SPEAKING TO THE SPEAKER
By Matthew DeFour
Staff writer

Political demonstrations in Batavia have increased since Dennis Hastert
became Speaker of the House and the country went to war in Iraq.

BATAVIA – On the eve of the third anniversary of the invasion of Iraq,
an undercurrent of political dissent stirs hundreds of miles from
Washington in the shadows of a sleepy Fox River Valley town.

Empty boots line the streets, crosses and coffins memorialize those
killed in the conflict, and citizens prepare to march with banners
and slogans in opposition to the war.

It’s an unfamiliar scene in most Valley communities, but this
particular town hosts the district office of U.S. Speaker of the
House Dennis Hastert, and increasingly since his ascension to that
position in 1999, the Batavia office has become a lightning rod of
political activism.

Though political demonstrators have been coming to Hastert’s office at
27 N. River St. for more than a decade, the most recent war protests
marked the first weeklong demonstration in the city’s history.

As opposition to the war increases and President Bush’s approval
ratings plummet in the buildup to a pivotal midterm election season,
many have begun to wonder what it takes to turn the political tide.

A political dialogue

Hastert himself doesn’t disguise his distaste for political
demonstrators who he believes target his office in order “to grab a
little press.”

“If a constituent has an issue, they can walk into my office anytime,”
Hastert said. “If people want to catch my ear, they should sit down
and talk with me. When people show up and try to bully their way in,
you have to try extra hard to be appreciative of their point of view.”

Hastert’s staff meets with constituents on a daily basis, which is the
primary purpose for the Batavia office. Sometimes Hastert learns more
about constituent concerns, as was the case last month when he sat
down with 16 local Hispanic leaders to talk about immigration issues.

“Whether a constituent agrees or disagrees with the Congressman’s
position, we feel it is our job to explain why he believes what
he believes and to hear from them the reason for their position,”
Hastert spokesman Brad Hahn said. “Ultimately, Congressman Hastert
does what he believes is right for his constituents and the country.

That does not change because people hold demonstrations.”

In the past, some demonstrators have been invited inside to sit down
with staff and discuss issues. But ever since an anti-war group in
2003 refused to leave the speaker’s office until they were put in
direct contact with the congressman, the office has been wary of
groups that rally with an agenda.

“Our rule of thumb is we want to sit down and exchange information and
ideas with our constituents,” Hahn said. “When the intent is simply
to embarrass the congressman or get publicity for a group or a cause,
we will not participate in that.”

Issue by issue

The degree of wariness tends to wobble, however, depending on the
issue.

Last year, a representative for the office came out to speak about
Aurora Beacon News, IL March 19 2006

specific legislation to a group holding a prayer vigil for Terry
Schiavo, the brain-dead Florida woman who became the focus of a
national right-to-life debate. In 2003, following the invasion of Iraq,
the Speaker issued a written statement to a group that had organized a
“support our troops” rally.

Many demonstrators, however, whether protesting the war or calling
for the recognition of Armenian genocide, are not greeted by anyone
from the office and must deliver letters through a Batavia police
officer standing guard at the front door.

Even those who do gain access feel their viewpoint is heard but not
taken seriously.

“Congressman Hastert is very nonresponsive to anyone who he does not
agree with,” said Mary Shesgreen, chairman of Fox Valley Citizens
for Peace and Justice, which has participated in the last week of
anti-war demonstrations.

“Over all the years that I have been calling and writing Dennis
Hastert’s office, I don’t believe I have ever had any evidence that
my calls or letters or visits to his office made the slightest bit
of difference in the way he votes.”

Mobilizing against the war

Shesgreen, of Elgin, has met with Hastert’s staff as well as
participated in a number of demonstrations throughout the years,
but her most impassioned endeavor has been calling for the troops
in Iraq to come home – a position she believes she shares with the
majority of the American people.

But she hasn’t always represented the popular view. Even before the
Iraq conflict, Shesgreen decried the war in Afghanistan, which even
Democratic leaders have continued to defend while criticizing the
Iraq war as a distraction from the broader war on terror.

In February 2003, as the United States was preparing to invade Iraq,
Shesgreen helped organize hundreds of people to protest the war, but
after the bombs began to fall on March 20, the nation came together
to support the president’s decision, as evidenced by the 150 people
who attended the “support our troops rally” at Hastert’s office,
compared with only a dozen war protesters, including Shesgreen.

