New Britain Herald, CT
29 Oct. 2004

Chamber to honor Harry Mazadoorian

By WILLIAM F. MILLERICK, Special to The Herald 10/29/2004

There are people who lead magnificent lives, in the purest sense of the
word. They inspire loyal friendship, they contribute to advancing
society and through their relentless optimism and sharing of their
innate talents, they inspire others to do the same. In short, their
deeds and words bring out the best in people.

For 20 years, the New Britain Chamber of Commerce has presented a
Distinguished Community Service Award at its annual meeting. This year,
on the celebration of two decades of recognizing leadership, the
recipient is someone who has lead just such a magnificent life.

Advertisement

Harry Mazadoorian, attorney, professor, author, community and political
leader, is this year’s Distinguished Community Service honoree. From
the day we announced this year’s award, the enthusiasm and genuine warm
good wishes have been terrific. And that is as it should be.

Harry Mazadoorian moves easily in many circles, some interconnected,
some not. He has friends from his youth as a student in New Britain
schools, a Herald carrier and graduate of New Britain High School. He
has many close friends from his days at Yale College and Yale Law
School. He has friends from his days in New Britain politics and his
time as Common Council majority leader. He has friends from the local
Armenian community and church.

The list goes on and on because Harry Mazadoorian’s life hasn’t been
two acts, it’s been in many acts. A few years ago, he was the chief
writer and the editor of what is nationally recognized as the single
best book on dispute resolution through mediation, the “Mediation
Practice Handbook.” There is nowhere near enough space here to go into
his later-life career as perhaps the pre-eminent national authority on
dispute resolution, but know this, as a Distinguished Professor of
Dispute Resolution at Quinnipiac Law School, he has been invited to
speak and headline at conferences around the world.

As this alternative to high-cost litigation has continued to gain
acceptance, much of it through Mazadoorian’s work, it is increasingly
being looked at as an important component of tort reform. Nationally
recognized, with friends in the highest of places, he never forgot
home, and home has never forgotten him.

Today, as he serves as chairman of New Britain General Hospital’s board
of directors his time is also spent on the American Savings Foundation
and the Banknorth boards. In the recent past, he’s been involved with
many community organizations, from Klingberg Family Centers, the
Visiting Nurses Association, the Red Cross, Family Services and others.
Many of them have called to secure reservations for the Nov. 18 dinner
at the CCSU Student Center ballroom. Information on the event, which
runs from 5 to 8 p.m., is available by contacting the Chamber at (860)
229-1665 or

Through every phase of his life, Harry Mazadoorian has always been what
many refer to as “a New Britain guy.” A New Britain guy is someone who,
when you run into them on the street or at a function, or have lunch,
talks about the city’s possibilities, about how history can positively
impact the future, about what’s right with New Britain. In short, a
“New Britain guy” is a booster and always will be.

I first met Harry Mazadoorian when I was editorial writer at The Herald
and you could see, instantly, that this was someone who looked for the
greatest good in the city and the people who worked and lived here.
People like Harry Mazadoorian made others proud to be here. His roots
are here and they’ll always be here, no matter how many notables he is
friends with or appears with.

A lot of people know that Mazadoorian is a very close friend of Fay
Vincent, the former commissioner of Major League Baseball. “We talk
almost every day,” he told me recently, when I pressed him.
Mazadoorian, Vincent and the late Bart Giammatti were classmates at
Yale together. Mazadoorian knew Vincent and Giammatti independently of
each other and eventually, those two met, essentially forming a trio.

That trio was tragically broken with Giammatti’s shockingly sudden
death of a massive heart attack in 1989, one week after he handed Pete
Rose a lifetime suspension from baseball for gambling. When Giammatti
died, Vincent, who was his deputy commissioner, rose to the
commissioner’s post. Mazadoorian, as loyal a Red Sox fan as you’ll
find, was Vincent’s frequent guest at the World Series and baseball
events over the years, which meant putting in an awful lot of time
watching the Yankees.

“This is a special week for me,” he said yesterday. “I’m very flattered
by this award and with the Red Sox finally winning, that’s a good
week.”

Harry Mazadoorian walks in many circles, local, national, athletic,
intellectual. He is welcome and respected in all of them. In every
circle he enters, home and away, he represents New Britain and he
represents this great city with a assured dignity and unmeasured
affection that is worth emulating.

I thought it was revealing, how he described a dinner with Yogi Berra.
“Bill, you’d have thought he was a New Britain guy. He was like 200
other people you know in New Britain, quiet, hard-working, modest,
successful.”

I suspect Harry Mazadoor-ian got along pretty well with Yogi that
night. It sounds like they’re a lot alike.

