NAASR CELEBRATES 50TH ANNIVERSARY WITH FORUM, GALA
Belmont Citizen-Herald, MA
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Actress and author Nora Armani will participate in “NAASR Celebrates
50!” a gala anniversary banquet, on Saturday evening, Sept. 30,
at the Royal Sonesta Hotel in Cambridge.
Beginning with a 5:30 reception and dinner, the evening will also
include a keynote address by Dr. Gregory H. Adamian, chancellor and
president emeritus of Bentley College in Waltham, remarks by Paul R.
Ignatius, former secretary of the Navy and assistant secretary of
defense, a retrospective video, and will conclude with music and
dancing with the Leon Janikian Ensemble. The banquet is open to NAASR
members and non-members alike.
Born in Egypt of Armenian parents and educated in England, Armani is
an actress whose repertory includes Shakespeare, Shaw, Beckett and
Hammerstein. She has appeared extensively on stage and screen worldwide
including the U.S., Cairo, Paris and London. Her own stage creations,
“Sojourn at Ararat,” “Nannto, Nannto,” and “On the Couch with Nora
Armani,” have earned international accolades during extensive tours
on four continents in over 25 cities. Invited to Armenia to star in
films, she is also a cultural ambassador, promoting Armenian cinema
worldwide. Her poems have been published in art catalogues and poetry
anthologies, her plays have been broadcast on French radio, and her
feature film script, “The Journey Back (Al Awda),” was awarded a
special grant by the International Film Festival of Rotterdam.
Dr. Adamian is a Charter and Life Member of NAASR and a member of
its Board of Directors since 1956.
During more than two decades as president of Bentley College,
the school experienced dramatic academic, financial and physical
growth. His service to the Armenian community was recognized by
Karekin I, Catholicos of All Armenians, when Adamian was awarded the
St. Sahag and St. Mesrob medal in 1998. He is also the recipient of
an Honorary Doctor of Law degree from Boston University.
The NAASR celebratory events of Sept. 30 will commence with a morning
symposium at the Royal Sonesta on “Armenian-Turkish Dialogue and the
Direction of Armenian Studies.” The symposium will take place from
9 a.m. until 1 p.m., and is open to the public at no charge.
The symposium will feature Dr. Taner AkíË of the University of
Minnesota, Rachel Goshgarian, Ph.D. candidate at Harvard University,
Dr. Richard G. Hovannisian of the University of California, Los
Angeles, Dr. Gerard J. Libaridian of the University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, and Dr. Christina Maranci of the University of Wisconsin,
Milwaukee. Dr. Kevork Bardakjian of the University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, will serve as panel respondent. Following the presentations
of the panelists, there will be a discussion and question-and-answer
period. Marc A. Mamigonian, NAASR’s director of programs and
publications, will serve as moderator and NAASR Chairman Emeritus
Manoog S. Young will be the honorary chairman of the symposium.
To receive an invitation to the banquet, or for more information about
the symposium, call 617-489-1610, e-mail [email protected], or write to
NAASR, 395 Concord Ave., Belmont, MA 02478.
–Boundary_(ID_Tl3GPE4RMK4jQKY28qcwyg)–

SCREENWRITING AND PLAYWRITING AWARD
Cambridge Chronicle, MA
Thursday, September 14, 2006
The Armenian Dramatic Arts Alliance announces the inauguration of its
annual contest for a play or screenplay based on Armenian themes. The
deadline for submission for the Frances Paul Lyons/Almas Paul Annual
Screenwriting & Playwriting Award is May 15, 2007, and the winning
writer will be honored with a $10,000 award in the fall of 2007.
The contest will be administered by ADAA, which will establish
a panel of theater and film professionals to select the
winning script. The contest rules have been posted online at
armeniandrama.org/contest.php. Scripts must have an Armenian theme,
but writers are not required to be of Armenian descent.
The Paul family established the Frances Paul Lyons/Almas Paul Annual
Screenwriting & Playwriting Award via their fund at the Western Diocese
of the Armenian Apostolic Church of North America, under the auspices
of Archbishop Hovnan Derderian, ensuring the continuance of this award
for years to come. Actress and ADAA board member Karen Kondazian,
a member of the Paul family, was honored to facilitate the creation
of this award, particularly to recognize her father and mother,
Varnum Paul and Lillian M. Paul.