“Once the war started, our numbers dwindled because people thought it
was a done deal,” Shesgreen said. “Now the participation is increasing
because they sense the tide turning.”

Shesgreen said the anti-war mood has been strong in downtown Batavia
this past week, with tremendous support from passers-by. Many people
have been waving from their cars and signing a petition to bring the
troops home.

The attitude is markedly different than when military mother-turned-war
protester Cindy Sheehan visited the Fox Valley last year. Shesgreen
said she contacted Hastert’s office about setting up a meeting between
Sheehan and the Speaker or his staff, but the office refused.

The reason Shesgreen continues to rally at Hastert’s office is
because it is the only local representation of power from the
nation’s capital. She also believes political demonstrations have the
potential to effect change, like last year’s demonstration against
the privatization of Social Security.

“President Bush’s attempt to privatize Social Security got squelched
and it got squelched by public opinion across the country,” Shesgreen
said. “The public demonstrations throughout the country against the
privatization of Social Security did succeed, although that fight
isn’t over yet.”

Speaking the truth

The Social Security protest at Hastert’s office was organized by
another veteran of Batavia political demonstrations: William McNary,
president of Citizen Action Illinois and co-director of its national
counterpart USAction.

McNary’s organization has promoted a national progressive agenda
through lobbying, candidate endorsements and demonstrations.

And he considers a demonstration outside Hastert’s office as the
event that catapulted his organization from nearly imploding in 1996
to its current membership of 3 million people in 24 states.

In September 1999, about 40 seniors bused to Batavia from Chicago
chanted slogans like, “Don’t sell seniors down the river,” and “Don’t
push seniors into HMOs,” as they vented their frustrations about
high-price prescription drugs and expensive managed-care premiums.

Two months later, more than 250 demonstrators returned to Hastert’s
Batavia office as part of a USAction conference in Chicago, once
again demanding prescription drug coverage for seniors.

Last year, President Bush passed Medicare reform with provisions for
prescription drug coverage. Though McNary said he still disagrees
with many of the specifics of the Medicare plan, he believes his
organization was instrumental in promoting a national discussion.

“It surely helps to have a disciplined message,” McNary said. “There
are a lot of people that are mad at this administration and are
mad at the Republican leadership. When these people get together,
the message is ‘angry people mad at Republicans.'”

McNary admits that one of the main purposes of the political rallies
is to draw attention to an underrepresented viewpoint, and if the
Speaker of the House isn’t listening, the media and the general public
often are.

A NEW YORK STATE OF GRACE
By Gretchen Fletcher
special correspondent

Sun-Sentinel, Florida
March 19 2006

One woman’s search for faith in the big city.

Granted, New York City is not known as a Mecca for pilgrims. If one
wanted to be a “traveler for religious reasons,” as the dictionary
defines the term, it would make better sense to go to one of the
new megachurches, perhaps in California, Texas, or somewhere in the
southern Bible Belt. But I was going to New York, and wondered if I
could find a place of inspiration and reverence.

My first stop was at MOBiA, the Museum of Bible Art. It occupies the
second floor of the American Bible Society near Columbus Circle.

There was an exhibit of primitive art by southern Christian artists
and one of ancient texts. I walked through the exhibit, “For Glory
and Beauty,” looking at some of the earliest written texts of the
Bible, goatskin scrolls and hand-illuminated manuscripts on vellum,
forerunners of the Gutenberg Bible I had seen the day before on
exhibit at the Public Library.

Leaving the museum, I thought the obvious place to go would be the
Cathedral of St. John the Divine, which I remembered from a childhood
trip as being awesome in the true sense of the word. The cathedral
wasn’t finished then, and it isn’t finished now. Its facade is still
shrouded in scaffolding, 113 years after its cornerstone was laid.

I had forgotten that shortly after 9-11 we had watched on TV as New
York’s fatigued firefighters struggled to carry hoses through the nave
to put out a fire we hoped was not the next wave of terrorism in the
city. It had actually been started by faulty wiring in the gift shop,
resulting in the fact that there was no gift shop open now, four years
later. Nor was the whole cathedral open to visitors; behind the altar
a blank, dark gray wall sealed off the once-beautiful apse, chancel,
and transept while they are being cleaned of soot and smoke damage.

