Armenianow.com
July 9, 2004
Public Relations Job: Americans train, hire locals to fill gap in
construction force
By Julia Hakobyan ArmeniaNow reporter
When the United States started discussion of constructing a new embassy in
Yerevan in 2001, the work initially caused a controversy among society and
mass media for two reasons. First: the new embassy will be the largest U.S.
Embassy (in total real estate) worldwide. Secondly: Turks (plus Bulgarians
and Filipinos) were among the laborers, but, in some specialities, Armenians
were not.
400 Armenians are included in the embassy construction workforce
A backlash of bad press criticized the Yanks for importing labor into a
country where so many natives can’t find work.
The Americans said they had good cause to hire outsiders. Simply, the
available Armenian labor force was not trained in the skills required for
the jobs.
“At the beginning of the construction the embassy advertised vacancies for
local construction workers but for some categories no one came,” said
Kimberly G. Hargan, Public Affairs Officer of the U.S. Embassy.
“The reason why JA Jones, the US Construction Company, took workers from
third countries was that Armenians were not familiar with western
construction techniques and were not acquainted with some specialties, such
as American standards of electrical works, plumbing and others.”
In a bit of goodwill (and good public relations), the Americans decided to
make jobs available to the locals by training them for such skilled labor.
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the
United States Embassy designed a program for training of local laborers and
invited experts from the United States and JA Jones Company to conduct
training of the Armenians.
The training for different construction trades lasts three to four weeks,
including a week of practical work. The schedule allows participants to be
placed in jobs as quickly as possible.
Now, more than 600 employees are building the embassy, 400 of whom are
Armenians.
“We think that once the new embassy is finished, people who were involved in
construction and were trained according to western standards would be highly
marketable,” Hargan said.
“We expect that with the continuing growth and improvement of the economy
more western companies are interested in coming here and constructing
hotels, office buildings . . . And Armenian constructors can apply their
knowledge to the western construction sector in their native country.”
But there’s still plenty of work for the embassy laborers. The project is
scheduled to be completed next March.
As for the need of the new embassy, Hargan said it was caused from the
tremendous expansion of US relations with Armenia in recent years. He said
dozens of sites were evaluated to find one that would best meet the needs of
the U.S. and Armenian governments.
The current embassy on Bagramyan Avenue does not meet US safety requirements
and is small for hosting staff. The new embassy compound is being built to
the highest engineering standards to resist blast and earthquake.
The new embassy will contain a five-story Chancery Building, USAID Building,
two-story Marine Security Guard Quarters, Warehouse, Main and Service
Compound Access Control Structures. It is located on the edge of Yerevanyan
Lake, a few kilometers outside the city center on the road to Zvartnots
International Airport.
The total space covers 90,469 square meters (22 American acres). It is the
biggest lot on which a US embassy has been built and its office space will
be among the largest for US embassies worldwide. The United States bought
the property from the Government of Armenia for about $5 million.
The new embassy will not block citizen access to the lake, which remains the
property of the Republic of Armenia.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARMENIA FOREIGN MINISTER COMMENTS ON NATO SUMMIT, OSCE MEDIATION AND ARMY
BASES
Golos Armenii, Yerevan
8 Jul 04
Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has said that Armenia is guided “by a
principle of complementarity” in its foreign policy and its
cooperation with NATO is not in conflict with its membership of the
CIS Collective Security Treaty. In a wide-ranging interview with an
Armenian newspaper carried by De-Facto news agency on 8 July, he
commented on the recent Istanbul-hosted NATO summit and hailed NATO
for its statement describing the South Caucasus as “a zone of its
special attention”. The following is the text of report by Armenian
newspaper Golos Armenii on 8 July entitled “The co-chairmen will come
to learn approaches of the parties” as published by De-Facto agency;
subheadings have been inserted editorially:
(De Facto correspondent) You headed the Armenian delegation at the
Istanbul NATO summit. What did Yerevan expect from the summit? To what
extent was this expectation justified? In this sense, what was of most
significance to you? Did you discuss any important issues?
(Vardan Oskanyan) Usually no documents or programmes are discussed at
the summits of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC). The
documents submitted for approval from the country leaders are
discussed beforehand and are agreed at monthly meetings of the EAPC.
The agenda was also known beforehand; therefore nothing special was
expected from the EAPC session. The same can be said about NATO, that
is, we did not expect anything unusual. NATO’s statement that the
South Caucasus is a zone of its special attention was the most
significant one as far as were concerned. It may be said that there is
a certain displacement in NATO’s priorities as regards our region. But
we were aware of this six months ago when the problem was discussed
within the EAPC framework.
In the course of the summit Armenia was not going to raise any special
problems. At the same time we officially announced that we were going
to deepen cooperation with NATO.
CIS versus NATO ties
(Correspondent) In view of Armenia’s membership of the CIS Collective
Security Treaty (CST), how expedient is its cooperation with NATO?
What does NATO mean to Armenia?
(Oskanyan) I see no contradiction here. We are not alone in this
matter. Other member states of the CST, Russia, Kazakhstan and
Kyrgyzstan, are also actively developing their cooperation with
NATO. In particular, Russia is actively implementing this by means of
the NATO-Russia council.
As is known, in its foreign policy Armenia is guided by a principle of
complementarity. Stemming from this, we aspire to establish relations
at the necessary level with all the main centres that are interested
in our region and have a certain effect on the processes taking place
in the South Caucasus. For this reason we are aspiring to be involved
in all the processes, programmes and projects in the region.
Russian bases and Georgian scenario
(Correspondent) Some experts think that after the withdrawal of
Russian bases from Georgia, the problem of the expediency of the
Russian military presence in Armenia will arise. Do you see this
happening?
(Oskanyan) In terms of politics the matter of the Russian military
deployment in Armenia is not directly linked with the preservation or
withdrawal of similar bases from the territory of Georgia. We have a
long-term agreement with Russia, I see no reason for annulling it in
the near future.
(Correspondent) Do you notice new tendencies in the process of the
Karabakh settlement in connection with the stepped up efforts of the
European structures in this process?
(Oskanyan) The OSCE Minsk Group is still dealing with the Karabakh
issue settlement. The Minsk Group cochairmen have recently initiated
meetings of the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan. The
cochairmen are expected to pay a regular visit to the region in
July. They will discuss the current approaches of the parties to the
settlement.
On the other hand, Armenia has a positive attitude towards the
initiatives of the European Union (EU) and Council of Europe (CE),
expressed during regular visits of the EU special envoy for the South
Caucasus, Heike Talvitie, and the CE rapporteur on Nagornyy Karabakh,
Terry Devis, who has recently been elected as secretary-general of the
CE.
We think that active efforts and initiatives of such authoritative
European structures may supplement but not substitute the efforts of
the Minsk Group cochairmen on the conflict settlement.
OSCE Minsk Group
(Correspondent) As a rule Azerbaijan blames the OSCE Minsk Group
cochairmen from Russia, the USA, France for failing to settle the
Karabakh conflict. How qualified are this kind of charges?
(Oskanyan) Really the Azeri party sometimes accuses the OSCE Minsk
Group and says that the conflict is not settled because of the
cochairmen’s inaction. The Azeris can only see and estimate only what
is advantageous to them this very minute. Whereas over the past few
years the mediators put forward several proposals. The last two were
accepted by Armenia and Nagornyy Karabakh but rejected by
Azerbaijan. At high-level meetings the cochairmen are now discussing
outlines of and prospects for a settlement on the basis of which it
will be possible to work out new suggestions which would become the
basis of the settlement negotiations.
US envoy
(Correspondent) The US ambassador to Armenia, John Ordway, expressed
the hope that the conflict will be settled within the next couple of
years. Some experts think that it would take next 20 to 25 years to
reach a settlement. Which of these two views is more realistic?
(Oskanyan) The Armenian-Azeri negotiations conducted at the initiative
of the OSCE Minsk Group cochairmen are aimed at working out an
agreement as soon as possible and bringing the positions of the two
parties on the Karabakh conflict settlement closer. Certainly we would
have preferred the US ambassador’s optimistic approach to come
true. It will enable all the regional countries to engage in
comprehensive cooperation.
(Correspondent) The mediators often reiterate that the settlement
fully depends on the political will and desire of the sides. Do you
think that Russia, the USA and France will accept any option of the
conflict settlement on which the parties agree?
(Oskanyan) I have already mentioned that the cochairmen make efforts
to organize meetings between the parties to the conflict, in the
course of which it would be possible to find general approaches and
outlines of a settlement. I think that in this context any suggestion
acceptable for the conflict parties, will be acceptable for the
mediators as well.
(Correspondent) The Azerbaijani leaders have started to add the phrase
“Nagornyy Karabakh” to the “Armenian-Azeri conflict” term which they
use. We did not notice this at first. How can you explain that?
(Oskanyan) We have said many times that the conflict is between
Azerbaijan and Nagornyy Karabakh. I think that the Azeri wording aims
at presenting the conflict in an advantageous light for Azerbaijan. I
would like to remind you that international organizations, in
particular the OSCE Minsk Group, use the expression “Nagornyy Karabakh
conflict”.

ARMENIA WILL HAVE SECOND OPERATOR OF MOBILE COMMUNICATION: DAVID HARUTYUNYAN
YEREVAN, JULY 10. ARMINFO. Armenia will have a second operator of
mobile communication, RA Minister of Justice David Harutyunyan said,
responding to “hot line” questions in the “Golos Armenii” newspaper.
According to him, no doubt has ever existed about a new operator
entering Armenia’s telecommunication market, nor will it be challenged
during the RA Government’s negotiations with the OTE company. “As to
whether I am satisfied with the current state of affairs, I am not,”
the Minister said. Without commenting on the arbitration proceedings
in London, Harutyunyan pointed out that “they are going on and can be
dismissed only if the Government’s negotiations with `ArmenTel”
produce positive results.” Speaking of the interests of the Armenian
Government and people, Minister Harutyunyan stated: “The Government is
acting in the consumers’ interests and is sure that the legal
litigation at the Court of Arbitration is not the most productive
method: we are always ready for negotiations,” he said.
The RA Government has suspended the enforcement of its resolution on
amendments to License #60 of September 28, 2004, which include an
amendment depriving “ArmenTel” of its monopoly of mobile communication
and Internet access. This step was considered necessary for
stimulating the negotiations. The disagreements between the RA
Government and the “ArmenTel” company are not only in the mobile
communication sphere, but also the installation of telephone
communication in rural areas, confidentiality of negotiations,
Internet, etc..

Armenian Protests Falter Under Authoritarian Rule
President’s Hold on Power Contrasts Sharply With ‘Rose Revolution’ in
Neighboring Georgia
By Susan B. Glasser
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, July 11, 2004
YEREVAN, Armenia — Inspired by the peaceful street revolution in
next-door Georgia last year that toppled the country’s longtime
president, Armenia’s newly united political opposition set out to
duplicate it here. They took to the streets this spring by the
thousands, denouncing Armenian President Robert Kocharian and vote
fraud in elections last year.
But as spring has given way to the sweltering Yerevan summer, it has
become increasingly apparent that there will be no Armenian revolution
— at least not this time. The opposition in recent weeks has called
its forces off the streets and retreated to closed-door strategy
sessions. Kocharian taunted them in a speech in France for failing to
realize that his police, unlike those in Georgia, were ready and able
to “maintain public order.”
Instead of creating a peaceful uprising, according to several
independent observers, Western diplomats and Yerevan residents
interviewed here last week, the protest proved to be an object lesson
in the powerful inertia of post-Soviet politics. Georgia, it turns
out, was more likely the exception than the model.
In the case of Armenia, Kocharian held onto power despite many signs
of widespread dissatisfaction with the course of this small and
struggling mountain country in the volatile South Caucasus region. And
he did so using the authoritarian tactics increasingly favored across
the states of the former Soviet Union, including willingness to use
force against protesters, elimination of independent television news
broadcasts and mass detentions of opposition activists.
“Of course, they tried to imitate” the Georgian revolution, Kocharian
said in an interview at his presidential palace last week. His rivals
failed, he said, because the Armenian opposition had “nothing in
common” with the pro-Western protesters who triggered the ouster of
President Eduard Shevardnadze in Georgia and instead is “trying to
sing an aria from one opera in a completely different one.”
Kocharian called his opponents poor losers interested only in
competing for power among themselves and said he had no choice but to
use police force to break up a demonstration they staged on April 12
and 13 because it constituted a “threat” to the state. “The government
has to protect the society from political extremism,” he said.
Kocharian’s crackdown drew immediate condemnation from international
organizations and foreign governments. Human Rights Watch, in a report
titled “Cycle of Repression,” found that 300 or more protesters had
been temporarily detained, several journalists attacked, and dozens of
protesters injured by security forces that used “excessive force,”
including stun grenades and water cannons, to break up the crowd.
Shortly afterward, authorities ransacked the headquarters of the three
largest opposition parties and several protesters have since received
harsh sentences. Edgar Arakelian, for instance, was given an 18-month
jail term for throwing an empty plastic water bottle at a police
officer.
“Kocharian is moving the country toward a police state,” said Mikael
Danielyan, a human rights activist who was assaulted March 30 by four
men and hospitalized for days. Danielyan said it was the first such
attack on a human rights activist in Armenia since the Soviet
collapse. “When they beat me, the government tries to show they can do
whatever they want; they have all the power.”
In the interview, Kocharian denied any systematic violations of the
sort that international election observers and human rights groups
complained about. While acknowledging that Armenia has “an imperfect
election system,” he argued that even if election monitors were
correct about violations, there would have been no change in the
outcome of the 2003 race, in which he was reelected in a second-round
runoff with 67 percent of the vote. “You would need a sick imagination
to have doubts about my election,” said Kocharian, who was first
elected in 1998.
He also claimed that just 17 opposition protesters were arrested, not
hundreds, and that of those, only a few appealed their
convictions. “If they treated them unfairly, hundreds could have
appealed,” he said.
The effort to duplicate what Georgians call the “rose revolution”
began in earnest in February, when two leading opposition factions —
the Justice alliance of nine smaller parties and the National Unity
Party — teamed up and walked out of the Armenian parliament.
Armenia’s Constitutional Court in a ruling last year had appeared to
sanction concerns about violations in the presidential race. In a
passage whose meaning is still hotly disputed by Armenia’s political
factions, the court either ordered or recommended a national
referendum of confidence in Kocharian by this April to assuage those
concerns. When Kocharian’s allies refused to act on a referendum, the
opposition opted for the parliamentary boycott and a campaign of
street rallies.
Almost from the start, opposition leaders said they believed that the
Georgian revolution had convinced Kocharian that it was necessary to
take tough steps against them — unlike Shevardnadze, who wavered on
ordering troops to break up the protests that triggered his
resignation last November.
“They were really terrorizing people here — they didn’t have this in
Georgia,” said Stepan Demirchian, a leader of the Justice coalition
and son of a Kocharian rival killed in 1999 when gunmen invaded
parliament and shot several prominent politicians. “Here, the
authorities are prepared to do everything to keep their power.”
But their critics said the opposition had just as much to do with why
their revolution failed as did Kocharian. Several analysts said
opposition leaders are skilled at using the language of
Western-oriented democracy but are in fact better characterized as
Russian-leaning professional politicians interested in seizing power
themselves. Ordinary Armenians, these critics added, simply never
believed that the opposition could topple Kocharian and improve the
situation. “It’s a very weak opposition unable to come up with any
sort of vision or positive program and unable to unite about anything
other than opposition to Kocharian,” said a senior foreign diplomat,
who spoke on condition of anonymity in keeping with diplomatic
practice. “They are not really opposition — they are people who
didn’t get power,” said Danielyan. Another key difference between
Armenia and Georgia has been the lesser role played here by
foreign-funded nongovernmental groups, such as investor George Soros’s
Open Society Institute. Independent television — which helped draw
thousands into the streets supporting Georgian leader Mikheil
Saakashvili — hasn’t existed in Armenia since the government yanked
the broadcast license of the network called A1+ two years ago. In
Georgia, “civil society is very strong, grass-roots groups are very
strong there, the media are quite strong there,” and they participated
in mobilizing activists who helped move along events during the
revolution, said Larisa Minasyan, executive director of the Open
Society Institute here. “In Armenia, genuine civil society has quite
distanced itself from the two political forces in this standoff.” For
now, the anti-presidential forces are on a break, unsure of how to
proceed besides promising “new elements,” as Demirchian put it, in
their campaign against Kocharian. “The only place we have left is the
street,” said Aram Sarkisian, another Justice leader. “There’s no
other way to continue our struggle, but they don’t like to let us out
on the streets, either.”
Hrayr Tovmasyan, an independent political analyst, said that “the two
sides are deadlocked and now the government and the opposition are
repeating the same moves over and over, like a long-running soap
opera. The opposition has no new moves left; they can’t arrange
protests anymore. This could be their death.
“The authorities don’t have any new moves, either, and won’t even
think about compromise, which could lead to their death,” he
said. “It’s just a dead end.”
He and other experts here say they worry that the Armenian political
unrest might turn into not only a case study in the difficulty of
challenging power in the former Soviet Union but a longer-term threat
to the country’s development. Closed borders have cut off Armenia
economically from its neighbors Turkey and Azerbaijan; Armenia fought
a war in the 1990s with Azerbaijan over the disputed enclave of
Nagorno-Karabakh. It does not have a wealth of natural resources
available. And now, Georgia has seized what international attention
there was on the South Caucasus region with its experiment in
democracy. “This standoff could last for years,” Tovmasyan said. “At
the same time, Georgia has grabbed the flag of democracy in the region
and will get investments there as a result, and Azerbaijan can count
on billions of dollars for its budget from oil. What future is there
for Armenia? It’s hard to say.”

Armenian opposition parties differ on ways of combatting corruption
Haykakan Zhamanak, Yerevan
10 Jul 04 p 3
Text of Naira Zograbyan report by Armenian newspaper Haykakan Zhamanak
on 10 July headlined “Don’t we need new targets?”
A conflict is brewing up within the opposition. The Justice bloc and
the National Unity Party agree that they need to revise their
strategy, but each of them has its own view on ways of doing it. The
Justice bloc, which includes the Republic Party and the People’s Party
of Armenia, says that they should no longer focus on [Armenian
President Robert] Kocharyan and [Defence Minister Serzh] Sarkisyan and
should start publicizing instances of corruption by ministers, MPs and
top officials.
Both Aram Sarkisyan and Stepan Demirchyan say that from now on, they
will disclose specific case of corruption that pervades the whole
current government. They will no longer say that “everyone is
corrupt”, but will name specific names. The National Unity Party
immediately protests, saying that if Justice really wants to revise
its strategy in such a way, they will be “sidelined”. They say that if
they divert their attention from Kocharyan and Sarkisyan, this will
give them an advantage and make it easier for them to retain power
until 2008. “The state is de jure ruled by Robert Kocharyan, but de
facto, he rules it together with Serzh Sarkisyan. All ministers and
top officials are following their orders and if the opposition aims at
them, this will be like placing responsibility for a military
operation on a soldier rather than on a commander. Kocharyan and
Sarkisyan would very much like the opposition’s blows to hit the
premier, the parliament speaker, other top officials – for they are
ready to make anybody a scapegoat in order to retain their
throne. Having a dinner, gambling or hunting together is not a
criteria for them. If need be, they will sacrifice all their
supporters just to keep their seats. And if the opposition does them
such a favour, speaking about ministers and MPs during its rallies,
Kocharyan and Sarkisyan will be deeply grateful to them. Moreover,
they will start providing the opposition with compromising information
about their partners, pretending that they are fighting for justice,
but in fact, attempting to distract public attention from
themselves. If the opposition does such a thing, this will be an order
from the state. National Unity will not take the bait and take part in
such intrigues,” says the vice-president of the party, Aleksan
Karapetyan.
Moreover, National Unity believes that by targeting top officials, the
opposition will provide Kocharyan and Sarkisyan with a strong group of
kamikazes and political prisoners. “Sensing a threat, these people
will cling to Kocharyan and become his kamikazes.” So National Unity
hopes that their colleagues will not be so naive to fall into the
government’s trap.
Meanwhile, Justice does not share National Unity’s concern. “There are
no primary or secondary targets. We are dealing with a criminal
administration and Justice will address each case of corruption
irrespective of who is involved in it,” says the Justice press
secretary, Ruzan Khachatryan.

KavkazCenter.com
11 07 2004 Sun. 22:18 Djokhar Time
Ossetia-Georgia: war on the horizon?
After America supported the peaceful transition of power from former
Georgian president Eduard Sheavrdnadze to young oppositional group headed by
charismatic leader Mikhail Saakashvili, US Secretary of State Colin Powell
called for immediate withdrawal of the Russian troops from Georgia and was
insisting that Georgia’s future must be free from Russian intervention.
Russia is worrying about it, figuring that the actions of the West are
interference into its domestic affairs, even though Moscow is missing the
fact that former Soviet republics are really former republics.
The latest events in Georgia have shown that the confrontation between
Georgia and its autonomy, South Ossetia, are unlikely to end just with angry
escapades or reciprocal invectives. If Russia gets involved in the active
confrontation, the danger that the war might spread towards the South
Caucasus will become very real.
Judging by Moscow’s first indirect reaction, the Kremlin will not be
standing aside if war operations in South Ossetia resume. But still, there
is no complete guarantee that Moscow made its final decision not to give up
that republic. So far you never know what pressure factors on Moscow
Washington may have yet.
Nevertheless, in Russia you can already hear some calls for integrating
South Ossetia into the Russian Federation. But Georgian central government
in Tbilisi is hoping for the Western states, which are for having Ossetian
autonomy as part of Georgia. Not only the West, which Georgia views as the
key arbitrator, is an intermediary in the exchange of views on the Ossetian
issue.
There is Turkey as well. Russian government does not trust the steps that
Turkey has been taking, such as «The Caucasus Security Agreement» signed by
Turkey and Georgia, which claims «with no superfluous diplomacy» (as Russian
sources put it) that not only Russia has the right to be present in the
Caucasus.
It is a known fact that in order to retain their influence in the Caucasus,
Russians have been using the disagreements artificially fomented by Moscow,
and provoking interethnic conflicts. The hand of Moscow is clearly seen in
the conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Ingushetia and North Ossetia,
North Ossetia and Georgia (in South Ossetia), between Georgia, Abkhazia and
Adjaria, between Karachaevans and Cherkesians, etc.
Depending on the situation, the opposing sides are provided with mercenaries
and weapons borrowed from the Russian army. Russia is trying to retain its
influence and its military presence in the Caucasus while making someone
else do the work and making it look like Russia itself is standing aside.
All kinds of methods and options are used for that purpose.
Thus, Russia’s puppets in South Ossetia are already voicing the Kremlin’s
instructions that Russia is allegedly staying away from the Caucasus
problems and left their allies to the mercy of fate. According to Moscow’s
scenario, if war operations resume, South Ossetian breakaway government in
Tskhinvali will get assistance from unrecognized pro-Russian republics and
from a number of «subjects of the Russian Federation» in the North Caucasus.
North Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transdniestria (de-facto independent pro-Russian
area near Moldova, Dniester River region), and Stavropol and Kuban Cossacks
(Southern Russia) will come to the rescue to help South Ossetia.
«South Ossetia has agreements about military aid with Abkhazia and
Transdniestria, as well as with Ters and Kuban Cossacks», Director of
Swedish-based Center for Strategic Research «Central Asia and the Caucasus»,
Murad Esenov, told RBC Daily.
President of Transdniestrian Moldovan Republic, Igor Smirnov, has already
made an official statement.
«In case of aggression we will not be standing aside, we will provide
comprehensive aid to our brothers, including military aid», Transdniestrian
leader told journalists.
Military storages in Transdniestria have huge amounts of ammunition, so the
help from Tiraspol (capital of Transdniestria) cannot be underestimated. So,
the new Georgian-Ossetian war may actually develop into an international
conflict right away.
Out of the latest events around South Ossetia we must also mention the
address of Tskhinvali’s leadership (South Ossetia) to Moscow with the appeal
to let the republic be integrated into Russia. Russian Council of Federation
reacted to this appeal. The Council of Federation `expressed concern with
the escalation of tensions and aggravation of the situation in the zone of
the Georgian-Ossetian conflict».
Russian parliamentarians mentioned that the «aggravation of the situation in
South Ossetia caused tension mounting all across the Caucasus» and offered
Georgian government in Tbilisi (Georgian capital) to «take all measures
necessary to implement the plans of combined control commission, dated June
2 this year». It should also be reminded that this is when the decision was
made to have Georgian troops pulled out of the territory of South Ossetia.
Speaking before the journalists, Chairman of the Council of Federation
Sergei Mironov stated that Russia is for Georgia’s territorial integrity,
but Russia still believes that all conflicts should be resolved peacefully.
Thus, on behalf of Moscow the Council of Federation virtually pointed
Georgia at the danger in changing the status quo of South Ossetia and the
danger in Georgia’s attempts to establish its control in that republic. It
means that South Ossetia still remains under the military patronage of
Russia.
Ahmad of Ichkeria,
for Kavkaz-Center
2004-06-11 00:15:11

Ha’aretz, Israel
July 11 2004
Wall annexes Rachel’s Tomb, imprisons Palestinian families

By Lily Galili

Behlehem resident Fuad Ahmad Jado, surrounded by a wall, hasn’t even
a way out to buy food.

Last Wednesday morning, 10 ultra-Orthodox men sat near Rachel’s Tomb
compound heatedly discussing halakhic (Jewish legal) issues. They
were sitting in a long corridor linking the tomb to a new house,
which until recently was owned by a Palestinian resident of
Bethlehem, who used to rent it to small business owners.
A few months ago the Palestinian sold the building, on Bethlehem’s
main road, to private Israeli buyers. In a short time it was
significantly altered. Its facade, which looked onto the Palestinian
street, was completely sealed and its rear was hastily joined to the
tomb compound. The result is a weird architectural product. The rim
of the pavement adjacent to the original structure is now part of the
interior of the joined building.
The soldiers in charge of security in Rachel’s Tomb live on the
basement floor, which was turned into a barracks. The entrance hall
is an improvised yeshiva. The rooms on the other floors are locked
up, pending renovation. The buyers’ “big plan” is to build a sort of
little settlement in the expanding compound of Rachel’s Tomb.
Former MK Hanan Porat knows a lot about it. “With the help of God we
are progressing toward maintaining a permanent Jewish presence and a
fixed yeshiva in Rachel’s Tomb, as Rabbi Kook urged, and bringing
Israelis back to where they belong.”
The house annexed to the tomb is not the last. In the adjacent
building, on the Palestinian side, a small humus diner is located –
but diners are few, due to the situation. “Blessed is God, we’re
taking care of the humus joint too,” says Porat. “The buyers have
received a good price for it, voluntarily. It’s a private purchase,
without the government’s intervention. All the official bodies in
Israel know about it, but they also know it’s all legal. There are
other lands owned by Jews in the area, on the other side of the
road.”
Asked if the goal is creating a Jewish settlement in this part of
Bethlehem resembling the Jewish settlement in Hebron, Porat says with
a sigh: “Alas, at a later stage and smaller, but yes. It’s time to
renew the meaning of the verse `your children will return to their
own land'”(Jeremiah 31:17).
This verse has been engraved on a wall slate in a little ceremony
inaugurating the new building in the tomb compound. However, the main
road’s official name, once Derech Efrata – the road to Efrat – which
until the intifada was also the main Jerusalem-Hebron road, is now
Yasser Arafat Street. This name is still on the road sign near
Rachel’s Tomb – so the future residents can say their address is
Rachel’s Tomb, corner of Arafat.
Jerusalem’s tomb
Many are waiting in line to move into the house. It will be inhabited
only after the separation wall south of Jerusalem is completed. The
creeping wall has been diverted from its course and will close in on
the expanded tomb compound, turning it into a walled enclave. The
wall bites into about half a kilometer of Bethlehem land, annexing it
to Jerusalem.
“It has never been decided that Rachel’s Tomb will be in C area
(Israeli security and political control),” says Shaul Arieli, a
Geneva Initiative activist. “The interim agreement of September `95
has a clause promising Israel free access to Rachel’s Tomb, but
without giving it the authorities deriving from a C area status. When
they set the borders of Jerusalem, they refrained from annexing
Rachel’s Tomb, because it is located in heart of Bethlehem. Now the
wall is in fact annexing the tomb. The wall in this area was built
during the trauma of the big events in Bethlehem and Beit Jallah. In
the insanity that ensued, the tractors arrived and created faits
accomplis.”
Huge concrete fortifications around Rachel’s Tomb are severing the
main road and writing a new history. The direct road from Jerusalem
to Hebron is no more. Near Rachel’s Tomb the road was blocked with a
high concrete wall built across it. The Palestinians wishing to enter
Bethlehem are directed to a small bypass. The Israelis are led into
the closed tomb enclave in dozens of buses daily (mostly organized
Egged trips accompanied by soldiers). Barrier 300 between Jerusalem
and Bethlehem was diverted toward Bethlehem and in the future it will
become a terminal like the Erez barricade.
The Palestinian businesses on this part of the road, once a bustling
shopping center, closed down because their clients couldn’t get to
them. A handsome sign with the word “Memories” testifies to the
existence of a once popular pub in the city that was once the
Palestinians’ big urban hope. Only a distant memory of that hope
remains. The history of the main road and Bethlehem’s geopolitics are
changing with the help of “contractor Effie Magal,” who is hanging up
his company’s advertisement posters on the wall with professional
pride.
The Palestinian partner to the Geneva Initiative, Yasser Abed Rabu,
cites Rachel’s Tomb to demonstrate that the Israelis are cheating.
Last Tuesday Fuad Ahmad Jado sat at the entrance to his house, near
the Al-Aida refugee camp. His address is hard to define. In the days
before the wall, his power supply came from Jerusalem and his water
from Bethlehem. He didn’t really belong to either, and the high
concrete wall creeping toward his entrance is complicating things.
Middle of nowhere
Jado’s story is a test of the High Court of Justice’s ruling on the
separation fence. His tale demonstrates that the “proportionality”
the court spoke of is like an “enlightened occupation.” Three
families live in the compound with Jado. The wall will make their
life impossible. Are three families, in the middle of nowhere, enough
to weigh against the security needs? Is the fact that Jado recently
had a heart attack, after a clash with the border police, and is now
facing open heart surgery, a matter to be considered? Jado, 47, who
speaks fluent Hebrew, believes it is.
In the relentless 36-degree heat, Jado pulls all the documents of his
history from orderly files. Order is second nature to the man who
worked for years in Israel’s licensing office in Jerusalem. One of
the permits, given his grandfather Ayub Hassan Jado in July 1978,
states explicitly: “this man was registered in the population
registry in 1967 and registered in form 049556. The place is within
Jerusalem’s jurisdiction.”
As proof Jado pulls out arnona (city rate) payment forms he received
from Jerusalem’s municipality and never paid. Does this prove he is a
true Jerusalemite?
Not really. On April 27, 2003, another permit was issued for Jado, on
which he was informed in red print that he belongs to Bethlehem. “An
officer who wasn’t born yet when my grandfather was a citizen of
Jerusalem came and informed me that I wasn’t a Jerusalemite,” Jado
says cynically.
The story does not end here. In recent months senior border police
officers came to Jado’s house, examined it and left. Then came an
officer from the military authorities and informed him, “you belong
to Jerusalem again.” They did not come again. As a Jerusalem citizen,
Jado is prohibited from entering Bethlehem, but also from entering
Jerusalem, because nobody issued him a permit to do so. Jado is
sitting on the land his family has lived on for 60 years and does not
belong anywhere. He has to sneak illegally to his medical tests in
East Jerusalem’s Al-Makassed Hospital.
The wall being built on his doorstep will imprison him within it,
with no way out in any direction. In the original plan, the wall was
supposed to pass west of his house, leaving it in Bethlehem. But as
his luck would have it, the house is near an Armenian monastery and
the monks did not want the wall to separate them from their real
estate property in the area. Unlike Jado, they have power and
connections and the fence route was diverted accordingly.
Now Jado is imprisoned within the wall. Once it is completed, it is
not even clear how he will be able to buy his family food. “Maybe
they’ll put up a supermarket here just for me,” he quips. “But what
if I need an ambulance, or fire fighters? How will they get here?”
Two months ago fire broke out in the Armenian monastery, which was
empty at the time. Jado called a monk who called the fire fighters.
It took the fire trucks two hours to reach the monastery from
Bethlehem, from a distance of two minutes away, because it had to go
through the road block instead of directly. Since then Jado is
worried about needing emergency treatment.
The big plan is clear to him. Israel intends to make his life
intolerable, in order to drive him from his land. About six months
ago a senior border police officer ordered him to move out. Jado
replied that in a state of law a resident cannot just be ordered out.
“Bring a document,” he told the officer, who did not return. Someone
suggested he petition the High Court of Justice. “Stop talking
nonsense,” he says. “I live in this country. The Shin Bet and police
run it. I would only lose money.”

Alexandria Town Talk, LA
July 11 2004
TOMPKINS: U.S. Olympic boxer fought here last year
Bob Tompkins / Staff Reporter/Columnist
USA Boxing officials weren’t kidding last year when they said there
might be a future Olympian in the Under-19 National Championship
Boxing Tournament that was held last August in Alexandria.
There was.
Vanes Matriroysan, a native Armenian and resident of Glendale, Calif.
who lost the 152-pound title bout to Nick Casal of Niagra Falls,
N.Y., here last August, is one of nine members on the U.S. Boxing
Team that will compete next month in Athens.
Curiously, after Casal won the title by beating Martirosyan, he said,
“It was the most competitive fight I’ve had this year. He definitely
belonged in the finals. He’s a good fighter.”
Martiroysyan, 18, was ranked just 14th in his weight class in
January, but he won 11 fights in six weeks and took advantage of
slips by boxers with bigger reputations to make the U.S. Olympic
team.
A semifinalist at this year’s U.S. Championships in Colorado Springs,
Colo., Martirosyan then beat five foes in five days to win the
Western Trials, which got him to the Olympic Trials. After America’s
top two welterweights were disqualified, Martirosyan advanced to the
Trials final and beat Corey Jones, 18-4. He then outpointed Austin
Trout at the Box-Offs to make the U.S. team and won the Americas
qualifier in Tijuana, Mexico.
Vicente Escobedo, another member of the U.S. team, didn’t box here
last August, but Anthony Vasquez of Snyder, Texas, who was runner-up
in the 132-pound finals in the Under-19 Championships here, pulled
the upset of the U.S. Championships last March by defeating Escobedo.
The U.S. National Champion in ’03, Escobedo, 22, won the Western
Trials to get back on track to making the Olympic team.
Eric Parthen, the executive director of USA Boxing, expressed
disappointment last week that Alexandria is no longer trying to build
a USA Boxing Southern training center, as it hoped to do a year ago
before state and federal grants for such a project were rejected.
“We’re certainly disappointed that hasn’t become a reality,” Parthen
said, “yet Central Louisiana is still being mentioned as a possible
site in the future, so it’s not dead yet.”
Officials from USA Boxing spoke highly of this community, the
hospitality and news coverage during their experience here last
summer, when Alexandria hosted the U.S. Junior Olympics and the
International Invitational Boxing Tournament in addition to the
Under-19 National Championships.
After all those positives, it’s a shame the bitter aftertaste lingers
with Louisiana College’s logical legal bout with Houston’s Galena
Park Boxing Academy and Youth Center for not paying a $78,000 bill
for food and lodging for the boxers during the first two events.
Galena Park director Kenny Weldon said many times to local officials
that while his group could bring the events to town, it could not
afford to finance them. The England Authority last summer voted to
provide “up to $30,000” to help with the financing of the U.S. Junior
Olympics (facility rentals, lodging, etc.) and the City of
Alexandria, according to Councilman Myron Lawson, agreed to
contribute $35,000 as a general sponsorship for the first two events.
Those events, incidentally, never would have taken place here without
LC’s help.
We can’t wait to see how this gets resolved, and LC, understandably,
wants the waiting to end.

Marlborough Enterprise, MA
July 11 2004
Casey: Take the time to say you care
By Helen Marie Casey / Local Columnist
Sunday, July 11, 2004
Perhaps we are all like the character in the novel who laments, “I am
obsessed by the fear that there will not be time enough.” We sit by
our barbeque or under a tree and, try as we may to relax totally into
the moment at hand, we are more often than not owned by the clock or
the calendar. We are indentured.

We are antsy when we are without projects or work and we fidget
when we have no idea of what the day will hold. What we really want
to do is be in control of our time and of the future itself. What we
want is impossible. We are like the little boy who attempted to empty
the ocean bucket by bucket: our ambition outstrips our capacity. We
cannot number the days we have nor can we know what will empty itself
into our life. And this gives rise to our fundamental terrors:
disaster can as easily knock us down as not. Our imagination runs
riot with the possibilities.

We do our best to safeguard everyone dear to us but the
reminders of how little control we have are everywhere. Nightly
newscasters tell us about the toddlers who fall out of windows or off
third-story porches. News stories of the serial killer who buried his
victims in his yard stretch across the ocean right into our front
room. Wartime atrocities have become our daily fare.

Little wonder that we take fright at the smallest provocation
and see danger where there is, in fact, nothing visible. Little
wonder that we are learning to be wary. Little wonder that we are
withdrawing into ourselves when what this tired old world wants is a
little more embracing and a little less handwringing.

There are always individuals who find ways to transcend the
horrors that life presents and even to rescue meaning from its hiding
places. Fortunately for the rest of us, these individuals are often
artists and they fill the empty spaces that surround us with
language, paintings, sculptures, dance, and music.

Poet and teacher Gregory Djanikian writes of the Armenian
genocide, about which one might think nothing good could be made.
Yet, the poet uses memory, storytelling, and simple, familiar images
to remind us that so long as there is memory and language, the
destroyers do not hold the ultimate victory.

The poet-conjurer begins one of his mesmerizing poems this way:
“I can tell you it was a village/fertile and full of grain,/that the
moon grew full above it/before it darkened./I can tell you that the
figs/were abundant, their tiny seeds/were like small gems, hard/and
round in the mouth.”

As the poet continues to describe the village, the women, and
the men — all disappeared — he makes them reappear. He makes the
village idyllic and his love for his people palpable. He makes it
possible for his readers to recall that while there is much humans
cannot control, there is also much that we can control. We can refuse
to be mastered by fear or threats. We can refuse to give up on the
fundamental values and principles that define us. We can refuse to
allow anyone to write the horrors out of history lest forgetting them
— or being ignorant of them — we come to repeat them.

A little past the midpoint of his poem, Gregory Djanikian speaks
of the men of his village: “I can tell you that the men/deep in the
fields of wheat/would lie down soon/and disappear into its many
roots.”

These summer days we may be restless about any number of things
but about a few things we should have singular clarity. We need each
other is the first thing and the second is that we ought to say so
now and again. If we don’t say so, it’s always possible there won’t
be time enough.