William F. Millerick is president of the New Britain Chamber of
Commerce. He may be reached at bill@newbritainchamber.

Marchers for peace endure rhetorical crossfire
By Keti Sikharulidze

The Messenger, Georgia
29 Oct. 2004

A 7,000 kilometer international march for peace titled “Caucasus
Without Hotspots” began in Moscow on September 19 and passed through
Tbilisi on October 27.

Having been blocked from separatist Abkhazia, the group nonetheless
hopes to travel to breakaway South Ossetia and other current hotspots
in the Caucasus before eventually returning back to the Russian
capital.

The marchers’ next stop is Tskhinvali. At a press conference on
Wednesday, they said they had had negotiations with the separatist
capital and that they are not against their traveling there but “they
are afraid that there may be provocations from the Georgian side.”

However, representative of the Ministry of Conflict Resolution
Levan Geradze said the situation was quite the opposite – that the
Georgian side is not against the marchers’ going to South Ossetia “but
we cannot give any guarantees that they would arrive there safely,
because unfortunately it is not controlled by the Georgian side. They
should ask for security guarantees from the Ossetian side, not the
Georgian,” Geradze told The Messenger.

The marchers include representatives of forty diasporas of Caucasus
people living in Russia and other CIS countries as well as veterans
of the Second World War.

As part of their effort, they intend to hold a “world congress of
Caucasus people” on May 9 next year, which will be the 60th anniversary
of the end of the Second World War in Europe, in the hope that this
will help resolve the various conflicts within the Caucasus.

The route of the march takes the participants through such
Caucasus conflict zones as Chechnya, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and
Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the three South Caucasus capitals of Baku,
Yerevan and Tbilisi.

Head of the march Vladimir Vakhania told The Messenger that the main
aim of the march is to tell the governments of Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Georgia and Russia to stop the bloody wars in the Caucasus region.

“We are marching these kilometers to play our part in the resolution of
conflicts in the Caucasus,” Vakhania said. “We are trying to explain
to all the people of the Caucasus that war is the worst thing that
may happen between neighboring nations. The only thing we have to
fight is separatism, extremism and terrorism.”

“We want to call for negotiations between the leaders of Georgia,
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia to solve the ethnic conflicts through
peaceful ways. It is very difficult to express the feelings of these
nations but I can assure you nobody wants war. Everyone is for the
peaceful settlements of all conflicts,” stated Vakhania.

Vakhania also stated that the organizers planned to reach Tbilisi
after 15 days, but that it had taken 37 days as they were unable to
cross the Russian-Abkhaz border at the river Psou. “We wanted to hold
a press conference there too, but unfortunately after negotiations
with Abkhaz officials we could not.”

After the problems in Abkhazia the members of the peace march went
to the recently reopened Russian-Georgian border crossing at Larsi
and after negotiations with Georgian and Russian officials were able
to cross into Georgia.

Good laws, weak practice put media freedom at risk
By Warren Hedges

The Messenger, Georgia
29 Oct. 2004

The OSCE’s text on repealing criminal libel laws
‘Ending the chilling Effect’ was authored in part
by Georgia’s Prosecutor General Zurab Adeishvili

Already facing heavy criticism for its treatment of human rights
concerns and respect for political plurality, the Georgian government
received serious criticism this week for its record on access to
information and press freedoms.

Over 50 Journalists from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia gathered in
Tbilisi October 26-27 for the First South Caucasus Media Conference
sponsored by the OSCE office of Freedom of the Media and the OSCE
Mission to Georgia.

On the one hand, organizers said that Georgia is at the forefront
of media freedom by passing some of the world’s most liberal laws on
defamation in July this year that decriminalized libel and slander,
meaning that journalists no longer have to fear jail time in case
they are accused.

OSCE’s representative on Freedom of the Media, Miklos Haraszti,
who hosted the conference, noted Georgia “belongs to the vanguard
not just in the CIS, Eastern Europe or even Western Europe but also
globally. It is among the five countries in the world that have
decriminalized libel.”

The other country’s where libel laws carry no criminal liability
– though they preserve civil liability – are the United States,
Moldova, Ukraine and Bosnia Herzegovina. By lifting the fear of
criminal prosecution, the OSCE’s Haraszti noted that these countries
reinforce modern civilization where journalists cannot be arrested
if someone disagrees with what they print or broadcast.

While Georgia’s legal statutes won praise, media analysts express
serious concern over how the laws are enforced and how the government
respects media freedom in practice.

Earlier this month, the media freedom watchdog Article 19 published a
report on Freedom of Information and the Media in Armenia, Azerbaijan
and Georgia and criticized the new Georgian government for its
failure to provide free access to information and several incidents
of officials intimidating journalists.

