Author: Emil Lazarian

ASSEZ DE LOIS MEMORIELLES
Auteur: Lazar Philippe
Liberation , France
18 octobre 2006
L’article “crime contre l’humanite” pourrait englober nombre
d’exactions.
A peine apaisees, les passions legitimement suscitees par la
promulgation de la loi du 23 fevrier 2005 “portant reconnaissance de
la Nation et contribution nationale en faveur des Francais rapatries”
et après le piteux retrait de son article sur l’enseignement des
bienfaits de la colonisation, voici que le Parlement en rajoute en
votant une loi reprimant la negation du genocide armenien de 1915. Et
voila le Premier ministre, qui n’en est pas a une approximation près,
declarant depuis les Antilles, qu'”il n’appartient pas au Parlement
d’ecrire l’Histoire”, oubliant que c’est en votant la loi du 29 janvier
2001, “relative a la reconnaissance du genocide armenien de 1915”,
que le Parlement l’a fait (puisque son article unique disposait que
“la France reconnaît publiquement le genocide armenien de 1915”) :
la nouvelle loi ne fait que tirer les consequences penales d’un refus
de se soumettre a la loi du 29 janvier.
Doit-on accepter, dans une democratie, une totale liberte d’expression
des citoyens ? Il existe au moins deux lois qui restreignent cette
liberte : celle qui permet de poursuivre l’expression de propos
consideres comme “une incitation a la haine raciale” et la fameuse loi
du 13 juillet 1990, dite loi Gayssot, “tendant a reprimer tout acte
raciste, antisemite ou xenophobe”. Bien qu’elle ait essentiellement
ete utilisee contre les negationnistes du genocide des Juifs, cette
loi ne concerne pas, formellement, que ces derniers. Mais la portee
de la loi Gayssot reste neanmoins limitee aux seuls crimes relatifs
a la Deuxième Guerre mondiale.
De tels crimes sont, on le sait, imprescriptibles. C’est evidemment
a leur propos que se pose de facon la plus aiguë la question de la
necessite ou non de punir leur negation. Si l’on renonce a reprimer
ce genre de declarations, il n’y a pas lieu d’aller plus loin, si ce
n’est de demander l’abrogation de la loi Gayssot (et evidemment de la
nouvelle loi que vient de voter l’Assemblee). Faisons l’hypothèse qu’on
ne retienne pas cette forme extreme de renonciation a poursuivre. Deux
questions se posent alors de facon imperieuse, qu’il faut examiner
d’un point de vue politique et technique :
Y a-t-il lieu de traiter de facon differente la negation des divers
crimes contre l’humanite ?
Comment identifier les “crimes contre l’humanite” ?
La reponse la plus equitable a la première question ne serait-elle pas
de lever la restriction de l’application de la loi Gayssot aux seuls
crimes commis avant et pendant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale ? Et il
suffirait, pour repondre a la seconde, de ne pas faire mine d’ignorer
– etrange occultation memorielle s’il en fut ! – qu’en droit francais
ces crimes sont parfaitement definis puisque l’article 212-1 du code
penal dispose que “les crimes contre l’humanite (la deportation,
la reduction en esclavage ou la pratique massive et systematique
d’executions sommaires, d’enlèvements de personnes suivis de leur
disparition, de la torture ou d’actes inhumains inspires par des
motifs politiques, philosophiques, raciaux ou religieux et organises
en execution d’un plan concerte a l’encontre d’un groupe de population
civile) sont punis de la reclusion criminelle a perpetuite”.
Resterait dès lors une seule question, incontestablement difficile :
comment passer du constat d’un crime specifique a la reconnaissance
de son appartenance formelle a la liste ci-dessus rappelee ? Il
faut revenir, la, au rôle, conteste et pourtant irremplacable, du
Parlement. Du Parlement ? Oui, bien sûr, de la meme facon que c’est
le Parlement qui vote les lois de bioethique, en tant que representant
legitime du peuple francais, sans qu’on l’accuse pour autant d'”ecrire
la science” en lieu et place des scientifiques.
