The Messenger, Georgia
Nov. 5, 2004
Snapshots of living together
By Nino Gvalia
At the exhibition
Photographers from Georgia Ira Kurmaeva and Liza Osephaishvili-Nemtsova
Until November 7, the TMS Art Gallery (16 Rustaveli Avenue) is holding
a photography exhibition titled ‘Living Together,’ presented by the
British Council and BP.
The collection features works by six young photographers from Georgia,
Azerbaijan and Armenia – Liza Osepaishvili-Nemtsova, Irina Kurmaeva,
Sitara Ibrahimova, David Hakobyan, Vahe Gevorgyan and Rafail Shakirov.
The Living Together exhibition is the result of a week’s work in
February this year, when the six photographers from the three Caucasian
countries met up to take snapshots around the theme of living together.
They worked in Tbilisi, Mtskheta, Marneuli and Tskhinvali, where
different ethnic and social groups live side by side.
According to Liza Osepaishvili-Nemtsova, working together on the
project was a very interesting experience, as it gave her the
opportunity to meet up with colleagues and share ideas. “I liked the
project very much. I met with interesting photographers and
collaborated with them,” she said.
The project was coordinated by the British photographer Ann Doherty,
whose works were exhibited in a British Council exhibition in the three
South Caucasian countries in 2003.
The aim of the project was to bring together a photo collection for a
touring exhibition describing how people of different origins can live
in peace and harmony, despite the recent ethnic conflicts in the South
Caucasus.
“When I see this exhibition, I think that it belongs to one author. I
don’t know if this is good or bad, but I find the exhibition very
interesting and also think that it is a very good idea when
photographers from different countries work on the same theme and then
exhibit their work together,” said the famous photographer Irina
Abzhandadze.
The black and white photographs printed to a very high quality well
illustrate the often harsh life of Caucasian people, who live in
poverty, face many difficulties, and whose eyes are thoughtful and sad.
“This theme has made a strong influence on me. The exhibition again and
again proves that photography is one of the main art-forms, which can
send a powerful message to a viewer,” commented the well known
photographer Yuri Mechitov while visiting the exhibition.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

The Messenger, Georgia
Nov. 5, 2004
Powel: U.S. works with both Azerbaijan and Armenia regarding Karabakh
According to Azeri 525 Gazeta, the Karabakh problem is touched upon in
a resent report of U.S. State Department. U.S. Secretary of State
Collin Powel stated that official Washington has close ties with the
Caucasus states and Central Asia, where its position is very strong.
Powel noted that Russian-American relations present a major interest
for the United States.
According to the State Department, Powel touched upon the problem of
Nagorno-Karabakh in a report on the three main problems of the foreign
policies of the United States. He said that the United States conducts
mutual work with Azerbaijan as well as with Armenia regarding the
settlement of conflict, however, Powel did not go into details.
Official Baku not once expressed dissatisfaction with the standpoint of
the United States in Karabakh.
The paper writes, “it can be assumed that after the last statement of
the U.S. Secretary of State, Washington will take a more active stand
in the matter of the settlement of the Karabakh problem.”
As the press service of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia
Hamlet Gasparian said, regardless of the fact what Azerbaijan wants and
says, Yerevan thinks the important the issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh
status is to be settled at negotiations. According to him, “all other
issues” can be considered by Armenia only after solving the region’s
status.

The Messenger, Georgia
Nov. 5, 2004
Abkhazia-Georgia rail link “within a year”
The Head of the Russian Railway Gennady Fadeev declared on Thursday
that the basic transport corridor connecting Russia with Armenia
through Georgia can start functioning within a year, Prime News
reports.
Gennady Fadeev told journalists in Yerevan that “from the point of view
of financial and technical opportunities, the
Sochi-Sukhumi-Tbilisi-Yerevan transport corridor can start functioning
within a year.”