The Armenian Dramatic Arts Alliance is currently working on creating
relationships with leading theaters in the United States to establish
reading series so that the winning scripts – and other scripts
by ADAA-affiliated playwrights – will be seen and heard. ADAA’s
headquarters are in Cambridge, with worldwide affiliates in Paris,
Yerevan, Los Angeles, Boston, New York and other major cities.
For more information, visit armeniandrama.org, or call 617-871-6764.

INDIA AIMS TO BOOST BILATERAL TRADE WITH CIS
IDEX Online
(September 14, ’06, 3:42 A Jewelbiz India Report)
Using a two-pronged strategy of boosting direct exports of loose
diamonds and colored gemstones, and entering into partnerships with
local companies for different joint ventures, the Indian gem and
jewelry industry hopes to supply nearly 10 percent of the estimated
Rs 6-7 billion ($130 – 151 million) CIS jewelry market within the
next two to three years.
This projection is based on the interaction that an eight member
delegation of The Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC)
had with representatives of the local trade and governments during
a 16 day visit to the region from August 20 to September 4, 2006.
The delegation of loose diamond, jewelry, colored gemstone, and
silver traders is the first such Indian delegation to visit Ukraine,
Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia. These countries are
viewed as having a good potential to emerge as important consumer
markets with strong increases in GDP, besides being possible sources
of raw materials and potential manufacturing partners.
The GJEPC believes that there are many opportunities for interaction
between the gems and jewelry industries of the CIS countries and
India. “Due to its strategic location and relatively free economy,
Georgia can be ideal as a transit manufacturing hub for our jewelry
manufacturers to market Indian goods in CIS countries,” says Sanjay
Kothari, Convener-PMBD, GJEPC, and head of the delegation.
Kothari pointed out that the current tariffs for direct imports of
finished jewelry are very high, between 8-20 percent, but these
are waived in case of imports from within the region. Therefore,
he says, there is a potential for assembly plants that finish partly
manufactured jewelry items from India, and distributes them in the
local markets.
Another opportunity exists in Armenia with its developed diamond
polishing plants. Due to changes in marketing arrangements
with Russia, these plants are suffering from a shortage of rough
diamonds. This shortage is opening up opportunities for Indian diamond
traders. Similarly, Indian companies can enter into partnerships with
existing jewelry manufacturing plants in countries like Ukraine. While
other opportunities exist in modernizing and developing gold, silver,
and colored gemstones mining in countries such as Kazakhstan.
While the GJEPC says it will work towards strengthening ties at the
industry association level, and facilitate steps for a reduction in
duties through interaction at government levels, it is leaving it up
to individual companies to explore joint venture and take advantage
of these opportunities.
Some of the key initiatives that the GJEPC has already decided on
include setting up a CIS desk at its Mumbai headquarters , appointing
trade coordinators or marketing representatives in different countries,
showcasing Indian jewelry at two key exhibitions – ‘Jeweller Expo
Ukraine 2007’ to be held November 22-25, 2007 and ‘ARU-2007’ to be
held April 19-21, 2007 in Almaty City, Kazakhstan, sending teams of
designers to learn the trends in these markets and holding an India
show in Georgia early next year.
The recent visit is part of the long term measures being explored by
the Indian industry to enter newer markets. Currently the U.S., which
accounts for nearly 35 percent of India’s gem and jewelry exports, is
India’s single most important market. However, the current slowdown in
U.S. demand and expected changes in the preferential tariff structure
could impact volumes.
Besides the CIS, the GJEPC and the government have also identified
Latin America and Africa as other potential new markets.

“NAGORNO-GARABAGH’S CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE MONUMENTS HAVE NOT ANY RELATION TO ARMENIANS”
demaz.org
15.09.2006
According to Rizvan Bayramov, a scholar-historian, there were nearly
700 historical monuments in Azerbaijani territories occupied by
Armenians Azerbaijani territories occupied by Armenian aggressors
have rich flora and fauna as well as historical and cultural monuments.
According to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, in occupied
Azerbaijani territories there are 689 monuments, of which 13 (6
architecture and 7 archeological) of worldwide importance, 242 (117
architecture and 7 archeological) – of state importance and 434 (373
architecture and 23 archeological monuments, 21 parks and monuments,
17 works of arts and crafts) – of local importance.