L’exemple de l’adoption – laborieuse mais en fin de compte souvent
largement consensuelle – des lois de bioethique et de leur evolution au
cours du temps devrait nous ouvrir une piste de reflexion permettant
de depasser les aleas des manifestations les plus recentes des elus
de la Nation en matière d’interference avec l’Histoire.
Pourquoi ne pas constituer, de facon analogue, une instance
consultative nationale chargee, non point de dire le vrai et le
faux, mais d’argumenter serieusement et avec une forte competence
scientifique (elle devrait evidemment comprendre une majorite
d’historiens) la legitimite de reconnaître qu’un fait historique
relève, ou non, de la liste ci-dessus rappelee ? Une telle instance
– disons un “comite consultatif national d’ethique en histoire” –
pourrait etre saisie de questions de cette nature par les pouvoirs
publics ou, sous certaines conditions, par tel ou tel groupe social.
Elle aurait pour mission non point de “conclure” mais de conseiller.
Et c’est a partir de cette analyse que le Parlement serait, le cas
echeant, conduit a ajouter, ou non, un fait historique a la liste des
crimes identifies. Ce sont donc bien les historiens qui ecriraient
l’histoire, et c’est sur la base de leurs conseils, officiellement
sollicites, que nos representants legitimes seraient amenes a decider
en notre nom que tel ou tel crime est d’une ampleur et d’une gravite
telle qu’il relève effectivement de cette qualification, avec toutes
ses consequences – desormais unifiees – en matière repressive.
Ne serait-ce pas la une facon d’echapper a l’engrenage qui nous menace
d’une serie de plus en plus fournie de lois specifiques renforcant,
toutes, une navrante concurrence des memoires de la souffrance des
peuples ?
Philippe Lazar president du cercle Gaston-Cremieux, cercle juif laïque
et diasporique
–Boundary_(ID_qqSHSHrEjKnWIUp75yOnPw )–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TURKISH PARLIAMENT DEBATES TROUBLED TIES WITH FRANCE
Agence France Presse — English
October 17, 2006 Tuesday
The Turkish parliament began a debate Tuesday to discuss relations
with France after a French bill making it a crime to deny Ottoman
Turks commited genocide against Armenians caused uproar in Turkey
and prompted threats of retaliatory measures.
The MPs were expected to adopt a declaration condemning the bill,
which foresees one year in jail for anyone who denies that the World
War I massacres amounted to genocide and was voted by the lower house
of the French parliament Thursday, parliamentary sources said.
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul was scheduled to make a speech.
The French bill is widely seen here as a punch below the belt by
opponents of Turkey’s European Union membership that will fan
anti-Western sentiment among Turks and make it harder for the
government to push ahead with painful EU-demanded reforms.
Ankara, facing mounting EU warnings to respect freedom of speech,
charges that the French move is an example of double standards, arguing
that the bill — if approved also by the Senate and the president —
will block free debate on a historical subject.
The EU is pressing Ankara to either scrap or amend the infamous Article
301 of its penal code, which has landed a string of intellectuals in
the courts for “insulting Turkishness.”
Most defendants, among them novelist Orhan Pamuk, the 2006 Nobel
Literature Prize laureate, stood trial for remarks contesting the
official line on the Armenian massacres, which Ankara fiercely rejects
amounted to genocide.
But even Pamuk condemned the French bill, saying that it flouted
France’s “tradition of liberal and critical thinking.”
Ankara had warned ahead of the vote that French companies would be
barred from major economic projects in Turkey, including a nuclear
power plant whose tender process is expected to soon begin, if the
bill was adopted.
Officials, however, have sought to calm down widespread calls for a
boycott of French goods on the grounds that French companies based
in Turkey and employing Turks could be harmed.
“What are we going to earn or lose by boycotting goods?… We should
consider this carefully,” Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said
last week.
“We will act calmly,” he said. “The steps that need to be taken will be
taken by the government on all political platforms at home and abroad.”