Fadeev noted that there was a prospect of increase of the volume of the
Armenian-Russian cargo transportations by means of railway, and also
noted that there was an opportunity to open a ferry link with Russian
port of Caucasus, but that in this issue “the opinion of the Georgian
side” was very important.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Hurriyet, Turkey
Nov. 5, 2004
Bush’s Victory, And A Nagging Question
BYEGM: 11/5/2004
BY TUFAN TURENC
HURRIYET- When US President George W. Bush put the blame for the
September 11 attacks on distant countries and societies, he gained the
support of many conservatives. Many Americans saw Bush as a leader who
would protect them from terrorism. Thus, the Republicans scored a great
victory. Yet many other Americans and people in other parts of the
world thought that Bush’s violent policies would fail. We’ll see
whether Bush’s victory will make the US president and his hawks more
aggressive or make them see common sense. No doubt that Bush’s victory
is in no way good for the world. One cannot help but worry about
humanity when Bush is in office, because his policies can neither end
terrorism, nor lead to peace in the Middle East. Bush ruined everything
that his predecessor Bill Clinton did over eight years for a positive
US image internationally.
Even people who favor the war in Iraq accept that the US is in a
quagmire there. Over 1,100 American soldiers have been killed.
Americans have killed 100,000 Iraqi civilians. What was Bush’s
justification? `Saddam poses a threat to the US because Iraq has
weapons of mass destruction.’ These justifications proved wrong. What
will happen now? Iraq will become an even greater nightmare for the US.
What will the future of the region be if Bush leaves Iraq in such
chaos?
Looking at the US elections from the Turkish angle, the situation is
clear: US policies about Turkey wouldn’t have changed much even if
Kerry had been elected. In fact Kerry’s policies on Cyprus and the
Armenian question weren’t clear, and this could have caused some
problems. Thus, in the short term, Bush’s victory is good for Turkey.
But in the long run, there’s no doubt that Bush’s violent policies will
also harm Turkey. In the future the US will have to leave Iraq in chaos
and this will cause trouble for Turkey and other countries in the
region. Whatever we say, the world will have to live with Bush for four
more years. The election is over, but this question still nags me.
Would Bush have won if Hillary Clinton had been the Democrats’
candidate instead of Kerry?

Radio Free Europe, Czechia
Nov. 5, 2004
Chechen President Congratulates Bush, As Do South Caucasus States
By Liz Fuller
Aslan Maskhadov (file photo)

Aslan Maskhadov has sent a telegram to George W. Bush congratulating
him on his reelection to a second term as U.S. president,
chechenpress.info reported on 5 November. Maskhadov characterizes the
United States as a country that embodies for all mankind the principles
of democracy and human rights. He said that in their unequal struggle,
the Chechen people derive inspiration from the values proclaimed by the
U.S. founding fathers. He hailed President Bush personally as embodying
“the lofty principles that are fundamental for all those who battle
against tyranny.”
In a commentary on chechenpress.info, Maskhadov’s envoy Akhmed Zakaev
explained that while many Chechens may consider Maskhadov’s words of
congratulation misplaced in light of Bush’s proclaimed support for what
Zakaev termed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “criminal regime,”
Maskhadov was in fact hailing Bush not as an individual political
figure, but as the head of a state founded on principles that are dear
to all Chechens. “The fact that Bush has retreated from those
principles does not detract from the significance of America as a
symbol of the struggle for the freedom of oppressed peoples,” Zakaev
argued. “In expressing respect for the U.S. principles of freedom and
democracy, we are simply stressing to what degree the current U.S.
administration has retreated from those principles by upholding the
Kremlin’s regime of tyranny,” Zakaev concluded.
The presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan have both written to President
Bush to congratulate him on his reelection. In a letter released by his
press office, Armenian President Robert Kocharian offered “warmest
congratulations,” and expressed the hope that Armenia’s “already
extensive” relations with the United States will strengthen over the
next four years,” RFE/RL’s Armenian Service reported on 4 November.
Kocharian also expressed gratitude for Armenia’s inclusion in the U.S.
