Author: Tavakalian Edgar

The snake

Fish.com

Kavkaz Center, Turkey
July 31 2004

Jack-of-all-trades

In March 2004 some «Timur Aliyev’s Institute of Social Development»
announced the so-called ‘War Prize’ action, whose results was
supposed to be some kind of an ‘anti-award’ to a politician or social
activist of Russian Federation and Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, who
made the ‘largest contribution’ to the cause of starting and
unfolding of the Russian-Chechen war (1994-2004). The organizers of
the action stated that this ‘peacemaking project’ was «aimed at
getting the international and Russian community involved `at a new
angle’ in viewing the war operations that have been going on in
Chechnya for the past 10 years».

The ‘War Prize’ was founded by the interregional organization
mentioned above under the leadership of journalist Timur Aliyev with
active assistance and informational support of Council of
Non-Governmental Organizations (CNGO) of the Chechen Republic, Center
of Extreme Journalism (CEJ) under the Union of Journalists of the
Russian Federation, The Prague Watchdog information agency, and
newspapers Chechen Community and Voice of Chechen Republic.

They say that the organizational committee of the contest (which had
two stages) has received 216 proposals on candidacies of possible
culprits in unleashing and provoking the Russian-Chechen war. The
following contenders were named at the competition for the ‘War
Prize’: from the Russian side – Boris Yeltsin, Vladimir Putin,
Vladimir Zhirinovsky, Pavel Grachev, Sergei Shakhrai, Sergei
Yastrzhembsky, Mikhail Leontiev, Yuri Budanov and others; from the
Chechen side – Dzhokhar Dudayev, Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev, Aslan
Maskhadov, Shamil Basayev, Ruslan Khasbulatov, Akhmad Kadyrov, Dokku
Zavgayev and others.

After the final selection of candidates, which was done in June 2004
by the jury consisting of 5 members (representatives of Russia,
Chechnya, the Caucasus and the US), the following ‘winners’ of the
contest were announced:

-from Russia:
1. Ex-President Boris Yeltsin,
2. journalist Mikhail Leontiev,
3. President Vladimir Putin,

-from Chechnya:
1. First President of Chechen Republic of Ichkeria Dzhokhar Dudayev
(posthumously),
2. former «head of the Chechen Republic» Akhmad Kadyrov
(posthumously),
3. Military Commander (Amir) Shamil Basayev.

Thus, according to the stated mission of the ‘War Prize’, former
President of the Russian Federation Boris Yeltsin and First President
of CRI Dzhokhar Dudayev «were recognized as the persons who made the
`largest contribution’ into the start and unfolding of the war in
Chechnya (1994-2004)».

Columnist from PRIMA news agency Alexander Podrabinek called the ‘War
Prize’ award ceremony, organized by Timur Aliyev’s half-mythical
organization in the middle of the Second Russian-Chechen war, as
‘wartime buffoonery’ and stated that «Russia, and its politicians and
military first of all, is fully responsible for the bloodshed in
Chechnya» (07-07-2004).

The entire paradox of this really strange action under the auspices
of Chechen human rights organizations is that the ‘golden prize
winner’ from the Chechen side, President of CRI Jokhar Dudayev, has
nothing to do with the second war, because he fell with the death of
the brave in the end of the first war. But the ‘silver prize winner’
of the contest, Akhmad Kadyrov, one of the main culprits of the
unleashing and unfolding of the second war, had nothing to do with
the Chechen people, because that national traitor was fervently
defending the interests of Russian statehood in Chechnya (this is why
he should have been included in the Russian ‘team’, and not in the
Chechen ‘team’).

On the top of all that, these are the ‘Chechens’, who are just as
famous but who were left out of the contest conducted by new Chechen
human rights activists and journalists: Umar Avtorkhanov, Salambek
Hajiyev, Ruslan Labazanov (culprits of the first war), Malik
Saidulayev, Yakub Deniyev-Arsanov, the Yamadayev brothers (culprits
of the second war), and Beslan Gantamirov, who had a hand and a leg
in unleashing and further development of both Russian-Chechen wars.

Quoting the words of journalist Alexander Podrabinek, what kind of
artful ‘objectivity’ one needs to have to put Shaheed/Martyr Dzhokhar
Dudayev and Amir Shamil Basayev «in the same ranks with such paltry
persons as Putin, Leontiev or Kadyrov!»

It is even no wonder that the organizers of that shameless action
came up with these kinds of results, since three out of five members
of the jury (the majority) were biased and belonged to interested
parties: one was right from Russia (head of Center of Extreme
Journalism Oleg Panfilov from the Union of Journalists), another one
was from pro-Russian Chechnya (historian and political analyst
Edilbek Hasmagomadov), and the third member of the jury was from
Armenia, the country which is Russia’s strategic ally in the Caucasus
(political analyst of Noyan Tapan information agency David
Petrosian).

Now concerning the main thing on this subject. As it was said in the
very beginning of this narration, the ‘War Prize’ action was
organized by some Institute of Social Development, headed by Timur
Aliyev, who was assisted by Council of Non-Governmental Organizations
(Chechnya), Center of Extreme Journalism (under the Union of
Journalists of the Russian Federation), The Prague Watchdog
information agency and newspapers Chechen Community and Voice of
Chechen Republic. But hardly anybody knows that the key player in all
of these organizations and editions, who had direct influence on the
results of the contest, is the same person – Tamerlan Aliyev (Timur
Aliyev), who considers himself to be a journalist and a human rights
activist. Let me bring up some specific facts.

First, the so-called «Institute of Social Development under Timur
Aliyev» is a part of the Council of Non-Governmental Organizations of
the Chechen Republic (he is trying to avoid the official name of the
state – Ichkeria). On September 15, 2003 Council of Non-Governmental
Organizations (CNGO, a total of 44 organizations including Institute
of Social Development) made a sensational statement (also published
by Kavkaz Center, 09-15-2003). That statement deviated from its
address to the international community, which CNGO made only a week
before that (September 7). The address was about the ‘UN blacklist’,
to which Russia proposed to add a number of leaders of the Chechen
Resistance Movement (like Ex-President Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev and
Commander Shamil Basayev).

This edited version of the address by Chechen Non-Governmental
Organizations was strongly criticized by Ex-President of CRI
Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev. He immediately made a statement (Daymohk
information agency, 09-22-2003), where he quite justly called this
substitution as «inadmissible deviation from the civil and patriotic
position» by CNGO chairmanship expressed in their address on
September 7, 2003. This is the quote from Mr. Yandarbiyev’s
statement:

«I consider it necessary to state that I strongly disagree with the
fact of separating my name and my fight from the name and the fight
of Shamil Basayev and other great patriots of the Chechen Nation who
have taken up arms to defend our Freedom and our Independence, and I
demand that Chechen Non-Governmental Organizations, who signed their
receding statement on 09-15-03, cross my name out of their political
opus, for I do not imagine myself or my activities isolated from the
entire Resistance or from the entire complex of methods that Chechens
have to resort to in the unequal battle, once they were betrayed by
the so-called international community headed by the UN, while
resisting the man-hating genocidal policies of the criminal Russian
state».

«And please don’t forget that the cause of Freedom and Independence
of the Chechen Nation, objective course of our fight and its
implementation do not depend on whether the international community
understands it or not, but it is the vital cause of the entire
Chechen Nation and it is prescribed to us by the Almighty Creator of
all worlds as difficult yet enviable destiny, and He is the One who
set the price for it and the day of celebration, which we must strive
after steadfastly and with no cowardly complexes like the mentioned
statement by Non-Governmental Chechen Organizations dated 09-15-03».

Second, Tamerlan Aliyev is an expert from the Center of Extreme
Journalism (CEJ) under the Union of Journalists of the Russian
Federation. And under the auspices of this Center he prepares a
special report in December 2002. The report was called «Press of the
Chechen Republic», which is now placed on the Chechen.org website
(see section ‘Topical’, subsection `Press of Chechnya’). In his
special report this ‘extreme journalist’ divided all mass media of
Chechen Republic of Ichkeria into 4 groups: ‘governmental’
(pro-Russian), ‘non-governmental’ (independent), ‘Separatist’
(Ichkerian), and other media (based outside of the Republic). At the
same time, among the ‘separatist media’ (under the control of CRI
Government headed by President Aslan Maskhadov) the author singled
out the so-called «newspapers of Wahabist trend» (Banner of Jihad,
Way of Jihad), which are published underground and express the
«interests of some leaders of Ichkeria».