Hospitalized for hypoglycemia Tuesday, Erdogan will miss the debate
in parliament.
France already passed in 2001 a resolution recognizing the massacres
of Armenians as genocide, prompting Ankara to retaliate by sidelining
French companies from public tenders and canceling several projects
awarded to French firms.
The killings are one of most controversial episodes in Turkish history
and open debate on the issue has only recently begun in Turkey,
often sending nationalist sentiment into frenzy.
Critics of the bill say it will also deal a blow to tentative efforts
for reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia.
Ankara has declined to establish diplomatic ties with Yerevan over
its campaign for international recognition of the genocide.
In 1993, it sealed its border with its eastern neighbor, a move
which was also a gesture of solidarity with close ally Azerbaijan,
which was then at war with Armenia.
Armenians claim up to 1.5 million of their kin were slaughtered in
orchestrated killings between 1915 and 1917.
Turkey categorically rejects the genocide label, arguing that
300,000 Armenians and at least as many Turks died in civil strife
when Armenians rose for independence in eastern Anatolia and sided
with invading Russian troops as the Ottoman Empire was falling apart.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

RUSSIAN PARLIAMENTARIANS CONCERNED ABOUT COMMUNICATION PROBLEMS OF ARMENIA
ARMINFO News Agency
October 17, 2006 Tuesday
Today, at a press-conference on the results of the session of
the Armenian-Russian inter- parliamentary commission for economic
cooperation in Yerevan, Russian co-chairman, member of the Federation
Council Nikolay Ryzhkov said that the problem of communications has
been worrying Armenia and Russia for 16 years, and the mechanisms of
its efficient solution are not found yet.
Nevetheless, he pointed out three ways of solving Armenias’
communication problems. The first way is the ferry service. Of course,
there are some difficulties here, e.g. prohibition of crossing the
excisable commodities, but they entrusted Igor Chernyshenko, a State
Duma member, with initiating the corresponding legislative amendments
to allow the ferry service of excisable commodities. The co-chairman
also expressed discontent with the activity of the Armenian and
Russian sides in cargo formation, and emphasized that he had taken
up this issue but didn’t see the return initiative of the Armenian
side. Yet, he said that he will actively examine this problem again,
but the Armenian side should also do something.
The second way is the one through Iran. Ryzhkov said that it is not
the best variant, but the most realistic one at the moment. However,
the most efficient solution of the communication problems of the
region would be the opening of the Abkhazian railroad which requires
money and time. According to various estimations, the resumption of
the Abkhazian railroad will require some $100-200 mln, he noted.
Ryzhkov stressed that the exploitation of the railroad is not an
economical but a political problem. The Georgian authorities have
politicized this problem, and if the political forces come to a
consensus, the problem will be solved, he said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Armenian National Committee of Canada
130 Albert St., Suite 1007
Ottawa, ON
KIP 5G4
Tel. (613) 235-2622 Fax (613) 238-2622
E-mail:[email protected]
Fo r Immediate Release
October 17, 2006
Foreign Affairs Minister of the Republic of Armenia Visits Canada
Ottawa-Vartan Oskanian, Foreign Affairs Minister of the Republic of
Armenia, will make an official visit to Ottawa on October 18 and meet with
Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Hon. Peter MacKay to discuss
Canada-Armenia bilateral relations.
To honour His Excellency Vartan Oskanian, Gary Goodyear, (MP – Cambridge)
and Chairman of Canada-Armenia Parliamentary Friendship Group, in
cooperation with the Embassy of the Republic of Armenia in Ottawa, and the
Armenian National Committee of Canada (ANCC), will host a luncheon/meeting
for the House of Commons and Senate of Canada members.
More than 75 joint economic ventures already exist between the two
countries. Many Canadian companies now operate in Armenia. Recently, Dundee
Precious Metals Inc. acquired 80% of an Armenian mining company for US$22
million.
The 125-year-old Canadian Armenian Community is a vibrant and growing
community with significant presence in all major cities across Canada. Over
2,500 Canadians visit Armenia a year-on business or for pleasure. This
number is expected to rise sharply in the next few years.