Millennium Challenge program and for Washington’s “active involvement”
in efforts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The radical Armenian opposition party Hanrapetutiun released a
statement in Yerevan on 4 November congratulating Bush, RFE/RL’s
Armenian Service reported. The statement expressed confidence that the
Bush administration will “bring the ongoing fight against international
terrorism to its logical conclusion.” It also expressed the hope that
U.S. efforts to ensure lasting peace in the South Caucasus and to
promote democratization in Armenia will prove successful. That latter
remark reflects Hanrapetutiun’s bitterness over last year’s
less-than-wholly-democratic presidential and parliamentary elections
and subsequent reprisals against the Armenian opposition.
Also on 4 November, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev wrote to Bush
saying he is confident that Bush’s efforts to restore peace to the
planet will continue, and stressing the importance Baku attaches to
continued cooperation with the United States, zerkalo.az reported,
citing Turan. “Azerbaijan, which is proceeding along the path of
building a democratic secular society based on the rule of law, is full
of determination to raise bilateral relations with the United States to
an even higher level,” Aliyev wrote.
Aliyev went on to stress Azerbaijan’s strategic value to the United
States, noting its unswerving commitment as a “strategic partner” of
the United States to promote peace in the region and to fight
international terrorism. At the same time, he noted that Baku continues
to place great hopes on Washington’s ongoing efforts to bring about “a
just settlement, based on international law, of the
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh.”
Speaking in Tbilisi on 4 November, Georgian President Mikheil
Saakashvili characterized President Bush as “a man of great principle,
a man of great understanding of the complicated issues in our region,
and a personality without whom the fight against terror in this part of
the world would hardly be possible,” RFE/RL’s Georgian Service
reported. Saakashvili said he plans to telephone Bush to congratulate
him personally, Caucasus Press reported on 4 November.
Nov. 5, 2004

International Journalist’s Network
Nov. 5, 2004
Contest in Armenia to honor special reports on Georgia
Television stations and companies in Armenia can enter a competition
aimed at producing a series of special reports about Georgia.
Internews-Armenia is organizing the competition, sponsored by the U.S.
Agency for International Development. The application deadline is
November 20.
The contest aims to offer the public better information on the social
and political processes in Georgia. Internews encourages a creative
approach to the reports, which could focus on the economy, culture,
environment, politics, social problems or international relations,
among other topics.
Candidates should submit a completed application form; two
Russian-language copies of a detailed script proposal; the production
schedule, to be completed by January 15; the curriculum vitae of the
director/producer and main participants; detailed production expenses;
a videotape of the applicant’s past work; and a letter from the TV
company agreeing to air the reports.
Internews will select the proposal based on the best likelihood of
carrying out the project and the professionalism of the bid, among
other criteria.
Detailed requirements and forms are available at
For more information, contact Internews-Armenia at [email protected],
telephone +374 1 583 620.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Eurasianet Organization
Nov. 5, 2004
ARMENIAN DEPLOYMENT IN IRAQ HAMPERED BY DOMESTIC OPPOSITION
Emil Danielyan 11/05/04
President Robert Kocharian’s administration in Armenia appears to have
pushed back plans to dispatch a contingent of non-combat troops to
Iraq. The planned deployment has generated determined domestic
opposition, with critics of the proposal cautioning that joining the
US-led coalition could endanger the small ethnic Armenian community in
Iraq.
Yerevan made what looked like a formal commitment to join the Iraq
mission during President Robert Kocharian’s official visit to Poland in
early September. The Armenian military contingent would be largely
symbolic — comprising roughly 50 military personnel, including
doctors, de-mining experts and truck drivers – and would serve under
Polish command. Poland, a staunch US ally, leads a multinational
division stationed in south-central Iraq.
Since the initial announcement, little progress has been made toward
deployment. Government officials announced in September that military
personnel would be dispatched before the end of the year. But observers
in Yerevan now wonder whether the government can meet this deadline.
A prerequisite for deployment is an inspection visit to Iraq by an
Armenian military delegation. The visit was originally slated for late
September. However, Defense Ministry spokesman, Seyran Shahsuvarian,
said on November 3 that such a mission has yet to take place.
Shahsuvarian declined to specify a reason for the delay, and would not
speculate on when the mission would occur.
Armenia’s parliament, meanwhile, has not received a formal request from
the government to authorize the troop deployment — something that is
required under the Armenian constitution. The National Assembly
ratified earlier this year an inter-governmental agreement with Kuwait
that regulates the movements of Armenian military personnel through the
Gulf state, which serves as the main logistical base for all foreign
troops deploying to Iraq.
Helping to explain the existing uncertainty is the fact that
Kocharian’s deployment plans have faced strong domestic opposition.
Kocharian critics maintain that the presences of an Armenian military
force in Iraq could prompt Iraqi insurgents to target the country’s
Armenian community, estimated at about 25,000, for reprisals. The
insurgents have already captured and killed dozens of citizens of
countries participating in the “coalition of the willing,” or otherwise
cooperating with it.
Among those opposed to the Iraq mission is Armenia’s biggest opposition
group, the Justice alliance, along with at least two dozen
non-governmental organizations. In late September, NGO representatives
issued a joint statement, cautioning that the consequences of
participation could be severe. “We risk turning a community of 25,000
people into hostages,” one of its signatories and a prominent
environmentalist, Karine Danielian, warned. Iraqi Armenians have
themselves exhorted Yerevan not to send troops. Their spiritual leader,
Archbishop Avak Asadurian, expressed their concerns in separate letters
to President Robert Kocharian and the Armenian parliament leadership.
Significantly, two senior army generals have recently voiced opposition
to deployment plans, marking a rare instance of public questioning of
government policy by members of the Armenian army’s top brass. One of
them, Deputy Army Chief-of-Staff Enrico Apriamov, implied that the
US-led invasion of Iraq had been a mistake.
Concern for the security of the Armenian community was a major reason
for the Kocharian government’s refusal to back the Anglo-American
invasion of Iraq in early 2003. Armenia welcomed the ensuing overthrow
of Saddam Hussein and publicly expressed a desire to “participate in
Iraq’s post-war reconstruction” shortly afterward. An Armenian liaison
officer was posted at the US Central Command in Florida in late 2003 –
a move widely seen as a prelude to the troop dispatch.
The commitment to deployment among Kocharian allies appears to remain
strong – at least publicly. In recent televised remarks Defense
Minister Serge Sarkisian said that while shares the critics’ security
concerns he believes that siding with the United States on Iraq is
vital for Armenia’s national interests. Foreign Minister Vartan
Oskanian, for his part, argues that the Armenian participation would be
solely “humanitarian” in nature. Another Armenian leader, Parliament
Speaker Artur Baghdasarian, noted on October 29 that the United States
has provided more than $1.5 billion in economic assistance to Armenia
since independence, hinting that Yerevan should somehow express
appreciation for the American largesse.
Some pro-government media commentators say deployment should be
considered by Armenians as a geopolitical necessity. They note that
Armenia’s neighbors, Azerbaijan and Georgia, already have hundreds of
troops on the ground in Iraq. Deployment could help Armenia complement
its military alliance with Russia with closer security ties with the
United States and the West in general. A cosmetic Armenian military
presence in Iraq, they add, is important for ensuring US neutrality in
the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process.
Some are skeptical that a troop contribution will produce greater
political and economic support from the United States. Alexander
Arzumanian, Armenia’s former pro-Western foreign minister and an
opponent of deployment, believes that risks far outweigh the possible
geopolitical dividends. “I just don’t see anything tangible we can get
now in return for putting at risk the lives of a large number of
Armenians,” Arzumanian told EurasiaNet.
Ultimately, it may turn out that decisions made in Poland will
influence Armenia’s final decision on deployment. Polish leaders are
pondering whether to scale down its 2,500-strong military force in
Iraq, or even withdraw it altogether by the end of 2005. Polish Defense
Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski called for a complete troop pullout in a
newspaper interview last month. Although other officials in Warsaw,
notably President Aleksander Kwasniewski, were quick to disavow the
statement, continued Polish military presence in Iraq is now in serious
doubt.
Armenia’s Prime Minister Andranik Markarian had that in mind when he
told reporters recently, “After clarifying some questions we may go
ahead or not go ahead [with the deployment]. Everything will depend on
the situation.”
Editor’s Note: Emil Danielyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and
political analyst.

Agence France Presse
Nov. 5, 2004
NATO chief hails alliance relations with Armenia

YEREVAN (AFP) Nov 05, 2004
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer Friday hailed the
alliance’s relations with the former Soviet republic of Armenia as he
wrapped up a tour of the Caucasus.
“Armenia has agreed in principle to start work on an Individual
Partnership Action Plan (IPAP) with NATO,” he said after arriving in
Armenia from Azerbaijan.
“This is quite a significant step in the development of our relations,”
he said.
De Hoop Scheffer arrived in Armenia at the tail end of his tour of the
Caucasus that also took him to Georgia and Azerbaijan.
Earlier in Baku on Friday, he told Azerbaijan to “turn a page” in its
relations with archrival Armenia, its neighbor with which it remains in
a state of war.
“At a certain stage you’ll have to turn a page,” de Hoop Scheffer said
as he prepared to fly out of oil-rich Azerbaijan, where he met with
President Ilham Aliyev, to neighboring Armenia to hold talks with its
President Robert Kocharian.
The former Soviet republics of Azerbaijan and Armenia fought a war in
the 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, over
Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnic Armenian enclave in Azeri territory.
A cease-fire agreement was signed in 1994 with Nagorno-Karabakh
effectively remaining in Armenian hands, but with Baku still claiming
rights to it. The two sides have yet to sign a peace treaty and
formally remain in a state of war.
In September, Azerbaijan refused to let officers from Armenia take part
in NATO-sponsored war games on its territory. The games were called off
as a result.
“These kind of activities should be accessible for anybody and
everybody,” De Hoop Scheffer said Friday. “My advice would be if there
is Armenian representation, what is a better way … to discuss these
fundamental problems. Let the Azeri voice be heard also in the presence
of (Armenians).”
The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan killed an estimated 35,000
people and displace close to one million.
Years of negotiations chaired by the so-called Minsk group — chaired
by France, Russia and the United States and operating under a mandate
from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe — have
failed to find a solution and today no transport or communication lines
link the two neighbors.
Nagorno-Karabakh “is a big problem which has created a lot of suffering
already for much too many years and which urgently needs a solution,”
De Hoop Scheffer said.
The NATO chief arrived in Baku from neighboring Georgia, where he met
with President Mikhail Saakashvili, who aims to join the alliance
within four years.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

KurdishMedia, UK
Nov. 5, 2004
Minorities comment on ‘Report on Minorities’

05/11/2004 Bianet.org
Members of Turkey’s minority groups denounce violent reactions against
the Prime Ministry’s working group on “Rights of Minorities”. Lawyer
Bakar calls for full implementation of Laussane Treaty, while Alevite
researcher Sener welcomes the debate.
BIA (Istanbul) – Individuals from minority groups denounce attacks
against the controversial Report on “Minority Rights and Cultural
Rights’ drafted by the Minority Rights and Cultural Rights Study Group
of the Prime Ministry’s Advisory Board for Human Rights.
The group’s groundbreaking proposals challenging the present
established concept of Turkish citizenry what excludes recognition of
ethnic minorities other than non-Muslim religious minorities, arouses
angry reactions by nationalist circles.
The group’s spokesperson Prof. Ibrahim Kabaoglu, and Prof. Baskin Oran,
author of the draft report are publicly charged as `separatists’ by
their critics for having proposed recognition of various ethnic
identities under the super-identity of `Citizen of Turkey’ rather more
than `Turkish Citizen’
Members of Turkey’s various ethnic communities expressed their opinions
to bianet on the ongoing controversy.
Lawyer Diran Bakar, an ethnic Armenian from Istanbul, said their views
on the Minority Report was generally positive but added they were
disturbed by the fact that the report did not refer to the minority
articles in the Lausanne Peace Treaty.
1924 Lausanne Peace Treaty signed between Turkey and the Allies of the
1st World War recognizes the rights of non-Turkish speaking `Trukish
nationals’ as well as non-Muslim religious communities.
Alavite researcher-writer Cemal Sener said the report should not be
attacked so harshly no matter what. “I do not agree with everything in
the report either,” said Sener. “But there is no reason for attacking
it like that.”
Hrant Dink, editor in chief of the bi-lingual (Armenian-Turkish) Agos
weekly said the report was not actually a “minority” report, but
instead, a “Turkey” report. According to Dink, the report depicts an
accurate picture of Turkey.
Cumhur Bal, the secretary-general of the Circassian Federation, said
they voted for the Minority Report as members of the Prime Ministry
Human Rights Advisory Board.
“Articles of Lausanne should be implemented”
Lawyer Diran Bakar said the Report on Minorities should have referred
to the articles of the Lausanne Agreement. Bakar added that although
they did not individually have any complaints about their life in
Turkey, the memories of past incidents, the incidents of September 6-7,
1957 were still fresh. Bakar complained that the institutions belonging
to his community were still under pressure. They were still barred from
ecclesiastic training, or from opening up schools or hospitals.
Sener: The report was not strongly defended
Alavite researcher-writer Cemal Sener is of the opinion that even Prof.
Dr. Ibrahim Kabaloglu, the head of the commission, could not defend his
own report properly against attacks. Sener said:
* Due to political implications of the concept `minority’ the Alavites
are uncomfortable of being categorized as a `minority’. In Turkey
claiming minority status is almost regarded as opposing the secular
republic. Yet, Alavites have always supported the secular republic as
opposed to Sharia, caliphate, Ottoman monarchy and the like.
* The concept “minorities” is usually used to define non-Muslims.
Alavites were not regarded as minorities during the Ottoman rule
because they were Muslims. They could neither benefit from the majority
rights, nor those of the minorities. The situation continued after the
establishment of the Turkish Republic. There is no mention of a
legitimate Alavite religion in any formal document. Alavites were first
mentioned in the EU Progress Report and the Prime Ministry Human Rights
Advisory Board’s report. It is positive that it is being discussed,
instead of being ignored.”
“The essence of the report is the essence of Turkey”
Hrant Dink is of the opinion that those who drafted the Minority Report
should be congratulated. Denouncing the ultra-nationalist member of the
group who tore the report to protest its content during a press
conference Dink said: `Maybe a copy of the report had been torn down.
But the essence of the report is the essence of Turkey and the reality
remains there.’
Dink continued as follows:
* The understanding of “minorities” in Turkey is different from the
understanding of “minorities” in Western democracies.
* The concept “minority” in Turkey is moulded with security concerns.
“This is an inferior notion, an inferior status, and so we cannot be
minorities.” However, there are minorities in this country even if they
are regarded as inferior or second-class. And I am one of them.
* In the same way the state looks at non-Muslims as a security problem,
but I feel insecure of my own future.
Cumhur Bal said they did not approve the behavior of the public workers
union Kamu-Sen representative, who tore the report during the press
conference. “This report was voted on and accepted. He may not agree
with the report, but he doesn’t have the right to act violently.”
(NS/BB/YE)
BIA News Center
05/11/2004

ArmenPress
Nov. 5, 2004
US DISAPPROVES OF AZERBAIJAN’S MOTION
BAKU, NOVEMBER 5, ARMENPRESS: The US ambassador in Azerbaijan, Rino
Harnish, said his government disapproves Azerbaijan’s initiative to
include an item on the occupied Azerbaijan territories on the UN
General Assembly’s session. “The official Washington is against this
idea,” the ambassador was quoted as saying by ATV television.
He said the US sees a solution to the Karabagh conflict through
regular peaceful talks between the parties. The ambassador also said
the official Baku has to make a concrete decision concerning the
participation of Armenian parliament members in a NATO seminar in Baku,
adding that Azerbaijan’s failure to do so would mean its failure to
respect the principle of inclusiveness.