separate us from the outside world with a
Chinese wall. There is light there too and we have always understood
that light through our culture and were not blinded, in fact, we have
been enlightened.
Rafael Oganesyan – Mrs. Petrosian, With more and more Armenians
leaving their homeland, how can Armenia preserve its culture within
foreign lands and communities?
Alvard Petrosian – With homeland, by homeland, in homeland.
Sarkes Senanian – As an Armenian helping funds chairman ,are you
thinking to help Armenians who are from Iraq which are living now in
Armenia
Alvard Petrosian – I am a representative of the Armenian Relief
Society and we have already helped Iraq Armenians in Iraq. We have
reached an agreement with Migration and Refugee Department Head
Yeganian to also implement a project for the Iraqi Armenians who have
moved to Armenia.
Nora Parseghian – What are the latest activities and projects of The
Armenian Relief Society in Armenia? 2.In what category do you put the
Armenian women? How do you value her situation? Are her rights being
kept, is she being abused by all means? Thank you
Alvard Petrosian – In the framework of the Genocide commemoration
programs, we opened an excellent maternity hospital in Akhurian on
April 26. A while ago, Shirak governor had asked us to open such
hospital. Two days before the opening — on April 24 — a boy was born
and we named him Vrezh. Now, less than two months after its opening,
the 120th child was born. We are all happy, and I think you are happy
too.
Vartan P. – I think that under the soviet union Armenian culture
underwent a Renaissance. Since indepedence, I have seen the worst of
people. Western-style girls who open up their asses is not armenian
culture. Thievery is not Armenian culture. I have seen a lot of down
sides to Armenian culture after indepdence. What would you say is the
upside? What is the actual situation about Armenian culture today? I
think a while back there was a proposition to introduce russian as a
second official language, that is also not Armenian culture. Thank you
Alvard Petrosian – It is true, we suffered losses (physical and
otherwise) during the 70 years, but we also accumulated immense
cultural wealth. Today, we are in cultural downsize, but everything
will be back on track. Such periods happen in the cultural history. I
believe in our talented heritage.
Eric – Ms. Petrosyan, What do you think of current nominations for the
Government high ranking jobs in Armenia. People with no knowledge and
skills are nominated to the positions only because of belonging to
this or that political party. What makes it more ridiculous is that
people desire to get positions in the current Government much higher
than their intellect can afford them to work for. As a result-
illiteracy, corruption, regress. The main goal here is how much money
one can make at the post before being fired or (which is worse) being
moved up to the higher positions. Is not that obvious that Armenia
with the current intellectual level of the Government cannot make any
progress?
Alvard Petrosian – That is the main source of our troubles. The wise
policy of nominations for offices would have solved many problems. It
will when we begin to realize that the human intellect is most
valuable asset and when we begin to appreciate people no matter what
party they are members of. That day will come.
See the full version of the interview in Armenian.

Yerevan Press Club of Armenia presents `MediaDialogue” Web Site as a
Regional Information Hub project.
As a part of the project web site is maintained,
featuring the most interesting publications from the press of Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey on issues of mutual concern. The latest
updates on the site are weekly delivered to the subscribers.
***************************************************************************
===========================================================================
CONFLICTS
==========================================================================
NEGOTIATIONS PROMISE RAPPROCHEMENT
———————————— —————————————-
Source: “Echo” newspaper (Azerbaijan) [June 21, 2005]
Author: R. Orujev
Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov Informed the Media
At the negotiations on the settlement of Mountainous Karabagh
conflict yesterday, special representative of Azerbaijani President,
Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov held a press conference on the
results of recent negotiations in Paris on June 17. He stated that
the negotiations had two formats – general, with the participation of
OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairmen, and the one between the Foreign
Ministers of the two countries, Elmar Mamediarov and Vartan Oskanian.
Azimov stated that the negotiations may be viewed essential in
content. `Various elements of peaceful settlement of the conflict
were discussed. Thus, the main issue raised was setting up a normal
situation on the occupied territories of Azerbaijan after their
liberation and return of the displaced persons to their
homes. However, this problem raises many other issues to be
resolved. Liberation of the territories is the most principle point
in Azerbaijani stance. Most concerns are raised by working out of
mechanisms for the coexistence of Azerbaijani and Armenian
communities of Mountainous Karabagh and their joint control over the
territory. Peaceful cooperation should be established between the
sides’.
As an instrument for reaching this result, the Paris negotiations
discussed the issue of restoring transport communication between
Azerbaijan and Armenia, according to the Deputy Minister. `It is a
common fact that Armenia has long supported it. Our position is that
in exchange for opening communications, Armenia should reject any
territorial claims to Azerbaijan. The functioning highway via Lachin,
linking Armenia to Mountainous Karabagh, should be under Azerbaijani
control. Another car route Agdam-Shusha-Khankendi-Lachin-Goris(Armenia)
-Sisian(Armenia)-Shahbuz(Nakhichevan autonomy) should be restored and
used by both sides. This highway leads further to Turkey. In my
opinion, recovery of this route may have a positive impact on setting
trust measures between Azerbaijanis and Karabagh Armenians. It is of
benefit to both peoples’.
Azimov noted that he does not intend to appear a great optimist since
all the points of negotiations mentioned are now on discussion.
Speaking about the `parliamentary elections’ in Mountainous Karabagh,
Azimov emphasized that in contrast to previous statements of this
country’s MFA, the recent one states that this event impedes joint
cooperation of the Azerbaijani and Armenian communities of Karabagh
in setting up legitimate power bodies. `I will note that Minsk Group
Co-chairmen of Russia, France and USA stated in Paris that they do
not view the current authorities in Mountainous Karabagh as
independent and legitimate, nor do they recognize any events
organized by such authorities’.
Azimov states that Agdam-Armenia-Nakhchevan car route will not be
very costly. `It certainly needs reconstruction in separate sections
but it is not a very complex project. The sooner the route is ready
for exploitation, the better conditions for cooperation between the
communities. To restore the route, there is an idea for holding a
conference of international donor organizations. Their assistance will
be necessary for restring all the infrastructure on the occupied
territories as well. It is expected that the aid will be provided by
UN, European Union and others. As for the security problems at initial
stage, it should be ensured on liberated territories by international
armed forces. Besides, control observation groups will be set by
Azerbaijan and Armenia. The route from Agdam to Shahbuz will be put to
operation only after withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied
territories. Its security will be ensured by the representatives of
international forces. Future sta! tus of MK will be discussed within
the framework of peaceful negotiation process’.
According to Azimov, the issue of subordination of Karabagh new
authorities to official Baku has not been considered yet. `However,
it may soon be discussed. In any case, the new authorities should
represent the interests of the population in total, including the
Azerbaijanis that returned`.
The Deputy Minister noted that in early July, Co-chairmen will visit
the region and may introduce new proposals to the sides. `Azerbaijan
insists on intensification of the negotiation process. We suggest
organizing several meetings between Foreign Ministers prior to the
coming negotiations between Presidents I. Aliev and R. Kocharian to
be held in Kazan in August while celebrating the city’s
anniversary. The Ministers should submit a number of agreements for
Presidents’ approval’. At the same time, A. Azimov stated that it is
still too early to speak about any principal agreement of the sides
even on one of the currently discussed points.