Participating in peace-keeping activities are among the priorities of the
Republic of Armenia which presently is involved in peace-keeping missions
in Kosovo and in Iraq. The government of Armenia is also anxious to learn
from the Canadian experience in these fields.
According to international organizations, Armenia is one of the most
progressive countries of the former Soviet Union in introducing, economic
liberalization, political freedom, freedom of speech and of press freedom.
Enhancement of relations between Canada and Armenia will benefit both
countries.
His Excellency Vartan Oskanian itinerary:
October 17, 2006 Arrival in Ottawa
October 18, 12:00 -2:00 pm: Luncheon/meeting, Room 601 of the Parliamentary
Restaurant, Centre Block.
October 18, 5:00 pm Meeting the Hon. Peter MacKay
#
For media inquiries please contact:
Kelly Williams, Gary Goodyear- MP Office. Tel. (613) 996-1307
Aris Babikian, ANCC Office. Tel. (613) 235-2622
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

October 18, 2006
Press Release
Western Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America
H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate
6252 Honolulu Avenue
La Crescenta, CA 91214
Tel: (818) 248-7737
Fax: (818) 248-7745
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:
WESTERN PRELACY ANNOUNCES BOARD OF REGENTS APPOINTMENTS
His Eminence Arch. Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate, and the Executive
Council of the Western Prelacy are pleased to announce the new
appointment of members to the Board of Regents of Prelacy Schools.
The newly appointed Board of Regents consists of the following members:
Dr. Armine Hacopian
Mrs. Sossi Hovsepian
Mrs. Marisa Sarian
Mr. Avo Kechichian
Dr. Vartkes Tomassian
Mr. Chris Keosian
Mr. Ara Bedrosian
Mr. George Chorbajian
Mr. Mark Guedikian.
On Monday, October 16, at the presence of Dr. Hagop Der Megerdichian,
Vice-Chair of the Executive Council and Representative to the Board
of Regents, the new Board convened its first meeting, during which
the election of the divan took place. The new divan is as follows:
Mr. Avo Kechichian Chairman
Dr. Armine Hacopian Secretary
Mr. Mark Guedikian Treasurer
The Prelate and Executive Council congratulate the new members of
the Board of Regents and divan, wishing them success in their daily
endeavors as they guide the new generation of Armenian students.
SECRETARIAT, WESTERN PRELACY
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

RUSSIA TIGHTENS CONTROL OVER THE ARMENIAN ENERGY SECTOR
Emil Danielyan
EurasiaNet, NY
Oct 17 2006
After more than a year of negotiations, Russia has completed the
acquisition of Armenia’s power distribution network, tightening its
grip on the Armenian energy sector. The Armenian government says
the $73-million takeover will breathe new life into the Electricity
Networks of Armenia (ENA). But government critics have denounced it
as a further blow to the country’s energy security.
The shares in ENA were formally transferred to an offshore-registered
subsidiary of RAO Unified Energy Systems (UES), Russia’s
state-controlled power utility, at a September 26 ceremony in Yerevan,
attended by senior Armenian officials and UES executives.
The deal was formalized one year after the government in Yerevan
announced and approved the Russians’ decision to buy ENA from Midland
Resources Holding, a British-registered firm that privatized the
once loss-making network in 2002. [For background see the Eurasia
Insight archive].
The Russian takeover of the Armenian power grid was first made public
in June 2005, presented as a long-term “management contract” signed
by UES and Midland. The World Bank and other Western donors questioned
the legality of that deal, arguing that it was cut without the approval
of Armenian regulatory authorities. But the donors acquiesced when UES
and Midland decided afterwards to sign a formal acquisition agreement
and follow relevant legal procedures.
It remains unclear why UES has taken so long to complete the
purchase. Unconfirmed reports in the Armenian press suggested that the
Russian energy giant, which has aggressively expanded its operations
in former Soviet republics, had second thoughts about buying ENA after
examining its books and discovering serious financial irregularities.
