Category: News

The Messenger, Georgia
Nov 19 2004
Kosovo will not help separatists
According to the Azeri newspaper Ekho.Baku, Nagorno-Karabakh,
Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transdnestr are rooting for the independence
of Kosovar Albanians. Karabakh separatists together with “friends in
misfortune” Prednestrovie, Abkhazia and South Ossetia continue to
consolidate their efforts to achieve recognition by the international
community.
The Azeri paper comments on a recent report by the newspaper
Moskovski Komsomolets that these separatist states are close to the
creation of a union of unrecognized states. According to Ekho.Baku,
these four ‘countries’ have held joint trainings where they agreed to
render mutual military assistance in case of a security threat to any
of the regimes.
But Moskovski Komsomolets reports their chief expectation is
connected to the fate of Kosovo. Many leaders from the four
separatist states think that soon this Serbian autonomy will receive
complete independence and recognition by the international community.
Such an event would give them a precedent and a chance, the paper
writes, “to draw themselves up to their full height.”
But commentators in Ekho caution that all the regions should be put
in the same basket. “First of all, we have to distinguish the
situation in Kosovo from the Armenian-Azeri conflict,” said Director
of the Peace and Conflict Resolution Center Elkhan Mekhtiev, adding
that the final decisions of the UN recognized Kosovo as an integral
part of Serbia.
He said that despite the fact that there is international decision
over that territory, there is no talk regarding the giving Kosovo
sovereign status. Moreover, according to Ekho.Baku, Mekhtiev said
that Serbia is adhering to the path of the European democratic
development and this is a further guarantee that the country will
retain its territorial integrity.
But in the case of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, he noted that
international organizations have decreed that they will not recognize
the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh or Abkhazia. “On the contrary,
OSCE and UN as well as other organizations confirm the territorial
integrity of Georgia and Azerbaijan. So, in this case, the issue of
status is the prerogative of Azerbaijan, because the Minsk Group of
OSCE says that it can recognize everything if Azerbaijan will agree
with that,” Mekhtiev said.
Conflict specialists in Azerbaijan think that the article in
Moskovski Komsomolets has a propagandistic character. A member of the
delegation of Azerbaijan in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council
of Europe Asim Mollazade thinks that Moskovski Komsomolets write “the
things they want to happen in reality but does not.”
“The depicted situation will never occur, because the world will
never recognize these formations created by Russia so that it could
create problems for independent Georgia, Azerbaijan and Moldava.
These separatist structures will always be recognized by the world as
parts of those countries. Any efforts of separatists to aggravate the
situation will not lead to the good either for them or for those
forces who are behind them,” he said. Mollazade also is sure that
Kosovo will never be recognized as an independent state.

PRESS RELEASE
Parliamentary Assembly Communication Unit
Ref: 582a04
Tel: +33 3 88 41 31 93
Fax :+33 3 90 21 41 34
[email protected]
internet:
PACE committee spells out steps to peaceful settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict
Strasbourg, 19.11.2004 – A report of the Council of Europe Parliamentary
Assembly (PACE) made public today spells out a series of steps Armenia and
Azerbaijan could take to fulfill their commitment to settle the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict peacefully.

In a draft resolution adopted at a meeting in Paris on Wednesday, PACE’s
Political Affairs Committee expressed concern at the creation of
“mono-ethnic areas which resemble the terrible concept of ethnic cleansing”,
and reaffirmed the right of displaced persons from the area of conflict to
return to their homes safely and with dignity.
The committee called on Armenia and Azerbaijan to submit constructive
proposals for the peaceful settlement of the conflict via the OSCE Minsk
Group, which should conduct speedy negotiations. If these fail, the parties
should consider using the UN’s International Court of Justice, the
parliamentarians said.

Meanwhile, the Council of Europe should offer experts to help Armenia and
Azerbaijan draw up a political status for Nagorno-Karabakh. Both countries
pledged to use only peaceful means to settle the conflict when they joined
the organisation in January 2001.
The committee also condemned any expression of hatred portrayed in the media
of Armenia and Azerbaijan, and called for a Council of Europe action plan
for mutual reconciliation involving the media, schools and universities as
well as contacts between locally elected representatives.
It is proposed that the report be debated by the Assembly at its next
plenary session in Strasbourg (24-28 January 2005).