Article 19’s Europe Program Officer Iryna Smolina authored the report
and also attended the Tbilisi conference where she told The Messenger
that the new government has employed the “chameleon method” whereby
“they changed names and changed their declarations but they have
retained the same methods with the media.”

In a survey of journalists and government officials in Georgia,
Article 19 found that both groups agreed that public bodies are under
a legal obligation to provide information to the public. But Smolina
explains that official bodies under the new government have an even
worse record of releasing public information.

Over the first nine months of the year, Article 19 has documented
numerous cases when journalists attempts to gain public information
have been denied through delays, procedural problems such as the
restructuring of government offices and the absence of official
offices to handle freedom of information requests.

In its report commissioned by the OSCE, Article 19 notes that despite
the Rose Revolution in Georgia, “public institutions until now retained
the secrecy and the attitudes of their predecessor regimes.”

The report also includes several cases of intimidation of journalists
that have occurred in 2004. In addition to the highly-publicized case
of Gori editor Rezo Okruashvili, who was jailed on planted evidence,
Article 19 records the cases of journalists who were threatened and/or
attacked by government officials and members of the National Movement.

In May 2004, the editor of a regional Kakheti paper was beaten in an
attack he said was inspired by local authorities. Then in July he was
attacked again and robbed. A day after the robbery he recognized the
attacker as a member of the ruling party and a close friend of the
local gamgebeli.

While lawyer Iryna Smolina says that better government policies are
needed, she also notes that Georgian media must do more to create
independent editorial policies. Many journalists, she says, have put
themselves in a weak position through self-censorship and unwillingness
to learn or use many of the laws that exist for their protection. “The
only way to make the laws work is to use the law,” she says.

A day after the OSCE conference closed Georgia received another wake-up
call when independent watchdog Reporters Without Borders announced
its third annual worldwide index of press freedom, dropping Georgia
to 94th position out of 167 countries. In 2003, Georgia ranked 73rd
out of 166 countries.

In a brief explanation of Georgia’s ranking, Reporters Without Borders
said the drop “is largely due to unrest in the autonomous republics
of Adjara and Abkhazia, which gave rise to press freedom violations.”

That report covers events from September 1, 2003 through September 1,
2004, and is based on questionnaires sent to partner organizations
of Reporters Without Borders, as well as to journalists, researchers,
jurists and human rights activists.

Rebirth, reberth
By Danny Rubinstein

Ha’aretz
29 Oct. 2004

Writing in Arabic, the late Israeli journalist and commentator Victor
Nachmias tells of his childhood in Egypt, his immigration to Israel,
and the tension between his native land and the country of his rebirth

“Alrajul aladi wulida marten” (“The Man Who Was Born Twice: The Story
of an Egyptian Jew Who Immigrated to Israel”) by Victor Nachmias,
Al-Ma’aref, 192 pages

Victor Nachmias, a well-known Israeli TV and radio commentator on Arab
affairs, chose to write his autobiography in Arabic in order to bring
his personal story to as many Arab readers as possible, in Israel and
outside it.

But there was another reason. In writing in Arabic (the language of the
enemy, as many Israelis will say), he was proving to the world – and to
himself – that the tension between Egypt, his beloved homeland, and the
State of Israel, to which he immigrated in 1957, was the pivot of his
life.

Arriving in Israel at the age of 23, he felt he had been reborn. There
was nothing very new in this sentiment. One could call it “old-school
Zionism” of the type that was abundant in the early waves of
immigration to this country, a hundred years ago and more. Among
today’s new immigrants there are also quite a few who might describe
their move to Israel as a “rebirth.” Indeed, people who take the
dramatic step of adopting a new homeland, a new language, and very
often a new lifestyle and profession, have a tendency to change their
names, too – a kind of public declaration of their new identity. They
are not the same people they were before. They have been born twice, to
quote the title of Nachmias’ book. But Victor Nachmias had another
reason for saying that he was reborn in the State of Israel: He arrived
at his new home in the Castel ma’abara (immigrant transit camp) on May
18, 1957 – which was also his birthday.

Nachmias is not the only Israeli Jew to write in Arabic. Perhaps one of
the earliest and most intriguing was Yitzhak Shemi, born in Hebron in
1888. Shemi worked as a teacher in Palestine, Damascus and Bulgaria,
and died in 1949. His book, “Revenge of the Fathers,” is considered a
literary masterpiece by Jews and Arabs alike. The Iraqi-born Jewish
authors recently profiled in this paper by Prof. Sasson Somekh are
probably more familiar to the general public. Somekh writes, for
example, about Yitzhak Bar-Moshe, born in Baghdad, who worked as a
senior employee in Israel Radio’s Arabic department and served as a
press and cultural attache at the Israeli Embassy in Cairo. Upon his
return, in 1994, he wrote “Cairo in My Heart,” about his experiences
there.