I walked around what remained to be seen of the chapels in the
side bays, reading the guide sheet. The cathedral, Episcopal
in denomination, has something for everyone in its fervor to be
ecumenical. Hanging from the apex of the stone arches is a circle
of silk streamers (red, yellow, black and white), symbolizing the
races of man. American Indians are represented by a medicine wheel
of elk hide, wood and feathers hanging above the chapel dedicated
to athletes. The bronze statue of a buffalo in that chapel speaks of
strength as well as of the American West. Jews are represented with
a statue memorializing victims of the Holocaust who died at Auschwitz.

It stands in the Missionary Bay with memorials for Armenians,
victims of the Ottoman Empire’s genocide, and for Muslims who died
in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the 1990s.

Two of the most touching chapels are the ones housing the Medicine
Bay and the Labor Bay. The former holds a book of remembrance in
which are recorded names of those who have died of AIDS, read every
month in the worship service. The latter holds the Fireman’s Memorial,
which honors 12 firefighters who died in a fire in lower Manhattan in
1966. Of course, since then, grieving visitors have placed mementoes
of the 9-11 firefighters.

All this said, I still viewed the Cathedral, the largest Gothic
structure in the world, as more of a tourist attraction than a place to
“find religion.” The guide told me I could catch a bus on the corner
of Amsterdam and 110th that would take me right to the Cloisters (my
next stop). “Be sure you stop for a torte or coffee at the Hungarian
Pastry Shop across the street,” he said. “It’s been the setting in
several movies, including Woody Allen’s Husbands and Wives.”

I admired the baked goods in the cases and ordered a Hungarian coffee,
which I drank while watching students from nearby Columbia University
tapping away on laptops. Then I went out to wait for the bus to the
Cloisters. I knew it would be a long trip, but I wasn’t expecting it
to take an hour.

The trip was worth the $1.50 in quarters, though, as it was an
opportunity to visit what I think of as the best “museum” in the city:
streets and neighborhoods full of people. My fellow passengers on this
summer morning were all young moms and dads escorting tots wearing
backpacks, talking about the day camps they were headed for.

The Cloisters, at the northern tip of Manhattan, is an off-campus
extension of the Metropolitan Museum. On land purchased by John D.

Rockefeller Jr., are reconstructed medieval chapels and monasteries
brought stone by stone from France and Spain. The Gothic and Romanesque
setting includes a room hung with the famous Unicorn tapestries whose
colors seem so vibrant it’s hard to believe they were woven around the
time Columbus was trying to get financing from Ferdinand and Isabella.

Surely I would have found inspiration here among the gardens and
fountains had I not been meeting a friend who broke the peace with
a litany of worries about health, finances and the state of the Union.

“Look,” I said. Across the courtyard from us a young priest in
clerical collar was attempting to lure sparrows to take bread from
his hand stretched out on the stone wall. A modern-day St. Francis,
he restored peace to the place.

The next day I was meeting another friend for lunch on second Avenue
and had just enough time to stop in at St. Patrick’s Cathedral on the
corner of Fifth Avenue and 51st Street. Surely, I would find what I
was looking for there — a moment of inspiration and reverence. But
first, of course, I couldn’t resist running into Saks. Then I picked
my way through the summer crowds on the cathedral steps, tourists with
tired feet and shopkeepers and office workers eating Sabrett hot dogs.

St. Pat’s looked just as I remembered it, even from the days when
my 6-year-old son had sat in a pew there and said, while craning
his neck to look up at the Gothic arches, “Whoever made this must
have been really creative!” Creative, yes. But I guess I was too
familiar with its beauty to feel much inspiration. Plus crowds of
shorts-clad tourists were wandering around with cameras, hardly
creating a reverent atmosphere.

I wished I were going to be in the city on a Sunday, as I had been
the year before when a friend took me to a Lutheran jazz service in
the church beneath the CityCorp Building. There, as her husband’s
trio played Body and Soul during Communion, street people, attracted
by the wailing clarinet, peered down at us through the window behind
the altar.

I walked on toward my appointed lunch, thinking that my visit to the
city was coming to an end and I had not found what I could call a
“religious experience.” On the corner of Park Avenue and 51st I saw
“Cafe St. Bart,” situated next to the Romanesque St. Bartholomew’s
church, with a dome and rose window. A notice board in front said:

SUMMER FESTIVAL OF SACRED MUSIC

SUNDAY AT 11 AM

MASS FOR FOUR VOICES

WILLIAM BYRD

How I wished I could come back to hear that!