Link to provisional versions of the draft resolution and recommendation
—
The Parliamentary Assembly brings together 630 members from the national
parliaments of the 46 member states.
President: Peter Schieder (Austria, SOC); Secretary General of the Assembly:
Bruno Haller.
Political Groups: SOC (Socialist Group); EPP/CD (Group of the European
People’s Party); LDR (Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group);
EDG (European Democratic Group); UEL (Group of the Unified European Left).

Sydney Morning Herald , Australia
Nov 20 2004
Sorry for all the apologies
By Ruth Wajnryb

It might bemuse a visiting anthropologist from Mars to discover
within Earth culture a speech event loosely called “saying sorry”. If
s/he stays around long enough, s/he may discover that the sorry
speech event is an umbrella term for a diverse collection of
utterances (or sorry noises) that leaders of democratic nations emit
– or feel compelled to emit – usually at some symbolic occasion.
Anniversaries of genocides are good.
I say “democratic nations” because for the life of me I can’t
remember one such verbal engagement with the issue of sorriness
coming out of the mouths of tyrants. It’s not the Idi Amin Club
members who wrestle with apologetics. At the bookends of the 20th
century, descendants of the dispersed survivors of the Armenian
genocide and those of Saddam’s gassed Kurds are still waiting.
I’d like to propose “apologetics” (note the small “a”) as a
superordinate to cover all the verbal noises that accrue with the
issue of sorriness. The word refers both to the verbal act and the
rumblings that surround it.
A recent example comes from Tony Blair. Jeered on by anti-war
protesters outside the annual conference of the British Labour Party,
and with considerable visible angst (most angst, of course, being an
interior experience), Blair wrestled with his apologetics, struggling
to find a way between the simplicity of straight-talking and the
complex pressures of public opinion mixed with party constraints.
He refused to apologise for the Iraq war. “The world is a better
place with Saddam in prison, not in power.” When it came to
allegations about the “sexing up” of prewar intelligence reports,
Blair’s ice got thinner: he “admitted”, “acknowledged” and “accepted”
that evidence about the weapons of mass destruction “has turned out
to be wrong”. It was a tenuous path to walk – between the cajoling of
anti-war protesters (they who, strangely, only surface in
democracies) and the sensitive fact that, as he speaks, he has boys
in the field. Even amid the party faithful, “guarded” and “gingerly”
are the ways to go.
An apology means saying you’re sorry. This seems straightforward
enough until you poke at the scar tissue of history. Sometimes,
etymology offers insights. It was not until the 18th century that
“apologise” seriously took on the meaning of “a frank expression of
regret for wrong done”. Before that, its meaning was closer to the
Latin and the original Greek, apologia, where apo (from, off) and
logos (speech) combine to produce an account mounted in defence or
justification. In modern terms, think of the closing argument of the
defence lawyer.
English retains this original sense in its “apologist”, though this
too has been tainted by negativity. Alleged apologists usually deny
that they are. The pseudo-historian David Irving denies being an
apologist for Hitler even while uttering his absurd claims that
openly seek to exonerate or explain away or diminish the monstrosity
of Nazism.
If you key “apologetics” into case-non-sensitive Google, you get
almost a million hits. These are mostly (big-A) Apologetics – a
Christian term for the practice of defending the Christian faith
against those who raise objections to its validity. This usage more
closely resembles the original Greek sense.
Contrast is a great mechanism for discerning the less-than-obvious.
To grasp the navigational complexity of apologetics, consider the
sheer simplicity of an uncomplicated act of sorry. At
, Democrat-voting Americans apologise
for Bush’s re-election.
One is reminded that English allows both forthrightness and
obfuscation, each achieved through words.

Reuters AlertNet, UK
Nov 19 2004
CRISIS PROFILE-Why is tension resurfacing in Georgia?
By Theresa Freese

