ARMENIA FORUM TO DISCUSS DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTRY RURAL REGIONS
by Tigran Liloyan
ITAR-TASS News Agency
September 18, 2006 Monday
The Armenia-Diaspora forum that will open in Yerevan on Monday will
discuss issues related to complex development of the country’s rural
areas, especially Armenia’s border settlements. Representatives of
Armenian communities of dozens of countries, heads of the Armenian
Church and all-Armenian organisations have arrived to attend it.
The forum that will be held for the third time “has become a kind of
constitutional structure in relations of the motherland with foreign
compatriots,” Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanyan said.
According to the official, “These relations are at a qualitatively
new level corresponding to the changed challenges of the time and
increased country’s potential.” This time the forum coincides with
the 15th anniversary of Armenia’s independence.
The Armenian foreign minister said that programmes of foreign donor
countries, international organisations, in particular, the World Bank,
as well as various organisations of the diaspora are also specified in
the guidelines of Armenian rural areas’ development (the US government
will provide to Armenian rural areas 250 million dollars within the
framework of the Millennium Challenge programme).
The Armenian government has chosen 20-25 from the country’s 150
remote settlements that need aid most of all, Oskanyan went on
to say. According to him, the developed programmes that will be
proposed for financing by the diaspora envisage the improvement
of infrastructure, creation of favourable conditions for sustained
development and involvement of the rural population in the process
of the projects’ implementation.
If the Armenian population comprises 3.2 million then over five
million Armenians live outside the republic. Out of this number 2.5
million Armenians live in Russia, about one million – in the United
States and 450,000 – in France.

THE RWANDAN DILEMMA VIS-A-VIS THE GENOCIDE
by The New Times
Africa News
September 17, 2006 Sunday
PART 1
Introduction
A dilemma can be defined as a state of uncertainty or perplexity
among competing options. The Rwandan dilemma vis-a-vis the Genocide,
which entailed the polarisation of Rwandans, is how to move forward
as one nation after the Genocide.
Rwanda as a nation has a long history of over 1000 years. It is a
joint project of Rwandans created through their chosen institutions
(Ubwami/Monarchy, Ubwiru/Constitution, Ubusizi/oral tradition,
Ingabo/Army, Ubucengeri/patriotism, etc). These institutions ensured
unity, stability and cohesion before colonisation.
On the other hand, colonialism completely re-engineered Rwanda into
different ‘races’ (Tutsi-Hamites, Hutu-Bantu, Twa-Pygmoids). This
racism was the root-cause of Rwanda’s tragedy that culminated into
the 1994 genocide.
The genocide process took one hundred years (1894-1994) beginning
with the first colonialist, and entailed entrenchment of negationisme
within the society. This came about in the colonial reconstruction of
the Rwandan society that forced Rwandans into their own self-denial
as one people, their heritage and historical social institutions
leading to the 1994 tragedy.
The dilemma, therefore, is whether Banyarwanda jointly own the tragedy
and bear its consequences. This dilemma can be accounted for by the
peculiarity of the Rwandan Genocide, which was between close relatives,
where siblings set upon each other and neighbour killed neighbour.
Contrasting it to the Holocaust or the Armenian genocide, the
Germans decimated the Jews and the Turks the Armenians. In both
these cases there is a socio-cultural difference between the victims
and perpetrators, as opposed to Rwanda which had no socio-cultural
difference between its people.
Therefore, while the Jews and the Armenians had a place to go to
after their genocides, Rwandans had nowhere to run to but live with
each other. Thus the resonance or echoes of polarity of Banyarwanda
after the genocide.
The Rwandan Genocide was possible through manipulation of the
traditional socio-cultural institutions such as the monarchy, Ingabo,
traditional media – the drums and horns to rally the populace for
a common cause. These included the monarchical decrees (guca iteka
or gushyira ingoma ku karubanda) that can be equated to presidential
decrees during the Genocide that compelled the populace to join in the
act. The use of Radio Television Libre de Mille Collines (RTLM) during
the genocide can be equated with the use of the traditional horn for
mobilisation for war and hunting expeditions (umuhigo, kwasira etc.).
Negationisme
The Rwandan dilemma begins with the denial of the Genocide. According
to Dr. Gregory H. Stanton of Genocide Watch, negationisme or denial is
the final of the eight stages in the continuum that is the genocide
process. In the eight stages, Classification of the victims, their
negative Symbolisation and Dehumanisation form the first three.