One of the most interesting issues of the conference was the
possibility of breaking the negotiation process in Prague, as it
often was the case provoked by various international forces. `I would
not state there is no such risk in place’, Azimov declared. `On the
contrary, the situation is quite complex and more problems are still
ahead. Each side should do its utmost for withstanding this
danger. In any case, Azerbaijan has not a single force opposing
peaceful settlement of the conflict. Therefore, I do not think that
our opposition forces, ready for parliamentary elections, may be used
for disrupting negotiation process”.
As reported by `Mediamax’, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian
gives a positive assessment of the negotiation results by his
Azerbaijani colleague Elmar Mamediarov. Oskanian stated yesterday at
the briefing in Yerevan that the negotiations were `of constructive
nature and passed in quite friendly atmosphere’. Alongside this, the
Minister noted `we did not reach agreement on one of the important
issues delegated to us by the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan
after the Warsaw meeting’. Despite this, Oskanian stated, `if each of
the sides makes a small compromise, there is a large chance for
agreement’.
===========================================================================
REGION
==========================================================================
IN THE BACKYARD OF BIG POLITICS
—————————————– ———————————–
Source: “Novoye Vremya” newspaper (Armenia ) [June 21, 2005]
Author: Tamara Hovnatanian
Since May, the dislocation of the Russian bases from Georgian
territory and opening of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline have become
most urgent issues on regional agenda. Moreover, they are related to
the factors likely to disrupt the geopolitical status quo in the
region. Therefore, these issues now get most comments by the
politicians and analysts, military men and economists.
Dislocation of the Bases Turned Into `Perfect Psychosis’ The epic
about dislocation of Russian military bases from Georgian territory,
particularly Batumi and Akhalkalaki, got prospects for fast
resolution through the mutual statement made on May 30 by the Foreign
Ministers of Russia and Georgia – Sergey Lavrov and Salome
Zurabishvili. Based on the agreement reached, the process of Russian
base dislocation is to be over in 2008.
Further information on the transfer of a part of Russian munitions
from Georgia to Armenia, to 102 Gyumri Base of Russian Armed Forces,
provoked a storm of indignation in Baku.
`We demand that the Russian military bases be not stationed in
Armenia’, Azerbaijan issued a `note of protest’. `The region needs
demilitarization, therefore we raise the issue of no necessity for
dislocating the troops here’, AR Foreign Minister, Elmar Mamediarov
stated.
`This step will not serve the interests of peace and security in the
region and will aggravate the situation still more in the complex
process of settling the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan,
which has shown faint hope for reaching peace in
negotiations. Moreover, this may impact Russian-Azerbaijani
relations’, Azerbaijani MFA states in its note.
Commenting on the official response of Russian MFA, Russian Charge
d’Affaires in Azerbaijan, Peter Burdykin stated, `This dislocation is
not directed against any of the third countries, it will in no way
impact Mountainous Karabagh settlement and does not contradict
international agreements. Therefore, I think there is no reason for
serious concerns and exaggeration’…
`The concerns over alleged transfer of Russian bases from Georgia to
Armenia, thus strengthening the military potential of Yerevan and
putting a menace to the process of Karabagh settlement, are
groundless. Any such statements, to put it mildly, do not sustain
criticism and reveal ignorance of the commenter at best and the
deliberate misinformation of the public for anti-Russian attitude at
the worst’, Foreign Policy Advisor of the Russian Embassy in
Azerbaijan, Achahmat Chekunov repeats, qualifying the reaction of the
Azerbaijani press to this question as `perfect psychosis’. The
psychosis by the way took the form of quite concrete threats to
Russia.
`Constructivism’ in Azerbaijani Style
Prime Minister and Head of Azerbaijani MFA both implied the `steps’
that might be taken by Baku in response. The `counter measures’ are
denunciation of the agreement on the tenancy of the Gabalin radar
station and access for American military bases to Azerbaijani
territory. At the same time, Baku threatens to have a wholesale
instead of retail in their case. `There is no point about giving
munitions to Armenia, it is just a dislocation to another Russian
base. This will be Russian property simply at another Russian base,
that’s all’, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov explained. He
emphasized that Russia will transfer only a part of the munitions to
Gyumri since it `respects and complies with the zone limitations of
the adapted Treaty on Reduction of Armed Forces in Europe’.
The fact that the dislocation of the munitions is carried out within
the framework of the Treaty and by Georgian quota is recognized even
in Baku. `Formally, Russia will have no changes, which is also true
for Azerbaijan’, Baku political scientist Rasim Musabekov comments on
the situation. `Aren’t the majority of the servicemen at the Russian
base in Akhalkalaki Armenians by nationality? We have another point
here. Previously, Armenia was rendered support in less obvious form,
now it is quite open. By its large military presence in Armenia,
Russia seems to be sheltering it from Turkey and stimulates its
unconstructive role in the region’.
It may be assumed the threats for `American landing troops’ are made
in Baku exclusively out of the bent for constructivism. The spirit of
constructivism also nourishes the Turkish aid to the reforms of
Azerbaijani armed forces. Thus in the time to come, the Nakhichevan
corps will get assistance of up to 3 million US dollars, besides a new
agreement with Turkey is to be signed. Based on the agreement, the
arsenal of Azerbaijani air defense forces will be renewed, a new
military aerodrome will be built in Nakhichevan and joint maneuvers on
guarding Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline are planned. Moreover, the
Azerbaijani sources state that the summer meeting of the Defense
Ministers of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey will discuss the issue of
setting up Turkish-Azerbaijani-Georgian military bloc. It is assumed
that the idea of creating this bloc may become a reality after the
operation of Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline. This context should also
embrace the Georgian-Turkish plans on the const! ruction of
Kars-Akhalkalaki railway network and the predictions of many analysts
speaking of the presence of Turkish military in Samtskhe-Javakheti
instead of Russian bases, even despite the promise of the Georgian
leadership for avoiding it.
`Russian Base is an Element of Security’
Meanwhile, the news agencies report that a railway echelon – 15 cars
with equipment and munitions, is already transported to Armenia from
Batumi. Two more echelons are taken to Russia.
The recent comment on this issue is made by the head of the General
Headquarters of Armenian Armed Forces, Michael Harutiunian, stating
yesterday `the planned dislocation of a part of the Russian munitions
from Georgia to Armenia will not disrupt the balance of forces in the
region’. `The Russian base in Gyumri is set for ensuring security not
in the East but the West. If we compare the balance of forces in the
West, it is essential to consider the half million Turkish Army,
dozens of thousands of Turkish tanks, hundreds of military aircraft’,
colonel-general stated, advising Azerbaijan to calculate its
equipment and munitions. `I would like to officially state that
Azerbaijan deceitfully holds more equipment and munitions than
allowed by the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces’.
The views of Armenian politicians and experts on dislocation of the
Russian munitions are diverse.
`Armenia and Russia comply with the bilateral Agreement on Military
Cooperation and Dislocation of the Russian military bases in Armenia,
also the quota obligations under the Treaty on Conventional Armed
Forces in Europe. If our decisions fall in the frames of these two
documents, no one is eligible to interfere in the affairs of Armenia
and Russia’, RA Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian commented on the
situation.
`The Russian base in Armenia is an element of security’, head of the
Standing Committee on Defense, National Security and Internal Affairs
of the National Assembly, Mher Shahgeldian stated, emphasizing that
there is no new agreement on enlarging and strengthening the
base. The dislocation is carried out within the strict limits of the
current agreement’.