Officials in Yerevan maintain the deal strengthens the local energy
sector by injecting badly needed capital investments in ENA. Andrei
Rapoport, the UES vice-chairman, announced during the share transfer
ceremony that the Russian company will invest $20 million in ENA over
the next 12 months.
Critics, however, claim that Armenia’s energy dependence on Russia
has reached a critical level, posing a serious threat to the
Caucasus state’s sovereignty. According to Eduard Aghajanov, an
economist critical of the government, ENA’s sale all but completed
the country’s “energy colonization” by Moscow. “It is inadmissible
to give everything to one state, especially in the area of energy,”
he told EurasiaNet. “Russia is now in a position to impose its will
on us in both the economic and political spheres at any moment. We
are tying a noose around our neck.”
UES already owns a cascade of Armenian hydroelectric plants and
manages the finances of the nuclear power station at Metsamor.
Another state-run Russian energy giant, Gazprom, controls Armenia’s
largest thermal power plant, and is currently its sole supplier of
natural gas. Russian gas is used for generating nearly 40 percent
of the country’s electricity, with another 40 percent coming from
Metsamor.
ENA’s sale was preceded by an equally controversial Russian-Armenian
energy agreement that was announced last April following Gazprom’s
decision to double the price of its gas for all three South Caucasus
states. Under the terms of that deal, Gazprom paid $250 million to
take control of another incomplete thermal plant located in the town
of Hrazdan in central Armenia. Most of the payment, $188 million,
is to be made in the form of free-of-charge supplies of Russian gas.
This means that the overall price of Russian fuel for Armenia will
remain virtually unchanged until the end of 2008.
Defending the April deal, Armenian leaders argued that it also commits
the Russians to spending at least $150 million on completing the
Hrazdan facility in the next few years. “This agreement will only
reinforce our energy security,” Prime Minister Andranik Markarian
said at the time.
The head of the World Bank office in Yerevan, Roger Robinson, likewise
described the gas settlement as “very beneficial” for Armenia. Robinson
made the point that there is “nothing fundamentally wrong” with Russian
ownership of Armenian energy facilities. “The important thing is to
have a very strong regulator that sets the rules and monitors the
rules for the delivery of public utility services,” he said.
Gazprom initially confirmed, but then denied reports that the deal
will also give it ownership of an incomplete Armenian pipeline,
which is scheduled to start pumping gas from neighboring Iran early
next year. The Armenian government also denied this. Still, Russia’s
Prime-Tass news agency quoted Gazprom Deputy Chairman Aleksandr
Ryazanov as saying on June 30 that the Russian monopoly is keen
to control the pipeline, which was originally intended to reduce
Armenia’s dependence on Russian energy resources.
Moscow has already reportedly forced Yerevan to make sure that the
pipeline’s diameter is not large enough to allow Iran to re-export
its gas to Georgia and possibly Eastern Europe. “We trampled on
our national interests in favor of Russia just because it [Moscow]
does not want to face any competition in the European gas market,”
complained Aghajanov.
There have been indications, though, that Yerevan and Tehran are
considering building a second pipeline that would serve to deliver
Iranian gas to third countries. “Naturally, when Iranian gas starts
flowing into Armenia, perhaps it will be exported to other countries
as well,” the speaker of Iran’s parliament, Gholamali Haddad-Adel,
told reporters during a recent visit to Armenia.
Despite the potential for securing alternative gas supplies, President
Robert Kocharian’s administration seems increasingly convinced that
Armenia’s long-term energy security hinges on the construction of
a new nuclear power plant in place of Metsamor’s aging Soviet-era
reactor. The reactor is expected to be shut down by 2016. Earlier
this year, the Armenian parliament allowed the government to start
searching for foreign private investors. The estimated construction
cost of a new nuclear power plant is at least $1 billion.