Since nearly all the Jewish communities in Arab countries have
disappeared and very few Jews are left who can claim that Arabic is
their mother tongue, presumably it won’t be long before there are no
more Jews writing or publishing books in Arabic. Nachmias’ book is thus
one of the last links in the chain.

Nachmias writes about his childhood in Cairo, about the Jews of Egypt,
about immigrating to Israel, about working for Israel Radio in Arabic
and Israel TV in Hebrew. He describes the great turning point in his
life in the wake of Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem (1977) – an event that
made it possible for him to return to Cairo and meet with top-tier
Egyptian officials. He writes about his coverage of Arab Israelis and
Palestinians.

The more personal he gets, the more interesting the book. Many parts of
it are genuinely moving. “Who are you, Victor Nachmias?” asks the
Egyptian journalist Anis Manzour, editor of the weekly magazine
October, after they meet and become close friends.

“I am a victim of the Israeli-Arab conflict,” Nachmias replies. “I was
forced to leave Egypt before completing my pharmacology degree at Qasr
al-Eini (Cairo’s famous medical school). I left with one 20-kilo
suitcase of clothes and personal belongings, a total of $20 (the
maximum allowance) and a certificate stamped with the words `exit, no
return,’ revoking the Egyptian citizenship held by my father.”

Years later, when Nachmias accompanied President Yitzhak Navon to Egypt
as part of the press corps, he was asked why, upon leaving Egypt, he
had chosen to go to Israel. The question was accusing in tone, and
Nachmias’ answer was that since Egypt had no right to expel him, they
also had no right to ask what made him choose Israel.

`Little Vicky boy’

Nachmias’ account of his childhood is quite sparing, which is a pity.
The book hardly mentions his father, who died in 1955, or the schools
he went to. He says little about his early family experiences and about
the social, cultural and political milieu in which he grew up. On the
other hand, he writes at length about the contribution of Egyptian
Jewry to the social, economic, cultural and political life of the
country.

The Jewish community in Egypt was indeed unique. It was an amalgam of
Jews from North Africa, Damascus, Russia, Iraq and Yemen. They
integrated well into the Levantine urban elite of Cairo and Alexandria,
which was composed of foreigners – Greeks, Italians and Armenians – in
addition to the French and British expatriates about whom so much has
been written.

A third or more of the Jewish community left Egypt after the Israeli
War of Independence, and another third after the Sinai Campaign in 1956
(the “triple” Israeli-Anglo-French attack, as it is known in Egypt).
The rest packed their bags after the Six-Day War. The Nachmias family
left – or was ordered to leave – in 1957.

They lived on the second floor. The landlord wanted to move the ground
floor tenant, Haj Saber, into their apartment so he could turn the
bottom floor into a shop. As the Nachmias family deliberated on what to
take with them, the neighbors came snooping to see what furniture they
were leaving behind.

Twenty years later, Victor Nachmias, the Israeli journalist, went back
to visit his childhood home at 1 Tur-Sina Street. The doorman, Uncle
Ibrahim, who was still there after all those years, recognized Nachmias
and greeted him excitedly. “It’s my little Vicky boy!” he exclaimed. A
little cluster of neighbors who remembered his late father, Mr.
Suleiman Nachmias, his mother, “Umm Vicky,” and his brothers and
sisters, congregated at the entrance. He went upstairs and there, to
his surprise, found a large porcelain vase that had belonged to his
family. His mother, afraid that it might break on the way, had decided
to leave it behind. For Nachmias, it was an epitaph to his mother, who
had died the year before.

The Cairo of Nachmias’ childhood – a Paris in miniature – was gone, and
in its place was a third-world metropolis. His reunion with Cairo in
1977 was like meeting an old flame, once young and beautiful, now a
wrinkled old woman. Nachmias’ writing here takes off, as it does in his
account of other personal landmarks – his first day in the ma’abara, a
visit to Jerusalem, his early days with Israel Radio. Nachmias was
involved in the Arabic news programs, which were a kind of flagship
project at the time. All over the Arab world, they were listened to and
believed – the very opposite of the situation today.

The book in its current format is geared to the Arab reader. Victor
Nachmias did not live to see its publication in Hebrew. A month ago, he
suffered a stroke, and passed away this week.