`We have a neighbor having executed Armenian Genocide on state level,
and the presence of the Russian military base meets our interests’,
is the opinion of the head of Republican Party of Armenia, Galust
Sahakian, noting that the stir around the dislocation is the result
of insinuations by the Azerbaijani side.
Among alternative views, the right forces took quite a negative
stance. According to the Chairman of Liberal Progressive Party of
Armenia, Hovhannes Hovhannisian, the Armenian authorities are making
`another unreasonable and dangerous step’. `They are trying to
withstand the disrupted political and economic balance in the country
by a military disbalance in the South Caucasus, by transferring the
Russian military equipment from Georgia to Armenia’, Hovhannisian
holds. At the same time, he does not suggest alternative ways for
restoring the disrupted balance.
`Armenia is No Dump’… Ex-Speaker of the National Assembly Babken
Ararktsian is still more categorical. `Armenia is no dump. Let
Russia take its garbage back. These munitions are over 40 years old,
and they are useless’, Ararktsian states, urging not to be anxious
over Azerbaijan’s statement that the transfer of the Russian
equipment to Armenia will radically impact the military potential of
the Armenian army. `Dislocation of the military bases to Armenia has
the aim of deteriorating Armenian -Georgian relations’, Ararktsian
thinks.
By the way, Russian military journalist Victor Baranets also
expressed a similar view. `I think this old rusty junk, more
resembling scrap metal, should not have been dragged to Armenia, it
is objective. However, it is a comfortable position for someone
sitting at a warm Moscow office. There is one serious objective
reason. If we go home by tanks and fighting machines from Georgia,
there are 18 bridges on the way, and nothing but the name might
remain from them’, the journalist holds, supporting the view that the
equipment was not transported by cargo aircraft and the trawls to
aggravate Georgia.
`The Russian bases is more a political than military factor’, Leader
of Popular Democratic Union, Vazgen Manukian states. `I don’t think
we should currently discuss if their military potential in case of
abstract military operations. I think Azerbaijan also understands
that these military bases will never be used in military
operations’. Leader of National Democratic Union also thinks the very
sense of the presence of military bases in Armenia will gradually be
reduced to zero point both for Russia and Armenia.
`I do not know how long this period will last till the economic,
political and geopolitical issues of the region are solved. There is
great uncertainty, however it is quite clear that this uncertainty
will not be settled through military means’, Manukian states.
`The bases in Georgia should have been dislocated a while ago’, the
political scientist, Director of Caucasus Media Institute, Alexander
Iskandarian thinks. In military sense, they lost their significance,
whereas in the political sense the presence of these bases works for
Georgia and not Russia, since Georgia is using this factor as an
instrument for pressure, and by the way in a very qualified way’.
According to the political scientist, Armenian-Georgian relations
were never very warm and good. `Alertness’ – by this term he defines
the relations between Georgia and Armenia, emphasizing that this
alertness, conditioned by objective reasons, will last for quite long,
not growing into confrontation that cannot be afforded by either
Armenia or Georgia. `The bases in Batumi and Akhalkalaki are not only
Georgian-Russian problem. It is the problem of Georgia, Russia and
Armenia’, political scientist Andranik Migranian holds. He thinks that
Armenia should be involved in Russian-Georgian negotiations on the
bases.
`The Richer Our Neighbors, the Better For Us’
It is only for a while that dislocation of the Russian equipment from
Georgia to Armenia distracted the politicians and experts from much
more obvious infringing on regional balance than the Russian bases.
`The exploitation of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline disrupts the
economic balance of forces in South Caucasus region, and Armenia is
trying to find alternative ways for its restoration’, RA Prime
Minister Andranik Margarian thinks.
`I don’t think Armenia’s interests are affected since the richer our
neighbors are the better for us’, former RA Prime Minister Hrant
Bagratian states as an argument. `Sooner or later such projects,
including the hopefully successful Baku-Ceyhan project, will have a
positive impact on Armenian economy as well’.
Not entering the disputes on economic efficiency of Baku-Ceyhan
pipeline, we will just note that Bagratian is not the only one
doubting the efficiency of BTC and its impact on Armenia.
`The presence of Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline feeds the prospects of
Karabagh issue settlement and excludes the possibility for restarting
military operations’, Vartan Oskanian thinks, emphasizing that
Azerbaijan in this sense faces serious limitations. `Those
considering Armenia’s marginalization from the project as a defeat of
Armenian diplomacy, get the following response from Armenian Foreign
Minister, `It is obvious that only through rejection of Karabagh we
might have the oil pipeline pass via our territory…’
In other words Armenia, being forced to choose, kept to
Karabagh. This choice fits in the formula, `Oil to Azerbaijan,
independence to Karabagh’. As a result, we have a quite peaceful
response to the oil pipeline by political parties of Armenia.
`Armenia has numerous factors for resistance, and it is not hopeless
or condemned’, head of `Dashnaktsutiun’ Armenian Revolutionary
Federation, Levon Mkrtchian states. `As for Armenian neighbors and
architects of regional politics, they should understand that
political science does not allow for the notion of `black holes’. So
if they try to keep Armenia in communication blockade, circumvent it
through all possible ways, they should keep in mind that in this case
stability and security are impossible in the region’.
Representative of `Ardarutiun’ opposition party Victor Dalakian
suggests as a counteraction development of democracy in the
country. As an illustration, he provides a full assessment of the
incomes in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey for the next year and a
long term forecast up to 2030. He does not calculate democracy in
barrels, assuring that it will bring more dividends than oil dollars.
Becoming A Regional Player?
The greatest optimism is expressed by economic experts. Thus, the
Director of `ArmRosgasprom’ company Karen Karapetian holds that
Armenia has a chance to use Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and
Baku-Tbilisi-Erzrum to meet its national interests.
`Certainly it would be more desirable if these pipelines passed via
Armenian territory, still it is already positive that they are
constructed even circumventing the Republic’, Karen Karapetian
states. He sees new possibilities for Armenia in these projects as
regards production of electrical energy. In his opinion, Georgia may
supply to Armenia a part of its gas from the quota for the transit of
the `blue fuel’.
`Having abundance of electrical energy and finishing the construction
of Iran-Armenia gas pipeline, as well as reconstruction of Abovian
subterranean gas depositary, Armenia may become a serious player in
the region’, the Director is confident. He suggests transforming `the
negative geopolitical situation for Armenia into an advantage’. The
forecasts show that Armenia’s neighbors will soon face deficit of
electrical energy they would have to compensate. It is not by
accident that Georgia has already started negotiations on the
construction of a new `Armenia-Georgia’ power transmission line’,
Karapetian states.
Meanwhile, regional processes keep developing in unexpected
directions for Armenia. As Iran IRNA agency reports with reference to
Baku sources, till the end of 2005, an agreement will be signed on
the supply of natural gas from Iran to Georgia via Azerbaijani
territory. Karadag-Tbilisi pipeline will be used for deliveries. The
Azerbaijani section of the pipeline was restored in 2004, whereas the
Iranian side allotted 2.5 million dollars without compensation for
repairing the Georgian section. Iranian gas will become for Georgia
an alternative to Russian supplies in case of their suspension. It is
interesting what advantages for Armenia will be envisioned by
Armenian political scientists and experts in this project?