These are followed by Organisation of the potential perpetrators;
Polarisation of the society into enemies and allies; Preparation and
mobilization of the population; before the Extermination and supposed
purification of the society.
The last stage is the negation or Denial of the genocide, but which
is manifest in every stage in the continuum. Negationisme itself is
an in-built mechanism in all the stages of the process to assure
oneself that nothing wrong is being done, and propel the actors
to the next stage. Thus negationisme and genocide in this sense go
hand-in-hand-they are like Siamese twins (ni umwana n’ingobyi).
Negationisme is therefore a dilemma because not all Rwandans accept the
fact of the genocide, which has become a way of life predicated on the
“we-they” predisposition; that is, we the Hutu and they the Tutsi and
vice versa, and therefore not Rwandans but enemies and allies. The
post-genocide military campaigns will suffice to illustrate this
polarisation.
After committing the Genocide at the urging of the genocidaire regime,
Rwandans were persuaded to vacate the country, seeing it as having
been taken over by alien invaders, and created the biggest refugee
influx in the world. In a bid to recapture power, the genocidaire
regime in exile reorganised itself in the Congo refugee camps to
launch armed attacks into Rwanda.
This created the first concrete manifestation of negationisme that
continues to this day. To begin with, the genocidaires transformed
humanitarian assistance to the Rwandan refugees in the Congo into
military hardware and embarked on what came to be known as Operation
Insecticide.
Operation Insecticide entailed genocidal incursions in Northwest and
Southwest of Rwanda between 1995 and 1996. Note the term “insecticide”,
which symbolised their continued extermination of the Inyenzi (Tutsi
coachroaches).
Operation Insecticide internationalised the Rwandan conflict, and would
form the basis for the forced return of the Rwandan refugees in late
1996 with the RPF/A pre-emptive attacks on the armed genocidaires in
the refugee camps, that would be followed by the overthrow of their
ally, President Mobutu, in May 1997.
In October 1997, insurgence operations started in earnest in Rwanda
beginning with what would come to be known as The First Operation
Alleluia, which targeted Congolese Tutsi refugees in Gisenyi and
climaxed with the Mudende massacres. The Second Operation Alleluia
targeted Goma and Gisenyi, and was partly “successful” in Goma with
the capture of arms from Katindo.
This was followed by Operations Amen and Odyssey in the DRC in June
and July of 1999 and 2000, respectively, but both of which failed
due to RPF/A counter-insurgency operations in the country.
In May and December 2001, Operation Oracle du Seigneur got underway in
Rwanda, only to be crushed by the RPF/A counter-insurgency operations
under the command of General James Kabarebe that resulted in the
capture of the Armee de Liberation du Rwanda (ALIR) Commander,
Col. Evariste Bemera and his Chief of Intelligence. This capture,
which included 1,762 insurgents, effectively marked the end of
insurgency inside Rwanda.
Women, both mothers and wives of the insurgents, played a crucial role
in ending the insurgency, by persuading their sons and husbands to
end the rebellion and join hands with the new government of national
unity. This is a testimony of the women having transcended the dilemma
of polarity.
However, in September and October 2003, the failed Operations
Trompete and Tabara took place from South Kivu and saw the return
to Rwanda of the top FDLR commanders in their denunciation of the
insurgencies. And beginning 2004 to date, Operation la Fronde (sling)
has been going on and is doomed to fail with the return of other top
commanders, including Seraphin “Mahoro” Bizimungu and more recently
Lt Col Nsanzabera.
Note the Christian insinuation of the genocidal attacks with the names
given to the insurgency operations, i.e., Alleluia, Amen, Oracle du
Seigneur (Oracle of the Lord), Trompete (suggesting Joshua’s trumpet
as he entered Jericho in the Old Testament), and la Fronde (evoking
David’s defeat of Goliath with the deadly sling).
These insinuations suggest the Christian God’s blessings, thus giving
weight and credence to the negationisme of the continued genocide. It
suggests that the Christian God is for the genocidal tendencies and
the purification of “Christian” Rwanda from the Tutsi “infidels”
who are also “inyenzi” (cockroaches).