Foreign minister says Muslim countries understand situation in Tak Bai

http, Thailand
29 Oct. 2004

BANGKOK, Oct 29 (TNA) – Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai
Friday told reporters that he received a positive response from his
counterparts in Muslim countries toward Tak Bai incident, in which
more than 80 Muslim men died while in the Thai army’s custody after
a crackdown on a mass demon stration in southern border Narathiwat
province on Monday.

Mr. Surakiart said he had earlier made phone calls to explain the
government action to crackdown on Tak Bai Muslim protesters to foreign
ministers of Indonesia, Morocco, Bahrain,and Dr. Abdelouzhed Belkeziz,
the secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Countries or
OIC which has 50 members.

He said Bahrain’s prime minister made a direct phone call to offer
his morale support to Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

”They appreciated that Thailand explained itself quickly to them about
what happened in Tak Bai. They said they understood Thai government’s
action well and promised to explain it to fellow countries. Bahrain
said it would support Thailand as it knew that we are peace and unity
loving people,” said Mr. Surakiart.

The OIC secretary general said he was pleased to hear an explanation
and that Thailand has investigated the deaths of the protesters while
in the army’s custody, he said, the OIC would also explain Thailand’s
decision to Muslim members countries.

He said Morocco would help by explaining Thailand’s situation to
Armenia, Tunisia, and Libya including other Muslim countries in the
middle east like Kuwait, Oman, and Saudi Arabia.

Confident that Thailand has cleared its bad mark among international
communities, Mr. Surakiart, however, acknowledged to the mistake by
the security forces in handling the situation which unnecessarily
caused a lot of deaths.

”I want to stress that we did not want to hurt our Muslim brothers. We
are family. It is worrisome and dangerous if some people have developed
a wrong perception that Thailand are against its own Muslim citizens.”
he said.

Mr. Surakiart said the United States also expressed its satisfaction
over Thailand’s action to investigate into the deaths after it
previously criticized the kingdom for breaching human rights.

”Thailand has respected human rights and constitutional rights but
mistakes could happen. We will leave that to the investigation team
to show us the truth,” he said, adding that the government would
certainly compensate the deaths and would help their families.

Responding to a question, the Thai foreign minister said other Muslim
countries were not worried that the situation would escalate because
of the Tak Bai incident.

”I think Malaysia would understand us and there should be no affect,”
he said.

Several Malaysian tourists were killed in a bomb blast at a bar in
Sungai Kolok District of southern border Narathiwat province last
night.(TNA)-E110

The Guardian, UK
29 Oct. 2004

Middle East sees benefits of Bush

There is surprising support for a second Bush term in Iran and the Arab
world, writes Brian Whitaker

Friday October 29, 2004

President Bush’s election campaign received support from an unusual
quarter last week when Hasan Rowhani, head of the Iranian Supreme
National Security Council, said that four more years of George W would
be good for Iran. Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader, was asked
about the Bush-Kerry contest at a meeting with journalists a couple of
weeks ago (before he was taken ill) and replied: “It makes no
difference.”

In London, the consensus among Arab ambassadors – though they don’t say
so publicly – is that keeping Bush in the White House would be
preferable to starting afresh with Kerry.

Such views are probably not what most people would expect to hear. Bush
denounced Iran in his famous “axis of evil” speech and has been making
hostile noises about it ever since. He has cold-shouldered Arafat and
more or less washed his hands of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
More generally, as far as the Arab world is concerned, he has spared no
effort to make himself the most unpopular American president ever.

Disliking Bush is one thing, but working up enthusiasm for Kerry is
another – and there’s little sign of that in the Middle East. What
interests Arabs most is America’s attitude towards the Palestinian
people. Although the US under a President Kerry might be expected to
re-engage in the peace process, Kerry’s emphatically-declared support
for Israel does not inspire Arabs with hopes of an even-handed
approach.

Also pointing in Bush’s favour is the popular Arab view that
second-term American presidents are better placed to take a firm line
with Israel than first-term presidents. The theory is that in their
second term they no longer need to please the Israeli lobby in the US
because they cannot seek re-election again. Although the examples of
Jimmy Carter and George Bush Sr tend to disprove this theory, it’s
widely believed nevertheless. Bush gains, too, from the argument that
says it’s best to stay with the devil you know. Arab politicians and
diplomats are fond of the status quo (look how long most of them have
had their jobs) and, after four years adjusting to life under Bush,
they would rather not embark on a new learning curve now with Kerry.