In Armenian-controlled areas there are still such archeological
monuments of worldwide importance as Gulu Musa oghlu’s tomb in
Aghdam (1314), Ganjasar in Kalbajar (1218), the Khudaferin Bridges
in Jabrayil, historical engineering reserve in Shusha city, the Azikh
Cave in Fizuli, and also Niftaly tumulus in Khojaly and Jabrayil.
Rizvan Bayramov, chief of the Cultural Heritage Department of the
Ministry of Culture and Tourism and historian-scholar informed that
lands occupied by Armenia are the territories of the West Azerbaijan.
According to him, almost all cultural and historical monuments there
have been destroyed or “Armenianized”.
Many experts consider that the mentioned statistics do not meet
realities. According to them, in Soviet period there was not a
chance to make up and to examine true list of cultural and historical
monuments of the mentioned territories.
As R. Bayramov informed, it is impossible to say concrete things on
this occasion: “In Soviet time a number of monuments of Azerbaijan
were included to a certain list. Such lists were made up in 1968, 1981
and 1988. Just in Shusha the Government registered 200 architectural
monuments. Anyway, it is very difficult to call a precise number of
monuments in the territory of Nagorno-Garabagh, as any time the list
can be completed owing to new archeological finds. There are cases
when one or another monument is in forest or people know it, but it
is unknown for scholars. Thus, it is impossible to deny availability
of new historical and cultural monuments in occupied territories. Any
way, under the list of 1988 there are 700 monuments.”
The Armenians resort to any methods to prove that Nagorno-Garabagh
and adjacent territories “belong” to Armenia. They have their will
to date. But according to the historian-scholar, the historical
truth is that the Armenians appeared in these territories just when
the Russian Empire that occupied Azerbaijan began resettlement of
Armenians living in Iran and other countries there: “I’d say that
the Christian monuments in occupied Azerbaijani lands have not any
relation to Armenians, as all of them belong to us.”
Armenians’ attitude to the historical and cultural monuments
of Garabagh and adjacent territories is an axiom for each
Azerbaijanian. According to R. Bayramov, equally with everybody the
Ministry receives information from mass media and those who visited
Nagorno-Garabagh: “We have not other information sources. But in
connection with environmental protection and guard the former Ministry
of Culture and present Ministry of Culture and Tourism repeatedly
addressed to international organizations. They’ve addressed to UNESCO,
International Center for the Study of the Preservation and restoration
of Cultural Property, International Council of Museums, International
Council on Monuments and Sites, etc.
Recently Minister of Culture and Tourism addressed once more to
UNESCO concerning fires made by Armenians in occupied Azerbaijani
territories. It is quite probable that recent fires resulted in
complete annihilation of the oldest cemetery in Khojavend.”
R. Bayramov reminded the fact that the point of the 1954 Hague
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of
Armed Conflict says that if the State has not a chance to protect its
cultural monuments, it has the right to address to the United Nations:
“The UN special committee should take all responsibility for cultural
values guard of any State.
It is appropriate mention that in connection with that we have done
a serious work and prepared appropriate statement submitted to the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I think that MFA, in turn, will make
all efforts and send a letter to relevant structures.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TURKEY, A TOUCHY CRITIC, PLANS TO PUT A NOVEL ON TRIAL
By Susanne Fowler
The New York Times
Istanbul Journal
International Herald Tribune
Published: September 15, 2006
Osman Orsal/Associated Press
The novelist Elif Shafak has been charged with insulting
“Turkishness.” Ms. Shafak’s trial is scheduled to begin next
Thursday. The European Union has urged Turkey to foster free
expression.
ISTANBUL – “If there is a thief in a novel,” said Elif Shafak recently,
“it doesn’t make the novelist a thief.”
Yet, Ms. Shafak is due in court here on Sept. 21 to defend herself
against charges that she insulted “Turkishness” because a character
in her latest novel, “The Bastard of Istanbul,” refers to the deaths
of Armenians in 1915 as genocide.
Ms. Shafak, a Turkish citizen who was born in Strasbourg, France, is
being sued under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, the same law
that ensnared Turkey’s best-known contemporary author, Orhan Pamuk,
in 2005.
She is scheduled to give birth to her first child the week of the
trial. A conviction carries a possible penalty of up to three years
in jail.
The plaintiffs are vocal nationalists who she says oppose the
government’s efforts to gain admission for Turkey, the only member
of NATO with a largely Muslim population, into the European Union.
“I believe they want to derail the E.U. process because that would
change many things in the structure of the state and the fabric of
Turkish society,” Ms. Shafak, an assistant professor of Near Eastern
studies at the University of Arizona, said in an interview.
“They would rather have an insular, enclosed, xenophobic society than
an open society.”
Ms. Shafak, 34, initially escaped a court date by successfully
arguing that the statements over which she was being sued were made
by fictional characters who could not be prosecuted. In June, a public
prosecutor in Istanbul agreed and dismissed the charges.
But Kemal Kerincsiz, a lawyer who is also the leader of a rightist
group opposed to European Union membership for Turkey, filed a new
complaint. In July, a high criminal court in Istanbul overruled the
lower court decision, paving the way for the trial.
“Article 301 has been used by ultranationalists as a weapon to silence
political voices in Turkey,” Ms. Shafak said. “In that sense, my case
is not unusual.
But for the first time, they are trying to bring a novel into
court. The way they are trying to penetrate the domain of art and
literature is quite new, and quite disturbing.”
The European Union agrees.
Olli Rehn, the European Union’s commissioner for enlargement, said
in July that such cases were evidence that Turkey had failed to align
its laws with the union’s standards. He urged the Turkish authorities
to amend Article 301 “in order to guarantee freedom of expression,”
which he called “a key principle at the core of democracy.”
Mr. Pamuk, at the time of his trial, said he hoped the charges against
him would not hurt Turkey’s chances of entering the union. He was
prosecuted for saying during an interview that “a million Armenians
and 30,000 Kurds were killed in these lands and nobody but me dares
talk about it.” Eventually, with a groundswell of support from the
West, the charges were dropped.
But more than 60 similar cases have been brought against writers and
artists in Turkey, although no one has served time in prison yet. The
person potentially most at risk is Hrant Dink, a Turk of Armenian
descent who edits a bilingual Turkish and Armenian newspaper.
In July, an appeals court upheld a suspended six-month prison
sentence against him in connection with a column he wrote, and he
faces new charges based on remarks he made in an interview, according
to Reporters Without Borders.
“The Bastard of Istanbul,” Ms. Shafak’s novel, was published in
Turkish and has sold 60,000 copies, a best seller in Turkey. It
is to be published in English in January. Its plot centers on two
families with a common past: Turkish Muslims living in Istanbul and
Armenian-Americans in San Francisco.
Among the excerpts opposed by the lawyers’ group is a passage in which
a man of Armenian descent worries about which version of history his
niece will accept as she is raised by her Turkish stepfather. He
wonders aloud if she will state, “I am the grandchild of genocide
survivors who lost all their relatives to the hands of the Turkish
butchers in 1915, but I myself have been brainwashed to deny the
genocide because I was raised by some Turk named Mustapha!”
Turkey says that the deaths of as many as 1.5 million Armenians were
not the result of genocide, but rather of a war in which many Turks
also were killed as the Ottoman Empire was collapsing.
As a writer, Ms. Shafak has shown a penchant for provocative topics.
Her previous novels have touched on suicide, the intersection of
Islamic and Jewish mysticism, and even love between a Sufi dervish
hermaphrodite and a Greek man. She has angered critics in the past
by, in their view, eschewing Turkishness by writing in English and by
using what Turks today call “old words” from the Ottoman vocabulary
that preceded the reforms of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who founded the
Turkish republic in 1923.
Ms. Shafak also took part in a controversial conference in Istanbul
last year on the Armenian question (the first such conference in
Turkey, and one that Mr. Kerincsiz and his group, the Unity of Jurists,
tried to prevent).
So while Europe struggles to define the idea of Europe and who
is European, Turkey is in the midst of its own debate about what
defines Turkishness and whether Turks even want to be considered
European. “There is a clash of opinion in Turkey,” Ms. Shafak said. “On
the one hand are the people who are very much pro-E.U., sometimes for
economic reasons, sometimes for political reasons.” On the other hand,
she said, are factions, including nationalists, who fear that Turkish
autonomy will be weakened by membership in the union.
“Fear is a powerful element,” Ms. Shafak said. “We were taught ever
since we were little kids that Turkey is a country surrounded by
water on three sides and enemies on all sides and that you can never
trust outsiders.”
The charges of “insulting Turkishness” seem particularly galling to
Ms. Shafak, whose mother was a Turkish diplomat and whose husband,
Eyup Can, is the editor of Referans, a respected Turkish daily
business newspaper.
“I was thinking of going back to the States to give birth, but
because of the trial I will stay here,” Ms. Shafak said. “And I am
happy to be giving birth in Istanbul. This city is very dear to me,
even though it suffers from a sort of collective amnesia.”

YEKATERINBURG YOUTHS SENTENCED FOR RACIST ATTACK
Union of Councils for Jews in the Former Soviet Union, DC
September 14, 2006
Three youths were sentenced in connection with a racist attack against
two Armenians in Yekaterinburg, according to a September 11, 2006
report by the Sova Information-Analytical Center. The youths were
found guilty of a hate crime after beating their victims on March 28,
2006. The oldest defendant, a 19 year old, was sentenced to a year
and a half in prison; the two others were fined.

UKRAINE: YANUKOVICH TAKES NATO OFF THE TABLE
Strategic Forecasting Inc (Stratfor)
September 15, 2006 Friday
Summary
Ukraine is not ready to join NATO, new Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor
Yanukovich said Sept. 14. The statement from Yanukovich is clear,
direct and correct: The U.S. geopolitical offensive against Russia
through Ukraine is over for now, and the issue of Ukrainian membership
in NATO will not be back on the table while Yanukovich is in office.
Analysis
New pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich said
Sept. 14 that Ukraine is not ready to join NATO. Though it was already
clear Ukraine was not going to make an overture to NATO any time soon,
the fact that Yanukovich went out of his way to make this statement
indicates that the U.S. offensive against Russia through Ukraine has
stalled for the time being.
When it supported the Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004, the United
States essentially indicated that it wanted to enfeeble Russia and set
the stage for Moscow’s elimination as a strategic competitor. Russia
reacted as one might expect, using a mix of political and economic
levers to reverse its fortunes in Ukraine. Two years later, the
pro-Russian Yanukovich is Ukraine’s prime minister.
Though Yanukovich leans toward Moscow, he is in the process of
forming a coalition government that features the pro-Western Viktor
Yushchenko, an Orange Revolution leader, as president. The alliance
between them remains somewhat nebulous, but one thing is clear:
Yushchenko controls foreign policy. Yanukovich, therefore, could not
have made this statement without reaching at least a tacit agreement
with Yushchenko — and the Kremlin — first.
The issue of national political maneuvering aside, Ukraine really is
not ready to join NATO any time soon. Yanukovich told Russian media
that public support for Ukraine’s joining NATO is between 14 percent
and 25 percent. Though the level of support is likely higher than that,
it is certainly not high enough — particularly in the pro-Russian
eastern and southern regions — to allow for a smooth accession effort.
And Ukraine is not the only place where the Russians are pulling
some strings.
The Russian Foreign Ministry announced Sept. 13 that it considered
Transdniestria’s independence referendum, planned for Sept. 17,
legitimate.
Transdniestria is a separatist enclave on the former Soviet republic
of Moldova’s eastern edge populated mostly by Russians. Russian
military forces, officially acting as peacekeepers after a brief
war in 1993, unofficially help Transdniestria maintain its de facto
independence. Until now the official Russian government position has
been that Transdniestria is still part of Moldova, and that Russia
respects Moldova’s territorial integrity. Today’s change marks the
first time the Kremlin has shifted that position since the end of
the Cold War.
The rationale for the change is simple. In May the West allowed
Montenegro to hold its own independence referendum and break away
from Serbia. In the Russian (and Transdniestrian) mind, the same
right should be available to the Transdniestrians. Keeping Moldova
off-balance is also the most effective way to block any additional
eastward expansion of NATO or the European Union; most organizations
have problems granting defense guarantees or trade privileges to
states that do not even pretend to control their entire territories.
And this is just the start. Three other regions in former Soviet
republics — Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan, and South Ossetia and
Abkhazia in Georgia — could follow through with their own referendums
soon, seeking to capitalize on the same precedent. At this time,
however, only South Ossetia has scheduled a referendum. Abkhazia
has explicitly said that reunification with Russia is off the table,
and Nagorno-Karabakh is on the fence between independence and joining
Armenia.

FEATURE-PEERING THROUGH A LENS INTO JERUSALEM’S PAST
By Luke Baker
Reuters
15 Sep 2006 01:01:41 GMT
JERUSALEM, Sept 15 (Reuters) – Behind the door of 36 al-Khanka Street,
a steep, stone alleyway squeezed between the Christian and Muslim
quarters of Jerusalem’s Old City, lies a treasure trove of history
in black and white.
Varouj Ishkhanian’s photographic studio is lined with emotive images
from the last 130 years, tracing Jerusalem’s past from Ottoman times,
through British and Jordanian rule, to the founding of the state of
Israel and the wars in between.
>>From wizened Ashkenazi Jews studying the Torah in the early 1900s,
to camel trains leaving Damascus Gate on their way to Bethlehem, and
British General Edmund Allenby standing at the entrance to the Holy
City in 1917, the grainy photographs capture centuries of religion,
politics and conflict.
“Every picture contains more than one thousand words,” the 73-year-old
Ishkhanian says with a chuckle, flicking through a stack of thick,
time-worn albums of original photographs piled on his desk, each
image indexed and dated.
“This one was taken by my grandfather, one of the first that he took,”
he says, pointing to a faded brown-and-white picture of Jewish women
praying at the Western Wall in the late 1800s.
There are portraits too of bare-breasted gypsy women during Ottoman
rule, of the execution of a crook by the Ottoman authorities in 1905,
and of Arab fishermen on the Sea of Galilee at sunset in 1885, one
of Ishkhanian’s favourites.
An Armenian who was born and grew up in the Old City, Ishkhanian is
himself a small part of the history that he and his grandfather — and
now his son — have photographed, having served as the semi-official
photographer of King Hussein of Jordan in the late 1950s and early 60s.
ROYAL MANDATE
He started taking pictures in his teens, in the mid-1940s, when he
would help out his grandfather Kirkor at his photographic shop on
Jaffa Street, in what was then called New Jerusalem — the part that
lay outside the Old City’s walls.
During the 1948 war that followed Israel’s founding, he remained in
the Old City, taking refuge in the Armenian Convent, but still going
out onto the streets each day to hone his craft.
Having developed a knack for both news and more lucrative wedding
photography — his collection contains several portraits of Arab
girls preparing for marriage — he cajoled the Jordanian authorities
who then administered Jerusalem into giving him the only pass to take
photos at the Hashemite palace in Jordan.
“I was working for several newspapers at the time and I just kept
pushing and pushing and eventually they said okay,” he recalls. “Very
soon I was going to Amman almost every day and became quite friendly
with the king.”
He used to have a signed portrait of Hussein, who died in 1999,
in pride of place in the window of his studio, but took it down in
1967 after the Israelis captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem
from Jordan in the Middle East War.
Now a signed portrait of Hussein’s son, King Abdullah, hangs inside
the small shop instead, overlooking Ishkhanian’s desk. A portrait of
Ishkhanian himself, looking dapper in his late 20s, hangs from the
same wall, just above that of Abdullah.
Other images include pictures of his father, Sarkis, who was never
bitten by the photography bug, instead working for the British
authorities during their mandate of Palestine, supplying fuel to
light the oil lamps of the Old City.
EYE ON THE PAST
As well as capturing many moments in Jerusalem’s more recent history,
the photos in Ishkhanian’s studio also reveal how society, traditions
and geography have changed over time in perhaps the most fought-over
patch of land in the world.
A picture from the early 1900s shows Jewish men and women praying
together at the Western Wall, the most sacred site in Judaism,
whereas now they pray in separate sections.
Another from the same period shows houses very close to the Wall that
Ishkhanian said once belonged to Moroccan Arabs, whereas now the area
in front of the Wall is an open square.
However, he refuses to be drawn into any political discussion that
his photos might throw up, leaving them to speak for themselves. “The
pictures show everything,” he says firmly.
With his sight gone in one eye after so many years in a dark room,
Ishkhanian now spends his days in his studio selling prints of the
collection for 50 shekels (about $11) a piece. His son Sarko helps
out and still takes pictures.
He also helps prod Ishkhanian’s sometimes patchy memory, reminding him
of what year he got married and when his three children were born. But
the father remembers clearly when he opened his studio — it was 1964.
“It was after I worked for the king, when I had some money. Then, we
weren’t thinking about the future, it was all dancing and parties,”
he says with a smile.
“It was before I got married, before the problems of 1967. It was a
good time.”
Showing off his favourite photograph — a view he took in 1952 through
the window of the Dominus Flevit church, looking towards the Dome of
the Rock and the Western Wall — he laments how business has declined
over the past six years, since a Palestinian uprising erupted.
But he remains buoyant and enthusiastic. “Every day is good,” he
says. “I still look at everything, and I still take pictures, even
if not as well as before.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

FACTBOX-“FROZEN” CONFLICTS IN FORMER SOVIET STATES
Reuters AlertNet, UK
14 Sep 2006 12:59:12 GMT
Dnestr-Moldova dispute
More Sept 14 (Reuters) – Moldova’s rebel Dnestr region will hold a
referendum on Sunday to underpin its independence, first proclaimed
16 years ago but unrecognised internationally, and set down its desire
to join Russia one day.
The row between Dnestr and Moldova is one of the so-called “frozen
conflicts” among former Soviet states which killed thousands of people
in fighting in the early 1990s and threaten to erupt once again.
The issue has also soured ties between Europe and Russia, which makes
little secret that it backs the separatists.
Here are the main details on such “frozen” conflicts that are left
over from the collapse of the Soviet Union whose internal borders
were often drawn regardless of ethnic lines.
MOLDOVA:
**DNESTR. The Russian-speaking region broke away from Romanian-speaking
Moldova in 1990 and fought a war in 1992. Russian troops intervened
to stop fighting and have remained in the region ever since.
The region is home to the bulk of Moldova’s industrial
might. Authorities in Chisinau are keen to return to the region and
are offering a broad autonomy but Slav hardliners, who run Dnestr,
want full independence.
GEORGIA:
**ABKHAZIA is a territory sandwiched between the Black Sea and the
Caucasus mountains. It fought a 1992-3 war against Georgia in which
it won de facto independence but no international recognition.
It was isolated for years after its victory but it has then forged
closer ties with Russia which has given Abkhaz residents passports
and pensions.
**SOUTH OSSETIA threw off Georgian rule in fighting in the early
1990s. A ceasefire was signed but the violence has threatened to
reignite, especially since pro-Western Georgian President Mikhail
Saakashvili was elected in 2004 and vowed to reunify the country.
Russia has peacekeeping troops in South Ossetia.
The region plans a referendum on Nov. 12 to confirm its independence.
AZERBAIJAN/ARMENIA
**NAGORNO-KARAB AKH TERRITORY is part of Azerbaijan but has been
controlled by Armenian separatists since armed conflict erupted in
the 1990s.
A major pipeline linking Caspian Sea oil fields to world markets
passes a few kilometres from the conflict zone.

HOME SOCIAL AND NETWORKING ORGANIZATIONS FOR IMMIGRANTS ARE CRITICAL FOR ADAPTATION
Kommersant
Sep. 15, 2006
The census carried out in Russia in 2002 underscored pessimistic
demographic prognoses for the country. For the first time in its
history, Russia is in a situation where demographic development,
replenishing the labor force, and even simply “filling up the space”
are possible only by attracting more immigrants. Demand gives birth
to supply, and a stream of labor migrants flooded into Russia from
the former republics of the USSR and from the Far East. Old diasporas
have begun to evolve alongside new communities of immigrants, breeding
dissatisfaction among native Russians. Polls show that only 16% of
Russians support the “opening” of the country to immigrants. According
to data from the Federal Migration Service (FOM), despite a decrease
in the number of Russians who are hostile to “foreign-borns” (from
32% in 2002 to 21% in 2006), the majority consider it imperative to
restrict migration.
Despite the decrease in the number of people who would wish immigrants
ill, the amount of general tension in relations between Russians and
immigrants is growing.
Against the backdrop of a growth in immigrant-phobia in Russia,
any attempt to institutionalize a community of immigrants provokes a
nervous reaction from society. In the Russian social consciousness,
immigrants appear as some sort of “monster of lobbying,” the frontline
detachment of invaders bent on grabbing power and accumulating
financial resources.
Modern diasporas in Russia as a whole are not so threatening. Today
successful and powerful diasporas have been created by Azerbaijanis,
Armenians, Jews, Ukrainians, and many other ethnic groups. Among
other things, they successfully lobby for their business interests and
organize the continuation of their culture. Others – representatives
of some Caucasian and Central Asian peoples, along with the Chinese –
have created communities that have only limited economic goals. In
the absence of a real diaspora experience, in the wave of crime and
corruption that characterized the 1990s some communities grouped
themselves around people with dark pasts and not entirely clear
presents, out of which grew criminal structures that put the final
stamp on how the institutes of the diasporas would be received by
the authorities and by ordinary Russians.
Not Ready to Dissolve
The problem is deepened by the fact that a significant portion of
immigrants in no way strive for integration. The reasons for this
are many.
Integration is opposed by traditional mindsets; by the insularity
of the immigrant communities, which can give rise to a microcosm of
a single ethnic culture; and by a lack of real economic stimulants
(immigrants calmly “ensconce themselves” even without integration). It
is telling that, according to data from the sociological research
institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 83% of Azerbaijanis
living in Moscow (one of the most numerous and well-organized
diasporas) would like to stay in Moscow, but only 45% of that number
(that is, just over a third of the Moscow Azerbaijani community) would
be willing to live in accordance with Russian norms and traditions.
Among other diasporas, excluding only the Ukrainian and the
Belorussian communities, the situation is most likely the same or
even slightly more complicated. The experience of Western Europe also
testifies to the fact that the extraordinary influence that immigrant
communities have on their members often limits immigrants’ chances
of integration. This becomes especially clear in situations where
the authorities directly challenge the opinions of national activists.
For example, some 80% of French Muslim immigrants claim to want to
adopt the French way of life, but the ban on the wearing of the hijab
in schools raised tension within the community.
As such, the most important thing now is the problem of mutual
adaptation: on the one hand to prepare the host society to receive the
immigrants, along with their national and cultural attributes, and on
the other hand to prepare the immigrants themselves to integrate in
the host society, to take on its core values, tenets, and “rules of the
game.” In this situation, precisely the organizations of the immigrant
community itself can be acceptable mechanisms for resolving problems.
Currently, dialogue with the diasporas is being conducted on the level
of “political consultation” and cultural programs. The national and
regional leadership of Russia is supporting various cultural programs
and facilitating regular meetings between government officials and
representatives of the diasporas. Russian President Vladimir Putin
has taken part in meetings with the Russian Armenian Council, the
All-Russian Azerbaijani Congress, and others.
Without a doubt, building bridges and forging contacts with
representatives of the diasporas is essential on all levels, from
federal to local. But it is not enough.
Community Adaptation
Everyone understands the direct intervention by the authorities in
the activities of the immigrant communities is necessary only when
the community structures have formed around people with criminal
histories, extremists, etc. Governmental organs in the position
of external overseers in such situations only aggravate the social
and political situation in any given region. In this connection, of
course, effective intervention in practice is possible only under the
conditions of a normally functioning judicial system and a substantial
decrease in the level of corruption.
With regard to law-abiding national communities (and they are the
majority), what is needed is a movement towards full adaptation and
integration for newcomers.
This means teaching immigrants and their children the Russian language
and acquainting them with Russian culture and the particularities of
the legal system, among other things. All efforts will be effective
only in conjunction with active reciprocation from the diasporas as
a whole, not only from their representatives.
Russia should not repeat the mistakes made by the countries of West
Europe, where the objects of integration policies were exclusively
individuals rather than national communities. In the end, national
communities that claimed control over the process of integration arose
anyway, severely restricting knowledge and understanding of what kind
of people lived in these communities. Prejudices and xenophobia can
be overcome only on the basis of a closer reciprocal relationships
between developed communities and government representatives and
civil society. The task is to mobilize the financial and organization
potential of the diasporas in the creation of their own positive image.
Under current conditions, what is required from immigrant communities
is transparency, opened, and an ability to rise to new challenges. The
conversation now should be not only about the traditional strength of
the diasporas in terms of preserving and supporting national languages
and cultures and developing their business interests, but also about
activity in the direction of the adaptation of the members of the
immigrant communities to life in Russian society.