The United States has already made it clear that it is less than
enthusiastic about the idea. Tom Adams, a senior State Department
official coordinating US aid to ex-Soviet states, argued during a May
visit to Yerevan that Armenia’s location in a seismically active zone
prone to powerful earthquakes should be taken into consideration. “I
think our view right now is that there are probably better alternatives
to a second nuclear plant,” Adams said without elaborating.
Editor’s Note: Emil Danielyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and
political analyst.

ERDEM: UN AND NATO PEACEKEEPING FORCES CAN BE PLACED IN THE CONFLICT ZONE AFTER THE PEACE TREATY BETWEEN AZERBAIJAN AND ARMENIA
Azeri Press Agency
Oct 17 2006
Vahid Erdem, head of delegation of NATO Parliament Assembly Future
Defense Planning Subcommittee held a press conference on the results
of his visit, APA reports.
Erdem said that the aim of his visit was to meet with the officials,
non-governmental organizations and mass media representatives and to
get acquainted with the current situation on the integration to NATO.
He will make a final report titled NATO’s role in South Caucasus on
the results of his visit.
“The report will be discussed in the meeting of the committee in
Canada under my leadership soon. Azerbaijani side has some offers to
the report and we will evaluate these offers,” he said.
Erdem said that Azerbaijan successfully cooperates with NATO and over
300 servicemen serve in peacekeeping forces in various areas. Showing
his attitude to the problem he said after the peace treaty between
Armenia and Azerbaijan the peacekeeping forces can be placed in
the territory.
“UN and NATO peacekeeping forces can be placed in the conflict
territory after the peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia,”
he said.
Vahid Erdem also said that unlike Azerbaijan Armenia has unambiguously
attitude towards NATO.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AZERBAIJAN DOES NOT INTEND TO SEEK EXPELLING FRANCE FROM OSCE MINSK GROUP
Regnum, Russia
Oct 17 2006
“I have not heard of any official announcements that Azerbaijan is
seeking expulsion of France from the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs,”
Head of the Information and Press Department at the Azerbaijani Foreign
Ministry Tair Tagizade is quoted as saying to Day.az, while commenting
on calls for it after the lower house of France’s parliament passed
a law that envisages criminal punishment for denial of the Armenian
Genocide.
In this connection, he noted that “diplomats have to work with
reality of political facts.” “France’s foreign policy is formed les
by the parliament and more by the French foreign ministry. So, I do
not understand, on what proponents of expelling France from the MG
co-chairs ground,” Tair Tagizade said.
Commenting on a statement by the bloc of Azerbaijani parties “Our
Azerbaijan” on necessity to freeze all relations with the country,
impose an embargo on French goods, recall the ambassador from Paris
and so on, he noted that “any political force in the country has a
right to make these or other statements.” “In this case, aspiration
can be seen vividly to gain political profit grounding on any issues,
including those that are not supposed to be subject for speculations,”
the head of the information and press department said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

HEROES OF THE VISA WAR
Olga Allenova
Kommersant, Russia
Oct 18 2006
Crowds Meet Deported Georgians in Tbilisi
A Russian Emergencies Ministry plane arrived in Tbilisi yesterday
carrying 150 Georgian citizens who were being deported from Russia.
They were given a hero’s welcome. That flight, which was supposed to
have brought to Tbilisi a Georgian citizen named Tengiz Togonidze who
died in Moscow on the way to the airport, delivered a crushing blow
to the remnants of Russia’s authority in the region. Kommersant’s
special correspondent Olga Allenova has the details.
That day, the Tbilisi airport was particularly crowded: besides
the usual crowds accompanying and meeting travelers, there were also
journalists and representatives of the Russian embassy and the Georgian
authorities. Even several additional fast food restaurants had opened
in the departure hall. The Emergencies Ministry (MChS) flight, which
was expected at 16:00, was delayed until 18:00: a Georgian citizen
named Tengiz Togonidze, who was supposed to be on the flight, died on
Moscow on the road to Domodedovo airport. As soon as the news reached
Georgia, it was clear that a turning point had been reached in the
cold war between Moscow and Tbilisi. The two sides will have to come
to an agreement now or never. Judging by the scene in the airport,
those in Georgia have cast their vote in favor of the latter.