People enjoy the view of old Tbilisi under the moon.
Photo by DAVID MDZINARISHVILI
What’s the problem?
Stability in the South Caucasus republic of Georgia is looking shaky
in the semi-autonomous regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Where exactly is the South Caucasus?
The South Caucasus consists of three states – Georgia, Armenia, and
Azerbaijan. All are former Soviet republics pinned between the
Russian Federation and the Middle East from north to south and the
Black Sea and Caspian Sea from east to west.
The Caucasus Mountains range divides and, Georgians claim, protects
the country from its northern neighbour.
Lying just beyond these mountains are the North Caucasus republics of
Russia: Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia, North Ossetia,
Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachai-Cherkessia, and Adygheia.
Why are there so many disputes in this region?
It’s a familiar story of Soviet nationalities policies and
ethnopolitical tensions tearing apart states. Most of the disputes go
back to when the Soviet Union broke apart in 1991, when autonomous
republics and regions clamoured for independence.
Ossetia was integrated into the Russian Empire in the late 18th
century, but divided between 1922 and 1924, when the South became an
autonomous region of Georgia and the North an autonomous republic of
Russia.
About 60,000 people live in South Ossetia. The population of North
Ossetia is more than 700,000.
When Georgia became a sovereign state after the collapse of the
Soviet Union, South Ossetia’s leadership seceded from Georgian rule
and went to war.
Thousands of people were killed and displaced between 1989 and 1992,
but South Ossetia’s population won de facto independence – but with
amorphous borders.
Abkhazia’s 1992-1993 war was much bloodier, claiming some 10,000
lives and uprooting tens of thousands of people – but the republic
achieved a solid boundary with Georgia.
Why do people in South Ossetia and Abkhazia reject Georgia?
They have grown accustomed to independence and fear Georgia will
attempt to retake their territories by force. They worry about
becoming a marginalised ethnic minority within Georgia.
Russia’s economic and political involvement complicates the
situation.
What is Russia’s involvement?
Both South Ossetia and Abkhazia owe their autonomy largely to Russian
backing.
Russia provides their inhabitants with Russian passports and
residency documents, allowing free movement into Russia.
Through them, the Abkhaz and Ossetians receive Russian pensions,
which are much higher than pensions from the Georgian state.
Georgians allege they receive military training and equipment.
In addition to its peacekeeping bases in South Ossetia and Abkhazia,
Russia maintains military bases in Georgia proper.
Some government officials are direct imports from Russia. The
currency is the Russian ruble, and there are Russian flags and
posters of Russian President Vladimir Putin everywhere.
Why is Russia doing this?
Mostly for geopolitical reasons. Many regional experts claim they
provide Russia with a foothold south of the Caucasus mountains.
At the same time, Russia is concerned about separatist movements in
its federation. If Abkhazia or South Ossetia successfully became
breakaway states, Chechnya’s calls for independence could be
validated.
However, Russia apparently does not want to see Abkhazia and South
Ossetia fall back under Georgian sovereignty. Instead, it avoids
officially recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent
republics but provides other types of support.
Why is the tension rising now?
President Mikheil Saakashvili came to power in the `rose revolution’
of November 2003, after mass demonstrations prompted by flawed
parliamentary elections resulted in the bloodless removal of his
predecessor, Eduard Shevardnadze
Whereas Shevardnadze is widely seen as having let the conflicts
freeze — and even allowing his government to profit from them —
Saakashvili promised to re-establish Georgia’s territorial integrity
by bringing three breakaway regions under control.
Georgia needs to settle these conflicts and get foreign troops off
its soil in order to achieve its long-term aim of joining NATO and
the European Union. It stands to reduce corruption, crime and the
trade in contraband, narcotics and weapons that results from porous
borders. Both the Abkhaz and Ossetians, as well as many Georgians,
survive on smuggling numerous products between Russia and Georgia.
How did the president start his campaign?
President Saakashvili’s first target was the autonomous republic of
Ajaria.
He succeeded in regaining control in May 2004, when the region’s
leader — Aslan Abashidze — fled to Russia.
Unlike Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Ajaria had had no history of
conflict with Georgia proper, and the majority of residents are
ethnic Georgians.
When did things begin heating up in South Ossetia?
The tension started rising in June 2004, and the conflict heated up
in August. The mid-October shooting of peacekeepers in South Ossetia
signaled a return to violence after a summer of fighting had given
way to tenuous peace.
The September massacre of more than 330 hostages after armed men
seized a school in Beslan, North Ossetia, was another blow to
stability.
Arguably overconfident after its success in Ajaria, Georgia moved
quickly without a well-planned strategy.
The Georgian crackdown on smuggling from Russia was designed to cut
off income to Ossetian authorities in Tskhinvali, South Ossetia’s
capital.
However, it also damaged the livelihoods of Ossetian and Georgian
communities and severed the only real interaction between them.
The Georgian government launched humanitarian aid and cultural
initiatives to garner popular support among Ossetians, but since
authorities were always accompanied by journalists, their activities
were perceived as show.
Armed Ossetians responded by closing roads linking disputed
territories. They detained Georgians on or near Ossetian lands, and
prevented Georgian media from operating freely.
Many Ossetians ceased communication with their Georgian neighbors,
reportedly under threat of being detained or losing their jobs or
pensions.
So is it just a question of coming to some agreement?
Ossetians and the Abkhaz firmly reject Georgian rule, while Georgian
residents in South Ossetia are adamant that they will never live
under Ossetian authority.
Georgian authorities say they never intended for events to degenerate
into a conflict. But the conflict incited fears in both Abkhazia and
South Ossetia that Georgia’s new leadership could be aggressive.
They are offering South Ossetia and Abkhazia wide autonomy within
Georgia, but cannot define this.
The population of Abkhazia halved after the 1992-1993 war, when
ethnic Georgians left or were driven out. Only a small group of
Georgians remains in the disputed Gali district – under Abkhazian
authority.
The republic has less than 250,000 inhabitants, compared with 536,000
before the war. The population of the Abkhaz capita, Sukhumi, was
also cut in half.
South Ossetia remains ethnically mixed, but Georgian-controlled
villages remain in its centre.
What are the humanitarian consequences of the tension?
People living on both the Georgian and South Ossetian sides of the
conflict zone are suffering.
Many buildings have been heavily hit by shelling.
People in the region — particularly those with damaged homes —
worry about surviving the winter for lack of firewood. Venturing into
the woods is dangerous. Villagers have disappeared, been killed by
landmines, beaten, detained or bribed.
Georgians are worried about Ossetian forces targeting their schools,
since some were heavily hit over the summer, and some families are
moving or sending their children elsewhere to study.
Georgia’s crackdown on contraband has left many people without
incomes. Some are unable to buy staple food items such as flour,
cooking oil and sugar.
Information on the situation in South Ossetia is difficult to obtain
or verify but Ossetians are reportedly experiencing similar problems.
At least eight civilians and peacekeepers have been killed or wounded
since the ceasefire began in South Ossetia on August 19.
What is going on in Abkhazia?
Abkhazia has been on the brink of civil unrest since disputed
presidential elections in early October 2004.
Abkhazia may pose a more difficult challenge to Saakashvili’s
government than South Ossetia. Given its Black Sea coast, it has
greater strategic, economic, and historical importance for Russia.
Peace in Abkhazia has been shaky since its 1993 cease-fire agreement.
A May 1998 special operation in Gali almost threw the republic back
into a full-scale war.
Worsening matters, the Abkhaz defense ministry reports that Georgia
is building up its forces along its border with Abkhazia.
What are the effects on regional stability?
Neighbouring North Caucasus republics could get involved, either to
call for independence from Russia or to support the Abkhaz or
Ossetians.
Former fighters from Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachai-Cherkessia, and
Adygheia are already politically involved in Abkhazia’s election
dispute.
Chechens supported the Abkhaz in their war against Georgia. Some say
they might now support Georgia against Russia in South Ossetia.
North Ossetia, meanwhile, has territorial disagreements with
Ingushetia and could get stuck in a two-front war if the South
Ossetia conflict escalates.
Who’s keeping the peace?
In South Ossetia, a Joint Control Commission representing Georgia,
South Ossetia, North Ossetia and Russia, as well as Joint
Peacekeeping Forces representing Georgia, Russia, and North Ossetia
are meant to prevent the escalation of the South Ossetia conflict.
Because Russia backs the Ossetians, Georgia claims it stands alone in
these institutions.
Georgia has signed an agreement with South Ossetia’s leader, Eduard
Kokoeti, that would prevent all armed formations except peacekeepers
and police inside the South Ossetia conflict zone.
But this will be difficult, many say impossible, to achieve.
Moreover, definition of the conflict zone is currently being
contested by Georgia.
The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is
seen by many analysts as the only objective body operating in South
Ossetia.
However, since Russia is an OSCE member state, it is difficult for
the organisation to expand its mandate to increase its observation
capabilities.
With only five military observers on the ground, the OSCE has little
chance of covering the region effectively.
The United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) performs a
similar function in Abkhazia and faces analagous obstacles.
It gave the peacekeeping mandate to the Commonwealth of Independent
States, and the contingent is entirely made up of Russians.
Negotiations between Georgia and Abkhazia on this point have come to
a halt since Saakashvili became president.