SOUTH CAUCASUS PARLIAMENTARIANS REACHING AGREEMENT
9—————————————————————————-
Source: `24 Saati’ newspaper (Georgia) [June 17, 2005]
Author:
Last week, Tbilisi witnessed a notable event likely to have a large
impact on the social political life of South Caucasus in
general. Parliamentary Assembly of South Caucasus countries was set
up at Georgian Parliament.
The negotiations on this issue started quite a while ago. The authors
of the idea stated that despite the contradictions in place, the
point is about the unsettled relations between Azerbaijan and
Armenia. The South Caucasus states have a lot of similar problems or
tasks which may be resolved through mutual effort, particularly when
it refers to international arena where Georgia, Armenia and
Azerbaijan may have a unified front for achieving their goals and
forgetting the current internal problems for a while. However, a
resolute step in this direction was made only recently, though the
bilateral negotiations (Georgia-Azerbaijan, Georgia-Armenia) at
parliamentary level regularly voiced the willingness for certain
activity in setting up the Parliamentary Assembly. Both the Armenian
and Azerbaijani sides, each on its behalf, thought it essential to
emphasize that the activity of the organization can hardly be
efficient as a result of problematic Armenian-Azerbaijani relations.!
Naturally, Baku put the blame on Yerevan, whereas Yerevan conditioned
the possible problems for the functioning of the Assembly by Baku.
Anyway, heads of the parliamentary delegations of the three South
Caucasus countries still signed the Memorandum on setting up the
Parliamentary Assembly of South Caucasus Countries (PASC) on June
16. It was signed yesterday at Georgian parliament. The signatories
to the Memorandum were Chairman of Georgian Parliament Nino
Burjanadze, Vice-speaker of Armenian Parliament Tigran Torosian and
member of `Yeni Azerbaijan’ government party, deputy of Milli Mejlis
(Parliament) of Azerbaijan, Syavush Novruzov.
Nino Burjanadze qualified the event as `unique’. `I think PASC has
the potential for becoming a serious and stable guarantee of
stability in the region. Setting up this union will undoubtedly
promote active dialogue between the three countries of the region’,
she stated to media representatives. According to Nino Burjanadze,
signing of the Memorandum became possible due to the study of the
experience of the Inter-parliamentary Assembly of Baltic countries.
However, the `unique event’ again revealed the deep contradictions
among the participants and raised certain doubts of its
sustainability. Thus, the head of the Armenian delegation, Tigran
Torosian expressed hope that the Assembly may be launched already in
2007. `I see no serious reasons that might stand in the way’, he
stated. However, the Azerbaijani delegation had its vision of the
situation. Representative of Azerbaijan, Syavush Navruzov stated in
his turn that setting up of the Assembly may become possible after
resolution of Mountainous Karabagh problem. `The territorial problems
unresolved, the Assembly’s activity may be considerably impeded’, he
stated.
Nevertheless at a special briefing, the sides showed willingness for
compromise and avoided discussion of the problems. After signing the
document, the sides unanimously declared that the mutual efforts of
the South Caucasus states may promote more efficient implementation
of the activities, aimed at the development of their countries and
the region as a whole.
===========================================================================
NEIGHBOURS
==========================================================================
GENOCIDE ALLEGATIONS MOVING AT US IN AVALANCHE
—————————————- ————————————
Source: “Milliyet” newspaper (Turkey) [June 18, 2005]
Author: Semih Idiz
Erdogan’s position, shortly qualified as `Our archives are open. Let
all the sides involved open their documents to do away with empty
talk,’ was again voiced in Beirut the day before. It stirred into
action International Union of Genocide Researchers, which sent its
address to Erdogan on June 13, 2005.
The Union, involving many famous scientists from various countries,
Turkey included, resolutely parries the arguments by Erdogan (`the
events of 1915 should be studied by historians to reveal the
truth’). The letter states that Erdogan is not aware of hundreds of
pieces of research on Armenian Genocide, conducted by the scientists
from various countries and nationalities for decades.
Conference in Every Two Years
The letter states in particular that the events of 1915 are qualified
by most scientists as Genocide, in compliance with the Genocide
Convention of 1948. The text of the letter was adopted unanimously at
the conference of the Union, held every two years. This year it took
place on June 4-7 in the city of Boca Raton (USA, Florida). The
address also states, `We admit that there are diverse opinions as to
how and why the Armenian Genocide occurred. However, rejection of
Genocide is not academic but propaganda behavior, an attempt to
justify the perpetrators, put the blame on the victims and to
obliterate the significance of this event from history pages’.
The Conference in Bogazici is Also Mentioned
The statement also points to the Turkish scientists, accused of
dependence on the government and the state in the attempts to hide
the truth and `provoke ethnic turmoil’. It also mentions the
conference on the Armenian issue, planned at Bogazici University and
postponed because of the reaction of Justice Minister Cemil
Cicek. `Thus your government proved its intolerance to academic and
intellectual freedom – the most important condition for democratic
society’.
Interesting Coincidence
The letter ends up, `To occupy a decent and equal place in
international democratic society, the Turkish society needs to bear
responsibility for Armenian genocide similarly to the German people
towards the Jews’. It is notable that the date of the address
coincided with the hearings on Armenian Genocide in German
Parliament. The historians should get together and study the issue
thoroughly in order to withstand similar statements to be gradually
increasing.
External Problem
The situation is getting clear each day. Both in the West and East,
Turkey stands alone in its position on Armenian Genocide. It is still
not clear what is the way out. Foreign Minister Abdullah Gull notes
that this issue is a priority for the government, not mentioning
however a concrete action plan. The government statements on this
issue seem to be largely focused on internal audience. Meanwhile, the
source of the problem is not inside the country, the greatest part of
the population refuting Genocide allegations. The problem is outside
Turkey’s borders, where these allegations are growing as a snowball
and moving at us in avalanche.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

The Messenger, Georgia
June 21 2005
Russians reassure Azerbaijan over base withdrawal
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Russian TV Vesti
Nedeli that Russia has managed to dispel concerns that Azerbaijan had
held over the deployment of Russian military equipment from Georgia
to Armenia.
“We have explained to our Azeri friends that the property and
equipment will be deployed on the territory of the Russian military
base,” he added, “so there will be no change in the balance of forces
in the region.”
Azeri President Ilkham Alyev said: “We understand that the weapons
are to be transported to the Russian military base and that they will
not be handed over to the Armenian Armed Forces.”
However, he added that Azerbaijan was still going to increase
military spending by up to USD 70 million by the end of the year, as
cited by Black Sea Press.

CNN
June 21 2005
Bomb kills anti-Syria politician
Tuesday, June 21, 2005; Posted: 7:32 a.m. EDT (11:32 GMT)
Hawi, a Christian, frequently spoke out against Syrian intelligence
and interference in Lebanese affairs.
Car bomb kills anti-Syrian politician in Beirut(1:54)
BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) — A car bomb has killed an anti-Syrian
politician in Beirut, a day after opposition leader Saad Hariri’s
camp won Lebanon’s parliamentary elections.
George Hawi, former secretary general of the Lebanese Communist
Party, died instantly in Tuesday’s blast, police said. It was the
second slaying of an anti-Syrian figure this month.
Hawi had actively campaigned for opposition alliance candidate Elias
Atallah, a co-founder of the left-leaning Lebanese Democratic
Movement, according to sources close to Hawi’s family, CNN’s Beirut
Bureau Chief Brent Sadler reported.
That movement was heavily influenced by prominent anti-Syrian
journalist Samir Kassir, who was killed June 2 during the election
period.
Kassir died when a bomb apparently planted in his car exploded. He
was a columnist for the Lebanese daily newspaper An Nahar, a
publication often critical of Syrian influence in Lebanon.
Police said Tuesday’s bombing was similar to the one that killed
Kassir.
Tuesday’s bombing “will be seen here in light of what happened during
the weekend, when the opposition won an outright victory, giving them
an outright majority in parliament,” Sadler said.
Hawi, a Christian, frequently spoke out against Syrian intelligence
and interference in Lebanese affairs, The Associated Press reported.
Hawi was related to an Armenian candidate who was standing for
parliament in the national elections that finished on Sunday, Sadler
said.
The bombing, which authorities said occurred about 10 a.m. (3 a.m.
ET) in a western Beirut neighborhood, left Hawi’s black Mercedes
crumpled.
Witnesses and security sources said the car had just left a gas
station and was traveling on a road when the bomb exploded.
Hawi’s driver escaped with only minor injuries; police sources said
the bomb apparently targeted Hawi, who was in the passenger seat.
“We are stunned,” said Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who
visited the blast site. “With every achievement by the Lebanese
state, we see there are those who want to target security and send
messages of this sort.”
On Monday, opposition leader Hariri said his anti-Syrian camp had
emerged as the winner in Lebanon’s parliamentary elections.
“The elections are behind us and we don’t see anything in front of us
but the future of Lebanon,” said Hariri, who became a candidate after
his father, Rafik, was assassinated.
Interior Minister Hassan Al Sabaa, speaking on national television,
said 72 of the 128 seats will be allocated to Hariri’s Future
Movement, an alliance that includes Walid Jumblatt’s Progressive
Socialist Party, Lebanese Forces and Qurnet Shahwan.
Another 25 seats will go to Amal (Nabih Berri) and Hezbollah; and 21
seats will go to an alliance of the Free Patriotic Movement, Skaff,
Franjieh and Tashnak, the minister said. (Full story)
“This victory is to be given as a present to the soul of the martyr
Rafik Hariri,” the son told reporters a day after the fourth and
final voting took place, in the country’s north.
The four elections, spread out over four weeks, marked the first vote
since the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanese territory.

ml
UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS
OFFICE OF MEDIA RELATIONS
Oriental Orthodox-Roman Catholic Consultation Holds 2005 Meeting
WASHINGTON (June 20, 2005)¯Relations between Oriental Orthodox and
their Eastern Catholic counterparts in the United States, and the
positions of the churches regarding proselytism, were topics discussed
at the 2005 meeting of the United States Oriental Orthodox-Roman
Catholic Consultation.
Co-chaired by Bishop Howard J. Hubbard of Albany and Very
Rev. Chorbishop John Meno of the Syriac (Syrian) Orthodox Church of
Antioch, the meeting was held at St. Nersess Armenian Seminary in New
Rochelle, NY, June 9.
The meeting was somewhat abbreviated due to the absence of one of the
presenters, His Eminence Metropolitan Mor Cyril Aphrem Karim of the
Syriac Orthodox Archdiocese of the Eastern United States, who was
called away on urgent business. On the Catholic side, Fr John Long,
SJ, offered an overview of the Catholic Church’s understanding of
proselytism, with special emphasis on relations with the Coptic
Orthodox Church, in the period immediately following the Second
Vatican Council. Fr. Ronald Roberson, CSP, then explained the
development of this policy after the end of communism in Eastern and
Central Europe, especially as described in the 1992 Vatican document,
“General Principles and Practical Norms for Coordinating the
Evangelizing Activity and Ecumenical Commitment of the Catholic Church
in Russia and in the other Countries of the Commonwealth of
Independent States.”
The members of the dialogue also had an opportunity to review major
developments in their churches during the past year. The situations of
the Syriac Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, and Coptic Orthodox Churches
were considered, as well as the death of Pope John Paul II and the
election of Pope Benedict XVI, the visit of the Syriac Patriarch to
India, and the seventh meeting of the heads of the Oriental Orthodox
Churches in the Middle East. Fr. Roberson reported on the second
meeting of the International dialogue between the Catholic Church and
the Oriental Orthodox Churches which took place in Rome last January.
The participants were particularly grateful to Fr Daniel Findikyan,
the Rector of St. Nersess Seminary for the gracious hospitality they
experienced during the meeting. They also warmly welcomed two guests
at this session, Most Reverend Gregory J. Mansour, the Bishop of the
Maronite Eparchy of St. Maron of Brooklyn, and Most Reverend Manuel
Batakian, Apostolic Exarch for Armenian Catholics in the United States
and Canada.
The 2006 session of the dialogue is due to take place on May 30-31,
2006, at the Cardinal Spellman Retreat Center in Bronx, New
York. Metropolitan Mor Cyril Aphrem Karim will give his paper on
relations between the Oriental Orthodox and their Eastern Catholic
counterparts in the United States, and the way in which the various
churches deal pastorally with divorce and remarriage will also be
examined.
The United States Oriental Orthodox-Roman Catholic Consultation was
established in 1978, and is sponsored jointly by the Bishops’
Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the United
States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and the Standing
Conference of Oriental Orthodox Churches in America. The Standing
Conference includes representatives from the Armenian, Coptic,
Ethiopian, Syriac, and Malankara Syrian Orthodox churches. In 1995 the
Consultation published “Oriental Orthodox-Roman Catholic Interchurch
Marriages and Other Pastoral Relationships,” which includes pastoral
guidelines for marriages involving the faithful of the two communions
as well as ample documentation about the development of the ecumenical
relationship between the two communions in recent decades. In 1999 it
issued “Guidelines Concerning the Pastoral Care of Oriental Orthodox
Students in Catholic Schools.”

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
June 21 2005
AZERBAIJAN, BAHRAIN AGREED TO SIGN MEMO ON COOPERATION BOOST
[June 21, 2005, 13:03:59]
Ambassador of Azerbaijan to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Elman Arasli
has held on June 20 a meetings with the Bahrain’s parliament speaker
Khalifa Al Dahrani, other governments officials and representatives
of business and financial circles of this country.
During the meetings the both sides have focused on the developing of
bilateral relationship and have agreed to sign Memorandum on the
enhancing of mutual cooperation between two countries. There were
discussed also issues on the political consultations, cooperation
within international organizations, organizing of the mutual Days of
culture and participation of Azerbaijani artists in the organizing in
Bahrain festivals.
Ambassador Arasli was interviewed by the local and foreign
journalists on the results of his visit, socio-political life in our
country and the causes and consequences of Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Political Affairs Magazine, NY
June 21 2005
Holocaust Education and the Working Class
By Norman Markowitz

Programs of Holocaust education have been established in a number of
states, monuments to both the Jewish and non-Jewish victims have been
established in the United States and many other countries and a
Holocaust Museum now exists in Washington. But, there is in my
opinion a danger that Holocaust education is in effect failing in its
mission, if its mission is to reach masses of people with an
understanding of the genocide carried out in World War II. Holocaust
education is important as part of a general program of fighting
reactionary and fascist ideology in the United States and the world.