Advertiser links
More Th>N Car Insurance
Switch to More Th>N and save £90 on average. Buying online…

morethan.com

its4me Insurance Less Money More Service
Your quote instantly from its4me’s leading insurers….

its4me-insurance.co.uk

Car Insurance for over 35s
Are you over 35? Looking for more affordable car insurance?…

insure.co.uk
In any case, the influential Egyptian daily, al-Ahram, sees no
substantial difference between Bush and Kerry, and has declared its
support for Ralph Nader (of Lebanese descent), describing him as the
only candidate who “responds to Arab-American interests and positions
on Palestine, Iraq, civil liberties and world-wide respect for
international law”.

While agreeing that there may be little difference between Bush and
Kerry on Israeli-Palestinian policy, Albert Aghazerian, a
Palestinian-Armenian historian, detects a difference in their general
attitude.

“It’s a difference regarding people who have taken it upon themselves
to act as if they are the liberators of the world,” he said in an
interview with the web magazine Bitter Lemons. “For all his faults, I
don’t think Kerry will ignore the lessons that we have learnt
throughout history. The Bush people think they have a self-righteous
justification to go and change the course of things. This messianic
spirit, I think, is less in Kerry than it is in Bush … I believe that
Bush has broken the basic rules of common sense … it has to do with
this messianic approach.”

Bush’s messianic view, some argue, will bring more polarisation in the
Middle East if he gets a second term, simultaneously benefiting the
most impatient reformers and the Islamist militants: the reformers will
be encouraged by continuing US pressure on Arab regimes, while al-Qaida
and its likes will look to Bush for further help with their recruiting.

There are various other sectional interests that could gain from
keeping Bush in the White House. Bush’s relaxed environmental policies
benefit the oil-producing countries (as do the current high oil
prices). Bush is less likely than Kerry to trouble Arab governments
with complaints about human rights, so long as they continue to fight
terrorism, and there are many Lebanese who welcome American efforts to
stop Syria interfering in Lebanon’s affairs.

As far as Iraq and the presidential election is concerned, the most
Machiavellian view was set out recently in the Jordan Times. On the
assumption that the war is unwinnable, the writer suggested that
electing Kerry now will allow the neoconservatives to blame him for
American failure in Iraq and to insist that everything would have
worked out fine if only Bush had been given a bit longer:

“Many on the American right still believe that the Vietnam war could
have been won if only the spineless traitors of the left had not
weakened American ‘resolve’ – and they say this even though Richard
Nixon, who was elected on a promise to end the Vietnam war and presided
over the whole latter phase of it, was a Republican. What could they do
with a lost war on a Democratic president’s watch?”

Far better, then, to keep Bush in power and make him reap the
whirlwind. The Iraq quagmire may also explain why Hasan Rowhani and
some other Iranian officials (though not, by any means, all of them)
would like Bush to have a second term. So long as the US is bogged down
in Iraq, it cannot seriously contemplate toppling the regime in Iran –
or, for that matter, in Syria. Prospects for the US remaining bogged
down look rather better under Bush than Kerry.

Some in the Iranian government also think Bush has begun to realise
that his hostile policies towards Iran are unlikely to succeed and is
therefore likely to adopt a more realistic approach if elected for a
second term. If the dominant view of the Bush-Kerry contest in the
Middle East is one of overwhelming cynicism, the picture among
Arab-Americans – who do, after all, have a say in the outcome – is
rather different.

Despite Bush’s effort to woo them with a with a message of greetings
for Ramadan (“Americans who practise the Islamic faith enrich our
society … Laura joins me in sending our best wishes”), they
overwhelmingly support Kerry.

A recent poll of Arab-American voters in four of the states where they
are most numerous – Michigan, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania – showed
54% backing Kerry and only 28% backing Bush, with the rest undecided or
supporting Nader.

Arab Americans, though, have different priorities from Arabs in the
Middle East. For them, the most important factor in deciding who to
vote for is the American economy, followed by terrorism/national
security, according to the poll. Iraq came fourth in their list of
important issues, and Israeli-Palestinian issues only eighth.

The poll was conducted by Zogby International, a Washington-based firm
whose boss, James Zogby, is himself an Arab American and also a
supporter of the Democrats.

In an article for al-Ahram Weekly he explained last week why he would
be voting for Kerry.

“The last four years have had a devastating effect on our nation,” he
wrote. “They have tested our national unity and our sense of mission.
The Bush administration has pursued domestic and foreign policies that
have been both neglectful and reckless. Because of reckless tax cuts a
record surplus was turned into record deficits.”

Turning to the benefits of electing Kerry and his running-mate John
Edwards, he continued: “Whatever differences I may have with them, I
know that they will pursue diplomacy over unilateral military
pre-emption. They can be better trusted to find a way out of Iraq than
the arrogant crew that got us into that mess in the first place.