Reporter, Greece
Nov 19 2004
Greece: OTE Secures settlement agreement regarding Armentel
19 November 2004 – The major shareholders of Armentel, OTE and the
Armenian state, have reached a settlement agreement following a year
of litigation, which is expected to be sealed by next week.
Armentel will retain exclusive rights for the provision of basic
telecommunication services and international data exchange channels
by 2009, but will not be a monopolist on GSM market. In addition,
parties have agreed on the gradual adjustment of tariffs. OTE has
disclosed no official announcement on the issue yet.
Note that call tariffs, the monopoly status and competition from IP
telecom providers were the main disputing issues between the
government and Armentel with both parties filing claims during the
previous year. Meanwhile, Armenia has also reportedly granted a 2nd
GSM license to Karabakh Telecom.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Daily News , South Africa
Nov 19 2004
Suspected mercenaries ‘chained like animals’
By Beauregard Tromp
Malabo: A South African arms dealer who could face death for plotting
to overthrow the president of Equatorial Guinea told a court
yesterday he and his comrades had been chained like animals and
tortured into confessing.
Equatorial Guinea’s state prosecutor demanded the death penalty for
Nick du Toit and decades in jail for 13 other suspected foreign
mercenaries.
But in a dramatic final day of submissions in a trial that began in
August, the defendants stood up in chains and handcuffs to plead
their innocence.
“No weapons, no arms, no explosives were found on us,” Du Toit said.
“We have done nothing wrong. Since our arrest, we have been chained
like wild animals. We have been tortured by the police.There hasn’t
been any coup attempt.”
State Prosecutor Jose Olo Obono rejected any allegations of
mistreatment, saying all prisoners’ rights had been respected.
“Any statement to the contrary is not admissible in this trial,” he
told the court.
After closing arguments yesterday the fate of the eight alleged South
African mercenaries and their co-accused is now in the balance with
the very real threat of every man spending the rest of his life in
prison.
Yesterday the men shuffled to the front of the courtroom in Atepa
International Convention Centre constrained by their leg-irons, and
one by one pleaded to the judge for their lives. Judgment is set to
be delivered next Friday.
First to enter the courtroom was Jose Domingos, one of the
naturalised South African Angolans, followed by Mark Smit, the
youngest of the group, who was brought in at the last minute to work
as a cook.
Some have visibly lost weight since a month ago. Most were wearing
shorts, T-shirts and sandals with the eight South Africans and six
Armenians still in handcuffs and leg irons.
After the judge and his two magistrates were seated, the alleged
ringleader of the mercenaries, Nic du Toit, was brought in, escorted
by six soldiers.
When the men were taken away later Du Toit was driven away alone in a
police van. He was kept away from the rest of the group who are all
seated behind eight defence attorneys.
The Equatorial Guinea authorities say there has been at least one
attempt to free the prisoners. It also emerged that while the
attention was focused on the trial of Mark Thatcher in Cape Town,
there had been another coup attempt.
The latest plot, EG authorities said, apparently was a local attempt
that was quickly quashed before it came to fruition.
Inside the courtroom a photographer and video cameraman moved around
the floor, photographing everybody present at the trial.
Even young Mark, who seemed teary-eyed and bewildered a few months
ago, has changed, now sporting a beard and a steely look was visible
from under his furrowed brow.
During the half-hour recess the men were glad for the opportunity to
speak to the South African officials attending the trial.
For Du Toit and Bones Boonzaaier it was another rare opportunity to
see their wives.
As they sit in an adjoining room, staring into their partners’ eyes
like young, starry-eyed lovers, they seem to relish every tidbit of
information they receive.
There was no talk of the trial, the horrendous prison conditions or
their health but rather of family, children and home. – Foreign
Service and Reuters