Third, journalist Timur Aliyev is an employee of The Prague Watchdog
information agency (Czech Republic). For example, only in the year
2004 the following articles written by that ‘extreme journalist’ for
that Czech information agency exclusively were published on the
website of The Caucasus Herald (kvestnik.org): «Attorney Abdullah
Hamzayev awarded the Peace Prize’ (03-12-2004), `Fliers with
Obituaries in Memory of Yandarbiyev Spread in Chechnya» (03-23-2004).

Fourth, Tamerlan Aliyev is the editor-in-chief of independent (as it
calls itself) social and political newspaper ‘Chechen Community’,
founded by Timur Aliyev’s Institute of Social Development mentioned
above. I.e., the editor-in-chief and the founder is the same person
(‘Chechen Community’ newspaper is registered with the Ministry of
Press, TV and Radio Broadcasting of the Russian Federation in
occupied Chechnya, Certificate No. 21-0088, issued November 5, 2003.
Registered at the address: 52, Mutaliyev Street, Nazran, Ingushetia).

When I was preparing this article, I got a hold of one of the recent
issues of that newspaper: No. 14 (28) dated July 6, 2004. The front
page of that newspaper had the material on the results of Aliyev’s
contest: «Yeltsin and Dudayev Recognized as Winners of ‘War Prize’»,
and the third page had an article by member of the jury of that
contest, Edilbek Hasmagomadov – `Civil Society in Chechnya’ (with a
photo of that «Chechen historian and political analyst» attached).

Fifth, articles by journalist Timur Aliyev get published on the pages
of the Voice of Chechen Republic newspaper on a regular basis
(editor-in-chief Satsita Isayeva). This newspaper also published the
article «Yeltsin and Dudayev Recognized as Winners of ‘War Prize’» on
its front page (issue No. 13, July 2004).

On the top of all that, journalist Tamerlan (AKA Timur) Aliyev
cooperates with the information service of British Institute for War
and Peace Reporting (IWPR) and his materials get published in the
English version of The Moscow Times. He is also a freelance reporter
for Russian newspapers ‘Russky Kurier’ (‘Russian Currier’) and
‘Moskovsky Komsomolets’ («Moscow Communist Youth League Member» –
this is what that newspaper is literally called). His materials are
also published by ‘Kavkazsky Uzel’ (‘The Caucasus Junction’), which
also provided its informational and moral support to the ‘War Prize’
action.

So, there is no doubt that the so-called Institute of Social
Development of Timur Aliyev (who is also a member of Non-Governmental
Organizations (CNGO) of Chechen Republic [without the word
‘Ichkeria’] and the founder of the ‘War Prize’), as well as Center of
Extreme Journalism (CEJ) (Russia), The Prague Watchdog (Czech
Republic) and newspapers Chechen Community and Voice of Chechen
Republic, who assisted Institute of Social Development in conducting
this bogus contest, had at least 3 votes (ethnic Russian, Russianized
Chechen and pro-Russian Armenian) out of 5 votes of members of the
jury, and from the very beginning plotted a usual dirty provocation
in the attempt to discredit the First Chechen President Dzhokhar
Dudayev (posthumously) and one of the Leaders of the Chechen
Resistance Commander Shamil Basayev (inter vivos).

In this particular case, ‘extreme journalist’ Timur Aliyev, — that
‘wartime buffoon’, who appeared as the official slanderer of heroes
of the Chechen nation, who attached himself to this nation, and who
is an employee on staff and a freelancer of all of the ‘human rights
organizations’ and ‘information editions’ listed above, may also be
(or almost is for sure) an employee on staff and a freelancer of
other ‘authoritative agencies’ that usually hide behind three-letter
abbreviations (FSB/KGB). It seems to me that the author of the
‘peacemaking project’ and the ‘War Prize’ even went overboard in his
desire to become a ‘jack-of-all-trades’.

Vizirkhan Mahmadov, citizen of CRI.

For Kavkaz-Center news and information agency

UEFA.com
July 27 2004

Shakhtar show their form

FC Shakhtar Donetsk’s hopes of ending a four-year absence from the
UEFA Champions League group stage were boosted with a win at FC
Pyunik in the first leg of their UEFA Champions League second
qualifying round tie.

Marica scores
The Armenian champions had eliminated FK Pobeda in the previous
round, but fell behind to Mircea Lucescu’s side on the half-hour mark
when 19-year-old Romanian striker Ciprian Marica scored his first
European goal for Shakhtar. Fifteen minutes into the second period,
though, Rafayel Nazaryan levelled for Pyunik, who went out at this
stage against PFC CSKA Sofia last season.

Win sealed
Shakhtar have made a flying start in the new Ukrainian season, and
moved closer to continuing their winning run when Marica scored again
with a quarter-hour remaining. Nigerian Julius Aghahowa, who like
Marica was on target in Shakhtar’s 3-1 league win at FC Dnipro
Dnipropetrovsk on Saturday, ensured a repeat of that scoreline
tonight with a goal eight minutes from time. The two sides meet
against next Wednesday in Ukraine.

ArmenPress
July 22 2004

VANADZOR TO HAVE ROUND THE CLOCK WATER SUPPLY IN 2 YEARS

VANADZOR, JULY 22, ARMENPRESS: Authorities in Armenia’s
third-largest town of Vanadzor say its residents will have round the
clock drinking water supplies in two years. The project to improve
water supplies is supported by a loan from German KfW bank. Henrik
Kochinian, the governor of Lori province, of which Vanadzor is the
capital, said the Bank has released 11 million euros credit for a
major restoration of water pipeline bringing water to the city.
Together with Vanadzor also residents of 12 rural communities will
have 24-hour water supplies.
Kochinian said local water pipelines have not been repaired for 35
years, except the network of Spitak that once received 150 million
from the state budget to restore it. He said the restoration of
networks in Alaverdi and Stepanavan will require from $3.5 million to
4$ million investments. These two cities are included in a World Bank
loan.

RUBEN POGHOSIAN’S BOOK ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Azg/am
22 July 2004

The Azg Daily’s library enriched recently with Ruben Poghosianâ=80=99s
book titled “Different approaches to the Armenian Genocide”. The book
was published by the Tekeyan Cultural Center in Aleppo in 2000. This
small in size but rather interesting book consists of a prologue, 10
chapters and an epilogue. The appendix of the book presents facts from
all over the world concerning the Armenian Genocide.

It is interesting that the name of Mustafa Kemal, founder of modern
Turkey, is among those recognizing the Genocide. Famous Turkish
sociologist Taner Akcam agrees with the author saying that Kemal
accepted the fact of 800 thousand Armenians being slaughtered during
the WW I.

The preface of the book, written by Alexan Keshishian, briefly
presents the scientific and social activities of the author, stressing
his profession of lawyer and his Ph.D. at Sorbonne University in
1952. The author participated in many scientific conferences including
ones on the Armenian Genocide. He is an author of many monographs, of
more than 100 articles in Armenia, French, English and Arabian
languages. In 1960 the UN invited Ruben Poghosian to work as a judge
and then as a supreme prosecutor in Congo.

In his book Poghosian deals with such issues as Armenians and the
concept of Genocide, the official pose of the Armenian and the Turkish
governments, attitudes of the Turkish intelligentsia, approaches of
the neighboring countries, views of the foreigners, general views in
the Arabian countries and the states openly acknowledging the fact of
the Genocide. He concludes at the end: “This preview of the existing
approaches to the Armenian Genocide reveal all complexity of the
problem and consciously bring to a conclusion that we, Armenians, were
unable to unite and systemize our efforts in order to level the issue
with international problems”.

All these stress the importance of Ruben Poghosian’s work, and his
thoughts over the scientific conference dedicated to the 80-th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide are very up-to-date. The former
Armenian president Levon Ter-Petrosian and his counselor Zhirayr
Liparitian headed the above-mentioned conference. If one of them
trying to emphasize the impertinence of the Armenian Genocide said:
“Today Armenia and Turkey have a great task to overcome the historic
challenges by establishing good relations”, than the second one tried
to transform the Armenian Genocide into a “phenomenon” evading the
word “genocide”.

The author touches upon the issue on the 16-th page: “This process,
launched by Zhirayr Shalian in 1983 and carried on by Zhirayr
Liparitian was to Turkey’ s delight and was unacceptable for us, the
Armenian Diaspora”. Though Liparitian has left Armenia and
Ter-Petrosian is president no more, the American non-scientific
structures keep on benefiting from the Armenian Genocide.

It is obvious that those structures have unlimited opportunities. In
other words if they are willing the recurrence of 80-th anniversary
this year during the upcoming conference then they can put forward
another representative, in the title of “enemy of patriotism”, of the
American intelligentsia instead of Liparitian. Financial support will
be enough for such a person to find effete snobs in Armenia. In this
case the task could be considered carried out. Consequently Ruben
Poghosian’s book is not just interesting but also teaches how to learn
on our mistakes and avoid all possible fraudulent activities during
the scientific conference dedicated to the 90-th anniversary of the
Armenian Genocide.

By Hakob Chakrian

Turkish Press
July 21 2004

No Compromises On Karabakh: Azerbaijan’s President

AFP: 7/21/2004
KHUDAT DISTRICT, Azerbaijan, July 21 (AFP) – Azerbaijan will make no
compromises in its negotiations with Armenia over the disputed
enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, President Ilham Aliyev said Wednesday.

The statement appeared to mark a hardening of Azerbaijan’s stance
over the conflict, which remains unresolved after a war in the early
1990s that displaced a million civilians and left some 35,000 people
dead.

“We cannot react positively to calls on us to make compromises. On
questions of our territorial integrity we will never make any
compromises,” Aliyev said on a visit to northern Azerbaijan.

“Certain calls on us (to make compromises on Nagorno-Karabakh) are
without foundation,” the Azeri leader added.

“All international norms, the economic situation, are on our side.
Large resources are being given to the army and we will continue to
make available these resources.”

Since large-scale fighting ceased in 1994 Nagorno-Karabakh — which
is internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan — and several
surrounding Azeri regions have been under the control of Armenian
forces.

Azerbaijan has insisted that Armenian troops relinquish the
territory, and has said it reserves the right to use force to settle
the dispute.

In the past, Azerbaijan has signalled that it might make concessions
in order to reach a lasting peace settlement with Armenia over the
enclage. One possibility that has been mooted is an exchange of
territory.

But Aliyev’s comments Wednesday, to a unit of border guards on
Azerbaijan’s frontier with Russia, seemed to indicate that this
option has now been ruled out.

Anadolu Agency
July 20 2004

Turks And Armenians Exchange Documents To Discuss So-called Genocide
Claims

ANKARA – Turks and Armenians exchanged documents in Austrian capital
Vienna to discuss the so-called genocide allegations, sources said on
Tuesday.

Sources told A.A correspondent that Turkish and Armenian authorities
met in Vienna on July 16th under chairmanship of Prof. Bihl of Vienna
Armenian Turkish Platform (VAT) and presented 100 documents to each
other.

Turkish delegation headed by Yusuf Halacoglu, the Chairman of Turkish
History Agency (TTK) gave 100 documents collected from several
archives and disproving the claims that Turks carried out a genocide
against the Armenians.

On the other hand, Armenian delegation handed over 199 documents to
Turkish delegations regarding their own claims.

Turkish and Armenian authorities will examine these documents till
the end of December 2004, and if necessary, they can present 80 more
documents to each other till May 2005.

Turkish and Armenian officials will meet again in 2005 and discuss
so-called genocide allegations in the light of these exchanged
documents.

The Independent

Second editor killed in 10 days as fear grips Moscow

By Andrew Osborn in Moscow

19 July 2004

Russia’s jittery foreign press corps was plunged into mourning yesterday
for the second time in as many weeks after another foreign journalist was
murdered in Moscow.

The killing of Paila Peloyan, the Armenian editor of the Russian-language
monthly, Armenian Lane, comes barely a week after Paul Klebnikov, the US
editor of the Russian version of Forbes magazine, was gunned down in cold
blood. Nobody has been arrested for his murder.

Mr Peloyan’s body was found dumped by the side of the city’s outer ring
road or MKAD far from the city centre on Saturday morning.

He had multiple stab wounds in the chest and had been savagely beaten; his
skull was cracked and his face covered in blood and bruises.

Information about his last movements is sketchy, though he is known to
have died between two and three o’clock on Saturday morning and his body
lay undiscovered for at least four hours.

Investigators say they have crawled over the crime scene in order to try
to find out what happened and prosecutors have opened a criminal case into
the killing.

They are not ruling out the possibility that Mr Peloyan was murdered
because of his professional activity.

In contrast to the late Mr Klebnikov, however, Mr Peloyan’s work appears
relatively uncontroversial. While the dead American journalist made waves
by publicising the names of Russia’s wealthiest people and delving into
their often insalubrious financial affairs, Mr Peloyan’s magazine was an
arts publication.

Moscow’s Armenian diaspora, Armenian Lanecarried features about
literature, the arts and history and included prose and poetry from
Armenian writers. Nobody was answering the phones at the magazine’s Moscow
office yesterday.

That Mr Peloyan’s murder comes so soon after that of Mr Klebnikov is
likely to unsettle foreign and Russian journalists alike. Mr Klebnikov was
killed in a drive-by shooting by at least two gunmen and died in a hail of
bullets just yards from his office. His murder had all the hallmarks of a
contract killing.

An online news site, the Russia Journal, spoke yesterday of “an undeclared
war against media representatives” and claimed that Russian and foreign
journalists had become an endangered species in Moscow.

It said: “These two senseless killings have once again put the issue of
journalists’ safety in Russia back on the agenda and raised well-founded
concerns among representatives of the fourth estate.

“This is not because killing journalists is a rarity in Moscow or in
Russia at large but two murders of journalists in less than 10 days in a
city that is not at war is something unusual, even by Russian standards.”
The Russian media itself made far less of Mr Peloyan’s murder, possibly
because as an Armenian hailing from a part of the former Soviet Union once
ruled by the Russians, he would not be considered a bona fide foreigner
like Mr Klebnikov.

It is estimated that two million Armenians live in Russia and the two
countries have a close relationship going back hundreds of years.
Officials at the Armenian embassy in Moscow said that they were profoundly
shocked by Mr Peloyan’s murder. “Naturally we learnt of this information
with great regret,” Armen Gevondyan, the embassy press secretary, told
Interfax news agency.

“We are taking all the measures we can together with Russia’s law
enforcement authorities to ascertain the circumstances of Mr Peloyan’s
death.” Mr Peloyan is the 16th journalist to be murdered in Russia since
2000 when Vladimir Putin assumed the presidency. The US-based Committee to
Protect Journalists says the country is one of the deadliest places to be
a reporter. It addressed an open letter to Mr Putin after Mr Klebnikov’s
killing, complaining about “the climate of lawlessness and impunity”.

“Cases [of journalists being killed] have not been properly investigated
or prosecuted, a testament to the ongoing lawlessness in Russia and your
failure to reform the country’s weak and politicised criminal justice
system,” it said.

JOURNALISTS MURDERED IN RUSSIA

Paul Klebnikov, editor of ‘Forbes’ magazine (Russian edition)

Age: 41

Died: 9 July 2004

Gunned down from passing car while leaving office in Moscow. Had exposed
workings of the country’s shadowy billionaires

Aleksei Sidorov, editor-in-chief of ‘Tolyatinskoye Obozreniye’

Age: 31

Died: 9 October 2003

Stabbed several times in the chest by unidentified assailant outside home.
Newspaper known for investigative reporting on organised crime, government
corruption and shady corporate deals

Valery Ivanov, editor-in-chief of ‘Tolyatinskoye Obozreniye’

Age: 32

Died: 29 April 2002

Shot eight times in head at point-blank range by assassin using a pistol
with a silencer. Murdered in Togliatti after paper exposed controversial
business deals linked to organised crime and government corruption

Natalya Skryl, business reporter, ‘Nashe Vremya’

Age: 29

Died: 9 March 2002

The reporter was repeatedly struck on the head while returning home in
Rostov-on-Don late at night. She was investigating a struggle for the
control of Tagmet, a local metallurgical plant. Just before her death, Ms
Skryl told colleagues that she had obtained sensitive information about
the story and was planning to publish it

Eduard Markevich, editor and publisher of ‘Novy Reft’

Age: 29

Died: 18 September 2001

Shot in the back. The paper, in the Sverdlovsk region, often criticised
local officials. Mr Markevich received threatening calls before the fatal
attack

Igor Domnikov, reporter and special projects editor of ‘Novaya Gazeta’

Age: 42

Died: 16 July 2000

Died in Moscow two months after being attacked by an unidentified
assailant and left lying in pool of blood in the entryway of his apartment
building. His colleagues and police were initially certain the attack was
related to his professional activity or that of the newspaper. It was also
believed for a while that the assailant mistook Mr Domnikov for a Novaya
Gazeta investigative reporter, Oleg Sultanov, who lived in the same
building. Mr Sultanov claimed to have received threats from the Federal
Security Service for reporting on corruption in the Russian oil industry

Natalya Skryl, business reporter, ‘Nashe Vremya’

Age: 29

Died: 9 March 2002

The reporter was repeatedly struck on the head while returning home in
Rostov-on-Don late at night. She was investigating a struggle for the
control of Tagmet, a local metallurgical plant. Just before her death, Ms
Skryl told colleagues that she had obtained sensitive information about
the story and was planning to publish it

Eduard Markevich, editor and publisher of ‘Novy Reft’

Age: 29

Died: 18 September 2001

Shot in the back. The paper, in the Sverdlovsk region, often criticised
local officials. Mr Markevich received threatening calls before the fatal
attack

Igor Domnikov, reporter and special projects editor of ‘Novaya Gazeta’

Age: 42

Died: 16 July 2000

Died in Moscow two months after being attacked by an unidentified
assailant and left lying in pool of blood in the entryway of his apartment
building. His colleagues and police were initially certain the attack was
related to his professional activity or that of the newspaper. It was also
believed for a while that the assailant mistook Mr Domnikov for a Novaya
Gazeta investigative reporter, Oleg Sultanov, who lived in the same
building. Mr Sultanov claimed to have received threats from the Federal
Security Service for reporting on corruption in the Russian oil industry

Student exchange program helps break down cultural barriers
young people gain new insights, perspectives on each other’s countries
YES program provides country’s youth with a chance to experience diverse
cultures

By Linda Dahdah
Daily Star staff

Thursday, July 15, 2004

METN: Falak Tinawi, 16, is all excited, almost frenzied when she
speaks about her experience last year. After spending a full academic
year in the state of Washington, she is back with a new view of the
world and the kind of strong self-confidence that makes her one of
those with a wide and promising future.

“This experience was truly amazing, in all senses. Before I went I was
very much involved into politics and had lots of ideas against the
US,” said Tinawi. “I used to think they have no interest in other
people and simply want to invade other countries.”

But she soon found out that the US consists of a diversity of opinions
and people, living in tolerance. “I met Pakistanis, Koreans, Arabs
… all living together, going to school together,” she said.

Although Tinawi was initially met with suspicion when she first
arrived in the US, sometimes being asked if she was a terrorist, she
gradually managed to change people’s opinion about her and Arabs. It’s
this willingness to hear the other out and to accept them that led
Tinawi to realize that Americans simply do not have access to the
right information about people in the Middle East. “They had the
wrong idea about us,” she said.

Indeed, Tinawi’s good impression of the community where she lived has
inspired her host family in the US to plan a visit to Lebanon during
summer 2005.

The dialogue which Tinawi had started between her culture and that of
the small community where she lived in the US is the premise behind
the “Partnership for Learning Youth Exchange and Study” (YES) Program,
which was started last year by the US State Department under the
Partnerships for Learning Initiative, following the US-led war in
Iraq.

Tinawi was among nine Lebanese students and 42 Arab students who spent
the 2003-04 academic year in the US as part of the program’s pilot.

The YES program, which is administered by AMIDEAST (American-Mideast
Educational and Training Services) in Lebanon and managed by a
consortium of organizations, plans to send about 200 Arab and Muslim
students by the year 2005.

This year, the program has recruited 24 students from all over the
country, selected from among 700 applicants.

“Spending a year of high school in a foreign country is a major
decision, and we are well aware that it would not be possible without
the support of the families,” said US Ambassador Vincent Battle.

“I was very nervous and worried at first. America is so huge, I was
scared she could get lost,” said Antoinette Tawk, whose daughter
Bouchra, 15, will leave in about three weeks along with the other
students.

But realizing her daughter was in good hands, and seeing the way the
whole program was managed, she rapidly changed her mind: “It is an
extremely enriching experience, and I can’t offer her such a great
opportunity, somebody is doing it for me.”

“It is like jumping from a bridge: The excitement is maximum and so is
the apprehension,” said Bouchra. Originally from Bcharre, North
Lebanon, she will soon find a new home in Rockport, Maine.

Leaving her parents for the first time, she has already established
contacts with her host family through the internet.

Enrolled in a full academic year, the students will attend classes,
labs and extracurricular programs including community services, youth
leadership training and civic education program.

“I feel happy and scared at the same time,” said Mohammed Mustafa,
15. “I will as much as I can improve the image of Arabs and Islam
there. I want to show them that contrary to what they think, we are
educated, cultured and open-minded. I want to introduce them to
Lebanon.”

Like the first nine, the new participants will indeed act as cultural
ambassadors, “becoming invaluable resources for Americans,” said
Battle. Their contact will provide hosting communities “with an
opportunity to learn about the rich and vibrant culture of Lebanon.”

In return, students will learn a lot, too. Amal and Khaled al-Ilani
are definitely proud of their son Ahmed, who just returned with new
ideals and objectives. “He introduced his country, his religion and
showed them that we were peaceful and civilized people. In return, he
has learned many things from the American society,” said Khaled.

“He was impressed by the institutional and social organizations. Now
he wants to change the Lebanese society, and is eager to be an active
member in all kinds of social organizations like the Red Cross or
other volunteering associations,” Amal said.

“The beauty of the YES project is that it introduces the rich and
diverse people of Lebanon to those of America. … Lebanese,
Palestinians and Armenians … meeting Black, White and Hispanic
American Families … They all gain new insights and perspectives on
each other’s countries, cultures, life styles and traditions,” said
Barbara Batlouni, AMIDEAST’s director.

Imad Khali, who went to South Carolina, was the perfect example of
such an interaction. “As a Palestinian, what was most striking is that
there were many Jewish Israelis in my school. I was rather scared at
first and they put me aside,” he said.

But then little by little they all started interacting, and even
understanding each other’s different points of view: “One of them even
came to the airport when I was leaving,” he said.

Besides this first experience, another one was waiting for Khali. “It
was incredible; my family had three adopted children, two Hispanics
and a Korean. It was really a life experience and I can’t wait to go
back.”

Interfax
July 13 2004

Russia, Armenia negotiating cooperation in gas field

Moscow. (Interfax) – Russia and Armenia are nearing completion on a
draft agreement on cooperation in the gas field, Russian Prime
Minister Mikhail Fradkov told the press on Tuesday following a
meeting with Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Margarian.

The two sides discussed cooperation in the construction of new
pipelines, he said.

“The outlook in this field is not bad,” Fradkov said. In particular,
Russian gas can be supplied to third countries through pipelines
crossing Armenia, he said.