“They will protect our civil liberties … and they will make the
pursuit of an Israeli-Palestinian peace a priority rather than a
neglected afterthought.”

Optimistic words. But we shall have to wait a few more days to see if
Kerry gets a chance to prove them wrong or right.

–Boundary_(ID_r5IFOEESZiX9yzPOx8TCsA)–

MM Speaker Meets With Charge D’Affaires Of Libya
[October 29, 2004, 17:07:57]

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
29 Oct. 2004

Chairman of the Milli Majlis Murtuz Alasgarov met with Charge
D’Affaires of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in
Azerbaijan Muhammad al-Jleti Jabir.

The Speaker said that although friendly relations between the two
countries have existed since ancient times, they have not been
brought to a due level, and that no a single sitting of the joint
interparliamentary commission formed three years ago has been held yet.

He expressed satisfaction, however, that despite all the problems,
Libya had supported the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. Our
people appreciate it and, our country has concern in development of
relations with Libya, he said.

Charge D’Affaires Muhammad al-Jleti Jabir shared Mr. Alasgarov’s
opinion stressing the importance of organization of reciprocal visits
of the two countries’ delegations for development of the relations. He
announced that Speaker of Libyan Parliament had invited his Azerbaijani
counterpart to visit the country and handed the letter of invitation
over to Murtuz Alasgarov.

Mr. Muhammad al-Jleti Jabir stressed as well that Libya has always
supported and will support in the future the territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan adding that despite the repeated requests from the
official Yerevan, his country has not yet allowed the opening of
Armenia’s embassy in Libya.

The parties then discussed a number of other issues of mutual interest.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Internews-Armenia to conduct radio show training

International Journalist’s Network
29 Oct. 2004

Armenian radio journalists and producers can apply for an upcoming
Internews seminar called “Radio Hour Production.”

Internews-Armenia said it will accept 12 participants for the seminar,
which is scheduled for November 29 to December 10 at the
Internews-Armenia headquarters in Yerevan. The application deadline:
November 25.

As with other Internews programs, the seminar will emphasize practical
work as a key part of the training. The consultant for this seminar
will be Bruce Gellerman of the United States. Gellerman is a veteran
radio journalist and producer who has worked with National Public
Radio, 60 Minutes, the BBC, CBS News, Deutsche Welle and the New York
Times.

For more information, contact training coordinator David Aslanyan at
[email protected] or telephone +374-1-58-36-20.

Internews-Armenia:

htm

BEAST ON THE MOON
by James L. Seay

When one hears the word, “Genocide,” one almost without fail calls to mind
the Nazi “final solution” to “the Jewish problem” which has become known as
the Holocaust. However, between 1915 and 1923, another Holocaust took place;
one which is today virtually forgotten. On May 16th, 1978, past President
and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Jimmy Carter said, “It is generally not
known in the world that, in the years preceding 1916, there was a concerted
effort made to eliminate all the Armenian people, probably one of the
greatest tragedies that ever befell any group. And there weren’t any
Nuremberg trials.” On May 11, 1918, only two years after the beginning of
the Armenian Holocaust, another past President and Nobel Peace Prize
laureate, Theodore Roosevelt, summed it up, saying, “…the Armenian
massacre was the greatest crime of the war, and the failure to act against
Turkey is to condone it … the failure to deal radically with the Turkish
horror means that all talk of guaranteeing the future peace of the world is
mischievous nonsense.”

After the able bodied Armenian men were “drafted” and killed by the
so-called “progressive” Young Turks of the Ottoman Empire, villages and
towns, now populated only by women, children and the elderly, were
“relocated for their own good” as Turkish Gendarmes “escorted” them in death
marches across Anatolia to the Syrian Desert, Der Zor. An estimated million
and a half people died. Not only was it an Armenian Holocaust, but, somehow,
I could not help but be reminded of the Trail of Tears. Man’s inhumanity to
man seems to know no boundaries.

I must admit, I knew little of the Young Turks and their efforts to
eradicate the Armenian people, a Christian minority in the Ottoman Empire,
except from reading The 40 Days of Musa Dagh by Franz Werfel in an
undergraduate Modern World Literature class B and that was well over 40
years ago! This was my background when I traveled to Normal, Illinois to
witness a play, Beast on the Moon by Richard Kalinoski, at the tiny
Heartland Theatre, hidden away in northeast Normal in what used to be the
Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Children’s School and sponsored by
Armenian-Americans, George, Carol and Peter Churukian.

Set in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in the 1920s, the core story deals with Seta, a
sparkling, impulsive young girl, filled with hope and the love of life, who
is brought to America from the “old country” by Aram as a “picture bride.”
Grateful that she has been saved from death, Seta discovers that her life as
Aram’s wife involves a different kind of suffering, as she endures a
soul-chilling servitude to a desperate and wounded man bent on begetting
sons who will replace the empty faces in a faded photograph of his dead
family. The title, we learn, comes from a Nineteenth Century lunar eclipse
during which the Turks ran from their houses and fired guns at “the beast on
the moon,” as the Armenian minority watched. A few years later, the Turks
again ran from their houses with guns, but this time, fired at their
Armenian neighbors.

The aching irony of the play is that both Seta and Aram, who have managed to
escape the atrocities wrought by the Young Turks and their predecessors in
the old country, find a new tyranny in which he attempts to turn his
quicksilver bride into a “proper woman,” obedient, compliant and silent,
while he attempts to become a proper patriarch. The play, in spite of its
historical background, is not so much a story of escape or revenge, but a
graceful fable of transformation, and begs the question, in such a marriage
and in such a world, how can both souls be rescued?

Kalinoski’s play, skillfully directed by Rachel Chaves and featuring
outstanding acting by Dan Irwin, Katy Lacio and Greg McGrath, is overflowing
with a wealth of images and dramatic action. It is funny, poetic,
compassionate and wise. But be warned, it is one of the most emotionally
powerful plays I have seen in a long time. It has all of the terrible impact
of a brick crashing through a plate glass window. And when you look at the
play’s poster of an ancient photograph of a stiffly-posed circa 1900
Armenian family, it will scald your heart. One should remember the words of
Adolph Hitler, who, while persuading his associates that a Jewish holocaust
would be tolerated by the West, stated, “Who, after all, speaks today of the
annihilation of the Armenians?”

Beast on the Moon is presented at the Heartland Theatre Company, at One
Normal Plaza, near the corner of Beech and Lincoln in Normal, Illinois. It
was originally produced as part of the 1995 Humana Festival of New American
Plays at the Actors’ Theatre of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. In three
weeks, it will open at the Moscow Arts Theatre in Moscow, Russia (made
famous by Constantine Stanislovski) and in March, 2005, it will finally open
in New York. Remaining performances at Heartland Theatre Company are October
28th, 29th & 30th at 7:30 p.m.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Erdogan: Opening Of Borders Depends On Armenia’s Attitude

Anadolu Agency
29 Oct. 2004

BAKU – Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday,
“Turkey has been defending from the very beginning that a solution
should be found to the Upper Karabakh dispute under territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan from the very beginning. Meanwhile, opening
of borders between Turkey and Armenia depends on Armenia’s attitude.”

In an interview with Azerbaijani Three Points newspaper, Prime Minister
Erdogan said, “there are some obstacles in front of normalization of
Turkey-Armenia relations and opening of borders. Ignorance of official
borders by Armenia, Armenia’s efforts for recognition of so-called
Armenian genocide, and long-standing historical problems between
Turkey and Armenia have been affecting our relations negatively.”

“Armenia’s maintaining its occupying policy against all resolutions of
the UN for Upper Karabakh also has a negative impact on our bilateral
relations. In order to normalize those relations, Armenia should
set good neighborly relations with Turkey and the other regional
countries,” he said.

-TURKEY-AZERBAIJAN RELATIONS-

“There have been historic cultural and social relations between Turkey
and Azerbaijan. Our bilateral relations have reached to a perfect level
in only 14 years after Azerbaijan acquired its independence,” he said.

Prime Minister Erdogan noted that the bilateral relations would
further improve after the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline
project was put into force, adding, “other energy projects will bring
our relations to the level of strategic partnership.”

Referring to Turkish-Azeri economic relations, Erdogan said that
“although political relations between the two countries are excellent,
economic ties are not at a satisfactory level.”

“The annual trade volume between Turkey and Azerbaijan is only about
430 million U.S. dollars. This is not an amount that makes us happy.
There need to be progress made in the areas of customs and taxation
as well as banking between the two countries.”

-TURKEY’S EU MEMBERSHIP PROCESS-

Referring to Turkey’s EU membership process, Prime Minister Erdogan
said, “we expect the EU to make a decision at its summit on December
17th to open entry talks with Turkey. In that case, accession
negotiations will start in 2005. The negotiation process will be
difficult and take a long time. The process will entail us to work
hard. The process also requires adequate financial source.”

“We are planning to fulfil entry talks in 2010 and reach our target of
EU full membership. Turkey’s membership will have positive impacts in
economy, politics and culture in Europe. Turkey will make a valuable
contribution to the EU in energy. Also, the EU’s influence in the
Islam world will increase with membership of Turkey,” Prime Minister
Erdogan added.