I stepped into the dark church. In front of the gilded altar stood a
small group of people wearing shorts and holding open red books. I knew
right away what this was: a rehearsal for the concert! How lucky could
I be? I slid into a hard, straight-backed pew for my own concert under
the Byzantine half-dome filled with a gold leaf and glass mosaic of
the Transfiguration with Christ in the center, arms outstretched. This
was what I been looking for. I had “found religion” in New York City.

Of course, I stopped in the gift shop in the narthex on my way out.

The saleslady said she came into the city every day from New Jersey
just to be in the church she loves so much and is so proud of. When
I asked about the cafe next door, she told me that its revenue helps
to defray the maintenance expenses of the church. She wanted to tell
me all of the church’s history, including the fact that Leopold
Stokowski, who went on to a career as one of the world’s great
conductors, was brought from Europe by St. Bartholomew’s to direct
its choir, establishing the church’s reputation as a place for good
music. Their Summer Festival of Sacred Music features works by Bach,
Bernstein and Byrd as well as Faure, Vierne and Kodaly. I could be
perfectly happy spending my whole summer vacation in their sanctuary,
eating all my meals in their Cafe St. Bart. That being impossible,
of course, I bought a CD of the Byrd Mass the choir had sung just
for me, the best souvenir of a trip I ever bought.

Gretchen Fletcher’s last story for Travel was on Newburyport, Mass.

She lives in Fort Lauderdale.

CLASH OF CULTURES IN FRANCE

Winnipeg Sun, Canada
March 19 2006

LYON, France — French youths protesting against a new employment law
ended up in an unexpected clash with Turks demonstrating against an
Armenian memorial when their separate marches crossed paths yesterday.

Riot police used water cannon to separate the two groups after
about 2,500 Turks opposed to the construction of a memorial in the
city centre to Armenian victims of a 1915 massacre attacked the
demonstrating youths, police said.

Officials said some youths protesting the employment law were
apparently of Armenian origin.

TALAT PASHA RALLY BEGINS IN BERLIN

Anatolian Times, Turkey
March 19 2006

Turks In Lyon Protest Erection Of So-Called Armenian Genocide Monument

BERLIN/LYON – The “Berlin Talat Pasha Movement” rally to protest the
decision of the German parliament on the so-called Armenian genocide
has begun today in Berlin.

Over 5,000 Turks attended the Berlin rally.

Meanwhile, Turks living in Lyon, France have protested the erection
of a monument on the so-called Armenian genocide in Lyon. Turkish
demonstrators held Turkish and French flags in their hands.

ARMENIANS BECAME A TOOL FOR KILLING MILLIONS OF INNOCENT MUSLIMS, MCCARTHY

Anatolian Times, Turkey
March 19 2006

ISTANBUL – American historian Justin McCarthy has indicated that
unfortunately, Armenians became a tool for killing millions of innocent
Muslims who had lived in the lands of Ottoman Empire.

Different aspects of Armenian issue during and after the First World
War were discussed at an international conference on “New Approaches
to Turkish-Armenian Relations” at the Istanbul University.

McCarthy said that Armenian people caused a threat for Ottoman people
because they were spies of Russia during the Russian occupation.

Noting that Armenian people aided Russia during this period, he
said that they contributed significantly to the losses of Ottomans
and became a tool for killing millions of innocent Muslims. McCarthy
added that Ottomans were right in their efforts to take under control
the insurrection of Armenians.

Taking the floor at the conference, the main opposition Republican
People’s Party (CHP) Istanbul deputy Sukru Elekdag has indicated that
all facts showed that “Blue Book” was a good example of forgery and
falsification. Recalling that in the meeting held on April 13th, 2005,
Turkish parliament decided that Turkey and Armenia should establish
a joint commission, make public their archives and results of their
studies. Elekdag noted that it was a peaceful initiative, stating
that Armenians should accept this initiative.

Elekdag stated that the parliament sent letters regarding the book to
British House of Commons and House of Lords, asking them to apologize
to Turkey for mistakes in the book. “The book written by James Bryce
and Arnold Toynbee includes 150 documents and reports. Eyewitnesses
were mentioned in the book with their code names and they are not
real persons,” Elekdag stressed.

Noting that documents in “Blue Book” were groundless and false,
he said that now Armenians only have this false book.

On the other hand, Ara Sarafian, the editor of Gomidas Institute,
claimed that documents in the book could not be ignored.