This religious fanaticism and tendencies also evoked the medieval
Christian crusades that supposedly had God’s blessings. It is no
wonder that in their fanaticism these insurgents have been listed as
international terrorist groups due to their mindless breach of peace
and destabilization in the region. Such naming of the insurgency
activities demonstrate how Christianity can be perverted and used
to condone genocidal acts and other crimes against humanity, which
constitutes a Christian dilemma par excellence in Rwanda.
PART 2
The continued denial of the Genocide notwithstanding, who then
is responsible? Responsibility for the Genocide, according to the
German philosopher Karl Jaspers, can be distinguished between types
of guilt and degrees of responsibility. The question of guilt deals
with individual and collective responsibilities, with the individual
and his or her relationship to others and to society.
Drawing from his Nazi German experience of the Holocaust that saw
the decimation of six million Jews during the Second World War,
Jaspers distinguished between four different concepts of guilt,
namely: criminal, political, moral and metaphysical.
Criminal guilt is defined by the law and established through
courts of law. It is evidence-based on the act and conduct of the
suspect who ultimately bears individual responsibility. However,
in Rwanda criminal responsibility became an issue because of the
overwhelming numbers of the suspected perpetrators. The challenge
was how to prosecute the large numbers, leading to the enaction of
the law categorising the perpetrators and establishing the Gacaca
justice system. Resorting to the traditional justice system, Gacaca,
underscores Rwanda’s resilience.
The current challenge is universal acceptance of the Gacaca process
by all Rwandans, as evidenced by those who recently fled to Burundi
to escape it or those who seem to be forced to attend the Gacaca
sessions as in the case of Ruhengeri (Musanze).
Political guilt, according to Jaspers, encompasses the actions of the
government as well as of the governed. Citizens bear the consequences
of the actions of their governments. They are subject to the State’s
power and dependent on the order that the State creates. However,
Jaspers insisted that everybody has a responsibility for how he or
she is governed.
To that extent political guilt is shared among the governments and the
governed. It is determined by the winning candidate in an election
whose power and will to judge is only restrained by his sense of
justice, political foresight, and respect for natural and international
law. In this sense, political guilt becomes collective responsibility.
In the Rwandan context, this means that the First and Second
Republics, which paved the way for the Genocide, could not have
done it by themselves without the overwhelming electoral support of
the governed, who continually returned the leaders to power with an
absolute majority of, at times, 99.9%.
In this sense, therefore, the majority of the population shares in the
political guilt, hence the collective responsibility. The dilemma is
failing to accept this political reality, of which many Rwandans —
including Hutu, Tutsi and Twa — previously lived in acquiescence.
This is despite the fact that the Genocide was committed in the name
of the Hutu.
Note that the Genocide was a political project based on demographic
majority disguised as “democratic”, “republican” and “revolutionary”
(demokarasi ya Rubanda nyamwinshi yakandamijwe ikigobotora ingoyi ya
cyami na gihake).
On the other hand, Jaspers established the concept of individual
moral guilt, which he posited as an absolute condition that everyone
is morally responsible for his or her actions, regardless of the
circumstances. He explicitly argues that following orders does not
exculpate (absolve) any individual, including the military. Moral
guilt is established through one’s conscience and through discourse
with friends and neighbours.
The dilemma is that, despite the ascribed political guilt, which
is collective, it does not absolve one from his or her own moral
responsibility, which has to begin with individual introspection
and self-examination. This lack of individual introspection and
self-examination vis-a-vis taking the moral responsibility accounts
for the current criticism of the general leadership in Rwanda. An
example of this criticism can be seen in those leaders adversely
mentioned in Gacaca who have failed to take moral responsibility.
Finally, the solidarity between fellow humans created the possibility
of what Jaspers calls metaphysical guilt. The belief in one human race,
transcending nations, races and conditions make everyone share in the
responsibility for injustice in this world, in particular for crimes
that happen in our presence or with our knowledge. If we fail to do
everything in our power to stop this crime from happening, we share
in the guilt.
In the choice between doing everything to save others and being
destroyed in the process or giving up in the face of insurmountable
obstacles, the morally innocuous (not intended to harm) choice for
one’s own life still produces a sense of failure and guilt.
The Rwandan Genocide was witnessed by the whole world, which failed
to act. This inaction entailed not just the superpowers, but each and
every individual belonging to the human race who did not do anything
in their power to stop the Genocide.
The immediate dilemma is the continued presence of the genocidaires
on the rampage in the region with the knowledge of the world, despite
the limited efforts to disarm and apprehend them.
Ultimately, the enormity of the Rwandan Genocide is beyond any human
reckoning or understanding. Thus Jaspers, discussing the German
dilemma, also observes: “[T]here remains the shame of that which is
always present, impossible to discover, merely to be explored.”
Sloganeering or even mounting placards merely denouncing the ideology
that informed the Genocide (Ingengabitekerezo) does not help in
understanding the complexity of the Rwandan Genocide. It is merely
being caught up in the rut of political posturing without addressing
the Rwandan dilemma.
However, there are many suspects who have taken it upon themselves to
own up the Genocide. One of the most illustrative examples is that
of a suspect who was found guilty by the Gacaca on a lesser charge
of pillaging but declared himself guilty of the greater charge of
genocide, saying he could not live with the guilt, a clear example
of assuming moral responsibility.
PART 3
The first challenge to the leadership is the full understanding
of the complexity of the truth about the Genocide. There are some
truths, foremost of which is the truth about the unity of the Rwandan
nation. It is this truth that has all along eluded Rwandans, including
many Rwanda scholars, since the coming of the colonialists and has
been about the Rwandan identity and how Rwandans historically related
to each other.
It includes the truth about their social relations and the alleged Hutu
“historical wounds” that continue to impact on the current social
discourse. It is also the truth about the social categorization of
Rwandans into different “races”.
There is also the truth about colonial reconstruction of the Rwandan
society that forced Rwandans into their own self-denial as one people,
their heritage and historical social institutions. These distortions
of the truth form the bedrock of the Rwandan dilemma.
Understanding these complexities of the truth is the beginning of
the Rwandan reconciliation.
The second aspect of the truth is the reality of the Genocide, which
is about the actors – that is, the victims, the perpetrators and
bystanders, and their respective roles. It is about who died and
his or her profile, so that in the process we restore honour and
dignity to the victims who have otherwise been represented as mere
statistics. The question will be who died, who killed them and who
witnessed it? When did they die? Where, how and why were they killed?
And, finally, where was he or she ‘buried’?
Many victims of the Genocide keep on being discovered in the most
unlikely and indecent places, including abandoned pit latrines
or cemented foundations of buildings. Many witnesses, including
guilty pleaders, are not willing to disclose the whole truth about
the Genocide. They only reveal the information that favours them and
hide that which is needed to aid in the unravelling of the truth in
the justice process.
Diverse victimhood
Victimhood also applies to the perpetrators, because in their very
act of genocide they too were dehumanised and continue to live with
individual guilt and shame for their roles in it. Many are, therefore,
traumatised. The leadership challenge is to fully appreciate the
diversity of victimhood and its implications in post-genocide Rwanda.
With the Genocide encompassing different actors — namely the
perpetrators, the victims and bystanders — it is in the admission
of the truth and assuming moral responsibility of what happened and
the role played by each and everyone that the reality of the Genocide
may begin to unravel.
The expected thoroughness of the Gacaca process, including the
national judicial system and the Arusha-based ICTR, is to facilitate
the establishment of the truth and therefore the criminal guilt of
the suspects. However the major challenge is with the Gacaca process,
which is yet to be fully owned by Rwandans and usually tends to be
undermined by some in the international community.
Some of the detractors of Gacaca are using the same political antics
of mobilizing sections of the population (i.e., Butare) claiming that
the Gacaca is the beginning of a “Hutu” genocide in vengeance of the
1994 Tutsi genocide.
The other leadership challenge is about the leaders’ political
responsibility emanating from the Genocide. This essentially brings
the question of credibility of the leaders already adversely mentioned
in the Gacaca process, and why they should continue in office. The
leadership should take political responsibility by individually
introspecting and examining themselves. This is a moral challenge
many leaders are reluctant to face — it may seem that leadership in
Rwanda is all about gainful employment.
Many of these leaders take cover under collective political guilt,
which allows them to shun individual responsibility for their
alleged roles in the Genocide. It is because of the shame and
assumed collective guilt (i.e., I was not the only one, all of us
are implicated) that Genocide has almost become a taboo subject to
discuss. The fact that such leaders do not talk about the Genocide
makes them vulnerable to blackmail by their peers and rivals who
assume the moral high-ground in the “we-they” (Hutu-Tutsi) polarity.
The cover of collective political responsibility ceases to be once
one becomes a leader, as he or she must be vetted and therefore take
individual responsibility for any alleged wrongs to society. It
is for these reasons that the public continuously questions the
credibility of their leaders, for which the only way out is taking
moral responsibility. For such leaders, moral renewal can be achieved
by introspection and self-examination to confront whatever doubts
and pangs of conscience they may have experienced and reassure the
questioning public. The challenge is that most of these leaders
vehemently deny any guilt, collective or otherwise.
For those on the moral high-ground, they should live with the fact
that they too are politically guilty. If we accept that the Genocide
was a process that took a century to consummate, then most of the
Rwandans living today would not be exempt from political guilt. It
is this that underscores the collective ownership of the tragedy and
lays the foundation for national reconciliation.
Reconciliation
Another major objective of Gacaca, apart from seeking, acknowledging
and recognizing the truth, is to develop and promote reconciliation
within the divided nation of Rwanda.
Reconciliation can only become a reality once the above-mentioned
denials, dilemmas and challenges are overcome. Reconciliation
therefore will meaningfully be accomplished by going back to ubumwe
bw’ Abanyarwanda. As the African proverb goes, when you want to
solve disputes, you do not take a knife to cut, but a needle to
sew. A Kinyarwanda approximation of the proverb would be: uca urw’
abavandimwe ararama.
Basing it on the truth, and whatever the grievance, Gacaca provides
the forum to continually dialogue on the challenges facing Rwandans
and provides a framework for concessions for the sake of a united
nation. Rwandans, in other words, should emphasize their commonalities
rather than their imagined differences and focus all their efforts
on national development, which in itself is a conflict resolution
strategy par excellence.
Conclusion
Despite the Genocide and the polarity it engendered, there are many
instances where Rwandans have individually transcended the myth of
differences between Banyarwanda.
A good example is that of the illustrious Nyange school girls who
refused to be separated into Hutu allies and Tutsi enemies as ordered
by insurgents (Abacengezi) in 1997, and opted to die in solidarity
as Rwandans.
Another example is that of Zula Karuhimbi who received The Campaign
Against Genocide Medal (CGM) for having saved over 100 Rwandans during
the 1994 Genocide.
There is also the example of Rwanda Defence Forces (RDF) as a national
institution where former adversaries are working together, as opposed
to the sectarian Forces Armee Rwandais (FAR).
All in all, Rwanda has been “de-racializing” the society and being
all-integrative, so that citizenship is not based on descent but
residence as long as you subscribe to the “Rwandan dream”!
The article is based on a paper presented at the RDF Senior Officers
Seminar held on 24th and 25th August, 2006.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

KOCHARIAN CALLS INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF NK ARMENIA’S ‘NO. 1 TASK’
Associated Press Worldstream
September 18, 2006 Monday 4:48 PM GMT
President Robert Kocharian on Monday said international recognition
of Nagorno-Karabakh was Armenia’s top task.
Speaking at a forum of diaspora Armenians, Kocharian said “Our
position is this: the existence of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh
is an inarguable fact … An all-Armenian effort for the international
recognition of the NKR should be the number-one task for our nation.”
Nagorno-Karabakh is a region in Azerbaijan that has been under control
of Armenian and ethnic-Armenian Karabakh forces since a 1994 cease-fire
ended a separatist war. The region’s final status has not been worked
out, and years of talks under the auspices of OSCE mediators have
brought little visible result.
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev frequently states that his country
is prepared to try to re-exert control of the region through force.
On Monday, a group of Iranian businessmen were in Nagorno-Karabakh
to visit local enterprises and discuss trade prospects.
“The visit of the Iranian delegation to the republic
of Nagorno-Karabakh is a new step on the road to deepening
cooperation,” said Anushava Danelian, the prime minister of the
region’s internationally unrecognized government.
Since the end of the war, Nagorno-Karabakh has remained largely
isolated, connected to Armenia only by a road running through
Azerbaijani territory. Nagorno-Karabakh proper does not border Iran,
but its forces occupy adjacent Azerbaijani territory that abuts Iran.
Iran has become a significant trade partner for Armenia, since Turkey
and Azerbaijan closed their borders in protest of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict.

WHEN IRAQI CHRISTIANS VANISH, RELATIVES IN U.S. PAY THE PRICE
by: Kelly Thornton
Copley News Service
September 18, 2006 Monday 11:30 AM EST
B.E. was hoping for a call about a house-painting job. Instead, the
Iraqi immigrant living in El Cajon, Calif., heard his sister’s voice,
with terrible news from Baghdad.
