ARMENIA’S PARTICIPATION IN PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS MUST BE COORDINATED WITH PARTNERS
Regnum, Russia
Sept 9 2006
“Decision on Armenia’s participation in the peacekeeping mission in
Lebanon has to be taken in coordination with geopolitical partners,”
chairman of opposition party The Constitutional Right Union, Armenian
parliament member Hrant Hachatryan at a press conference on Sep 9.
The oppositionist, however, did not specify Armenia’s geopolitical
partners in this issue, REGNUM correspondent reports.
“When Armenia first took decision to participate in a peacekeeping
mission at a state level, I pointed to the problems that we were
consequently to face. Participating in peacekeeping operations is
an important part of geopolitical technologies. By plugging into the
system, Armenian authorities have taken up a serious responsibility,”
Khachatryan stated.
He says he does not rule out the possibility of Armenia’s sending
her peacekeepers to Lebanon. “In each particular case, an individual
decision has to be taken on the issue,” he remarked.
Armenian peacekeepers joined in 2004 the peacekeeping mission in
Kosovo as a part of a Greek battalion. From January 2005, Armenian
servicemen have been a part of a Polish peacekeeping division in Iraq.

CURRENT MID-EAST CONFUSION BRINGS HISTORIANS BACK TO OTTOMANS
Zaman Online, Turkey
Sept 9 2006
The Middle East experienced its most peaceful and glorious years
during the Ottoman Empire.
Lands sacred to Muslims, Christians and Jews enjoyed peace and comfort
for nearly 400 years.
However, the region has not experienced such stability and harmony
since the fall of the Ottoman Empire nearly a century ago.
With the recent crises in the Middle East, historians have focused
their attention on the Ottomans.
With the forthcoming 15th Turkish History Congress (TTK) to be held
next week, 750 foreign experts have submitted statements and articles.
Responding to Zaman’s questions, Prof. Yusuf Halacoglu, chair of
the Turkish History Council, said: “That the lands in the Middle
East previously belonged within the domains of the Ottoman Empire
encourages historians to study more.”
Foreign scientists are eager to present their statements on Turkish
history during the 15th TTK.
Only 350 of the statements have been approved in the congress.
The participation demand derived from increasing curiosity about
Turkey and the Ottomans from historians.
Halacoglu remarked that they had to reduce the number of historians
from 750 to 310 due to the limited time.
The chair of TTK noted that the participants know both the Ottoman
Turkish language and contemporary Turkish.
During the congress, the presentations will cover several different
topics, and experts will be able to express their views freely,
Halacoglu stated.
Controversial issues like the Armenians and missionary work will also
be discussed in the congress.
Halacoglu claimed there might also be people backing the Armenian
genocide, and added, “They should base their claims on firm ground
because we have our own information to refute their claims.”

FALSE ARMENIAN MAPS CLAIMING TO KARABAKH AND NAKHCHIVAN ON SALE IN CHINA’S TAIWAN AND HONG KONG
Today, Azerbaijan
Sept 9 2006
“False maps, globes and school textbooks showing Azerbaijani regions
-Nakhchivan and Karabakh- as Armenian territories are on sale in East
and Southeast Asia,” said Akbar Huseynli, an Azerbaijani living in
Hong Kong.
He told APA that these school facilities are sold in Hong-Kong,
Shanghai and Taiwan.
“African, European, Arabian nations and even Armenians have a number
of economic and cultural societies in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Most of
people living here are unaware of Azerbaijanis and Azerbaijan.”
He said that articles on Azerbaijani oil have recently spread in
media but Southeast Asia is not well known here.
“The reason may be that Taiwan has no political-economic ties
with Azerbaijan. It is a pity that Azerbaijan plays no part in the
activities of the most competitive trade center.”
He regretted that there is no Azerbaijani Diaspora in Southeast Asia
while there are about 17 diasporas in Belgium and the Netherlands. A
lot of Azerbaijani businessmen are active in China but they have not
gathered together to form a Diaspora.
URL:

AZERBAIJAN INCLUDED CLAUSE REGARDING NK CONFLICT IN DECLARATION OF BAKU CONFERENCE OF OIC TOURISM MINISTERS
Author: S.Agayeva
TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Sept 9 2006
Azerbaijan included a clause regarding Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
in the declaration of Baku conference of Tourism Ministers of OIC
(Organization of Islamic Conference), the Minister of Culture and
Tourism of Azerbaijan Abulfaz Garayev told journalists, Trend reports.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will be once again delivered to the
attention of the representatives of Islamic countries, the minister
stressed. Azerbaijani side will present the facts of destroying
the historical and cultural values of Azerbaijan in result of this
conflict.

FALSE ARMENIAN MAPS CLAIMING TO NK AND NAKHCHIVAN ON SALE IN TAIWAN AND HK
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Sept 9 2006
“False maps, globes and school textbooks showing Azerbaijani
regions-Nakhchivan and Karabakh- as Armenian territories are on sale
in East and Southeast Asia,” Akbar Huseynli, an Azerbaijani living
in Hong-Kong, told APA.
He said that these school facilities are sold in Hong-Kong, Shankhay
and Taiwan.
“African, European, Arabian nations and even Armenians have a number
of economic and cultural societies in Hong-Kong and Taiwan. Most of
people living here are unaware of Azerbaijanis and Azerbaijan”.
He said that articles on Azerbaijani oil have recently spread in
media but Southeast Asia is not well known here.
“The reason may be that Taiwan has no political-economic ties
with Azerbaijan. It is a pity that Azerbaijan plays no part in the
activities of here- the most competitive trade center”.
He regretted that there is no Azerbaijani Diaspora in Southeast Asia
while there are about 17 diasporas in Belgium and the Netherlands. A
lot of Azerbaijani businessmen are active in China but they have not
gathered together to form a Diaspora”.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

KIDS’ ECO-CAMP HIGHLIGHTS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Source: World Vision Middle East/Eastern Europe office (MEERO)
Reuters AlertNet, UK
Sept 9 2006
Children learn through fun and games at the Eco-Camp
World Vision MEERO,
Twenty four children from six villages in an ecologically devastated
region of Lori in north Armenia, heard how their communities’ precious
forests are disappearing at an alarming rate during an ecology camp
in late August.
Experts say some 30% of trees in Lori were illegally felled for
heating and construction purposes during the last decade.
‘This region used to be very rich in forests, and it suffered most
from people’s barbarity. Youth today don’tknow how long it takes for
a sapling to grow into a tree, have no idea about the environmental
disaster they face in future,’ said Marat Manukian, Lori ADP acting
manager.
[rquotebox] An estimated 15% of forests are cut in Armenia for heating
and construction purposes each year. [rquotebox] Forests covered 25%
of Armenia at the beginning of the 20th century but now only 8% to 9%
of the nation is forested. An estimated 15% of forests are cut in
Armenia for heating and construction purposes each year.
Organized by Lore Eco-Club NGO with the support from World Vision,
the eco-camp aimed to raise awareness about environmental issues and
find solutions through interactive games and presentations.
The participants were the children who have previously participated
in seminars on environmental issues and won a composition contest.
Together with ten local and two Peace Corps volunteers they learned
about water turnover of water, desertification, the provisions of
Orhus Convention and the importance of preserving the environment.
‘We believe these children will return to their villages and educate
their peers. We hope to see more people like us, people who care for
the environment and understand its importance for the development of
our region’, says Manya Melikjanyan, the president of Lore Eco-Club.
The camp was held near the village of Gyulagarak, where members of
Lore recently discovered massive, unauthorized woodcutting and raised
a clamour among the international organizations and governmental
bodies. As a result, the felling was stopped and the forest of relic
pine-trees will be preserved.
[lquotebox] We do hope that unauthorized tree felling will be reduced,
if we join efforts and educate people. [lquotebox] Sona Vardumyan,
22, a volunteer from Stepanavan, said those who plan wood cuttings and
all the population are now on the alert. ‘We do hope that unauthorized
tree felling will be reduced, if we join efforts and educate people’,
she adds.
Lore Eco-Club NGO was established in 1999 to implement environmental
and health programs. World Vision and the club have been organizing
seminars on environmental issues, publish booklets, monitor the Lori
woodlands and plant trees since April, 2006.

JORDAN EAGER TO DEVELOP COOPERATION WITH AZERBAIJAN IN TOURISM SECTOR
Author: S.Agayeva
TREND Information, Azerbaijan
Sept 9 2006
Jordan intends to develop cooperation with Azerbaijan in the sphere
of tourism, Farrukh al-Habibi, the Jordanian Minister for Tourism
and Antiquary, told journalists on 9 September after a meeting with
Abulfaz Garayev, the Azerbaijani Minister for Culture and Tourism.
Azerbaijan ahs a rich political potential, he underlined, noting his
country’s intention in the expansion of cooperation with Azerbaijan
in this sphere.
The Minister stressed that it is planned to develop a project on
cooperation. In the near future this project will be submitted to the
Azerbaijan for consideration. The Minister hopes that the cooperation
will be mutually profitable for two countries.
In respect to the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict Farrukh
al Habibi noted that Jordan was interested in the peaceable resolution
of the conflicts.

ARIS KAZINYAN: “OWN GAME” OF MIKHAIL SAAKASHVILI AND ARMENIAN FACTOR
Regnum, Russia
Sept 9 2006
Aris Kazinyan – expert of the Caucasus analytical center
On Sept 1 Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili appeared with a very
curious statement. While speaking in Sagarejo, he said that Russia is
pressuring Armenia into adopting an anti-Georgian policy. At least,
that’s how (and in no other way) one should understand his following
sentence: “Russia has finally closed the customs house in Lars; and
closed it not only for us, but also for Armenia, whose cargoes have
been going through Lars, because it tells Armenia too: let’s carry out
some plans together.” Saakashvili did not care to specify what “plans”
(perhaps, because there was nothing to specify) he was talking about,
however, Saakashvili’s “Armenian emphasis” is quite symptomatic as
such. What made him appear with such a tactless (in every respect)
statement?
Saakashvili is hardly aware of what exactly the “relevant”
Armenian-Russian talks are about; of course, we do not doubt the
competence and awareness of the Georgian President, but the whole
point is that Moscow and Yerevan are not plotting anything against
Tbilisi. Anyway, Saakashvili appears to be sure of, at least, the
present Armenian authorities; dwelling on the subject of imaginary
Russian pressure on Armenia, he notes: “Naturally, nobody will agree
to this, but such a policy – of pressure on Armenia over Georgia –
is present!”
It may also happen – it may well be so – that the imperative of the
Georgian President – “naturally, nobody will agree to this” – has no
specific addressee and is just a preventive move. We can see this in
his following statement: “Nobody has ever succeeded through slavery.
Only proud, self-respecting countries succeed – countries like Poland,
Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, who did the same a few years ago and
have become successful European states. I don’t want to name a few
other countries who are being led by those forces and are beggars
and, today, they are as impoverished as they were before.” Let’s
not conjecture what Saakashvili meant; the more important point is
that Saakashvili’s speech in Sagarejo – and the quite unexpected –
at first glance – address to the Armenian issue – perfectly fits into
the context and logic of his present policy.
First of all, we should note that the process of ethnic consolidation
of the Kartvelian nations populating Georgia (in the scale and content
officially proclaimed by Tbilisi) is yet far from completion.
Georgian citizens – representatives of the Kartvelian group
of the Caucasian language family – are not objectively a single
ethno-political community and are quite diverse in terms of traditions,
culture, language, mentality and the perception of the very concept of
“Homeland.” For quite a long period in history, there was almost no
consolidating ethnonyme in Georgia; even today, people representing
the Kartvelian group do not identify themselves according to the
state terminology. The diversity of dialects: Gurian, Imeretian,
Lechkhumian, Rachian, Kartlian, Kakhetian, Pshavian, Meskhetian,
Ingiloian and some others and the circumstance that Megrels (in
particular) speak their own language reflect not so much the purely
linguistic peculiarities of those groups as the extent of difference
in their traditions, mentality and values.
Particularly, the biggest Kartvelian group, Megrels, call themselves
not “Kartvelians” but “Margali” and their country (their historical
area – Homeland) – “Samargalio.”
It is especially important to note that, from the ancient times
till the first half of XIX, the western and eastern parts of the
Kartvelian group had very little contact with one another. The Surami
Range dividing the territory of Georgia into two parts was a kind
of Great Dividing Range between two worlds, and this fact has given
rise to such concepts as “Amiereti” – the country behind the range –
and Imiereti – the country before the range (like Ciscaucasia and
Transcaucasia). It was exactly due to this historical division that
the western Kartvelians are initially called “Imeretians.” But, in
fact, Imeretians are also Gurians (who call themselves “Guruli”),
Lechkhumians, Rachians, etc. Megrels live farther to the west and
have always been closer to Abkhazians than to Gurians or Imeretians.
Eastwards of the Surami Range was the land of the eastern sub-groups
– mostly Kartlians and Kakhetians, who have not historically had
close contacts with the western Georgians, not mentioning Megrels,
Abkhazians or Svans.
Due to this peculiar logic of historical development, the Kartvelian
group does not now have a single approach to the concept of
“Homeland.” This is a very important aspect of the problem we are
considering – this aspect allows us to see how much interested the
present-day population of the Republic of Georgia can actually be in
“fighting and dying” for Abkhazia or South Ossetia. The foundations of
the nationalist ideology were laid by public figures Ilia Chavchavadze
and Akaky Tsereteli in late 19th century. It was exactly they who
tried to give the local concept of “Homeland” a larger – mass –
scale. And it was they who established a certain tradition: the factors
consolidating the nation are based not so much on (the assertion of)
the national – all-Kertvelian values – but on the search for the
image of “extra-Kartvelian” enemy. Particularly, in his works Ilia
Chavchavadze chose Armenians as “an enemy.” “The Armenian choice”
of Chavchavadze was due mostly to the fact that, unable to adjust
themselves to the development of capitalist relations, the Georgian
noblemen were forced to sell their estates to rich Armenian merchants.
What really matters in this context is not so much the ethnicity of
the “external enemy” as the very ideological existence of such an
image. By the way, this ideology has lived up to now. The key weapon
of the Georgian parties in the first quarter of the 20th century,
this ideology predetermined the logic of the development of the
national life, and the First Georgian Republic (1918-1920) was also
based on the vector of United and Indivisible Georgia. At the same
time, it should be noted that in 20th century this ideology failed to
go outside the activities of the political elite and to grow into a
national (all-Kartvelian) feeling. Still, as we have already said,
the process of consolidation of the Kartvelian nations populating
Georgia (in the scale and content proclaimed by Tbilisi) is far from
completion. The political elite of new Georgia has failed to make the
Abkhazian problem a consolidating – all-Kartvelian – factor. People
have failed to see what exactly they must sacrifice themselves for.
And even the western Georgians, who still have mutual problems, have
refused to unite “for the sake of Abkhazia.” Even more, in the most
concerned Megrel community, we can see diametrically opposite moods –
one part of Megrels is definitely closer to Abkhazians.
The historical “psychology of feudal principalities” in Georgia is
traditionally the most influential internal political factor in the
country. Even more, it is exactly this psychology that gives birth to
leaders of “national scale,” whose political image reflects not only
the specificity of “own nation” but also the traditional separatism of
feudal princes. In this light, it should be noted that the concept of
“separatism” the Georgian authorities keep applying to Abkhazia and
South Ossetia is much more applicable to the lifestyle and traditional
mentality of the Kartvelian society. The separatism of feudal princes
has actually taken deep roots in the multi-layer Georgian soil, and the
modern history proves this mentality to be quite viable. It is typical
of almost every politically (publicly) significant figure in Georgia,
irrespective of his psychological, moral or intellectual image. It
is quite noteworthy that, right after his political fiasco, the first
Georgian president Zviad Gamsakhurdia proclaimed the independence of
the Megrel-Abkhazian Republic. And even this rare historical example
is just the top of the iceberg of Georgian contradictions that is
drifting around the scattered “principalities” of Sakartvelo.
As we have already noted, besides the factor of linguistic isolation
of the Kartvelian society, there is also another nuance that
does not let the Abkhazian and South Ossetian problems become a
consolidating factor. The Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, just
like the Republic of Georgia, internationally recognized within its
territory, is a kind of empire, and the struggle of the country’s
leadership for Abkhazia is more like a colonial than patriotic war (in
fact, it is a war of robbers – it’s enough remembering the figures of
“the leaders of the Georgian home guards”). This is a very important
circumstance – as colonial wars more often shatter and even decay the
rear than consolidate it. With no all-national concept of “Homeland” in
Georgia, the local authorities still apply feudal ways of territorial
administration. What we could see during the civil war was exactly
a feudal rule; at a certain moment, the confrontation was very much
like the squabble of “feudal princes” – the only difference was that
the new rulers of the territories were not noblemen but criminals.
Emzar Kvitsiani is a typical representative of the Pleiad of
“Georgian feudal lords” of the epoch of independence. That’s why the
acting Georgian authorities tend to qualify almost every de facto
disobedient administrative-territorial unit as “a bed of criminal
structures.” And they do this irrespective of the extent of their own
corruption. In this light, we would like to remind you the words of
the well-known Georgian historian Berdzenishvili, who wrote in 1937:
“Feudal Sakartvelo (Georgia) has never fully embraced the concepts of
‘Abkhazia,’ ‘Kartli,’ ‘Kakheti,’ ‘Somkheti’ and the title of the King
of United Georgia has never turned into a formula with historical
content.”
The present Georgian President sees himself in the historical
chronicles standing beside the most respected monarchs of the past.
His fixed idea is to restore the territorial integrity of the
Georgian state and, more importantly, to resolve the historical
internal Kartvelian conflicts. He truly imagines himself to be
the monarch of United Georgia. This is a very important nuance –
a nuance that must be always kept in mind; the present Georgian
President is capable of any most unexpected and thoughtless action:
he is really unsurpassed in giving political surprises. He can take
aback even the most sophisticated technologists; the ace of political
intrigue, feudal lord Aslan Abashidze, was unable to oppose anything
(constructive) to the irrationalism of Mikheil Saakashvili; the
President is illogical and sure of being the chosen one. He really
believes that his destination is to unite Great Georgia. Being the US’
protege, he is not like his “nest brothers” – Viktor Yushchenko or
Alexander Milinkevich, who are being actively built up by the masters
of Hammer and Angle Bar; unlike them, Saakashvili has the Idea. The
first thing that comes into mind is the famous phrase: “If Garibaldi
had not been a Mason, Italy would not have united.” That’s probably
how Saakashvili interprets his position of a “protege” – at least,
for the time being.
The first Georgian President also felt himself as a kind of missionary,
but, among other things, he lacked extravagance: pedantic Zviad was
not a trouble maker. He clearly saw that his country was “a patchwork
blanket” and realized that this mosaic posed a real threat to the
idea of United Georgia. At first, he also tried to implant the idea
of Common and United Homeland into the minds of all the Kartvelians
and traveled the whole Sakartvelo for this purpose; emotionally
restrained, seaside Megrel, he praised Kakhetia as the first wine
grower. “Demographically, Kakhetia has always been a mono-national
region, and Georgians have always been a majority here,” he said in
the Kakhetian village of Akhalsopeli in 1989.
“Today, we are facing a serious problem. Tatars, Armenians and
Ossetians have risen to their feet. We must save from foreigners
Kakhetia – our holy land!” Could Gamsakhurdia imagine then that
some few years later he would be forced to rise with the idea of a
Megrel-Abkhazian Republic?
Today, there are no grounds for speaking about serious prerequisites
for changing the state structure exactly as a mechanism consolidating
the nation, especially as there was almost no concept of “the King
of All Georgia” in Georgia’s history; at the time of the signing of
the Treaty of Georgievsk (in Aug 1783) Irakly II was called the King
of Kartli-Kakheti. The authority of the Georgian King has never been
a consolidating force as people in other regions swore allegiance
to other rulers – the King of Imeretia and others; in fact, the
restoration of monarchy in the disintegrated Georgian society may
disintegrate the Georgian state.
President Saakashvili, who is really daydreaming of a Place in the
chronicles of the Georgian history (certainly, next to the most
outstanding rulers), is going to solve this problem too; of course,
not as a King but as the ruler of “All Georgia.” He openly views the
period of his accession to “the presidential throne” in the context
of the events of early XIX. The starting point for him is 1801 when
the western Georgian Kingdom was abolished and annexed to Russia. The
supporters of the ambitious President consider the following 205
years as the “frozen interval” of the national life.
In this context, we would like to point to the speech of the advisor of
the Georgian president, former prime minister and MP of Estonia Mart
Laar: “The so-called ‘Russian peacekeepers’ are not keeping peace,
they are trying to keep the last fragments of the Russian Empire.” The
July 28 article in the Akhali 7 Dge daily is also quite symptomatic:
“It is exactly the strong powers that tell the other countries involved
in international relations how to play in the political game and
often decide in their stead. As a rule, small and weak countries are
‘oppressed’ in international relations. For such countries it is very
dangerous to be neighbor to a strong country as stronger neighbors
leave weaker countries no chance for maneuver or choice. Unfortunately,
Georgia is a small country neighboring on Russia – this is our ‘gift
of fortune.’ Russia’s policy on the Caucasus has not changed. Czarism
is still Russia’s ideology. This crossroads of the world civilization
is still the axis of the Russian neo-imperialism, and Georgia is part
of this axis. For years Russia has refused to put up with the lost
of this rebellious country. They can’t put up with the fact that our
small country is showing resistance to Great Russia. Russia has failed
to enslave Georgia even though for many years it has been pressuring
our country economically and supporting separatist regimes.”
It is noteworthy that the emphasis on the year 1801 (just like on
the Treaty of Georgievsk) goes well together with Saakashvili’s
world-view; it allows him to kill several birds at once: to
demonstrate his ambitions and succession to royal traditions, to
present the Georgians as a chosen noble society (thereby, increasing
discrimination against other non-Kartvelian citizens), to show why
Georgia has lost its independence – because of Russia. Each of these
vectors is a doctrine for a special study – a self-sufficient policy –
but only taken together, do they form the “effect of Saakashvili.”
The policy to blame Russia for the loss of the Georgian throne
fits well into the context of the present developments in Georgia;
the American strategy of expansion into the region requires further
aggravation of Russian-Georgian relations, and this fits well with the
mood and ambitions of Mikheil Saakashvili. The July 5 2006 meeting of
the US and Georgian presidents resulted in George Bush’s statement
that each state has the right to carry out military actions against
radical forces with a view to protect its own security and sovereignty.
Even though this statement was made in connection with the Middle
East events and was aimed at justifying the policy of Israel, it was
equally referred to Georgia. Some sources say that this issue was even
discussed during the Washington meeting. “This meeting was absolutely
historic for Georgia,” Saakashvili said. “I am sure it was, and the
Georgian people will certainly see its results. It is absolutely
clear that the US will support our struggle for freedom till the
end.” We should note that, when saying “struggle for freedom,”
the Georgian President also means the restoration of Georgia’s
territorial integrity.
It is especially important to note that, when speaking about the
right of each country to protect its independence and security by
any means, George Bush emphasized the destructive influence on one or
another region by exactly the forces supporting terrorism. As early
as July 9 – just four days after the meeting – a terrorist act in
Tskhinvali claimed the life of South Ossetian Security Secretary Oleg
Alborov; two weeks later the Georgian Parliament adopted a resolution
“On Peacekeeping Forces in the Conflict Zones”; and on July 21 the
Georgian President dismissed his State Minister for Conflict Resolution
Giorgy Khaindrava. The next step was the “anti-criminal operation in
Kodori Gorge.”
The royal hunt for birds has revealed one more target for the
indignant Georgian “monarchists” – Armenians. In the context of the
constantly discussed topic of 1801 and the policy of making an enemy
of Russia, the researchers cannot but point out that “the decree
on the liquidation of the Georgian throne was read out in Tiflis
(Tbilisi) by Armenian Iosif Argutinsky, and the first governor
general was Armenian general Lazarev.” In the first half of the
20th century Georgians began showing increasingly negative attitude
towards Armenians; they regarded Armenians as Russia’s proteges and
the heralds of the loss of the Georgian throne. The founder of the
Georgian nationalist ideology Ilia Chavchavadze wrote: “Armenian
scholars are standing their ground, they are seeking to get home in
a place they have never had home… they wish to convince everybody
that they allegedly have the historical right to live here.”
This idea runs through the nationalist ideology to these days. No
coincidence that during the “revolution of roses” certain
representatives of the Georgian nation, particularly, those from
the nobles, expressed concern for the presence of Armenian blood in
the veins of all the three leaders of the revolution; those times
were not easy for Saakashvili… “Christian Georgians have always
felt danger on the part of Armenians,” says the academic head of the
Russian Project of Jerusalem University, Dr. Dan Shapira. “Armenians
have lived in Georgia since the beginning of time. Even the capital
of Georgia, Tbilisi, has until recently been the Armenian city
and the key Armenian cultural center eastwards of Istanbul. Thus,
Jews have never been regarded in Georgia as a problem or threat –
the traditional place of ‘Jew’ was occupied by Armenians.”
In other words, anti-Semitism in Georgia has traditionally been
expressed in the form of Armeno-phobia. As we have already noted, the
Georgian President is trying to implant the idea of Common Homeland
in the minds of the Kartvelians and to make this a basis for a new
scale of values. Language is not a consolidating factor, that’s why
general consciousness of Homeland is given an exclusive role.
This is also important from pragmatic point of view; only if generally
conscious of their Homeland, will the Kartvelian people be able to
perceive the unprecedented achievements the acting president has made
in the last years – first of all, the establishment of control over
Ajaria and Abkhazian Svanetia. Otherwise, all his achievements will
look just a zero (in the general consciousness).
That’s why he is forced to regularly appear with the story about
notorious Armenian-Russian plot against Georgia in hope that the
factor of external enemy will consolidate the Georgian society. In
“his game” Mikheil Saakashvili actually needs nationalists.

DAVID CRUMM: ICONS OPEN NEW RELIGIOUS WORLDS
Free Press Columnist
Detroit Free Press, MI
Sept 9 2006
Free lectures to be given on Tuesday
This Madonna and child icon belongs to Bishop Nicholas Samra, a Melkite
Catholic clergyman who visited St. John Armenian Church recently.
Related articles:
~U If you go
~U Tell us what you think In our culture where image is everything,
local Orthodox and Catholic leaders are planning to showcase some of
the most powerful images human hands can create.
They’re icons, and it’s no coincidence that this ancient term for
sacred images also describes the little pictures on our computer
screens. At first glance, icons are merely pictures, but both kinds
of icons really are doorways to the forces hovering behind them.
In computers, icons open software from e-mails to databases. In
churches, icons are “visible images that open up the invisible world,”
said the Rev. Garabed Kochakian, an iconographer and the pastor of
St. John Armenian Apostolic Church in Southfield.
“Icons are channels, like windows to God,” added the Rev. Dimitrie
Vincent, pastor of St. Thomas Albanian Orthodox Church in Farmington
Hills. Like Kochakian, he is an artist as well as a priest.
The two were among nine religious leaders who met recently at St.
John to plan a joint icon showcase Tuesday at an Orthodox church
in Livonia.
“Icons really are symbols of what unites us as Christians,” Vincent
said last week.
Catholics also are getting more interested in them, said Michael
Hovey, an ecumenical adviser to Detroit Cardinal Adam Maida. “In the
past year, I’ve visited at least 60 of our Catholic parishes and I’m
impressed at the growing number that have icons,” Hovey said.
Dan McAfee, the director of Maida’s office for Christian worship,
said, “There was a time after our Second Vatican Council when people
were eager to clear out everything in our churches that might seem
extraneous. People removed lots of statues and paintings. But I think
people are realizing that, in some cases, we may have gone too far.”
The growing fascination with these strangely flat-looking images of
saints and biblical scenes may seem puzzling. The rest of the world’s
media are racing in other directions, like sending clips of movies
to the tiny screens of cell phones.
Antiquity is part of the allure of icons. Traditional Christian
stories say that the gospel writer St. Luke also painted icons.
Centuries-old tales of miracles surround many of them. But icons are
much more than history lessons.
After the meeting, Kochakian took guests to see a large icon that
he designed for a wall of his church. It’s a mosaic made of colored
glass and gold leaf, showing St. Gregory the Illuminator, the first
head of the Armenian Church about 1,700 years ago.
As guests approached the mosaic, they saw a tall, bearded man in red
robes standing before a snow-capped mountain in Armenia, holding a
model of a church. Then, as guests moved closer, they could see a
drama unfolding in the background. A fist seemed to emerge from the
sky, wielding a flaming hammer.
“In Armenian tradition, that’s the hand of Christ emerging to strike
the ground with a golden hammer to mark the location of our first
cathedral,” Kochakian said.
There was more: The saint’s eyes seemed to fix on viewers wherever
they stood, silently asking what each one thought of these images.
Such all-seeing eyes are the trademark of this sacred art, McAfee
said. “As you approach an icon, you find that, as much as you look
at the icon, the icon looks back out at you.”
The icon of St. Gregory was merely an arrangement of colored glass
and yet the saint’s eyes seemed alive with the question: So, what do
you think of this spiritual world?
Then, suddenly it dawned on at least this visitor: Our contemporary
fascination with asking for each person’s viewpoint on the spiritual
world is really as ancient a practice as icons themselves.

FILM “YOL”: A MONUMENT TO HUMAN ENDURANCE
By Jalal Jonroy
KurdishMedia, UK
Sept 9 2006
Yilmaz Guney (1 April 1937 – 9 September 1984)
When shown at the Cannes Film Festival ’82, YOL received a standing
ovation and won the coveted first prize. YOL is a Kurdish drama made
by Yilmaz Guney -a Kurd- while serving 19 year prison sentence in
Turkey. Y. Guney escaped prison and now lives in Paris where he and
other Kurdish artists in exile have formed (The Kurdish Institute)
to help save the Kurdish culture – a much neglected and maligned
treasure of mankind’s cultural heritage.
On the surface, YOL relates the sufferings, the loves, and the hope
of five Kurdish prisoners while on temporary leave. On the way -YOL-
to their homeland Kurdistan, occupied by fascist military Turkey,
the film slowly and sensitively reveals the terrible operation
and hardships of the Kurdish nation. YOL is a long harsh road into
Kurdistan -deliberately kept backward socially and economically, by
successive Turkish governments. Poverty, bad transportation, luck
of schools and hospitals (witness the dentist’s scene), deprived
children smoking cigarettes, villagers crammed in tiny mud houses,
and farmers still having to work with antiquated tools are all shown
in dramatic contrast to the purity and natural beauty of Kurdistan.
The only signs of 20th century progress the Kurds see daily are the
machine guns of Turkish soldiers!
The five prisoners soon find themselves in the greater and more
oppressive prison of Kurdistan. Through lack of education, the Kurds
are held under and old feudal system with its blood feuds and complex
codes of honor -for example with the respect to adultery. Today,
this medieval web coupled with religious ignorance, and compounded by
Turkish political and economic oppression, reduces much of Kurdistan
to a rigid backward social structure with both men and especially
women trapped as victims. (Witness during the snow scenes the unspoken
painful dilemma of husband and wife who had “betrayed” him martially.)
To ease its exploitation, Turkey dupes the people with confused
brand of religious and archaic moral standards, hence, for example,
the mass hysteria and the tragic scene of the train.
YOL is a compassionate journey through Kurdistan kept under a permanent
state of siege by Turkey since the dawn of this century.
Here, over one and a half million Kurds (and similar numbers of
defenseless Armenians) have been massacred. Persecution, tortures,
gallows, mass deportations, aerial bombardments, napalm, poison
gas, mass trials, organized terror, forced assimilations, and total
destruction of towns and villages are marked in blood on Kurdish
mountains as the unwritten history of Kurdistan. To talk about basic
human rights would be futile, when Turkey, in order to add insult,
calls the Kurdish nation “Mountain Turks”.
To this date, mere speech in Kurdish or Kurdish costume carries a
mandatory prison sentence! Of course, since twelve million Kurds in
Turkey are not supposed to exist, any mention of even the word Kurd
is banned, let alone Kurdish culture! (Last March, a non-Kurdish
sociologist, Ismail Besikci, was sentenced to ten years for merely
describing the Kurds as a separate ethnic group.)
Turkey, a member of NATO, receives over one million dollars a day from
the United States as military aid. The corrupt fascist Turkish junta
uses much of this to destroy Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, and liberal
Turkish people. As recently as last May, Turkey in conspiracy with
Iraqi military fascists staged a back-handed attack on Iraqi Kurdistan,
and burned Kurdish villages. Two thousand Kurds were captured, most
of whom are now under torture in the already over-crowded Turkish
prison camps.
Robbed of its oil, food produce, and other natural resources by its
more powerful neighbors, Kurdistan lies in a singularly strategic
position -between the Middle East, Russia, and Europe. Due to this
quirk of fate, Kurdistan has always been the battlefield of aggressors
with Kurds used as worthless pawns in a brutal game of greed and power.
Today, the fascist governments of Iran, Turkey, and Iraq are
shamelessly ganging up to exterminate the Kurdish nation -something
no one has been able to do for 3000 years from Alexander the Great,
the Mongols, the Persian and Ottoman empires, to the British. The
Kurds are some 40 million people. Descendants of the ancient Medes,
they have lived in Kurdistan long before the Turks existed.
YOL is a monument to human endurance; to the sick and wounded
in Kurdish mountains; to thousands of lost orphans and homeless
families. YOL is a poem of tears and flowers dedicated to the bereaved
women and weeping mothers of Kurdistan.
If you add up the hardship of the freedom-loving peoples of El
Salvador, Vietnam, South Africa, Afghanistan, Palestine and Poland, it
may not equal the plight of the Kurdish nation whose very existence is
endangered. Yet ironically because Kurds are being massacred by Iran,
Turkey, and Iraq, and not directly by “white” or “big” powers such
as Russia or America, the Kurdish cause, though a unique tragedy,
does not get the media exposure of the support automatically given
to other national causes. How apt, even today, is the sad, age old
proverb: “Kurds have no friends”!
YOL is hymn to the unsung heroes of the Kurdish nation, who against all
odds and modern destruction machines, fight alone for the preservation
of their dignity, and identity. Form the heart of Kurdistan, YOL
is a gift of spirit and hope to the oppressed people everywhere in
the world.
Outside links KurdishMedia.com does not take the responsibility for
accuracy of the outside sources.