Turkish History Institution Chairman Prof. Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu offered
Sarafian that a joint project could be conducted. “Let’s conduct a
project. What happened to Armenians in Anatolia? If there are any
mass graves, we can excavate them. If such a project is conducted,
many demagogical matters will be removed. We should search losses of
Turks as well.”

Sarafian said that he accepted the offer.

WHAT’S A CIVILIAN, DEMOCRATIC SOLUTION?
By Hasan Celal Guzel
Published: 3/18/2006

Turkish Press
March 19 2006

RADIKAL- Following the Armenian conference financed by the Soros
Foundation, a conference on ‘Turkey’s Kurdish Issue – Civilian and
Democratic Searches for Solution’ was organized by the Helsinki
Citizens’ Assembly and Empathy Group at Bilgi University last
weekend. The supporters of Kurds with known strategies and tactics
were well intentioned, but unrealistic intellectuals, some of whom
only accepted the Western thesis, revealed their thoughts without
any pressure. Then they ended the meeting without finding a civilian,
democratic solution. Certain mistaken policies have been followed since
the early years of the republic on the Kurdish issue. The realistic
policies followed by Ataturk during the years of national struggle
couldn’t be continued, the meaning of Turkish citizenship and Turkish
identity – the upper identity – weren’t explained well, sub-ethnic
identity wasn’t accepted under the policy of ‘homogeneity,’ and until
recently prohibitions dominated the issue of mother tongues. However,
everybody who has reason, mind and conscience should see that Kurds
have never been treated like second-class citizens or minorities
but have always enjoyed all the rights and possibilities of Turkish
citizens. The poverty and underdevelopment which has nothing to do
with ethnic differences isn’t seen only in southeastern Anatolia. It
should be stressed that the mistakes which were made in the past
aren’t continuing anymore.

The mistakes of certain intellectuals, malevolent separatists and
the West derive from the fact that they consider Turkey a country
where conditions from a quarter-century ago still exist. It’s easy
to talk about a civilian, democratic solution and it sounds nice. Who
would want armed conflicts and war? So we should ask how a civilian,
democratic solution would work. Those who claim to seek this kind of
solution have never made a concrete suggestion which wouldn’t harm
Turkey’s integrity and unity. The aims of the Kurdish separatist
movement, supported by the terrorist PKK, are known:

1. Firstly, paint the separatist Kurdish movement in Turkey as a
‘peaceful’ movement seeking a civilian, democratic solution

2. Pressure the political rulers by accelerating the PKK’s terrorist
activities

3. Ensue an amnesty for the end of terrorist activities

4. Try to establish an ‘autonomous administration’ in the political
field

5. Establish a ‘federative administration’

6. Finally, establish Kurdistan with the regional Kurdish
administration in northern Iraq

Those who make these calculations depend on the PKK’s terrorist
actions, the appeasement of populist politicians, the support of
intellectual dreamers, the protection of European Union circles and the
expectation that US forces in Iraq will act in their favor. These are
all mistaken calculations. The public knows the actual wishes of the
people. The government and state cannot make any more concessions over
Kurdish separatism, which has turned into terrorism. Our nation would
never let someone make concessions from sovereignty or territory –
not even under the threat of being excluded from the EU or the Western
world completely. If a civilian, democratic solution is expected on
the Kurdish issue, firstly, the terrorist PKK should disband, and such
political movements as the Democratic Society Movement (DTH) should be
cleansed of terrorist elements and put on the political platform. It’s
a must for the PKK to be disarmed towards this end. Only then we can
talk about such formulas as amnesty and political representation.

FIVE OPTIONS TO DIVIDE THE JERUSALEM CAKE
By Nadav Shragai

Daily Star – Lebanon
March 20 2006

Some Israeli political parties have openly discussed the transfer of
Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority.

But when it comes to the Old City and the Temple Mount, there is
still reticence to challenge public conventions regarding what all
agree are the most emotionally charged places in the world.

Nevertheless, Ruth Lapidoth is heading a team of experts under
the auspices of the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies (JIIS),
to suggest options for a settlement of this holy and disputed area
known as the “historic basin of Jerusalem” – the Old City and its
adjacent territories.

Lapidoth and her team are not the first to offer solutions for the
Old City and Jerusalem. On various occasions, concerned parties have
floated the idea of expropriating all political sovereignty from
Jerusalem within the walls, seeing it as a holy place belonging
to no one, to be governed by a joint council of Jews, Muslims and
Christians. However, the current JIIS report abandons, to a large
extent, the idea of areas devoid of sovereignty. In the majority of
its options it proposes a return to old-style partition. The five
options were recently presented to acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
and the chairman of the Likud and Labor parties.

The first option proposes full sovereignty and control of the basin
by Israel, while granting some autonomy to Palestinian residents,
and perhaps also determining a special status for Christian and
Muslim holy places. The proposal essentially institutionalizes the
existing situation, as Muslims and Christians currently operate their
institutions autonomously. This option also proposes the possibility of
granting international immunity to the holy places or to the clergymen
serving in them.

The second option is the exact opposite: Full sovereignty and control
by the Palestinians throughout the basin, with autonomy for the Jewish
residents (for instance in the Jewish Quarter) and special status
for Jewish holy places. This option would perhaps be acceptable to
the vast majority of Palestinians, but one may safely assume that
Israel would reject it out of hand, just as the Palestinians would
reject the first option.

The third option proposes a territorial division between the sides,
with international supervision. In this option, following an agreement
on boundaries, each side is sovereign and the source of authority in
the territory allocated to it. The territorial division of the basin
between Israel and Palestinians could be implemented on the basis of
a wide variety of alternate borderlines, which the team lays out in
five sub-options:

First, the Jewish and Armenian Quarters under Israeli sovereignty,
the Muslim and Christian Quarters under Palestinian sovereignty,
and the Temple Mount included under Israeli sovereignty.

Second, the Jewish and Armenian quarters included under Israeli
sovereignty, the Muslim and Christian quarters under Palestinian
sovereignty and the Temple Mount under Palestinian sovereignty.

Third, the Jewish Quarter under Israeli sovereignty and the other
three quarters and the Temple Mount under Palestinian sovereignty.

Fourth, the Jewish, Armenian and Christian quarters, and the Temple
Mount, under Israeli sovereignty, and the Muslim Quarter under
Palestinian sovereignty.

Fifth, each of the above options, with territorial division of the
Temple Mount between Israel and the Palestinians.

The issues raised by this third option are complex, and some seem
irresolvable at first glance: for example, the request for freedom
of Jewish ritual on the Temple Mount, the issue of supervision
of construction, human rights, preservation of antiquities,
border-crossing conditions, restrictions on security matters, the scope
of judicial and criminal jurisdiction of each side over citizens from
the other side who enter territory under their control.

On the basis of this option, the two sides would grant surveillance
and oversight authorities to an international body. This body, which
would function as an “observer,” would have to examine whether the
sides carried out the directives of the arrangement.

A fourth option proposes joint management, and a division of authority
between the two sides with international backing. The Old City basin
would operate as a single unit, and the sides would share the majority
of administrative and policing authorities in the basin.

The international body would be responsible for authority in areas
in which the joint operation would, for whatever reason, fail. The
agreement could determine a period of time upon the conclusion of
which the international body would have to restore to the different
sides those authorities that it assumed.

In the fifth option, similar to the fourth, the historic basin would
“usually” be administered as a single unit, although this would be
carried out by the international body itself, and not by the parties.

Nevertheless, it is possible that relatively small areas, primarily
those holy places on which there is no dispute, would be divided
among the sides on a territorial basis. According to this plan,
which would essentially mean internationalization of the holy basin,
the international body would retain not only supervision and oversight
authorities; it would also be responsible for administering the holy
basin, and would constitute its source of authority and control.

One of the more interesting questions is who would operate
the international body? Here, again, the team lays out several
sub-options: an international organization such as the United Nations;
a multinational organization that would be established especially
for the purposes of this task; or a country such as the United States
or Switzerland.

The permanent settlement team of the JIIS did not expressly recommend
any of these options, but it does favor some sort of international
involvement in administration of the Old City, mainly in the areas
of security and preservation and supervision of the holy places. The
bottom line of the new report states: “It is especially complicated
to plan and put into place a special regime for the historic basin,
but it may be assumed that there is no other solution that could gain
the agreement of the two sides and of the international community.”

Nadav Shragai is a correspondent for Haaretz. THE DAILY STAR publishes
this commentary in collaboration with the Common Ground News Service.

ALIYEV THREATENS TO SUSPEND GARABAGH TALKS

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
March 17 2006

Baku, March 16, AssA-Irada
President Ilham Aliyev has reaffirmed official Baku’s intransigent
stance with regard to the long-standing Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict
over Upper (Nagorno) Garabagh.