A family member had been abducted by masked gunmen demanding a
$30,000 ransom.
Kidnapping is nothing new in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s
regime, but lately there’s a new twist: Some of the targets are
Iraqi Christians likely to have family members in the United States
or Europe who can pay to save them.
B.E. – who insists on anonymity because of concern for his family
– began frantically seeking help from relatives and friends in El
Cajon. Family members in Chicago, Detroit and Europe did the same.
One cousin donated $5,000. Another cousin, $2,000. An uncle, $4,000,
and so on. B.E., who was mostly unemployed and has children, managed
to contribute $1,000 from what he had and from his circle in El Cajon.
Two days later, after the full ransom had been paid in U.S. dollars,
B.E.’s brother-in-law, Albert Anderious, was released.
On that day in March, the 45-year-old father of five was transported
in the trunk of a car to a road near the infamous Abu Ghraib prison,
west of the Iraqi capital, and released by a masked gunman who told him
to leave Baghdad or be killed. Anderious is a member of the Chaldean
Church, a branch of the Roman Catholic faith.
A substantial number of Iraqi families in California, Michigan,
Arizona and Europe have been extorted in this manner, according to
Iraqi-Americans and immigrant-rights activists.
“This started shortly after the American invasion, but now it’s
increasing,” said John Kalabat, an Iraqi-American who immigrated to
the United States in 1979 and became a language professor at Cuyamaca
and Grossmont colleges near San Diego. “For the mafias, it’s a nice
business, kidnapping someone and getting $20,000 to $50,000.”
Christians in Iraq make up perhaps 3 percent of the population and
include Chaldeans, Assyrians, Armenians and Syriacs.
The Chaldean community is mushrooming in El Cajon, where the group
has a larger presence than anywhere else in the country except
Detroit. The Chaldeans, who number about 25,000 in San Diego County,
have been vocal supporters of the U.S.-led invasion.
Probably less than 800,000 Christians still live in Iraq. They have
been leaving for places such as the United States for decades, to find
economic opportunity and to flee political persecution under Hussein.
Iraqi immigrants in El Cajon said they suspect Sunni and Shiite Muslim
insurgents are choosing Christian victims for two reasons: Because
they are more likely to have relatives with cash, and to accomplish
the bigger goal of driving them out their homes and the region.
B.E. and his family are just one story: Many Iraqi immigrants living
here know of a relative or friend from their home village who was
abducted for ransom. Family members scramble for funds; sometimes
the hostage is released, sometimes not.
Anderious’ family was overwhelmed with relief when he came home,
but the experience has made B.E., and others, bitter and broke.
“This thousand (dollars), it was for me – it was a big money, because
I need it more,” B.E. said. “But what (do) you do if there’s someone
in trouble? You have to help him. You have to cut it from your wage,
from your bills, from your kids, from your food, and pay for them. I
feel anger here. These bastards, they get this money for nothing.
It’s not right.”
As security in Iraq disintegrates, B.E. said, there is no one to call
for help and the kidnappers exploit that. “These people, they know
there’s no power of law there. Therefore, they do what they want.
They know the police (are) very weak. They do nothing.”
The sectarian violence raging in Baghdad prompted U.S. commanders in
recent weeks to send more soldiers to the capital in a renewed bid
to curb the surge of killings and kidnappings.
There’s even a market among criminal groups who buy and sell
hostages to each other to maximize profits, said Farouk Gewarges,
a Chaldo-Assyrian who owns an insurance business in El Cajon.
“Some people, they want to get money the easy way. All they know is
how to kidnap and use their guns,” said Gewarges, who knows Anderious
and many sad stories about other kidnappings.
“They are thugs who don’t know how to work, they have no brain. It’s
an easy job – put a gun to (a) head, kidnap him, ask for money and
release him,” Gewarges said.
Anderious called B.E. in El Cajon after his release, thanking his
brother-in-law and asking for financial help to come to the United
States.
Anderious, who works as a taxi driver, told B.E. he was chauffeuring
two Iraqi engineers when he was boxed in by two cars. Masked gunmen
jumped out, pulled the three men from the taxi, blindfolded them and
shoved one man in the trunk of each of the vehicles.
After a couple of hours, they arrived at their destination. The
abductors proclaimed that the two engineers had been working with
the Americans. Then they were shot to death in front of Anderious.
Anderious got lucky. He had not been observed helping Americans. If
his family paid, he would live.
The kidnappers used Anderious’ cell phone to call his family.
Anderious was forced to live in darkness and wear a blindfold –
even for eating or trips to the bathroom.
Once he was freed, Anderious wasted no time in heeding the kidnappers’
warnings to leave Baghdad. The day he was released, he took his family
to northern Iraq, where most Chaldeans have settled.
But there is no money left for his family to escape the country.
“He called me when he got out,” B.E. said. “He wants to leave Iraq.
He called me for help. I said, ‘I’m sorry I can’t. Because I need
now help because I’m new in America. Jobs not too much good.'”
There are many similar stories of violence and suffering.
For Ramzi Marcus’ 17-year-old nephew, Fadi Marcus, it was a different
outcome.
The Chaldean boy was snatched from the street while walking to
school. He was a high school senior. A quiet, shy kid who liked
reading, swimming and soccer. The kidnappers used the boy’s cell
phone to ask for ransom.
Marcus and his family scraped together the $20,000 and then followed
directions. The kidnappers sent them to 10 places before finally
allowing them to leave the money under a rock. The kidnappers said
the teen would be released within two hours, but he was not, said
Thaira Sako of El Cajon, the boy’s aunt.
That was a year ago.
The boy’s parents remain in Iraq. His mother is “crazy” with grief.
His father is “looking for bodies constantly,” said another aunt,
Janet Namo of El Cajon. Every time there is news that corpses have been
found, Fadi’s father rushes to view them, not knowing what to hope for.
It is just the latest of many tragedies for the family. When Ramzi
Marcus was 27, he became a political prisoner in Iraq. He was held
for eight years. While he was imprisoned, his 23-year-old brother
was hanged by Hussein’s regime because he was a Chaldean activist.
To get to the United States, Marcus, who is now 50, walked from Iraq
to Turkey to Greece. He made his way to Frankfurt, Germany, then to
Mexico City and then to Tijuana, where he was among a group of about
130 Chaldeans who made news when they were temporarily detained at a
Tijuana hotel before being allowed to cross the border in September
2000.
He received political asylum June 20, 2001. But he and his wife worry
and grieve for the family members they left behind.
Sako, his wife, puts it this way: “We pray a lot.”

THIS YEAR’S LAST TRAIN WITH RUSSIAN MATERIEL READY TO LEAVE GEORGIA
Interfax News Agency
Russia & CIS Military Newswire
September 18, 2006 Monday 11:50 AM MSK
This year’s last train, carrying arms and materiel of the Russian 62nd
military base, deployed in Akhalkalaki, is ready to leave for Russia.
“The train, expected to leave on Tuesday, will transport three tanks,
11 air defence systems, and 300 tons of munitions,” a military base
official told Interfax-AVN on Monday.
According to him, the departure of the last train will be attended
by Commander of the Russian Task Force in Transcaucasia Major General
Andrei Popov.
Deputy Commander of the Russian Task Force in Transcaucasia Colonel
Vladimir Kuparadze told Interfax-AVN earlier that this year a total
of six trains had transported 179 pieces of materiel and 217 tons of
various cargo from the Russian 12th military base in Batumi to the
Russian 102nd base in Gyumri, Armenia.
A total of 358 pieces of materiel and 1,671 tons of cargo will be
transproted from Akhalkalaki to Russia.
The withdrawal of Russian military bases from Georgia will be resumed
next year, with the deadline slated for 2008.

SIX ARMENIAN STUDENTS WALKING TO RAISE AWARENESS OF GENOCIDE
by Kristin Zagurski, Omaha World-Herald, Neb.
Omaha World – Herald (Nebraska)
September 16, 2006 Saturday
Sep. 16–Six Armenian college students passed through Omaha Friday
on their walk across America to raise awareness of genocide.
The students — Ed S. Majian, 22; Albrik Zohrabyan, 23; Hasmig
Tatiossian, 23; Vahe Abovian, 30; Sarkis Nazaryan, 28; and Levon
Sayadyan, 24 — began their walk June 27 in Los Angeles.
They walk 30 miles a day, followed by a recreational vehicle in which
they sleep. They plan to end their journey Oct. 30 in Washington,
D.C., where a rally will be held.
The group — walking under the name Journey for Humanity — is
holding rallies in other major cities along its way, including one
at 4 p.m. Sunday in Des Moines at the Iowa State Capitol. That rally
is being held in conjunction with the local chapter of Save Darfur.
In the Omaha area, the students met with staff members of U.S. Reps.
Jeff Fortenberry and Tom Osborne and Sen. Chuck Hagel. They also talk
to citizens along their way, telling them about the ongoing genocide
in the Darfur region of Sudan.
The group’s main goals are bringing change to help Darfur and
encouraging people to recognize past genocide — specifically the
Armenian genocide of 1915, Majian said. Amid the chaos of World War I,
Turkey killed an estimated 1.4 million Armenians.

RA PRESIDENT AWARDED MEDALS AND HONORARY TITLES TO JOURNALISTS
Public Radio of Armenia
Sept 18 2006
Today President Robert Kocharyan awarded medals and honorary titles
to a number of representatives of the sphere of journalism. Following
the awarding ceremony, the President talked with the journalists
about tends and problems of the information field.
The President noted that together with the shortcomings, it is obvious
that the information field is developing, the number of analytical
journalists, who are consistently studying and highlighting concrete
topics, is increasing.

ARKADY GHUKASYAN: NOTHING OUTSIDE THE OSCE MG FORMAT WILL BENEIT NK
Public Radio of Armenia
Sept 18 2006
Any format of negotiations over the settlement of the Karabakh issue
outside the frames of the OSCE Minsk Group will not benefit Nagorno
Karabakh, NKR President Arkady Ghukasyan told the journalists.
In his words, Azerbaijan’s latest activity outside the Minsk Group
is a recurrent attempt to divert the attention of the international
community. “Nagorno Karabakh is ready to hold negotiations with
Azerbaijan in any format. However, if we aspire for resolution of the
conflict, we should stay loyal to the OSCE Minsk Group format,” NKR
President noted. Turning to the topic of the Azerbaijani territories
under NKR control, he advised the Azerbaijani side not to forget
that Armenian Shahumyan region and part of Martakert are still under
Azeri control.

HISTORIAN SAMVEL KARAPETYAN IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE TERM “OCCUPIED TERRITORIES”
Alisa Gevorgyan – “Radiolur”
Public Radio of Armenia
Sept 18 2006
The last 15 years were certainly fatal for the historical-cultural
monuments on the territory of Artsakh and the neighboring liberated
territories. These monuments survived not because the attitude of
Azerbaijan towards these was milder than towards the headstones in
Old Jugha. Simply, during these years the memorials were maintained
by people for whom every item was the holy relic of the motherland
inherited from predecessors. During the recent years, particularly in
the light of the opportunities provided by the cease-fire, different
Armenian organizations were actively studying the historical-cultural
legacy in Artsakh and the neighboring liberated territories. In 1997
“ERA” Company undertook reconstruction works at Dadivank complex.
Currenly archeological digging is under way in Aghdam. Exceptional
monuments have been found in this region, which once again best confirm
the centuries-long existence of the Armenian ethnos in this area. “When
speaking about mutual concessions, it should be kept in mind that
Armenia has already made concessions by losing Northern Artsakh,”
says historian Samvel Karapetyan, President of the “ERA” Company.
Samvel Karapetyan has carried out investigations in all seven liberated
territories. “The first investigations started in 1993-1996, when no
resident could be found on these territories.
Today the situation has changed. I have been to all seven territories,
but it’s not ruled out that in one or two years the explorations will
restart, since today you can learn more from the settlers than your
eye can catch during one visit, he says.
According to the historian, certainly, the historical monuments of a
country are not decisive in politics, but these can indirectly impact
the decisions of political figures.

NO RESULTS ACHIEVED AFTER MAMMADYAROV-OSCE MG CO-CHAIRS MEETING
Public Radio of Armenia
Sept 18 2006
No progress was registered after Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar
Mammadyarov’s meeting with the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs, Deputy
Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Hafiz Pashaev told “Trend” Agency. He
noted that the inclusion of the issue on frozen conflicts in the
agenda of the 61st sitting of the UN General Assembly agenda can be
considered positive. “It can be important from the perspective of
drawing the attention of the international community to the issue,”
Pashaev underlined, adding, “I do not think, however, that this will
have an impact on the resolution of the issue.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress