Author: Chaltikian Arsine

ISRAELI FILMMAKER DISCOVERS TIES TO ADOLF EICHMANN IN CHILDHOOD HOMETOWN
Ramit Plushnick-Masti

AP Worldstream
Apr 24, 2006

When an Israeli filmmaker began researching his roots in Austria,
he made a shocking discovery: His brother had bought his bar mitzvah
suit at a clothing store owned by the family of future Nazi mastermind
Adolf Eichmann.

While making a new documentary, Micha Shagrir learned that his family
was closer to the Eichmanns than he ever imagined. There were business
ties, social acquaintances and mutual friendships in their neighborhood
of Linz, Austria.

Shagrir’s film, “Sight of Memory,” was being aired on Israeli
television Monday night, the eve of the country’s annual Holocaust
remembrance day. It also is being shown at a film festival in Linz
on Wednesday.

The 68-year-old Shagrir, whose parents fled Austria when he was a
baby, worked on the project for more than two years. The quest took
him to Bischof Strasse, the street where his family lived just four
doors down from the Eichmanns.

The family homes are still intact: No. 7, where he was born, and No.
3, where the Eichmanns lived. But their businesses are long gone.

Shagrir’s family owned a well-known candy factory, while Eichmann’s
father, Robert, ran an electronics store, and his mother had a
tailor shop.

Yet some of the neighbors remain. Shagrir was pleasantly surprised to
learn that the family factory _ Schwager Candies _ was something of a
town symbol. Shagrir’s family name was changed after moving to Israel.

“When I came to film on the street, people 80 and 70 years old passed
by,” Shagrir said. “Tears poured down their faces when they remembered
the candies and cookies they ate.”

Elderly people who still live on the street spoke easily of life
between the Eichmanns and the Jewish Schwager family. Such ties were
routine until the Holocaust.

Looking over town documents, Shagrir found a 1926 picture of his
grandfather being crowned president of Linz’s Jewish community.

Sitting four seats away, at a ceremony attended by about 100 of the
town’s VIPs, was Eichmann’s father, who as president of the Protestant
community was a natural ally of the Jewish leader.

“The closeness between them was understood because they were both
presidents of minority groups,” Shagrir said.

Shagrir was even more surprised to learn that his older half brother,
Haim Grunwald, bought clothes for his bar mitzvah _ a Jewish ritual
of entering adulthood _ from the Eichmann’s tailor shop. “He told me
his bar mitzvah jacket was bought there,” he said. Grunwald died two
months ago, just before the film was completed.

Most of the Schwager family survived the Holocaust by fleeing Austria
and Germany in the 1930s, narrowly escaping the systematic Nazi
extermination of six million Jews.

Eichmann, the SS leader who organized the mass murder of Jews, was
tracked to Argentina after World War II, abducted by Israeli agents
in 1960 and tried and hanged by Israel.

As part of his research, Shagrir had coffee and strudel with
Eichmann’s nephew, Hannes, and spoke on the telephone with the Nazi
killer’s youngest son, Ricardo, a professor of Mideast archaeology in
Berlin. Neither agreed to be filmed for the movie, but they expressed
personal sorrow for their relative’s actions, he said.

For Shagrir, going back to Austria was not just a professional
experience, but also the first time he confronted the roots he spent
most of his childhood hiding.

“When I was growing up, I didn’t say that I was born in Austria. It
wasn’t something to be proud of, especially coming from a city that
aside from me, Adolf Eichmann and Adolf Hitler were raised,” Shagrir
said in an interview at his cluttered Jerusalem home.

“On the eve of the establishment of the state of Israel, growing up
as someone who came from German culture _ classical music, singing _
it was shameful and embarrassing,” Shagrir said.

Shagrir is no stranger to controversy. He spent years studying
the massacre of 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey between 1915-1923,
producing a movie in 1976 that set off a diplomatic tiff that almost
led Turkey to cut ties with Israel.

The 50-minute movie, which focused on Armenian folklore, music,
dancing and culture, included 45 seconds of footage from 1917 of
hundreds of Armenian bodies hanging from trees and inside ditches,
Shagrir said. Hours after the movie’s premier showing in Jerusalem,
he received an angry call from the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

Turkey, which is extremely sensitive to the Armenian killings
and insists the deaths were not a planned genocide, was demanding
Israel’s state-owned TV cancel a planned broadcast of the film,
Shagrir said. Israel TV later decided not to air the movie.

For Shagrir, the fact that Israel’s Holocaust memorial falls on
the same day as the 91st anniversary of the Armenian killings is
especially significant.

Yet Shagrir said he would like all of his films to teach future
generations that such incidents should not only be documented and
researched, but prevented at all costs.

“What does it matter if there are 1,000 people in a ditch, 100,000
or a million,” Shagrir said. “The message is that it is forbidden to
kill or expel people because of their beliefs.”

Eurasia Daily Monitor — The Jamestown Foundation
Wednesday, April 19, 2006 — Volume 3, Issue 76

IN THIS ISSUE:
*New political alliance emerges from Kyiv city council
*Armenian parliamentary speaker denounces prime minister
*Gazprom takes over Armenian power station, pipeline
TYMOSHENKO SET TO OUST NEW MAYOR OF KYIV

Banker Leonid Chernovetsky has managed to secure the legitimacy of his
election as Kyiv mayor. On April 10, the Shevchenkivsky district court
in Kyiv ruled that there was no proof of vote buying by Chernovetsky.
Outgoing mayor Oleksandr Omelchenko had accused Chernovetsky of buying
votes and demanded that his victory be invalidated (see EDM, April 5).

However, Chernovetsky’s position remains shaky. The Yulia Tymoshenko
Bloc (YTB) has forged a strong alliance to oppose the new mayor at the
Kyiv city council, and is seeking a rerun of the mayoral election in
order to topple Chernovetsky. His election has bared yet another rift
between the Orange Revolution partners, as the deputies elected to the
Kyiv council from the Socialists and President Viktor Yushchenko’s
People’s Union-Our Ukraine party (NSNU) apparently have nothing against
Chernovetsky.

In the run-up to the March 26 mayoral poll, the YTB was pronouncedly
neutral. Its candidate, Mykola Tomenko, had withdrawn long before the
race started in earnest, and the YTB did not back either Omelchenko or
his key challengers, Chernovetsky and boxing champion Vitaly Klitchko.
The YTB, however, won more seats than any other party in the election to
the city council — 41 out of 120 — and Tymoshenko’s ally Mykhaylo
Brodsky, who is expected to chair the YTB faction in the council,
offered support to Chernovetsky, reportedly expects backing for his bid
for the post of council secretary in return.

Chernovetsky, however, made it clear that he has a candidate for that
position from his own, eponymous bloc. This may have triggered the
conflict. On April 15, YTB people, their satellites from the Civic
Active of Kyiv (GAK), and the Pora-Reforms and Order liberal bloc
(Pora-RiP) ignored the first post-election session of the Kyiv council,
which was scheduled to formalize Chernovetsky’s election.

Chernovetsky was in a difficult situation, as convening the council
without the three parties would not have a quorum. Thus, according to
law, Chernovetsky could not have been sworn in. Chernovetsky was saved
by three deputies from Pora-RiP, who broke ranks and took their seats. A
visibly nervous Chernovetsky was then sworn in.

On the same evening, Tomenko gathered a press conference to announce the
creation of a “coalition of democratic forces” called “Fair Kyiv.”
According to Tomenko, the coalition including YTB, GAK, and Pora-RiP has
a majority, with 62 of the 120 seats in the city council. (But without
the three dissenters who attended Chernovetsky’s inauguration, Fair Kyiv
would be two seats short of a majority.) He also said that Fair Kyiv had
elected Klitchko as its leader, and that they would seek a new election
for mayor of Kyiv.

Tomenko argued that Chernovetsky has failed to present an action plan
for the development of Kyiv, that his legitimacy was in question because
he scored only slightly more than 30% of votes in the election, and that
Chernovetsky’s coalition, “including the Party of Regions and the NSNU,”
was “a challenge to Kyivites.”

Representatives of the opposition Party of Regions (PRU) of Viktor
Yanukovych and the NSNU had indeed been among those deputies who did not
boycott the council’s first sitting. This prompted the YTB to accuse the
NSNU of cooperating with the PRU in the council in violation of previous
agreements on a parliamentary coalition, which apparently rules out
cooperation with the PRU at any level, including local councils. On
April 17, Tymoshenko forbade her own bloc members to join any local
alliances with the PRU. She threatened potential dissenters with
expulsion.

Tomenko and Tymoshenko said that the Kyiv “coalition” between the NSNU
and the PRU was “unnatural.” For some reason, however, they abstained
from castigating the Socialists, whose representatives attended
Chernovetsky’s swearing in along with NSNU and PRU deputies.
Tymoshenko’s accusations against Yushchenko’s party in this case may be
an exaggeration as, unlike Fair Kyiv, the NSNU and the PRU did not
formalize any alliance at the council.

The quarrel over Chernovetsky coincided with another dangerous
development for the Orange coalition. On April 14, the NSNU rejected an
accord reached with the YTB and the Socialists a day earlier, which in
transparent terms stipulated that the post of prime minister in the
alliance would go to Tymoshenko. Yushchenko’s reluctance to return
Tymoshenko the post from which he fired her last year, and her
reluctance to accept a coalition on different terms, has so far been the
main problem in the talks on re-establishing the Orange coalition. The
rift over Kyiv mayor should only deepen the mistrust between
Yushchenko’s team and Tymoshenko.

The creation of Fair Kyiv, meanwhile, has apparently triggered the
dissolution of the Pora-RiP bloc. On April 17 Pora leader Vladyslav
Kaskiv announced that the bloc had ceased to exist because its leader,
Klitchko, had joined Fair Kyiv without consent from Pora. Kaskiv,
however, did not make it clear whether his people will be in the
opposition to Chernovetsky.

(NTN TV, April 10; UNIAN, April 14; ICTV, April 15; Ukrayinska pravda,
April 14, 17; Ekonomicheskie izvestiya, Channel 5, April 17, 18)

–Oleg Varfolomeyev

GOVERNMENT INFIGHTING HERALDS START OF ELECTION CAMPAIGN IN ARMENIA

Armenia’s governing coalition is beset with fresh infighting between the
two largest political parties loyal to President Robert Kocharian, which
could have repercussions for next year’s parliamentary election. The
Orinats Yerkir (Country of Law) Party of parliamentary speaker Artur
Baghdasarian has publicly denounced Prime Minister Andranik Markarian
and his Republican Party (HHK) over questionable privatization policies
pursued by the Armenian government.

The move appears to mark the start of Baghdasarian’s election campaign.
The 36-year-old speaker, who is one of Kocharian’s potential successors,
is widely believed to be trying to enhance his populist appeal by
attacking a government in which his party is represented by three
ministers.

The row broke out on April 11 at the start of parliamentary debates in
Yerevan on the privatization of remaining state assets from 2001 through
2004. A government report on the process was expected to be accepted by
the Kocharian-controlled National Assembly without much fuss. The
parliament did endorse it, but only after three days of bitter
recriminations traded by the two coalition partners in front of
television cameras and gloating opposition parliamentarians.

Orinats Yerkir lawmakers strongly challenged the integrity of the
privatization deals handled by Armenia’s Department for State Property
Management, humiliating the pro-Markarian head of the government agency,
Karine Kirakosian. They pointed to the fact that 48 of 69 state-owned
enterprises put up for sale during the four-year period were privatized
without tenders or auctions and at knockdown prices. Most of those
enterprises have long ceased to operate and were primarily of interest
to private buyers as pieces of real property.

It emerged that virtually all properties located in central Yerevan were
sold off at ridiculously low prices ranging from to per square meter.
The market value of real estate in the increasingly expensive city
center is at least 0 per square meter. Newspaper reports said last week
that among the lucky buyers of lucrative properties were Trade and
Economic Development Minister Karen Chshmaritian and a businessman whose
daughter is married to Kocharian’s elder son.

Baghdasarian and his loyalists allege that the huge price disparity is
the result of government corruption and nepotism. “They have
appropriated millions and have to account for it,” Baghdasarian charged
without naming names. He also accused the government of illegally
privatizing buildings that once belonged to educational, cultural, and
scientific institutions.

Markarian and HHK parliamentarians rejected the accusations, presenting
them as yet another manifestation of Orinats Yerkir’s trademark
populism. “All privatizations were approved at government sessions,” he
told reporters on April 12. “Representatives of that party were present
at those sessions. If they had questions they could ask them and be
given explanations.” Markarian aides implicitly threatened to publicize
“compromising material” against Orinats Yerkir in retaliation. The
threats led the latter to somewhat tone down its anti-government
rhetoric. “Had we gone a bit further, we would have destroyed each
other,” admitted another HHK leader, Galust Sahakian.

The key question is what prompted Baghdasarian to lash out at the
HHK-dominated government now, just two months after he and other
coalition leaders pledged to stop embarrassing each other in public and
to preserve their uneasy marriage of convenience at least until the 2007
election. “One can arrest any official who has dealt with the
privatization sphere at any moment and rest assured that justice has
been done,” wrote a columnist for the 168 Zham newspaper. “On the other
hand, it is clear to everyone that Orinats Yerkir does not care much
about state property privatized for nothing.”

What the party does care about is a strong showing in the next
legislative polls. Barring the absence of personal attacks on Kocharian,
the pre-election discourse of its young leader has always differed
little from that of opposition leaders. Baghdasarian’s statements may be
often demagogic and short on specifics, but they won him the post of
National Assembly speaker and the second-largest faction in the Armenian
parliament after the HHK in 2003. He is arguably the most electable
member of the ruling regime, which explains the persistent speculation
about his ambition to succeed Kocharian, who is expected to step down
after completing his second five-year term of office in 2008.

Baghdasarian already scored more political points last October when he
forced the government, reportedly with Kocharian’s blessing, to start
compensating some of those Armenians whose Soviet-era savings bank
deposits were wiped out by hyperinflation in the early 1990s (see EDM,
October 6, 2005). (Compensation of the former deposit holders was a key
Orinats Yerkir campaign promise in 2003.) So observers wonder if his
latest offensive in the parliament was also agreed with the Armenian
president. But it is not clear why Kocharian would want to undercut the
HHK, Armenia’s number one “party of power” that has served him so well.

Some local commentators say the HHK is not 100% reliable for Kocharian
and his closest associate and most likely successor, Defense Minister
Serge Sarkisian. The latter ran for parliament on the HHK ticket in 2003
and promised to name in February the party with which he will team up
for the 2007 vote. But Sarkisian has still not made the announcement,
suggesting that he might be lacking faith in Prime Minister Markarian’s
Republicans.

(168 Zham, April 13-14; Lragir.am, April 13; Aravot, April 13; Haykakan
Zhamanak, April 12)

–Emil Danielyan

ARMENIA’S GIVEAWAYS TO RUSSIA: FROM PROPERTY-FOR-DEBT TO
PROPERTY-FOR-GAS

Armenian critics describe the government’s new agreement with Russia,
giving up infrastructure property for moderately priced gas, as the
equivalent of giving up the family’s milch cow — or at least selling
the cow for the price of milk.

The preliminary Armenian-Russian sale-and-purchase agreement, first
announced on April 6, was not signed as scheduled on April 14 — an
indication that the bargaining continues over some details. It also
appears that Moscow and Yerevan need a decent interval to condition —
if not convince — Armenia’s population to accept the terms of the
energy agreement and, more broadly, the changing nature of Armenia’s
relationship with Russia from partnership of choice to servitude without
a choice.

According to Gazprom announcements and Armenian officials’ statements
from April 6 to date, the 25-year agreement includes the following
elements:

1) Gazprom will charge 0 per one thousand cubic meters of gas supplied
to Armenia from April 1, 2006, through January 1, 2009. The price will
be subject to negotiation from 2009 onward. Armenia had paid to per
one thousand cubic meters until 2005, and it will sell assets to Russia
in 2006 in order to be able buy the gas at double the old price.
However, the price of gas delivered to Armenian consumers will rise only
slightly, because the government will use the proceeds from the asset
sale to Russia in order to subsidize the domestic gas sales.

2) The joint ArmRosGaz company is taking over the fifth power bloc of
the Hrazdan gas-fired power plant and unifying it with the four old
blocs, which are already controlled by Russia’s Unified Energy Systems
(UES), under a single management system. Hrazdan’s unfinished fifth bloc
was slated to become Armenia’s largest and most modern power generating
unit. Gazprom is to pay 9 million for Hrazdan-5 in three annual tranches
from 2006 to 2008.

Of this amount, 9 million will be nominally transferred to Armenia’s
government, which will use the funds to subsidize moderately priced gas
supplies to Armenian consumers. Significantly, those funds are earmarked
for ArmRosGaz to ensure its profitability — i.e., they are to revert to
Gazprom, which is the dominant stakeholder in ArmRosGaz. Curiously, the
remaining million is to be transferred in cash into the Armenian
Defense Ministry’s extra-budgetary account.

3) ArmRosGaz is to take over the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline. It shall
acquire Armenia’s ownership title to that pipeline’s first section,
Meghri-Kajaran (40 kilometers), which is due for completion before the
end of 2006; and will become the general contractor for construction of
the pipeline’s second section, Kajaran-Yerevan (197 kilometers). Thus,
Gazprom will be in a position to dictate the terms of Armenia’s access
to Iranian supplies or prevent Armenia from diversifying its supply
sources altogether. Meanwhile, Russia uses Turkmen gas for deliveries to
Armenia, and Iran had similarly planned to supply Armenia with gas from
Turkmenistan.

4) Gazprom’s existing, 45% stake in ArmRosGaz shall increase to a
veto-proof majority, between 75% and 82%, by adding Gazprom’s stake in
the Hrazdan-5 power bloc. The Russian company is to invest 0 million in
the completion of Hrazdan-5. Gazprom’s offshoot Itera holds another 10%
stake in ArmRosGaz.

Construction of the Hrazdan-5 power bloc was being completed by Iran’s
Sanir company under a 2005 investment agreement. Iran made available to
Armenia a 0 million soft loan for completing Hrazdan-5 and a million
investment for building an electricity transmission line from Hrazdan to
Iran. Armenia was to repay the loan by supplying electricity from
Hrazdan, using Iran-supplied gas to produce that electricity. The
project envisaged annual profits of 0 million for Armenia, which would
have retained ownership of Hrazdan-5 and covered more than 40% of the
country’s electricity requirement from this project.

Russia already owns Hrazdan’s first four power blocs and some smaller
hydropower plants, as well as Armenia’s electricity distribution grid
(all under Unified Energy Systems) and controls the gas distribution
network (through ArmRosGaz), as well as exercising financial management
of the admittedly obsolete Metsamor nuclear power plant. The transfers
of Hrazdan-5 and control over the Iran-Armenia pipeline will deliver
Armenia’s energy sector totally in Russia’s hands.

(Noyan Tapan, Mediamax, Arminfo, Interfax, April 7-17; see EDM, January
17, 20, April 6)

–Vladimir Socor

The Eurasia Daily Monitor, a publication of the Jamestown Foundation, is
edited by Ann E. Robertson. The opinions expressed in it are those of
the individual authors and do not necessarily represent those of the
Jamestown Foundation. If you have any questions regarding the content of
EDM, or if you think that you have received this email in error, please
respond to [email protected].

Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution of EDM is strictly
prohibited by law.

The Jamestown Foundation
4516 43rd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-483-8888 (phone)
202-483-8337 (fax)

Copyright (c) 1983-2005 The Jamestown Foundation.

PanARMENIAN.Net

EU: Karabakh Settlement Should Be Solved by Peaceful
Tools Exclusively

22.04.2006 20:07 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The major aim of EU Special
Representative for the South Caucasus Peter Semneby’s
visit is to discuss situation in the South Caucasus
and define the next stage of the European Neighborhood
Policy (ENP), Peter Semneby told journalists at his
news conference in Baku on April 22. Speaking about
the Nagorno Karabakh conflict resolution, Semneby said
that it should be solved by means of peaceful tools
exclusively. “This is a very important and fundamental
principle,” the diplomat said. “Both parties should
fully use all mechanisms being created to solve the
conflict,” he stated. Semneby hopes there is a chance
for parties to come to agreement in 2006, reports Trend.

Vardan Oskanian: Co-chairs haven’t made new proposals to settle Garabagh conflict

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
April 20 2006

[ 20 Apr. 2006 17:58 ]

“The people of Nagorno Garabagh should decide themselves which status
they need – this is Armenia’s stance,” Armenian foreign minister
Vardan Oskanian stated (APA).

“Armenia is ready to discuss matters of overcoming the consequences
of the war when official Baku recognizes Garabagh people’s right to
self-determination. Only after that, speaking about territories that
form the security belt and return of internally displaced persons
will be possible. As coming to OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs making new
proposals, this is both true and not. Proposals, or rather principles
of the settlement, remain the same. Mechanisms are subject to change,”
Oskanian said./APA/

AZERBAIJAN URGES IRAN TO HELP SETTLE CONFLICT IN KARABAKH

ITAR-TASS, Russia
April 19 2006

BAKU, April 19 (Itar-Tass) – Azerbaijani Defence Minister Safar Abiyev
urged Iran to help settle the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.

During his talks with his Iranian counterpart Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar
on Wednesday, the Azerbaijani minister said, “We believe that Iran,
which names us its friendly country, must help us solve this problem.”

Mohammad-Najjar, who is currently on an official visit to Azerbaijan,
said, “Security in Azerbaijan means security in Iran. Our defence
capability is your defence capability. We’ve supported and will
support Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.”

The talks focused on military cooperation between the two countries
and prospects for its development, the Azerbaijani Defence Ministry’s
press service reported. The ministers also discussed regional security
and the Caspian Sea status.

Mohammad-Najjar said Iran has the right to use nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes “Iran continues its uranium enrichment activities.

This is the Iranian nation’s right. The forces, which don’t like Iran,
are seeking to deteriorate the situation, but they will fail.”

The Iranian minister named Azerbaijan “a friendly country”. He
stressed that Iran and Azerbaijan were cooperating in different fields,
including in the military sphere. “As part of my visit I’ll hold talks
on expanding military contacts with Azerbaijan although there is an
agreement on military cooperation between the two countries. If we
have problems, we’ ll solve them,” he said.

On Thursday, the Iranian minister will meet Azerbaijani Foreign
Minister Elmar Mamedyarov and parliament speaker Oktai Asadov. He is
also expected to be received by Azerbaijani President Ilkham Aliyev.

IS THIS DIYARBAKIR?
By Mehmet Kamis

Zaman, Turkey
April 17 2006

Bedri Mermutlu has made interesting findings about cities in the
preface to the book titled, “Seyahatnamelerde Diyarbekir” (Diyarbakir
in Travel Books).

These findings are about Diyarbakir in particular. Contemporary
Diyarbakir is a lost city as if it has been shaken and destroyed by
the trauma of modernity. It is impossible to understand this city
just by looking at it from its present state. He drew a perfect
picture of Diyarbakir in the past describing the vineyards that,
40 years ago, used to exist around the city. The people who lived in
that period could never have imagined the vandalism that has turned
these wonderful vineyards into a modern ugly Baglar district of the
city. The modern people living in Baglar district today can never
imagine that there were wonderful vineyards in Baglar district 40 years
ago, if someone does not tell them about that. Diyarbakir is a unique
city which existed in its own authentic world, but unfortunately, its
silhouette becomes indistinct day by day. There was a neatly dressed,
conversational Diyarbakir gentleman, whose attitude we used to watch
in admiration and his dignity in trying to know what time it was by
looking at the chain watch he carried in the pocket of his waistcoat.

If the things we are saying about Diyarbakir today are not about
its culture, accumulation or the things it wants to tell modernity,
then what are they about? Burned tires, stone throwing children,
red-yellow-green flags and highly politicized people… A cosmopolitan
city of civilization, where Turks, Armenians, Kurds, Syrians, Keldanis,
Jews and even Greeks could live altogether in the beginning of the
20th century, Diyarbakir has now turned into a weird city which cannot
tolerate the existence of anything different from itself.

Southeastern Anatolia is between the paws of terrorism and conflict
again. Ethnic terror in the region, which was almost ceased after
[terrorist leader] Abdullah Ocalan was captured in 1999, has been on
the rise since 2004. It seems reforms implemented in the European Union
(EU) process and politicians taking initiatives for the betterment of
the region did not please the PKK. The recent positive developments
in the region falsify the views of the PKK that the people there are
poor and are cruelly treated. This situation, of course, undermines
the views of the PKK. In order for the PKK to maintain its power,
the conditions that keep it alive should remain in the region. For
this reason, the rights of the people in the region must be taken
away from them. The PKK wants the villages to be evacuated, people’s
native languages to be banned, the state of emergency to continue and
all the people in the region to be treated as “terrorists.” Kurdish
intellectual Umit Firat said in his remarks published in Radikal daily:
“The PKK cannot exist in an EU member country. Trying to solve the
Kurdish problem like the problems solved in the EU is something that
the “hawks” on both sides do not want.”

The old Diyarbakir ought to rid itself of politicization in a bid to
help the old orient emerge. That profound mysticism can only surface
in this way. Thousands of years of accumulation of knowledge can
direct the modern world in many directions. What great stories
are there about Ahlat, Ercis, Mardin, Hasankeyf, Mem u Zin and
Ishakpasha. The re-emergence of those stories necessitates an end to
over-politicization and chauvinistic nationalism. This end must come
regardless of the warlords.

Then it will be understood that we have many things to offer to the
whole world. These wise lands will have a better chance to express
the accumulation of experience over the human spirit and the lifelong
spiritual journey. The excellent and awe-inspiring sunrise over the
Suphan Mountain and centuries of friendship in Adilcevaz will all be
open to observation.

The whole region is covered in the dust of the ashes left over from
the fire caused by terrorism here. Once cleared, we will, perhaps,
discover that Diyarbakir gentleman, who is serious, conversational
and wearing a chain watch…

The Messenger, Georgia
April 14 2006

Wine blockade update: Armenian winemakers plug their product

“There exists the opinion that Georgia is good in wine and Armenia in
cognac and it is high time to break these stereotypes,” Avak
Arutunian, Armenian Wine Producers head

By Keti Sikharulidze

The head of the association of Armenian Wine Producers Avak Arutunian
believes that his country’s product can easily replace Georgian wine
on the Russian market.

Speaking with the Russian news agency Regnum Arutunian called
Russian’s resolution to ban Georgian wine imports as a “correct
decision.”

Arutunian thinks that Armenian wines can compete with both Georgian
and Moldavian vintages and that the only country that is capable of
competing with Armenian wines, in terms of quality, is France.

“Our wines are highly competitive with Georgian, Moldavian and even
French wines. The thing is that there exists the opinion that Georgia
is good in wine and Armenia in cognac and it is high time to break
these stereotypes,” Arutunian stated on Thursday.

At the same time that Arutunian was speaking of the great merits of
his country’s wines, a Georgian delegation headed by Minister of
Agriculture Mikheil Svimonishvili left for Moscow on Thursday to hold
meetings with Russian officials to discuss lifting the Russian
embargo on Georgian wines.

“We should do everything we can to solve this problem in order to
avoid any kind of confrontation,” Svimonishvili told journalists.

Russia banned imports of all Georgian and Moldovian wine on March 27,
and last week the ban was extended to include cognac and sparkling
wine.

According to Russia’s Chief Sanitation doctor Gennady Onishenko 13
percent of the Georgian and Moldavian wine tested in 38 Russian
districts meet international standards, while 46 percent of the wine
tested in Moscow is of bad quality.

KARABAKH ISSUE INCLUDED IN ISTANBUL DECLARATION

PanARMENIAN.Net
14.04.2006 02:15 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Nagorno Karabakh problem is included in the
Istanbul Declaration at the recurrent conference of the Parliamentary
Union of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Azeri
delegation member, Chair of Social Welfare Party of Azerbaijan, MP
Hanguseyn Kyazymly reported. He remarked that Azeri delegation members
addressed the Karabakh issue at the event in question. “This is our
biggest achievement. Azeri representatives being included in three
commissions of the OIC Executive Committee is another achievement,”
Kyazymly said.

Problems of Islamic countries and solutions to these were discussed
at the conference, he remarked. The event, in which 437 delegates
from 47 countries took part, was organized April 8-13, Trend reports.

ARF HOSTS ‘ARMENIANS AND THE LEFT’ CONFERENCE

Yerkir
14.04.2006 15:37

YEREVAN (YERKIR) – The Armenian Revolutionary Federation concluded
a weekend-long conference entitled Armenians and the Left on April
9th, when featured speakers Robert Fisk and Noam Chomsky spoke at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in front of a crowd of 750
about War, Geopolitics and History: Conflict in the Middle East.

During his lecture, Fisk explained why the Armenian Genocide must be
known in order to understand how the region has been condemned since
World War I to foreign intervention, chronic war and >mass slaughter.

The conference began on April 7 at the New York Society for Ethical
Culture, where over 1,000 people attended a lecture by Fisk about the
Middle East and US journalism. The crowd featured many out-of-town
guests, including twenty members of the Armenian Youth Federation
of Canada as well as travelers from Philadelphia, Washington, D.C.,
Boston and Los Angeles.

The conference’s main events took place on Saturday, April 8, when
twenty activists, scholars, and opinion makers gave presentations at
the CUNY Graduate Center in Manhattan. Presentations took place in six
panels on a variety of critical topics, including human rights in the
Caucasus, women and political power, globalization and imperialism,
Armeno-Turkish dialogue, Armenian political identity, and reparations
for mass crimes against humanity.

Fisk also promoted his most recent book, The Great War for
Civilization, in which he dedicates an entire chapter to the Armenian
Genocide, which he described as `The First Holocaust.’ Fisk announced
his plans to travel to Van and other areas of Western Armenia to
promote the Turkish language edition of his book.

POWERS OF COUNCILLORS OF VILLAGE OF DASHT, ARMAVIR REGION, PREMATURELY STOPPED

Noyan Tapan
Apr 13 2006

YEREVAN, APRIL 13, NOYAN TAPAN. At the April 13 sitting, RA government
decided to prematurely stop the powers of councillors of the village
community of Dasht, Armavir region, and to fix and hold special
elections of councillors in the electoral district of the village
community of Dasht on the last Sunday of the 30-day term after the
decision’s coming into force. According to RA Government Information
and Public Relations Department, RA Minister of Finance and Economy
was charged to allocate 127 thousand 685 drams (about 280 USD) from
government’s 2006 reserve fund to CEC united fund for the purpose of
financing the expenditures on organization and holding of the special
elections of councillors in the village community of Dasht.