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
Nov 19 2004
Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict Creates Obstacles for Economic
Development -President
President Ilham Aliyev, receiving a delegation led by Turkish State
Minister Gursad Tuzmen on Thursday, said he was satisfied with the
activity of the Azeri-Turkish inter-governmental commission.
Aliyev said that Azerbaijan attaches great importance to the existing
efficient cooperation between the two countries’ business people and
that meetings between Turkish and Azeri entrepreneurs positively
affect strengthening of economic ties.
The President also pointed out the existing economic potential for
expanding these relations, which are further promoted by the
friendship between the two states.
Touching upon the Upper Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Nagorno
Karabakh, Aliyev said the conflict is a serious obstacle for
Azerbaijan’s economic development.
`We demand the international community, in particular, the
organizations directly involved in the conflict resolution to
approach the issue fairly and put an end to double standards.’

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Nov 19 2004
UN COMMITTEE HIGHLY VALUES AZERBAIJAN GOVERNMENT’S PERIODIC REPORT
[November 19, 2004, 13:05:55]
On the base of the Executive Order of the President of Azerbaijan of
22 June 2002 on preparation of the report on implementation by the
Republic of Azerbaijan of the `International Pact of Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights’ the country joined on 21 July 1992, the second
periodic report of the Government was submitted to the UN Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on 5 May 2003, it was
announced by the press service of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
Azerbaijan.
The report was considered at the 33rd session of the Committee in
Geneva on 16-17 November 2004. According to Presidential Executive
Order, the Republic of Azerbaijan was represented here by the
delegation headed by first Deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan
Khalaf Khalafov.
Speaking at the session, he presented detailed information on the
work done in the country for protection of economic, social and
cultural rights and relevant achievements gained since submission of
the fist report.
The Committee welcomed the inclusion of top-ranking government
officials in the delegation and highly valued its members’
irrefragable answers to the questions raised.
In the course of the visit, Mr. Khalafov also met with Director
General of the UN’s Geneva office Mr. S. Ordzhonikidze, High
Commissioner Mrs. Arbour, President of the International Committee of
the Red Cross Mr. Kellenberger and Foreign Minister of Belarus Mr.
Martynov. The meetings were focused on the settlement of the
Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, human rights
protection in Azerbaijan, bilateral cooperation other issues.

RIA Novosti, Russia
Nov 19 2004
EUROPEAN UNION’S EXPERIENCE USEFUL FOR CIS
BERLIN, November 19 (RIA Novosti, Taras Lariokhin) – The European
Union’s experience is useful to the CIS countries, Deputy Foreign
Minister Vladimir Chizhov told RIA Novosti in Berlin where the 10th
European forum, Vision of Europe, organized by the BMW Herbert Quant
foundation, opened on Friday.
The EU has existed for more than 50 years and some of its experience
can be of use to the CIS, Mr. Chizhov said. According to him,
developing cooperation between the CIS and the EU does not compete
with cooperation within the CIS.
“These processes do not conflict with each other, they are not in
opposition,” he said. “They build an objective foundation for
interaction between the CIS and the EU as organizations.”
The main purpose of the conference is cooperation between CIS and EU
countries. Debates on the topics, “The EU and the CIS – Contours of
New Economic Cooperation,” and “Europe – New Vision?” will be held
during the two-day meeting.
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan, Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev,
the foreign ministers of many CIS countries and representatives of EU
countries will attend the forum.
Mr. Chizhov is representing Russia at the forum.

Glendale News Press
LATimes.com
Nov 19 2004
Getting versed in theater
Glendale resident turns Armenian poetry into English play for
Barnsdall Gallery Theatre.
By Josh Kleinbaum, News-Press and Leader
GLENDALE – Anahid Keshishian is quick to point out that her latest
stage venture is not a poetry reading, even though the actors will be
reading poetry.
“It’s very theatrical, it’s very visual,” said Keshishian, the
creator and director of “They Were Poets,” a play featuring Armenian
poetry translated into English. “It’s a risky thing to do, taking
poems and making them into theater, because it’s an emotional roller
coaster. They go from the jubilee of a wedding to a funeral, and then
to erotic love songs. The themes are chained together.”
“They Were Poets” debuted at Hollywood’s Barnsdall Gallery Theatre
earlier this month. Another performance is scheduled for 8 p.m.
Saturday at the theater, 4800 Hollywood Blvd., and the show could be
extended another week or two.
Keshishian, a Glendale resident, teaches Armenian Language and
Literature at UCLA. Three years ago, she recruited a group of her
students to form Arena Productions, a Glendale-based nonprofit group
that aims to bring innovative performances to the Los Angeles area.
“They Were Poets” includes a cast of 13, mostly Armenians and
students or former students.
“It was something that has never been done before, and I don’t know
if it’ll ever be done again,” said Ashot Tadevosian, a member of the
cast. “Armenian culture remains among Armenians. It really never gets
out and is never presented to other nationalities. For it to be
recognized, this is the best way to do it – to translate it into a
language like English. A lot of people speak English.”
The play includes 22 poems with many from well-known Armenian poets,
but Keshishian did not necessarily pick their best-known works.
“It was a really interesting concept in that they did take these
amazing poems and translate them into English and put them to music,”
said Teni Khachaturian, who saw the play Nov. 13. “The combination of
the two things was really powerful.”
Tickets are $20 and are available by calling 818-240-7080, or by
e-mail at [email protected].