Miami Herald , FL
July 11 2004
Playwrights up for Downstage
BY CHRISTINE DOLEN
[email protected]
The men and women clustered around a table in the cozy old Band
Cottage on the Ransom-Everglades campus are, just like the ones
meeting across the street in a cramped upstairs apartment at the
Coconut Grove Playhouse, both daring and vulnerable.
All of them are writers looking for guidance and feedback. Not
journalists, novelists, short story writers or poets but playwrights,
people who tell stories through drama and dialogue. They summon
worlds from their imaginations, invent characters to live in those
worlds, then (if they are both skilled and fortunate) begin the
collaborative process of bringing their play to life on a stage.
Developing scripts so that they’re ready for that last step is what
Downstage Miami — the program that has brought those men and women,
Miami playwrights and their mentors, together — is all about.
”Downstage Miami allows a group of people to investigate what they
have to say in an environment that can guide them, so they don’t keep
their writing in drawers,” says Leslie Ayvazian, author of Nine
Armenians, High Dive and other works, and one of the program’s mentor
playwrights.
“In these situations, you learn as much as you teach. I’m delighted
by the way their work has leapt forward, through their own discipline
and the way they have learned to critique each other. It’s kind and
generous feedback and criticism. Not harmful.”
HELPING HANDS
This protected, purposeful nurturing of South Florida playwrights and
their scripts in professionally led workshops was the brainchild of
Rem Cabrera, chief of cultural development for Miami-Dade County’s
Department of Cultural Affairs and the Downstage Miami program
administrator.
When he was studying for his master’s degree in creative writing at
Florida International University, he recalls, “I tried to write a
play and had no one to help me. Our theater community here has just
exploded over the last 10 to 15 years, and new works have to arise
from this community. There wasn’t any support structure.”
After consulting with theater folks and the leadership of the Theatre
League of South Florida, Cabrera launched the program in 2001. Former
Theatre League head Barry Steinman suggested the name Downstage
Miami; to Cabrera, it represents “the spotlight at the center edge
of the stage, like the bow of a ship. It signifies a high focus of
attention. It connotes progress and forward movement.”
And in this still-early stage in its evolution, the program seems to
be living up to its title.
Already, it has attracted some of the biggest names in play-writing
— including Pulitzer Prize winners Edward Albee (who commented, when
Cabrera shared that his dog had destroyed his copy of Who’s Afraid of
Virginia Woolf?, ”Yes, everybody’s a critic”) and Nilo Cruz, as
well as Arthur Kopit, A.R. Gurney, Eduardo Machado, María Irene
Fornés, Jeffrey Sweet and Ayvazian — as mentors.
Kopit, mentor to the 2004 writers, has found the city “a very, very
rich dramatic and cultural broth to dip into … something you don’t
have in Toledo or Buffalo or even New York. It brings in so many
conflicting sensibilities.”
Its dramatic stories, he says, “have to do with the essence of the
United States as a melting pot. With corruption, dreams, commitment
to culture and the changing of cultures. … The background of
someone who’s lived in Miami, whether they’re Latino or not, is
influenced [by that]. That’s very powerful, enriching and
stimulating.”
The past and present participating Miami playwrights, chosen in a
”blind” process in which their submitted writing samples are
considered without identifying information attached, have backgrounds
as different as their scripts — stories about foreign adoption,
young love, an incestuous affair, a lesbian couple dealing with a
troubled grown son, a daughter yearning to flee her wealthy Cuban
father’s tyranny.
Susi Westfall, for example, is a founder of City Theatre, formerly
one of its producing artistic directors and a play-writing teacher at
the New World School of the Arts. Lauren Feldman is a young actress
and playwright whose work is being performed (she’s also part of the
acting company) in City Theatre’s Summer Shorts Festival at the
Broward Center through mid-July.
Actor-dancer-playwright Ricky J. Martinez is appearing in King Lear
and A Midsummer Night’s Dream at New Theatre this summer, and there
are plans for a New York production of his Downstage Miami play, Sin
Full Heaven, in late spring of 2005.
Buck Fever, the first play by actor Juan C. Sanchez, is making it to
New York even sooner. Sanchez, who pays his bills by working as an
assistant house manager at the Coconut Grove Playhouse and whipping
up drinks in the café at Books & Books on Lincoln Road, is getting a
production of his play by the terraNOVAcollective at Manhattan’s Blue
Heron Arts Center Oct. 29-Nov. 20. Of Downstage Miami, Sanchez says
simply, “I think the program made me a playwright. Leslie [Ayvazian]
was the first person who called me a playwright. I walked into [this]
with 15 pages of a first play and 25 years of desire. It’s obviously
very important and life-affirming.”
Dancer-choreographer and New World faculty member Gerard Ebitz, who
says of his fellow writers ”I trust these people,” became a
Downstage playwright. So did Arnold Mercado, poet, playwright,
screenwriter and fencing instructor who writes in both English and
Spanish; David Caudle, whose Feet of Clay just won the Samuel French
One-Act Competition; and actor-playwright David Cirone, who has
monologues from his Downstage-developed play The Lucky Believe
included in the just-published Best Men’s Monologues of 2003 and Best
Women’s Monologues of 2003.
STAYING POWER
At first, mentor playwrights came in for one weekend each. But
Ayvazian has kept working with her group, e-mailing back and forth,
commenting on revisions, returning to Miami in late June for another
round of work with them at Ransom-Everglades. And Kopit has led all
of this year’s sessions, even arranging for a June reading of
Feldman’s Penguins on Parade at New York’s Lark Theater, where he
runs a play-writing workshop.
”It was her first full-length play, so when she was finished, she
wasn’t sure it was good. It was important that she hear it quickly,”
says Kopit, who wanted to get her some fresh reactions.
“I’m in New York, and it was convenient for me and a useful and
essential thing for her. … I could get some people whose opinions I
value to come, like [playwrights] David Ives and Jenny Lynn Bader —
people whose judgment I trust and who know what not to say. You’re
not there to tell the writer how to fix the play; there’s always
something that’s not working, and the writer is very vulnerable.”
True enough, but Feldman intends to do a significant rewrite before
her fall reading in South Florida and believes what she got at the
Lark was “tons of exquisite feedback, and the whole experience was
nothing short of extraordinary. … I never expected an opportunity
like this could exist for a young Miami playwright.”
While Kopit was in Miami in late June, Caudle got to hear his play
Visiting Ours read in that borrowed Coconut Grove Playhouse apartment
space by some of South Florida’s best actors: Pamela Roza, Angie
Radosh, Tara Vodihn, Marjorie O’Neill-Butler and Ian Hersey.
Afterwards, Kopit solicited reaction from Caudle’s fellow playwrights
and the actors, guiding the discussion, offering his own
observations, giving Caudle lots to contemplate.
And whether the playwrights are doing writing exercises, reading
their own scripts aloud, getting feedback from their mentors and
fellow playwrights, hearing actors read their scripts or opening the
work up to public readings at places like New Theatre and GableStage,
it’s all part of the Downstage Miami process, a process designed to
let Miami voices enter theater’s mainstream.
And that, says Kopit, is a great thing.
”These are all really good writers who are working on very
interesting subjects. This isn’t about getting something right so
you’ll have a hit play; it’s about the process of learning how you
write,” he says. “A good play is so idiosyncratic [that]
playwrights aren’t jealous of each other’s success. When you see a
good play, it excites you. It reminds you of why you do it.”