Marxists have a valuable role to play in rescuing it from both narrow
academicism, that is, research by and for small groups of academic
specialists as part of normal careerist work, and the `mass market’
Hollywood approach, which uses melodrama to portray horrors without
any explanation of fascism and the social classes that supported it,
except that it concerned horrible German people in uniforms who
tortured and murdered mostly Jewish victims.
There were many inter-related Holocausts, but the Jewish Holocaust,
the mass murder of roughly two-thirds of the Jewish people of Europe
and one-third of the Jewish people of the world by German fascists
and their allies and collaborators, is rightly seen as the signature
crime of modern history and as one of the greatest crimes against
humanity in all history. The experiences of its victims and the
actions of its perpetrators have been analyzed in many books,
catalogued in museums, expressed painting, sculpture, and cinema, in
all of the fine arts. At a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise
globally and in the United States for a variety of reasons, including
the increased influence of rightwing religious and secular forces in
the rich countries and also the increased influence clerical and
secular rightists in many Islamic countries where publications like
Hitler’s Mein Kampf and classic anti-Semitic `conspiracy’ forgery,
The Elders of the Protocols of Zion, have flourished. It is important
to relate advance Holocaust education. The view that Jewish people
are `people of privilege’ whose only political involvement is in
support for the state of Israel, the more it is spread and believed,
produces a `win’ situation for reactionaries, by both strengthening
reactionaries for whom Jewish people, even those who are their
servants, can be handy scapegoats for their failures, and
strengthening Jewish reactionaries who regularly conflate criticism
of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism and use all real examples of
anti-Semitism as a rationale to encourage Jewish people to provide
uncritical support for Israel.
Marx expected workers to do great things, to free themselves from the
dictatorship of capital, to make great efforts to change the world,
which of course meant also to make great efforts to understand it, to
master the learning and culture that their class enemies both sought
to deny them and use against them. Capitalists have deep contempt for
working class people whom they believe they can endlessly manipulate
through propaganda that, like commercial advertising, appeals to
their prejudices and emotions.
The name Holocaust, derived from the bible, is powerful and
expressive, but I think it is better to use the term genocide, the
attempt to murder a whole people – not discriminate against them,
exploit them as slaves or serfs, or laborers, even drive them out of
regions where they had lived, forcibly resettle them – but murder
them, wipe them out.
For working people, particularly, it is important to understand that
the genocide directed against the Jewish people of Europe, regardless
of whether they were religious Jews, or secular Jews, or even thought
of themselves as Jews, since some had been raised as Christians in
Christian families, was perpetrated by Fascists, the enemies of all
working people. Fascists came to power in Germany and other European
countries using rabid hatred of Jews, socialists, Communists, and in
the Nazi case with direct threats to use violence to protect
`Germany,’ by which they meant the `racially pure’ warrior country of
their imagination, superior to all others, `without social classes,’
except the racial elite, and without labor unions and modern urban
secular liberal culture. Jews were to Nazis what `liberals’ are to
the blustering American rightwing, evil phantoms who were
simultaneously the powerful wealthy elites controlling the media and
the professions and the organizers and leaders of Socialism,
Communism, and all radical movements seeking to overthrow the elites.
In Italy, where fascism as a reactionary movement and party was born
after WWI anti-Jewish racism was not a factor in its early years,
because anti-Jewish traditions on the Italian secular right were
marginal. Fascist movements everywhere appeal to and greatly extend
core prejudices of long duration used by ruling groups to divide
working people. The core prejudice can be anything, anti-Semitism in
most of Europe, anti-Chinese racism in countries like Malaysia and
Indonesia, anti-Armenian and anti-Kurdish racism in Turkey and other
countries.
For American working people, a good way to focus holocaust education
would be to compare the Nazis and the KKK. Both saw themselves as
militants, even revolutionaries, seeking to save the system from
itself, to revive mythical pasts and protect grand abstractions in
which the existing social hierarchies were preserved. For the Klan
the abstractions were the old the South, and in the 1920s Nordic
protestant America. For the Nazis they were `the Nordic Aryan race’
and the German nation as empire (Reich) fighting the `enemies within’
who had `stabbed it in the back during WWI, and preparing to fight
the external enemies, that is, the Allied powers who had unfairly
defeated it in WWI.
Both the KKK in the South and the Nazis in Germany worked to fight
unions, had connections often with conservative elements of the local
police, and had wealthy and powerful backers behind the scenes who
helped to fund their activities, not so much to bring them to power
but to keep liberals, socialists, Communists out of power, to keep
the working class divided and intimidated, acting out its
frustrations against minority scapegoats. Ironically, Germany’s
`solid South,’ Bavaria, to this day the political stronghold of
conservative forces, both harbored and nurtured the Nazi movement in
its early years.
Most importantly, Marxists should work to help teach working people
that the Holocaust is not unknowable, a view often encouraged by
`high brow’ literary critics and celebrity philosophers, not about
something dark in the human condition. If everyone is responsible
then ultimately no one is. That which we cannot understand we cannot
correct or cure.
For Marxists and for the broad left generally, the Holocaust can be
understood as a set of dialectically inter-related events that
happened, could have been prevented through different national and
international policies at the time, and can happen again, if a party
or a military group supported by powerful class interests internally
and/or internationally comes to power committed to building a war
machine, destroying workers rights, and solving the countries
economic problems by imperialist conquests.
Blaming a vulnerable minority, for example, the Nazis Big Lie
propaganda against Jews for betraying Germany in WWI and instigating
`Cultural Bolshevism’ in the 1920s worked for Hitler and his backers.
In the contemporary US uniting the religious and secular Right
condemnation of Gays and Feminists for undermining the American
family, producing the `Vietnam Syndrome,’ and creating a `political
correctness’ that always `blames’ America for everything and must be,
has been a fixture of mass media and Republican politics for decades,
like an appendix waiting to burst.
When ruling classes are in immediate crisis, they can call upon such
forces, Nazis, Klansmen, whom they have used but kept at arm’s
length, to retain their power. At least that was the background for
European fascism in the interwar period. But that is not the only
way.
As many fear in the US particularly, the mindset that leads
eventually to an open terrorist capitalist state dictatorship, the
center of the classic Marxist-Leninist definition of fascism, and
creates the conditions for genocide can become `normal’ a part of
accepted political discourse over a period of time. Rightwing
governments can `co-exist’ with and help to legitimize open terrorist
fascist parties and societies as the Rumanian monarchy did with the
Iron Guard, Horthy did in Hungary, Pilsudski did in Poland and of
course, Southern `conservative’ segregationist did when it suited
them with the KKK. When `ordinary people’ over time come to accept
pogroms or lynchings as a normal part of life, either averting their
eyes are vicariously identifying with the killers because that is
more acceptable than resistance, perspective is lost and the
ideologies and policies of fascism become `mainstream.’
When those committed to an ideology of unilateral military posturing,
return to an idealized past, secular or religious, those contemptuous
of liberalism in all its definitions, and hostile to the labor
movement in all but its most craven forms, permeate mass media as
they do in the United States today, a context is created in which the
Geneva rules of war can be buried in Iraq, the acceptability of using
torture against prisoners, regarded as both a war crime in declared
wars and occupations, can become a serious topics of discussion.
That some of the advocates of such policies are themselves of Jewish
American, African American, and Mexican American background, is a
distinction from the Fascist Axis of World War II. But it may be a
distinction without a great difference, since an `ecumenical’ fascism
open to all those who support its militarist, national chauvinist,
anti-working class and anti-humanist policies is still fascism. Even
Hitler proclaimed the Japanese, who of course did not fit positively
into Nazi race ideology, `honorary Aryans,’ since they allied
themselves with him and acted in the militarist and imperialist way
that advocated.
Karl Marx always believed that working class people could understand
socialist theory, political economy, history, because it was in their
interests. He was serious when he contended that his work was written
for workers, a point that twentieth century capitalist’s
propagandists have sneered at because of obvious difficulty in
reading Capital especially and other of Marx’s classic works. But
Marx expected workers to do great things, to free themselves from the
dictatorship of capital, to make great efforts to change the world,
which of course meant also to make great efforts to understand it, to
master the learning and culture that their class enemies both sought
to deny them and use against them. Capitalists have deep contempt for
working class people whom they believe they can endlessly manipulate
through propaganda that, like commercial advertising, appeals to
their prejudices and emotions.
Holocaust education should be aimed both in the schools and the
larger society at working class people. Workers more than non working
class people can understand why big corporations like Thyssen Steel
and the big German auto companies supported Hitler before and after
he came to power, because he would break the unions literally, take
away the rights of their organizers and the labor parties the
Communists and Social Democrats which represented the working class,
and build a war machine that would enrich German capital. Workers
more than most people can understand that great wealth is the
foundation of power and power exists to protect and expand great
wealth – something they see in the organization of their work places
and in the laws that govern them at those work places.
Workers more than non-working class people can understand that the
only real thing the German ruling class had against the Nazis was
that they lost World War II, which had far more devastating negative
consequences for German big capital than all the riches the Nazi
regime provided for them through its re-armament policies and early
conquests.
As for the Jewish Holocaust, German capital didn’t really care for
the most part about Jews or other minorities in Germany, just as they
didn’t really care about the German majority, except as their workers
and employees. In some areas of the economy, banking and merchant
capital, there were prominent capitalists of Jewish background, but
the only thing that really distinguished them from their fellow
German capitalists was the social prejudice and exclusionary policies
that many of the latter expressed toward them. The majority of Jewish
Germans were, in the popular American sense of the word, middle and
lower middle class, small business people and lower professionals,
seeking to improve their lot through increased access to education
under the liberal Weimar Republic after WWI. They neither Germany’s
`Big bad Capitalists ‘ nor were they the most important leaders of
the Communist and Social Democratic parties, the parties of the left,
as they were portrayed in Nazi propaganda although prominent Jewish
Germans did have leading positions in both parties. Although Jewish
German Communists and Social Democrats were special targets of Nazis
and other rightwing political anti-Semites, they were from my
understanding fully integrated into their parties, and committed to
the different definitions of a socialist Germany which their parties
represented.

Workers much more than non-working class people can understand why
German capitalists played no real role in the anti-Nazi resistance
and underground, very weak as it was, that existed in Germany. The
only conservative or establishment group that sought to oust Hitler
was a section of the military, and then only seriously when it was
plain to everyone save Nazi ideologues that the war was lost and the
longer Germany stayed in it, the worse things would be for all
Germans. Even then, in July, 1944, when barring some breakup of the
allies, the war was irretrievably lost and would result in Germany’s
general devastation and occupation, German capitalists sat on their
hands rather taking any action that would show the military and the
general population that they were backing the attempted coup against
Hitler.
Workers who know that there are even in the most miserable situations
relatively decent bosses, `easy bosses’ as they used to be called in
the U.S. in the 19th century, can understand that men like the Nazi
businessman OskarSchindler and the few other establishment Germans
who acted save Jewish prisoners from extermination were exceptions,
remarkable exceptions, but exceptions nevertheless.
If Hollywood, which has told Schindler’s story, were not the great
center and archive of capitalist dreams, it might take works like
Yuri Suhl’s They Fought Back and make films about Jewish partisans
who fought in integrated units with non Jewish anti-fascists in the
Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and other countries. Working class people
would understand the simple point made by Suhl and others – those
Jewish people who were integrated into larger societies had a much
better chance of surviving than the segregated ghettoized, religious
populations who had accepted their marginalization and isolation and
turned to their religious and economic leaders to act as a buffer
between them and hostile authorities and non-Jewish communities.
Separation and segregation within the working class movement has
always produced defeat and disaster.
The genocide, which the Nazis called `the final solution’ developed
out of the war, out of the war primarily in the East, against the
Soviet Union, as historian Arno Mayer, a truly distinguished
historian, has shown most powerfully in Why Did the Heavens Not
Darken. The threats to do such things long existed in both the Nazi
movement and the pre war the Nazi regime had created a form of
extreme segregation for German Jews and those Jews in Austria and
Czechoslovakia who had fallen under their control, while encouraging
anti-Semitic governments in Hungary and Rumania, satellites of
theirs, to increase their anti-Semitic activities. Italian fascist
dictator Mussolini passed anti-Semitic laws in Italy in 1938 to
ingratiate himself further with Hitler and his fellow European
fascists, the great majority of whom advocated anti-Semitic politics.
But the commitment to genocide, bureaucratically organized mass
murder accomplished in concentration camps which resembled
slaughterhouses for cattle and other animals, was a direct result of
the Nazis launching World War II, their invasion of Eastern Europe,
with large numbers of impoverished Jewish ghetto dwellers along with
a significantly smaller Jewish middle class, and particularly their
invasion of the Soviet Union, which Hitler saw as the end all and be
all of our movement, meaning a political and racial holy war, and
which Hitler had previously called a a Jewish head on a Mongol body.
In teaching the Holocaust to working class people, it is important to
emphasize the role of anti-Fascist United Front campaigns, to support
the Spanish Republic against Spanish Fascists and their German and
Japanese Fascist backer so oppose the Japanese invasion of China, to
oppose the Munich agreement, on the sound basis that fascism means
war. These mass protest movements in politics can and should be
compared to postwar peace campaigns, since the kind of broad left
people who opposed the Korean and Vietnam Wars and the present Iraq
war were and are the legitimate successors of those who fought
against fascism and war and sought to achieve peace through
anti-fascist collective security.
Those who supported and continue to support U.S. military
interventionism in both the cold war and post cold war periods and
the legitimate successors of the rightwing isolationists who didn’t
want to fight Hitler both because they agreed with his
anti-Communist, anti-labor orientation (if not his open terrorist
dictatorship) and wanted to create a `Fortress America’ in a U.S.
dominated Western Hemisphere rather than form multilateral alliances
of any kind. Today, these ultra-right elements, oddly called
`neo-conservatives’ even though they are neither new nor are they
trying to conserve anything, still think in terms of `Fortress
America’ but today they see the whole world the way their
predecessors once saw the Western hemisphere.
Had the United States, England, France, and the Soviet Union worked
together to build a collective security system and alliance against
Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, and Fascist Italy, the Holocaust
against European Jews, Gypsies, Serbians, Soviet prisoners of war,
and other Slavic peoples who were low on the Nazi `race’ hierarchy
might have not happened. Had the divided anti-Nazi forces in Germany
built a popular front alliance against the Nazis in the early 1930s
it is doubtful that would have come to power. History isn’t
predestination, except for religious and some political sectarians.
Working people especially responded to the appeal of Communists
throughout the world that the struggle against fascism and war were
one and the same in the 1930s. The victory of fascism and the war it
produced were no more inevitable then than the victory of imperialism
and war is today.
Working people can understand how the divisions among anti-Fascists
in Germany strengthened the Nazis because they have seen divisions
and turf wars weaken their unions in the face of employer offensives
for decades. Workers can understand how the appeasement policy toward
Hitler launched by the conservative governments of Stanley Baldwin
and Neville Chamberlain in Britain, a policy that they thought would
enable them to do business with Hitler and work with him against the
Soviets and Communist revolutionaries, enabled the Nazis to build
their war machine without serious opposition, annex Austria and
Czechoslovakia, and then launch the war.
Trade unionists especially have seen many of their leaders give
uncritical support to Democratic party politicians who thought they
could continue to do `business as usual’ with the administrations of
Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, retreat steadily and weakly support
less draconian `welfare reform,’ and more multi-lateral wars in Iraq
and other places rather than challenging the Bush administration
directly. To defeat a government that literally is racing to military
disasters means seeking creative ways to abolish the Taft-Hartley
law, increase trade union membership, win back trillions in lost
revenues since 1980 through a policy of retaxation aimed at
corporations and the rich, and regain the momentum lost in the 1970s
when the disastrous effects of the Vietnam War and the Watergate
conspiracy led progressives in Congress to develop a `transfer
amendment’ aimed at significantly reducing military budgets in a post
Vietnam era and shifting funds to revive social programs dealing with
education, housing, health care, and transportation.
That the Soviets signed a non-aggression pact with Hitler in August
1939 is certainly true, but we should not think of that pact the way
Joseph Goebbells would want us to if he were still literally rather
than figuratively alive, That was a consequence of the appeasement,
not a cause of the war. Given the British and Anglo French policy of
the previous six years, to blame the war on that pact is, as the
British might say, rather Acheeky.
Also, working class people can understand that both genocide reached
the dimensions it did, six million Jewish people and many millions of
others in a war which in Europe claimed perhaps 40 million people,
because of the divisions among the Anglo-American allies and the
Soviets on the question of the Second Front after 1941. The delaying
of a second front for nearly two years lengthened the war, prevented
Soviet forces from liberating the death camps far earlier than they
were, and magnified the mass killing of Civilians carried out by the
Fascist Axis in Europe, China, and the Pacific.
That 11 million people perished in the concentration camps alone,
that Croatian Fascist underlings of the Nazis practiced genocide
against Serbian Yugoslavs that cost through direct mass murder as
many as 800,000 lives, that perhaps as many as 27 million Soviet
citizens, the majority of them civilians, were killed in the war,
should be factored in when workers are taught about the Fascist
Genocide against the Jewish people.
After World War II, former Nazis and conservative intellectuals in
Germany sought to develop the view that the great crimes of the
Hitler regime were the result of Volk Egoismus, mass hysteria, and
the actions of the high Nazi leaders, especially Hitler.
Thus everybody was responsible, which meant nobody, except Hitler and
a few top Nazis were responsible. In the United States the Soviet
leader Joseph Stalin was compared to Hitler and the Soviet Union was
portrayed as a totalitarian state that had to be fought as Hitler was
not fought. In the process, people were encouraged to forget about
fascism, to see history in terms of evil men and big totalitarian
governments fighting against conservatives, and to let the Nazis,
their class backers, and their mass followers, off the hook of
history.
The Holocaust became a series of facts, of numbers, and of feelings,
of the victims and the survivors, for whom one could only feel deep
pity and in a general way guilt that not more was done to save them.
Over time, this is not a way to help the working class and the whole
people understand the Holocaust since only knowledge that is applied
and updated becomes truly relevant and lives.
Understanding Fascism, its mindset, its class nature, its social
purposes, and seeing it as a process, something that develops,
happened before and can happen again, and not only from would -be
Hitlers but from Pierre Lavals, the French conservative politician
and Vichy collaborationist leader (that is particularly important
because we in America have a lot of Pierre Lavals in both parties,
although the great majority of course are in the Republican Party) is
necessary if we are to learn from the past. Fascism is much more
extreme but ultimate not qualitatively different than the
glorification of the military and the police, the hatred of
liberalism and Apolitical correctness, that permeates rightwing
establishment politics in America today and rightwing mass media, and
that such forces given the right circumstances can become fascist, is
essential to preventing war and fascism and preventing new genocides.
The old conservative philosopher George Santayana wrote that those
who learn nothing from history are condemned to repeat it. An old
German Communist in the 1920s said, `Strike the Nazi wherever you see
him.’ We can and we must teach workers to understand that without an
understanding of history, they can suffer its repetition, not in the
same form but with the same basic content and results. We can and
must teach workers to understand and fight fascism, because that is
the only way to really understand the genocide, the Jewish and
non-Jewish Holocaust, and honor its victims.
A few months ago I was involved in an Internet discussion concerning
the role of the Roosevelt administration, which has been widely
criticized over the last generation for its failure to do more to
save victims of the Holocaust. In my next article, I will discuss
these issues as a continuation of the discussion on Holocaust
education today.
–Norman Markowitz is a contributing editor of Political Affairs. He
can be reached at [email protected].

UN does not recognize Karabakh polls – rep says
Azad Azarbaycan TV, Baku
20 Jun 05
[Presenter] The United Nations Organization recognizes the Azerbaijani
authority in the territories occupied by Armenia. The UN
resident-coordinator in Azerbaijan, Marco Borsotti, has said that the
UN does not recognize the [parliamentary] elections in Nagornyy
Karabakh. He said that the UN would voice its opinion about elections
to be held there after the conflict is settled in line with
Azerbaijan’s interests.
[Correspondent] The UN does not recognize the [parliamentary]
elections in the self-styled Nagornyy Karabakh republic, the UN
resident-coordinator, Marco Borsotti, said. He also said that the UN
accepts only the Azerbaijani authority in the occupied territories.
[Borsotti, speaking to microphone in English with Azeri voice over]
The UN recognizes no other but Azerbaijani authority in Nagornyy
Karabakh as the UN backs the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. We
always proceed from these principles. When the conflict is settled in
line with the interests of Azerbaijan, we will be able to say
something. However, until it happens, we will not comment on any
events staged in Nagornyy Karabakh.
[Passage omitted: the UN does not suspend humanitarian aid to Azezi
refugees]
[Video shows Karabakh, packs, presumably of humanitarian aid, being
unloaded from a lorry]

NKR PRESIDENT DOUBTS OSCE MG CO-CHAIRS WILL PRESENT A COMPLETE SCHEME
OF CONFLICT SETTLEMENT ON THEIR VISIT TO THE REGION
YEREVAN, June 21. /ARKA/. “I doubt OSCE MG Co-chairs will present a
complete conflict settlement scheme on their visit to the region”,
stated Arkady Ghukasyan, NKR President in Stepanakert. Commenting on
the proposal of official Baku to establish dialogue between the
Armenian and Azeri communities of Nagorno-Karabakh, Arkady Ghukasyan
said that it would be rather good if Azeri community of NKR started
dialogues with Greek, Russian, Ukrainian and other communities of NKR,
to begin with. “Constant efforts of Baku to show that Nagorno-Karabakh
is not a conflict party, but a community only testify to the lack of
seriousness in the approach of Azerbaijan to the settlement. The
unwillingness of the official Baku to conduct direct dialogue with
Stepanakert prolongs the solution of problems which concern the Azeri
people”, noted NKR President. L.V.–0-