“If the occupied territories are not freed, Azerbaijan may reconsider
its participation in peace talks with Armenia. If we see that Armenia’s
involvement in the peace process is just an imitation, we will suspend
the talks,” Aliyev told the second congress of World Azerbaijanis in
Baku on Thursday.

Upper Garabagh, which is internationally recognized as part of
Azerbaijan, has both Azerbaijani and ethnic Armenian population. It was
occupied by Armenia in early 1990s, along with seven other Azerbaijani
districts, after large-scale hostilities that killed up to 30,000
people and forced over a million Azeris out of their homes.

The ceasefire accord was signed in 1994, but peace talks have been
fruitless so far and refugees remain stranded.

The commander-in-chief said that although the ceasefire was reached
12 years ago, the negotiations carried out so far have been fruitless
due to Yerevan’s inappropriate position.

“We can take part in the talks if we believe in their results. But
how long? This can’t go on forever. The patience of the Azerbaijani
people and authorities is getting exhausted.”

Aliyev reminded that Upper Garabagh is a historic Azerbaijani land
and Armenians came here only in mid-19th century. “They came to the
region as visitors, but afterwards acquired the quantitative majority
and paved the way for separatist sentiments,” he said.

“Official Baku will never accept the occupation of Azerbaijani
territories. The Armenian invading forces must pull out, while
Azerbaijani citizens must return to the land of their forefathers.

Only after this can normal relations be forged between Azerbaijan
and Armenia. And this is the only way to achieve a peace accord,”
the president said.

ARMENIANS’ VISIT NOT ELABORATED

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
March 17 2006

Baku, March 16, AssA-Irada
Three Armenian representatives joined an event of the European security
body in Baku on Thursday.

It is still unclear how the three employees of Armenia’s ministries of
foreign affairs and transport, as well as another government official,
succeeded in coming to Azerbaijan to attend the 14th economic forum
of the OSCE.

Commenting on the matter, Deputy Prime Minister Abid Sharifov said
the visit was paid through the OSCE, but declined to elaborate in
which Azeri embassy the Armenians had acquired their visas. “Do I
have to report to you?” he enquired in reply to journalists’ questions.

Sharifov noted that the Azeri government does not interfere with the
conduct of events on the level of OSCE. He said that although Azeris
and Armenians have attended the same conferences before, it would
be wrong to interpret this as cooperation with the aggressor nation,
which is out of the question.

“I repeat that the fact Armenians attended the same conference does not
mean cooperation. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan are OSCE member states.”

Frank Geerkens, head of the OSCE Chairmanship Unit, said Armenia’s
participation at the forum as an OSCE member is “natural”.

“Today’s event pursued economic goals. As for the Upper Garabagh
conflict, the OSCE representatives visited Armenia and Azerbaijan last
month. The organization is interested in the conflict settlement and
is making efforts to achieve this,” Geerkens said.

The head of the OSCE Office in Baku, Maurizio Pavesi, stated that the
permission to visit Baku was provided by the Azerbaijani government
proper and advised journalists to approach officials with this
question instead.

The hard-line Garabagh Liberation Organization (GLO) strongly condemned
Armenians’ attendance. Its members staged a protest, trying to disrupt
the discussions. But the police prevented the attempt, detaining four
of them.

In a statement, the organization said it considers the fact the
government did not prevent the visit as an insult to the memory of
those who died in battles for Garabagh and a severe blow dealt upon
the Azerbaijani people’s interests.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARMENIAN MINISTER TRYING TO DERAIL PEACE TALKS, AZERI OFFICIAL SAYS

Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
March 17 2006

Baku, March 16, AssA-Irada
An Azeri presidential administration official has accused Armenian
Foreign Minister of attempting to derail efforts to settle the
long-standing Upper (Nagorno) Garabagh conflict, following the latter’s
outrageous statement.

“Vardan Oskanian is trying to disrupt peace talks. As I understand,
his latest statements signal that he wants to negatively affect
the entire peace process,” the head of the President’s Office
international relations department, Novruz Mammadov said, while
commenting on Oskanian’s statement that Upper Garabagh “has never been
part of Azerbaijan and is Armenian land”. The Armenian minister also
maintained that if Baku does not recognize the independence of the
self-proclaimed republic, the occupied land would “never be returned”.

“Azerbaijan reserves the right to free its land from under the
aggressor country’s occupation and this is in line with international
law,” Mammadov said. He added that Armenia has recently been under
pressure with regard to the conflict resolution.