The approximately one hundred Russian citizens who were preparing
to leave Georgia on the same MChS plane were reluctant to speak with
journalists. Only one woman responded, when asked why she was leaving,
“since it’s possible, I’m going.” Airport workers said that those who
are leaving are mainly Armenians and some Georgians who have succeeded
in obtaining Russian citizenship. “Why are they leaving?” parroted a
security services official at the airport, his voice heavy with irony
– “because it’s free!” A little while later, the same man explained
with dignity to journalists that President Saakashvili has forbidden
cargo planes from the Russian MChS to fly into Georgia so that Russia
has been forced to send an Il-62 passenger plane instead of stuffing
people into cargo planes like cattle. Valery Vasiliev, the Russian
consul in Georgia, told me that this will probably be the last plane
that will take Russian citizens out of Georgia: all of those who wanted
to leave Georgia, around 500 people, have already left. In reply to
the question of how it came about that a person being deported by
Russia died on the road to the airport, the consul answered, “it is
a very sad event, there will be an investigation,” but said nothing
more concrete. That was provided by Georgian ombudsman Sozar Subari:
“It is run-of-the-mill fascism,” he said. “It’s Nazism. I approached
the Russian ombudsman with a request that he intervene in this outrage,
if in Russian some kind of positive forces still exist. Out of the
150 people deported today, more than half have normal documents and
the right to live in Russia!”
When the people from the MChS plane cleared passport control and
began to trickle into the arrival hall, they were surrounded by a
wall of journalists so solid that it was difficult to push through
it. Those who arrived did not want to comment. Someone shielded his
face with his hands, and another covered his head with his coat as he
pushed through the throng. The men, frowning, haphazardly attired and
with unshaven cheeks, were irritated and embittered, and the women
were distraught. One of them, who was carrying a child in her arms,
stopped as a microphone was thrust at her. “Why did they arrest you?”
she was asked. “My visa was not in order,” said the woman. “What will
you do now?” “I don’t know! I have no idea what to do!” The following
dialogue was had with another man:
“How long did they hold you in the isolation unit?”
“Ten days.”
“Ten days?!! How did they treat you?”
“Badly.”
“Why did they arrest you?”
“Because I’m a Georgian.”
Many explained their arrest in similar terms. Someone said something
in Georgian about Russian Nazism; someone showed his passport, which
had a Russian visa, and said that they had no right to kick him out.
Someone mentioned a week of incarceration in an isolation unit,
where it was even forbidden to wash. Someone simply broke down in
tears of humiliation.
I glanced at the ombudsman, Mr. Subari, whose eyes were aflame. I
think he was feeling these people’s humiliation as keenly as they
themselves were. And I felt burning shame for my country.
A young woman from the Georgian Education Ministry stopped children
and teenagers and pressed into their hands a booklet that had “Welcome
Home!” written across it. On the other side of the booklet, a notice
from the Education Ministry explained that all schoolchildren who had
been forced to leave Russia would now be attending Georgian schools
and that they should call such-and-such a number so that they would be
accepted into school. The children hid the booklets in their pockets,
and their mothers cried.
The Russian Federal Migration Service stated that day that all of
the deportees had overstayed their visas or did not have visas at all.
The service also said that the Russian budget allocates about 27,000
rubles for the deportation of a migrant, which includes expenditures
for tickets, detention in a special holding area, medicine, and food.
But in the case of the deported Georgians, the budget was economized
by half: the deportation of a single Georgian was managed by the
government for only 13,000 rubles. Maybe that’s why Tengiz Togonidze,
an asthmatic, died when he wasn’t given medication in time.
In Georgia yesterday thousands of people saw on their television
screens their compatriots and their visas, both overstayed and valid.
Thousands of people heard the story of Tengiz Togonidze. Thousands of
people in Georgia asked each other for the third time – this was the
third MChS plane from Russia – why it was necessary to so thoroughly
humiliate the Georgians, who were once desired guests in Russia. I
am certain that these people will never forget what they have seen.
“Russia shown has its face once again,” Georgian Minister for Refugees
Georgy Kheviashvili told me. “Russia has shown that it is impossible
to live with it in peace. Russia has done everything to push Georgia
as far away as possible. Well, thanks for the gift. I don’t doubt
that we will be able to use what has happened in our own interests.”
I also have no doubt.
_Georgians_Tbilisi/
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

EXTREMISTS MANAGE TO KEEP EACH OTHER HAPPY
By Gwynne Dyer
Hamilton Spectator, Canada
Oct 18 2006
Words matter. The Holocaust of the Jews in the Second World War
was genocide. The mass deportation of Chechens from their Caucasian
homeland in the same war was a crime but not genocide, though half of
them died, because Moscow’s aim was to keep them from collaborating
with German troops, not to exterminate them. Which brings us to the
Armenians and the Turks.
On Oct. 12, France passed a law declaring that anyone who denies that
the mass murder of Armenians in Turkey in 1915-17 was genocide will
face a year in prison. But the French foreign ministry called the law
“unnecessary and untimely” and President Jacques Chirac called Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan to apologize.
Why would the conservative majority in the French parliament
deliberately set out to annoy the Turks, knowing the law will
eventually be vetoed by the president? Because they hope to provoke
a nationalist backlash in Turkey that will further damage its already
difficult relationship with the European Union.
French public opinion is already in a xenophobic mood over the last
expansion of the EU, with folk tales of “Polish plumbers” working for
peanuts and stealing the jobs of honest French workers causing outrage,
especially among right-wing voters who never much liked foreigners
anyway. The prospect of 80 million Muslim Turks joining the EU, even
if it is at least 10 years away, is enough to make their blood boil.
So a row with Turkey should attract votes to the right’s presidential
candidate in next May’s election. That’s likely to be none other
than current Prime Minister Nicolas Sarkozy who said last month that
Turkey should never be allowed to join the EU: “We have to say who
is European and who isn’t. It’s no longer possible to leave this
question open.” The new law is not really about Armenians or Turks.
It’s about the French election.
Meanwhile, in Turkey, anti-EU nationalists have their own game. As
Turkey was busy amending its penal code to conform to EU standards in
the past few years, hard line lawyers and bureaucrats smuggled in a
new law, Article 301, that provides severe penalties for “insulting
Turkishness.”
In practice, that mainly means trying to ban public discussion of the
Armenian massacres. Some 70 prosecutions have already been brought
by the ultra-right-wing Union of Lawyers against Turkish authors,
journalists and other public figures.
For several generations Turkey flatly denied any guilt for the Armenian
massacres, insisting they didn’t happen and if they did, it was the
Armenians’ own fault for rebelling against Turkey in wartime.
Latterly, Turkish intellectuals have been saying that a million or
more Armenians did die in the mass deportations and that Turkey needs
to admit its guilt and apologize, though most still refuse to call
it genocide as that would put it in the same category as the Holocaust.
The prosecutions for “insulting Turkishness” — even against Turkey’s
greatest living novelist, Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk — are
not just attempts to stifle this dialogue among Turks, or between
Turks and Armenians. The ultra-nationalists also want to derail the
negotiations for EU membership by painting Turkey as an authoritarian
and intolerant state that does not belong in Europe. They are, in
effect, Sarkozy’s objective allies.
But Prime Minister Erdogan will probably repeal Article 301 once next
year’s elections are past. France’s law, which requires people not to
deny the Armenian massacres, the talks that 301 bans, will probably be
vetoed by Chirac. And Turkey’s best-known Armenian journalist, Hrant
Dink, who has already been prosecuted several times under 301, has
just announced he’ll go to France “to protest against this madness and
violate the law … and I will commit the crime to be prosecuted there,
so that these two irrational mentalities can race to put me into jail.”
Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles
are published in 45 countries.
p/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Articl e_Type1&c=Article&cid=1161121814335&ca ll_pageid=1020420665036&col=1112188062581
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress