alpha

Ali, I agree with you that “all human societies have the same basic capabilities under the same conditions”. I believe geographical terrain and the climate has the most impact on determining the characteristics of an ethnic group. If you look at Europe, Northern Europeans are more closed and analytic; in contrast Southern Europeans are more hospitable and friendly. Please don’t get me wrong I am not accusing you for the crimes against civilization committed by Turks and Mongols. Whatever was done can not be corrected, an advanced civilization was destroyed. A lot of it was not even their fault. If they faced a formidable resistance they would have acted differently. Unfortunately the indigenous people of Middle East were not able to organize an organized resistance, just like it was done in Europe. I also agree with you that it was a matter of survival for Turkic tribes to be merciless when they were in Central Asia, but I don’t understand why the cruelty has continued after they have firmly established themselves in Anatolia. I think it was the inertia of killing that did not stop for many centuries (and in some cases continues to this day). I am not an expert in history of Central Asia, but I believe in Samarkand at one time arts and sciences have flourished. So allow me to disagree with your statement that “the meager contributions to world civilization by Mongols and by Turks is a function of the inhospitable terrain they were born in rather than any genetic defect or what. Central Asia is basically a frozen flatland with no tree cover and arable land, and no civilization has ever been born in such an inhospitable terrain.” I agree with you that “no one is inherently evil. We came to Anatolia because if we didn't we were going to die out.” As a result of those invasions a great civilization has died out. I personally think the greatest benefactor of Turkic and Mongolian invasions were not even them, but Northern and Western Europe. After distractive invasions of Central Asian tribes the center of civilization has shifted from Southern Europe and Middle East to Northern and Western Europe.

Computers vs. Automobiles At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, "If GM had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon." In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics: l. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day. 2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car. 3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this. 4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine. 5. Only one person at a time could use the car unless you bought "CarNT," but then you would have to buy more seats. 6. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive, but would run on only five percent of the roads. 7. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "General Protection Fault" warning light. 8. New seats would force everyone to have the same sized butt. 9. The airbag system would ask "are you sure" before deploying. 10. Occasionally for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna. 11. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Rand McNally road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither need nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department. 12. Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car. 13. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.

Arab Caliphate created an advanced civilization, where sciences and medicines were reached to unsurpassable levels for its time. The barbaric Mongolian invasion threw the Middle East back at least a couple of centuries. Up until today Middle East has an inferiority complex because of Mongol barbarism. Arabs look back at the days of Caliphate with nostalgia. Ali Suat, if you consider what Mongols have given and taken from the civilization you will notice that they did not affect it positively.

I think this is the beginning of the process of final disintegration of Georgian State. I think it will disintegrate into Mengrelia, Geogria, Svaneti, Ajaria, Abkhazia and Osetia (it will be a union of loosely connected states). If conditions permit Javakheti will secede to Armenia and Borchalu (Marneuli) region will join to Azerbaijan. The uncalculated steps of Georgian politicians has brought Georgia to this dismal condition. Even an experienced politician like Shevardnadze might not be able to save the disintegration process.

Since only strong nations can be aggressive, at various times of history whichever power had the means to be aggressive, impose its cultural values, or its military might on others, it has done so. Looking back at history the list of aggressive states is filled with superpowers like, Ancient Rome, Arab Caliphate, Mongol Empire, Colonial Spain, British Empire, Russian Empire, and nowadays the American Empire. It’s not necessarily bad to be aggressive. Most of these states have contributed greatly to the advancement of human civilization (except Mongols probably).

ԺՈՂՈՎՈՒՐԴՆ ՈՒ ՉԱՐՉԻՆ - Վա՛հ, էսքան էլ չա՞ր լինի մարդ: Ի՞նչ է արել Վոյինը վատ: Միասնության քոքը վառել, Միահեծան տեր է դառել, Ինքը՝ ազնիվ բասկետբոլիստ, Սերժին դարձրել մոնոպոլիստ, Ազգին բերել դարման ու դեղ, Բացել միլիոն աշխատատեղ, Կոմպլեմենտար ու հեզանազ՝ Ռուսին ծախել ,Մարսե ու Կանազ... - Օ~ֆ, հերիք է, չարչի ախպեր, Մի խոսեցնի ինձ դրանից, Երնեկ նրա վիզան մերժվեր, Էստեղ չգար Ղարաբաղից... - Սերժի առջեւ հապա էնօր Գոռում էիք միաբերան, Թե անկեղծիք ու կամավոր Նախագահ եք ընտրել նրան... - Սու՛տ է, ախպեր: Քանի դեռ կա Սերժ ու Վոյին, ու դաշնակներ, Չի լինելու Հայաստանում Ոչ ազատ խոսք, ոչ կյանք, ոչ սեր... Մռնչաց չարչին, վիզկապը հանեց, Դուրս ելավ տակից մի վոյին-բազե, Հրահանգը ցոլաց, իջավ շեշտակի, Մակեյան Պետրոսն ընկավ կա-պե-զե... Edit: font by nairi

This, from a Canadian newspaper, is worth sharing. America: The Good Neighbor. Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon -! not once, but several times - and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America! This is one of the best editorials that I have ever read regarding the United States. It is nice that one man realizes it. I only wish that the rest of the world would realize it. We are always blamed for everything and never even get a thank you for the things we do.

The following article better explains the views about failed US policy in the Middle East. It reiterates my point that by selling weapons to Israel US is becoming a part of a conflicting side. from the September 13, 2001 edition - US policy in Mideast under scrutiny Mideast leaders have condemned the attacks, while some Arabs express anger at US policy. By Cameron W. Barr | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor JERUSALEM - "You have to understand that the bullets that are fired at us, the missiles fired at our homes, and the Apache helicopters that the Israelis use - we know that all these things come from the US, and they are killing Palestinians," says Hani Jubah, a burly street merchant in East Jerusalem. His stall is around the corner from where some Palestinians celebrated Tuesday's attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. These outbursts have created a public-relations pitfall for the Palestinian cause, but they also highlight what may be the central motivation for the attacks: US policy in the Middle East. The Middle Eastern origins of the attacks remain a matter of speculation, but US officials have identified Saudi militant Osama bin Laden as their main suspect. Authorities in Boston have identified five Arab men as suspects, and have seized a car at Logan Airport containing Arabic-language flight manuals, according to a report in yesterday's Boston Herald. At the same time, regional leaders from Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat to Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi have condemned the attacks and sympathized with the victims. Many Muslims and Arabs have been alarmed by Mr. bin Laden's emergence as a suspect. Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi, the leading cleric of the majority Sunni sect of Islam, yesterday added his voice to a chorus of outrage. "Islam is a religion which rejects violence and bloodletting," he said in a statement reported by the Egyptian state-run news agency. But analysts of the Middle East say it is likely that bin Laden acted in concert with other groups and perhaps with the acquiescence of one or more governments. If this scenario proves true, they envision a multitiered US retaliation that would target several entities across the region. If the attacks on New York and Washington are indeed a reaction to US policy in the Middle East, the next phase of the crisis may presage a widening conflict between the West and the adherents of Islam. Critics of the idea of a "clash of civilizations" are reluctant to concede that such an era is upon us. Nonetheless, says Middle East scholar Rosemary Hollis, "the likelihood has increased over the past 24 hours." Abdel Monem Said, director of Egypt's Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, says the attacks and their aftermath will add "to the existing tension between Islamic countries and the West in general." Ms. Hollis, of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, says she never bought the theory, advanced in the late 1990s by Harvard University political scientist Samuel Huntington, that global conflicts would arise between different cultures. "Now, I think it has elements of a self-fulfilling prophecy," she says. Secretary of State Colin Powell, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and other leaders have contributed to the impression that the New York and Washington events constitute "an attack on civilization," as former NATO commander Gen. Wesley Clark told the BBC yesterday. In this atmosphere it may be difficult for Americans to consider how their foreign policies may have engendered the sort of malice required to kill thousands of civilians in the space of a few hours, but many people in the Middle East are begging them to do so. "I'm against hurting innocent people and civilians, we all are, but this is a big message to the US to rethink their position in the Middle East and their policy," says Mr. Jubah, the East Jerusalem vendor. As the world's only superpower, the US is bound to make some people unhappy at least some of the time. But in this region, sentiments long ago surpassed mere resentment. "There is a growing anti-Americanism in the Middle East as a whole," says Edward Djerejian, a former assistant Secretary of State. The roots of this anger lie in US political manipulations in the region during the 1950s and 1960s, but it has grown to new heights over the past year, which has witnessed escalating violence between Israel, the main American ally in the Middle East, and the Palestinians. "The US is the main military supplier of Israel, and Israel is using US equipment to quell a civilian uprising," says Murhaf Jouejati, an expert on Syria at the Middle East Institute in Washington. For many Arabs and Muslims, the combination of US military support for Israel and its reluctance to mediate in the conflict is an insupportable position. They are angry that their own governments seem powerless to buck the American line. Iraq has also been a source of rising Arab and Muslim anger. While the US demands Iraq's scrupulous adherence to United Nations resolutions - even at the cost of impoverishing what was once one of the region's most prosperous countries - it appears to apply a different standard toward Israel. The Jewish state has long exhibited a combative reluctance to heed UN resolutions. The US also styles itself as the world's main promoter of democracy and human rights, but some of its closest friends in the Middle East are not democratic and show little regard for human rights. That is one reason, as Mr. Djerejian observes, "the leaders in the Gulf countries have become increasingly sensitive and concerned about [the anti-US] phenomenon." The US maintains close ties with several family-run Gulf states to protect US access to oil. Apart from Israel, the region is devoid of democratic government. "The US wants to control the world. Look at the way they control the Gulf and control the oil there," says Aida Abu al-Hawa, a lingerie saleswoman in East Jerusalem. "And this is a democratic state?" she asks, referring to the US. "This is the greatest of the dictator states." In a poor part of the sprawling Egyp-tian capital, an elderly Cairene exhibited a quiet satisfaction with the turn of events. "The US just finally got a taste of its own medicine," says Mohammed, refusing to give his family name. Nicole Gaouette and Philip Smucker contributed to this report. Copyright © 2001 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.

NO matter what's the purpose of terrorism it should condemned, since it's taking innocent lives. Armenian terrorism dates back to Tehlirian and lived another boom in 70's. ASALA was a shame to our nation. It's a black page in our recent history. We as a nation should not encourage extremism. The actions of ASALA were a result of the world's silence to our plees. Tehlirian's case was a little bit different. He was an emotionally unstable man, who lost everything in Genocide and had nothing to live for. Even though the Turkish court sentenced him, but he managed to escape. I don't think Armenians should feel proud of Armenian terrorists. We are a civilized nation and should stand up for the ideals we preach for.

MJ, what is the difference between suicide bombers in Israel or U.S? The end result always is the same, distraction. I think the terrorists chose the WTC and Pentagon symbolically, in order to show their dissatisfaction with U.S. policies. They could have bombed other buildings that would have caused a lot more damage. Bomb in a sports event or at a concert would have taken a lot more lives. I guess their intentions were not simply killing people, but to attack the symbols of financial and military prowess. They made a very strong statement. Also, why do you think “the sentiment of cultural “superiority” always has tendency to lead to military wars when the circumstances allow.” Shouldn’t “cultural superiority” be proven by civilized means, not by destruction? Distruction and loss of lives shows “military superiority” not “cultural superiority”. Saudi Arabia has been exporting Muslim fundamentalism to other countries, don’t you think they should bear some of the responsibilities for the Muslim fundamentalist terrorism. It seems like US is only after the weak states, whose existence is irrelevant to US foreign policies. Do you know that most of the financial support for Muslim fundamentalism and terrorism comes from Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates. In facts only three states, S. Arabia, UAE, and Pakistan, have recognized ultra religious Taliban as a legitimate government of Afghanistan. They don’t harbor terrorist organizations but they surely help them financially. If Afghanistan has to be bombed so do the three above-mentioned states. I guess we both agree on the arrogance of U.S. foreign policy. Do you think the tragic events will change the failed foreign policy? I think that the terrorists wanted to achieve a slight change in US foreign policy, and they might. First and foremost US shouldn’t unilaterally support Israel, as it does not. There are only 6 million Jews (not 20 million. In the world there are 20 million Jews. 6 million in US, 4.5 million in Israel, 1.5 million and Russia and rest are spread out all over the world) living in United States, which has a population of 300 million. That’s only 2% of the populace. MJ don’t you think supplying weapons to one of the warring sides helps one gain an advantage over the other. Russia supplied weapons to Armenia, and we won the war. (can you be more specific when Russia supplied weapons to Azerbaijan). Similarly US is supplying weapons to Israel so they can bully the Arab world. In regards to NATO, if most of the members are against US actions, US still carries out its policies. No fly zone over Iraq is the best example of this. How the influence of USSR over Warsaw Pact was different over the influence of U.S over the NATO.

Here is the article from the Opinion section of September 15 LA Times. I find it very interesting. By NAOMI KLEIN, Naomi Klein is the author of "No Logo." TORONTO -- Now is the time in the game of war when we dehumanize our enemies. They are utterly incomprehensible, their acts unimaginable, their motivations senseless. They are "madmen" and their states are "rogue." Now is not the time for more understanding--just better intelligence. These are the rules of the war game. Feeling people will no doubt object to this term: War is not a game. It is real lives ripped in half; it is lost sons, daughters, mothers and fathers. Tuesday's act of terror was a reality check of the harshest kind. It's true: War is most emphatically not a game. And perhaps, after Tuesday, it will never again be treated as one. Perhaps Sept. 11, 2001, will mark the end of the shameful era of the video game war. Watching the coverage on Tuesday was a stark contrast to the last time I sat glued to a television set watching a real-time war on CNN. The Space Invader battlefield of the Gulf War had almost nothing in common with what we have seen this week. Back then, instead of real buildings exploding over and over again, we saw only sterile bomb's-eye views of concrete targets--there and then gone. Who was in those abstract polygons? We never found out. Since the Gulf War, American foreign policy has been based on a single brutal fiction: that the U.S. military can intervene in conflicts around the world--in Iraq, Kosovo, Israel--without suffering any U.S. casualties. This is a country that has come to believe in the ultimate oxymoron: a safe war. The safe-war logic is, of course, based on the technological ability to wage a war exclusively from the air. But it also relies on the deep conviction that no one would dare mess with the U.S.--the one remaining superpower--on its own soil. This conviction has, until Tuesday, allowed Americans to remain blithely unaffected by--even uninterested in--international conflicts in which they are key protagonists. Americans don't get daily coverage on CNN of the ongoing bombings in Iraq, nor are they treated to human-interest stories on the devastating effects of economic sanctions on that country's children. After the 1998 bombing of a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan (mistaken for a chemical-weapons facility), there weren't too many follow-up reports about what the loss of vaccine manufacturing did to disease prevention in the region. And when NATO bombed civilian targets in Kosovo--including markets, hospitals, refugee convoys, passenger trains--NBC didn't do "streeter" interviews with survivors about how shocked they were by the indiscriminate destruction. The United States has become expert in the art of sanitizing and dehumanizing acts of war committed elsewhere. Domestically, war is no longer a national obsession, it's a business that is now largely outsourced to experts. This is one of the country's many paradoxes: Though it is the engine of globalization around the world, the nation has never been more inward looking, less worldly. No wonder Tuesday's attack, in addition to being awful beyond description, has the added horror of seeming, to many Americans, to have arrived entirely out of the blue. Wars rarely come as a complete shock to the country under attack, but it's fair to say that this one did. On CNN, USA Today reporter Mike Walter was asked to sum up the reaction on the street. What he said was: "Oh, my God. Oh, my God. Oh, my God. I just can't believe it." The idea that one could ever be prepared for such inhuman terror is absurd. However, viewed through the U.S. television networks, Tuesday's attack seemed to come less from another country than from another planet. The events were reported not so much by journalists as by the new breed of brand-name celebrity anchors who have made countless cameos in AOL Time Warner movies about apocalyptic terrorist attacks on the United States--now, incongruously reporting on the real thing. And for a bizarre split second on Tuesday night, CNN's graphic "America Under Attack" disappeared and in its place flashed another one that said "Fighting Fat"--an eerie ghost graphic of what passed for news yesterday. The United States is a country that believed itself not just at peace but war-proof, a self-perception that would come as quite a surprise to most Iraqis, Palestinians and Colombians. Like an amnesiac, the U.S. has woken up in the middle of a war, only to find out it has been going on for years. Did the United States deserve to be attacked? Of course not. That argument is ugly and dangerous. But here's a different question that must be asked: Did U.S. foreign policy create the conditions in which such twisted logic could flourish, a war not so much on U.S. imperialism but on perceived U.S. imperviousness? The era of the video game war in which the U.S. is always at the controls has produced a blinding rage in many parts of the world, a rage at the persistent asymmetry of suffering. This is the context in which twisted revenge seekers make no other demand than that American citizens share their pain. Since the attack, U.S. politicians and commentators have repeated the mantra that the country will go on with business as usual. The American way of life, they insist, will not be interrupted. It seems an odd claim to make when all evidence points to the contrary. War, to butcher a phrase from the old Gulf War days, is the mother of all interruptions. As well it should be. The illusion of war without casualties has been forever shattered.

MJ, can you please explain me what do you mean by “The war has been declared not by the US but to the Western Civilization”. I thought war on Civilization could be declared only by cultural means. What is a war on Civilization anyways? US is supporting one of the warring factions in Middle East, by supplying weapons to Israel, so technically it’s a participant in that war. So you can’t claim that was has been declared against US. In regards to these horrifying terrorist actions I thought this was simply a terrorist action done by people who were disgruntled. In this case I thought it was US foreign policy. Just because the terrorists were Arabs shouldn’t make it a “War on Western Civilization”. Timothy McVeigh, was an American born and bred right wing terrorist who was influenced by extreme right wing and was dissatisfied by the actions of federal government that’s why he bombed Oklahoma City. Did we make such a big deal out of it. Was it considered a “War against liberals”? Of course not. I wouldn’t have been surprised if someone from Yugoslavia who has lost his whole family because of NATO bombing tied a bomb to him and blew himself up around White House. I am not a psychologist, but I think people who are capable to blow themselves up feel extremely powerless and see no point in their lives. They see the terrorism as the last resort. Don’t you think that people who have lost their families due to or because of US foreign policy can commit actions in US soil? An Arab, or any other person, who has lost his son or brother, would be capable to go to extreme measures. In Muslim world everybody knows that it’s because of American support that Israel is capable of bullying its neighbors. A few centuries from now historians would probably look at it as “the second crusader state”, used by West to gain a foothold in the Middle East. In regards to bombing of Yugoslavia, you should know better than I do, NATO is the US. The rest of the members are just supporters. The role of US in NATO is similar to USSR’s role in Warsaw Pact. MJ, I am sure you have heard the word “revenge” a lot from various news sources? If you haven’t than I have. I have heard a lot about War, (some commentators also mention WW III), isn’t that an indication for American public’s appetite to see loss of lives and ruins in other parts’ of the world. I am disappointed at this civilized nation. I hope it’s because of mourning and extreme panic. You have also said, “most of the people behave and express themselves in a very restrained and dignified manner, and expect their”. It’s true that most people were restrained in their comments, but some have harassed Muslims and even shot at Mosques. This is truly tragic. In times of panic Americans can do a lot of things that they later regret. Don’t forget the same thing happened against Japanese living in California during WW II. Well I am glad at least someone has a confidence in this administration, because I surely don’t.

Recently many news sources, referring to government officials’ statements, discuss a lot about the WAR or WORLD WAR III. Any reasonable person knows that for a major World War, two opposing sides have to be militarily in equal standing. What country is US going to war with. Afghanistan? World War III between Afghanistan and US. It just makes me laugh. But Afghanistan did not do anything. It even condemned the attacks. There is not enough evidence to support the involvement of Afghani government in a terrorist attack. So even if US bombs this impoverished country, just like it bombed Yugoslavia, it becomes an aggressor. I thought they don’t support aggressors. Instead of looking at reasons that pushed these people to sacrifice themselves and take 5,000 lives with them, US officials close their eyes on demands of terrorists. Terror is a sign of weakness. It’s a last resort for people who feel powerless to confront a major power. So instead of bombing innocent civilians in Afghanistan, just like US did in Serbia, it should look at demands of these terrorists. What causes people to sacrifice themselves; obviously dissatisfaction from the US foreign policy in the Middle East. US unconditionally supports Israel, thus alienating Arabs and reinforcing the feelings of a perpetual victims amongst Palestinian Arabs. The bombing will turn into a PR campaign to satisfy the feeling of revenge by American public. It’s really sad that majority of people of a civilized country such as US, support the medieval notion, “blood for blood”. I thought we were more civilized, but apparently I was mistaken.

Caucasian Regional Studies, Vol. 3, Issue 1, 1998 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE QUESTION OF JAVAKHETI Voitsekh Guretski* -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Armenians are the second largest ethnic group and the most numerous ethnic minority in Georgia. Mainly they live in Tbilisi and also in Javakheti - a province in the southern part of Georgia, lying against the borders with Turkey and Armenia, where Armenians make up over 90% of the population. Beginning from the early 90's, when Georgia became engulfed in total chaos, problems have emerged in the relations between the authorities in Tbilisi and several of the political organisations in Javakheti. To this day, jurisdiction of the centre is considerably limited in Javakheti, yet following the experiments in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the central authorities prefer to refrain from any radical actions in this region. The situation is made more complex by the presence of the Russian military bases in Javakheti and the problem of Meskhetian Turks seeking to repatriate to Meskheti(1), from where they were forcefully deported in 1994. The future of the province will most probably be determined by the (now developing) new geopolitical order in the South Caucasus, the major determining factors of which are the new communication routes and pipelines. Introductory notes Historically, Armenians in Georgia were engaged chiefly in commerce and craftsmanship and, respectively, lived predominantly in the cities, principally in Tbilisi. According to the results of the 1897 census, Armenians made up 18.7% of the population in the Tiflis province, 25% in the Tiflis district and almost 75% in the city of Tiflis(2). In those days, Armenians owned the largest enterprises and wholesale storages warehouses, and also the biggest capital. Besides, they played an important role in the city's cultural life, which at the end of the last century, before Baku oil boom began, was Transcaucasia's busiest and most important centre. Armenians have compactly resided in Southern Georgia for almost 170 years. When after the war with Turkey (1828-1829) Russia obtained the Black Sea coast from the Kuban to Poti and the largest portion of the Georgian provinces of Meskheti and Javakheti, the Armenians living on the Turkish territory began to massively resettle to the territories of the Russian empire. It was during this process that Armenians settled in the Akhalkalaki district (Javakheti), where they soon outnumbered indigenous Georgians; in 1903, the majority of 54,816 people living in 150 villages of the district were Armenian). After 1829, 2,536 Armenian families resettled to the neighbouring Meskheti (centre-the city of Akhaltsikhe) from Erzerum, while smaller groups of their compatriots had lived there earlier as well; in 1913, 41,873 Armenians lived in the Akhaltsikhe district (16,499 in the city, the rest in 16 Armenian villages).On the eve of the Bolshevik coup, Armenians amounted to as much as 82% of the entire population of the Akhaltsikhe district.(3) Under the Soviet rule, the share of ethnic Armenian population in the Georgian SSR slowly, albeit systematically declined, forming the average of 10% (still maintaining the second place numerically after the Georgians). In 1926, Armenians made up 11.5% of the population of the Georgian SSR, 11% in 1959 and 9% in 1979. Armenians constituted 34.1% of the population of Tbilisi in 1926, 21.5% in 1959 and 12% in 1989. (4) According to the 1989 census, 437,211 Armenians lived in Georgia (8.1% of the total population). Their majority (roughly 150 thousand, i.e. 12% of the city's population) lived in Tbilisi and also in Abkhazia (about 75 thousand, i.e. 14.6% of the population of the Abkhaz ASSR).(5) The largest group, however, ( about 200 thousand) lived in Javakheti (over 90% of the population) and Meskheti (about one third of the population). Administratively, Javakheti is divided into two districts - Akhalkalaki (covering 1,235 square km and home to the population of 69,103) and Ninotsminda (covering 1,353 square km and the population of 37,895)(6). On the whole, the province with 2% of the country's population, occupies 3.7% of the country's entire territory. The city of Akhalkalaki has 15,192 inhabitants and the city of Ninotsminda (former Bogdanovka)- 6,944. In the past eight years since the last census, the region's ethnic composition has altered - the number of ethnic Russians living in some of the villages in the Ninotsminda district close to the Armenian border declined (these were Old Believers, chiefly Dukhobors and Molokans whose ancestors settled in the Transcaucasus way back at the beginning of the 19th century; some of them decided to return back to Russia). In terms of ethnic composition, Javakheti remains a purely Armenian region - even the most reserved Georgian sources estimate the number of Armenians at 91.3% of the population(7), while Armenians themselves claim that this figure is as high as 97%. Meskheti is divided into four districts: Akhaltsikhe (covers 1,010 square km and has 54,822 inhabitants), Adigeni ( 799.5 square km and 21,282 inhabitants ), Aspindza ( 825.3 square km and 13,432 inhabitants), and Borjomi ( 1,189 square km and 38,973 inhabitants). The province (of Meskheti) occupies 5.5% of Georgia's entire territory and accounts for 2.4% of its population. The population of the district centres is as follows: Akhaltsikhe - 24,650, Adigen - 1,239, Aspindza - 3,783, Borjomi - 17,764. A number of Russians left Meskheti in the recent years, as did approximately 700 Ossetians after the conflict broke out between Georgians and Ossetians(8). Armenians make up one third of the Meskheti population. Their number in the Borjomi district, however, is lower than in the Akhaltsikhe district. On the whole, Armenians constitute approximately 40% of the population in Meskhet-Javakheti. In the night November 14-15, 1944 Meskhetian Turks(9) , more than 115 thousand people, were deported from South Georgia, predominantly from Meskheti(10) (man, who fought in the war shared their fate later). All of them were forcibly transferred to the Central Asia, chiefly to Uzbekistan. Later, unlike many other deported peoples, Meskhetian Turks were not allowed to return home The explanation the Soviet authorities offered was the absence of the technical means to arrange the repatriation, and those who returned spontaneously to Meskheti were sent back. Even those who tried to visit their native lands as tourists were denied the right to do so. After the Soviet Union fell apart, the bid of the Meskhetian Turks to return home was obstructed by the authorities of the independent republic. The new Georgian Government under Zviad Gamsakhurdia offered Meskhetian Turks to either register as Georgians or settle elsewhere outside the region (other than Meskheti). This testified to the official policy of “Georgianisation of the state(11). Today Georgian authorities declare their readiness to resolve the problem, yet point to several pertinent issues. In July 1996, pursuant to the decree by President Shevardnadze, the state commission on the matters of the Meskhetian Turks was created. The then National Security Minister Shota Kviraia stated that return of the Turks to the lands bordering with Turkey and Armenia would give the “interested parties with their own strategic interests in the Caucasus an opportunity to use the “Meskhetian card . Kviraia also linked the question of the Meskhetian Turks with the increasing propaganda of Islam in Georgia(12). Official Tbilisi is apparently mindful of the unpredictable reaction of the Georgian Armenians to the repatriation of the Meskhetian Turks. Geographical conditions distinguish Javakheti and Meskheti from the rest of the country. Because of the harsh climate, the former is often called “Georgia's Siberia : in winter the temperature here drops to minus twenty degrees and snow may not melt for six months. Javakheti sits on an elevated mountain plateau surrounded by extinct volcanoes and the region is often shaken by earthquakes. The city of Akhalkalaki is situated at the altitude of 1,750 above sea level, while several villages in the Ninotsminda region are located above the altitude of 2,000 metres. In the 19th century Javakheti was a place of exile. The largest part of Meskheti - the cradle of Georgia's statehood - is located in the Akhaltsikhe hollow whose slopes are covered with apple trees, vineyards, and wild forests. Further up, as in Javakheti, there are alpine plains. For permanent residence Javakheti and Meskheti are not very popular in Georgia. Javakheti during Perestroika and Gamsakhurdia's rule (1985-1991) and the beginning of Shevardnadze's rule. Javakheti is the least invested part of Georgia. There are too few roads and railways and the existing ones are in poor repair and the city infrastructure is underdeveloped. One of the reasons for this, apart from the huge discrepancies between the centre and the peripheries typical for all former Soviet Republics, was the expansion at the end of the 50's of the frontier zone along the Turkish-Soviet border to 78 kilometres into the country (in other places this zone was 7 to 27 kilometres wide). The special heightened regime of control in the frontier zone (where the visa to enter was only issued to those invited by the residents of the zone), with the exception of part of Javakheti, was exercised on the entire territory of Meskheti up until the beginning of Perestroika(13). The local Armenians perceived this also as a policy designed to limit their contacts with Armenia. Only in the second half of the 80's when tensions began in the Nagorno-Artsax, the Government of the Georgian SSR adopted a program of the social and economic development of the population in Javakheti. This, perhaps, was an attempt to prevent possible turbulences in Javakheti against Tbilisi. The events in Nagorno-Artsax catalysed the creation of the Armenian national movement in Javakheti. The two regions have much in common: they are located in the republics neighbouring Armenia, close to the Armenian border, where Armenians represent an overwhelming majority of the population. When the first armed clashes occurred in Artsax, many volunteers from Akhalkalaki and adjacent villages hastened to help Artsax Armenians (first volunteers went there as early as in March,1988). Filaret Berikyan, who for the period of four years was in charge of Artsax issues on behalf of the Government of Armenia, notes that Armenians in Javakheti have a keen sense of national identity: “There were many of them in Artsax, they even created their own units (14). Along with the increase in the number of volunteers, a large number of weapons was supplied to Javakheti. These weapons remain there in private possession to this day. Some argue that the province is the most heavily armed part of Georgia after Abkhazia. In 1988 the national-popular movement Javakhk (the Armenian for Javakheti) was created whose influence rapidly grew among the local Armenians. The official goals of the organisation was the preservation of Armenian cultural heritage, science and history of Armenia in local schools, protection of national institutions and also the development of the region. According to David Rstakyan, one of the Javakhk leaders and Chairman of the Coordinating Council of the public and political organisations of Javakheti, initially Russians, Georgians and Greeks too were among the Javakhk leaders. Only after Gamsakhurdia came to power, did the organisation assume the role of a protector of the rights of the region's Armenian population “frightened by the threats on the part of the Georgian nationalists (15). From the very beginning, however, the goal of Armenians in Javakheti was at least to obtain autonomy, if not to unite with the region with Armenia. The centrifugal aspirations of Armenians (as well as Abkhaz and Ossetians) had from the very start been supported by Moscow. The aim of their policy was to maintain control over Georgia which then resolutely strove to gain independence, yet being weakened by those centrifugal movements, was forced to seek help in the Kremlin. In its turn, Yerevan tried to quell the secessionist aspirations of Armenians in Javakheti. Armenia wanted to avoid fight on two fronts and realised that in the event of conflict with Georgia, it would find itself virtually blockaded (the borders had already been sealed by Azerbaijan and Turkey). Both processes (Russia's support of the centrifugal trends in Javakheti and opposition of these trends by Armenia's official leadership) intensified in the subsequent years. During Gamsakhurdia's rule, Javakheti was beyond the jurisdiction of the centre. The most serious conflict between Tbilisi and Akhalkalaki concerned prefects (the position introduced by the president. The borders of the prefectures coincided with those of regions): Armenians refused to accept three consecutive prefectual candidates sent from the capital because they were Georgian. This was done in the following manner - the armed crowd gathered in front of the administrative building in Akhalkalaki, and did not let candidates from Tbilisi into the building. The protests were organised by Javakhk. David Rstakyan offers the following explanation: “Prefectures were introduced in the period of transition from totalitarianism to democracy, but we considered that they led to dictatorship as they consolidated the executive power. We attached critical importance to the nationality of the prefect since in a non-democratic state with no civil society and where no fair rights and freedoms are guaranteed by the Constitution, the fate of a nation is contingent upon individuals serving in this position. We did not trust the central authorities and therefore wanted an Armenian to be their representative in Akhalkalaki. Georgia to this day remains a non-democratic state, although a certain positive signs have appeared(16). Before Tbilisi agreed to make some concessions, the Provisional Council of Representatives governed the region. According to Tigran Karakhanyan, Secretary of the Akhalkalaki City Assembly and member of the Javakh movement “The Council was set up in the conditions of a political vacuum that emerged after we rejected the prefects imposed by Tbilisi . In February 1991 each of the 64 villages of the Akhalkalaki region elected their representative and eight representatives were elected by the city. Of these the Council (of Representatives) of 24 people was created. The Presidium of seven (among whom one Georgian was a beau geste to Tbilisi) was the working body of the Council. David Rstakyan: "The Council of representatives was not a constitutional organ, but the existing law did not allow us to safeguard our own interests. The Council of Representatives was to function until the office of the prefect was fully manned (all he vacancies filled)". Rstakyan and Karakhanyan do not conceal that the Council which declared itself dismissed on November 15, 1991 when the man at last accepted by the Armenians became the prefect was under full control of Javakheti(17). At that time, several incidents took place in Javakheti which could have resulted in armed clashes: the armed residents of the Akhalkalaki region did not allow the National Guard to enter their territory, disarmed the unit loyal to Zviad Gamsakhurdia that intended to return to the capital via Javakheti after having accompanied the president fleeing to Armenia after the coup in Tbilisi. One of the meetings of the Council of Representatives voted on Javakheti's independence, however, the idea failed to receive the majority vote in the Council(18). According to the Javakh Armenians, all their actions were purely defensive in nature and were a response to Tbilisi's faulty policy vis a vis ethnic minorities.(19) During Gamsakhurdia's presidency the question of the frontier zone re-emerged. Under the new law, the zone was 21 km in width along the entire border. The law, already as a legal act of the independent Georgia was approved by the State Council. According to Tigran Karakhanyan this was against the interests of the Armenian population: “In the frontier zone embracing a large part of our region to the city of Akhalkalaki, building of houses is prohibited. Imagine a family which lives on the border with Turkey and which has five or six children. We have families with many children. Where will they live once the children grow up? This law has nothing in common with international norms (20) According to Filaret Berikyan, Gamsakhurdia intended to settle Georgians in the frontier zone, he encouraged the Georgian population to settle in Meskheti and Javakheti, including the places where the Old Believers in the Ninotsminda district with the aim of creating a Georgian buffer between Armenia and Armenian-populated Javakheti.(21) On March 10, 1992 the Military Council governing Georgia was transformed into the State Council and Eduard Shevardnadze became its chairman. During the first four years of his rule the centrifugal trends in Javakheti did not diminish (the most serious crisis occurred in 1994 when the Head of State sent his representative to Akhalkalaki). Due to the weakness of the centre, the region remained virtually independent from Tbilisi. The war in Abkhazia exacerbated the situation in Javakheti: first, most Armenians living in Abkhazia supported the Abkhaz which provoked anti-Armenian sentiments in Georgia. Second, Russia that supported the Abkhaz and Ossetian separatism, could instigate analogous conflict in Javakheti. According to Mamuka Areshidze, Chairman of the Parliamentary Commission on the Matters of the Peoples of the Caucasus, Russia did attempt to incite an armed conflict in Javakheti: such an attempt presumably took place in the autumn, 1993 at the most difficult time for Georgia after the defeat in Abkhazia and Zviad Gamsakhurdia's return to Georgia (22). The Javakh leaders, however, deny this allegation, although they admit their close collaboration with the Russian military base in Akhalkalaki (many Armenians of Javakheti work at the base). David Rstakyan asserts that if outside forces had attempted to enter Javakheti then, they would have encountered the adequate response . He may be referring to the Mkhedrioni fighters who in 1993-94 terrorised Georgia, yet they had never crossed the border of the Akhalkalaki district. In 1995, after the parliamentary and presidential elections in Georgia, the situation in the region began to stabilise. In the elections of November 5, 1995 Javakheti voted for Eduard Shevardnadze's Citizens Union, Aslan Abashidze's Union of Revival and also for Jumber Patiashvili, the communist candidate and Shevardnadze's main contender in the presidential elections. David Rstakyan who ran for the parliament and had his confidants in the polling precincts, alleges that Patiashvili won in the city as well as in rural areas, later however, the results were falsified and Shevardnadze emerged as a winner.(23) On the Status of Javakheti The Constitution of Georgia adopted on August 24,1995 states that the administrative-territorial arrangement of the country based on the principle of the separation of powers shall be determined after the full restoration of Georgian jurisdiction on the entire territory of the state (Article 2, paragraph 3)(24). This has not been achieved yet. Though, for more than three years now, the new administrative arrangement of the country is being formed. Pursuant to Decree No 237 of 1994 of the Head of State, the institution of Representatives in the regions was introduced (this administrative-territorial unit is of a higher order than the regions remaining from the soviet system, corresponding to the historical provinces of Georgia). The territories settled by the Armenians were included in the region of Samtske-Javakheti (or Meskhet-Javakheti) embracing the historical Meskheti and Javakheti (six districts). Gigla Baramidze was appointed the State Representative. According to a member of the Javakhk movement, creation of the region within such borders is aimed at counterbalancing the Armenian majority in Javakheti, since in Samtskhe-Javakheti Armenians no longer represent the overwhelming majority. Several days after the issuance of Decree No 237, T. Karakhanyan chaired the Akhalkalaki City Assembly session. At the session protests were voiced that the Decree threatened the rights of the Armenians, besides for even the most trivial things one would have to travel to Akhaltsikhe, the capital of Samtskhe-Javakheti. Dissatisfaction was also caused by the fact a Georgian was appointed as the State Representative which was reminiscent of the conflict involving the prefects. Many members of the Assembly believed that under such circumstances declaration of independence was the only alternative.(25) D. Rstakyan argues that creation of the Samtskhe-Javakheti region is anti-constitutional. First, the Presidential Decree of 1994 provided creation of the institute of the State Representative(s) and not creation of the regions, and, second, the change in the administrative arrangement should be effected through a referendum. In 1997, members of the Javakh began to collect signatures under the document of the following content: “Dear Javakhks! The Coordinating Council of the public and political organisations of Javakheti, in accordance with Paragraph 1 of Article 67 of the Constitution of Georgia (no less than 30 thousand electors have the right of legislative initiative),(26) are organising the collection of signatures for the discussion in the Parliament of the following issues: 1.discontinuation of the process of creation of the anti-constitutional region of Samtskhe-Javakheti; 2. upon the passage of the chapter of the Constitution on the territorial arrangement of the country, to grant Javakheti the respective status of the administrative-territorial unit within the framework of the Georgian Constitution.(27) According to D. Rstakyan, 12,000 signatures were collected before September 1997 in the Ninotsminda district and 30,000 in the Akhalkalaki district. D. Rstakyan alleges that the process of the collection of signatures was obstructed by police and special services. “There were cases when police went to the homes and threatened people, saying we intended to use the signatures for other purposes abridging the text of the appeal. One representative of the special services came to me and said that indeed the Constitution provided the collection of signatures, yet a special permission was required for that. (28) Leaders of the Javakh declare that their aim is not uniting Javakheti to Armenia or the independence of the region. “We will not follow suit of the Nagorni-Artsax says D. Rstakyan and clarifies that the movement only aims to secure the rights for the local Armenians compatible with the rights of ethnic minorities in a “civilised world and also to provide guarantees that would ensure that these rights would be observed. Rstakyan considers the article of the Georgian Constitution on the “cultural autonomy and giving Javakheti a status of the subject of the future federation to be the best guarantor. The Georgian press, however, regularly writes about “the fifth column of Javakheti blaming the Javakh leadership in separatist aspirations. Although harshly critical in tone, these publications have historical foundation: apparently, the Javakhk did not altogether renounce the idea of the secession of the province from the centre and still sustain this idea as one of the alternatives for the future .(29) According to David Rstakyan, however, “an administrative-territorial unit within Georgia is only required in order to have Armenian schools and have conditions which would be conducive to pesuing the Armenian way of life. Georgia is a member of the UN and therefore the same standards of the protection of national minorities must be observed here as are accepted by other democratic nations. Of course, Georgia has its specificities and one can argue about the concrete forms in which the cultural autonomy shall be exercised: we could work out a draft and submit it to the Parliament for consideration. Unfortunately, at present the Georgian government is ignoring us, and this is not a normal situation. We do not oppose Georgia's political system, we do not call for war or strife, and yet we are prevented from the collection of signatures. This compels us to doubt the sincerity of attitude toward us. (30) It cannot be ruled out that ignoring the demands of the Armenians by the Georgian authorities can lead to civil disobedience. The paramilitary organisation “Parvents (the Armenian name of lake Paravani in Javakheti) is a serious proof that Javakheti is preparing for different options. According to M. Areshidze, weapons that Parvents possesses initially belonged to the Russian base and were used in Nagorni-Artsax.(31) The existence of paramilitary organisations in Georgia are confirmed by the Deputy Minister of Defence General Guram Nikolaishvili: pursuant to the temporary agreement on the status of the Russian bases on the territory of Georgia (reference is to the first agreement which Russia did not ratify and the next agreement was not ratified by Georgia -V.G.) we agreed to the bases if Russia fulfilled three conditions: to guarantee Georgia's territorial integrity; to assist in the building of Georgia's national army; to disarm and dismantle the armed groups on the Georgian territory which were not part of either Georgian or Russian regular armies. None of these conditions have been met. Today we control Javakheti, but we encounter certain difficulties. (32) The activities of Javakhk are supported by the majority of Javakheti's Armenian population. Officially the movement has 5,000 members. There are differences within the movement regarding the strategy of activity, though this is concealed and the organisation pretends to be monolithic. The most radical members of the Javakh or those who are under the influence of the Armenian party of Dashnaktsutsyun demand that the province be united with to Armenia (officially this party does not exist in Georgia). There is also a pro-Georgian wing in the Javakhk represented by those close to the MP from Javakheti and his brother, the prosecutor of the region (in the Parliament elected in 1995, Armenian minority has four MPs one from each - the Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda districts and two from Tbilisi elected by proportional representation through the party list of the Citizen's Union of Georgia) and also those from the entourage of the head of the region. According to M. Areshidze, representatives of the most extreme wings of the Javakhk do not play a significant part in the movement.(33) It must be noted also, that Russia and Armenia try to excercise influence on the Javakh. The Georgia authorities have no definite idea as to “what must be done in Javakheti . Partially, this is due to the ongoing disputes regarding the model of the state. These disputes between the advocates of centralisation and federalisation have been underway ever since the declaration of Georgia's independence. The former, being the overwhelming majority, are prepared to accept a special “federative status of Abkhazia and Ajara alone (some also of the South Ossetia). They argue that federalisation threatens Georgia with dismemberment as it encourages other ethnic minorities (primarily Armenian in Javakheti and Azeris in the Marneuli region) and also such sub-ethnic groups as Mengrelians and Svans to seek autonomy from the centre. In their turn, the federalists argue that in the situation where Georgians only constitute about 70% of Georgia's population, national minorities are compactly settled and the provinces differ considerably from one another (Mengrelians and Svans speak their own languages), the only way to preserve the country's integrity would be to grant the provinces wide rights. Shevardnadze is apparently inclined to this letter conception. In September 1997 the President instructed M. Areshidze , supporter of federalism to prepare a draft law on the national minorities. Evidently, the passage of this law will not be smooth and painless for the supporters of centralism.(34) The absence of concrete responce of the official Tbilisi authorities to Armenia's propositions and the Javakhk activities can be explained by their desire to avert another secessionist war after wars in Abkhazia and South Ossetia: having been confronted with Abkhaz and Ossetian separatism, Georgia “chooses to be cautious with regard to its southern part with the Armenian population, Russian military and a border with Armenia .(35) The impression is created that for tranquillity and peace, Tbilisi for the time being reconciles to the fact that it does not control part of its own territory (something similar is happening with regard to Ajara). But Tbilisi can only pursue such policy while the state structures are being strengthened on the one hand, and new transport communication routes are being developed on the other. Then these issues will have to be resolved. Socio-Economic Situation in Javakheti In Javakheti there are still no signs of growth evidenced in Georgia's economy recently: privatisation has not begun, and not a single kilometre of the roads, the worst in the country, has been repaired, numerous industrial enterprises continue to be idle. The living standards in Javakheti are lower than in the rest of Georgia. In the 90's the province has been neglected, the necessary infrastructure is absent, unemployment is high. At the end of 1997 only 20% of the former employees worked in the local cannery. Rstakyan and Karakhanyan claim that Tbilisi is intentionally ignoring the province. They blame the central authorities for removing equipment of the idle enterprises and allowing the looting of the property of bankrupt collective farms. According to them, not a single dollar from the credits and targeted financing received by Georgia has gone to Javakheti, and the ministry officials sent western investors to other parts of the country (especially Tbilisi and Rustavi). The province has no lobby in the capital as MPs from Javakheti occupyed pro-governmental position.(36) Despite the fact that Tbilisi continues to pursue the policy of non-interference in the affairs of Javakheti, and by doing so finds itself in a deadlock, as if conceding to the demand of the province's autonomy. Leaders of the Javakhk declare that when they achieve the status of a subject to the Georgian Federation for Javakheti, they would immediately attract investment and the life of the population would improve.(37) According to the federalists, in order to avoid tensions in the nearest future caused by dire material difficulties that the population is experiencing, the central authorities must invest in Javakheti as much and as soon as possible. It must be noted, however, that in the given situation of the absence of full control of Tbilisi over Javakheti, taking such steps entails great difficulties and requires extreme flexibility. The population of Javakheti predominantly live cultivating private plots and shuttle trade with Turkey, some are engaged in supplying petrol to Armenia, others in the extraction of stone (which mostly ends in Turkey; apart from uncontaminated environment, the chief resources of the province are: marble, bazalt and construction stone). Few of the residents found jobs in small private enterprises: bakeries, filling stations, shops.(38) Officially, unemployment is low, but reliable data are absent. Unemployment benefit is eight Lari (approximately $6.15), while a kilogram of pork on the food market in Akhalkalaki costs 4.5 Lari. The shortage of jobs compels many to go abroad, mostly in Russia. Many also leave for permanent residence to Armenia(39). Along with Georgian Lari, Russian rouble is also in circulation in the province. Roubles are supplied to the market by the military from the Russian base that are paid in roubles. In most of private shops and restaurants Lari is accepted with reluctance. These difficulties in the circulation of the Georgian national currency is evidence that the military base is the largest and most important “enterprise in Javakheti. In summer of 1997, the Georgian president signed Decree No 348 “on the circulation of the national currency Lari on the territory of Georgia and on urgent measures to establish Lari as the only legal payment tender (40). The Decree directed ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defence to agree with relevant bodies of the Russian Federation the issue of payment of the salaries to the military serving on the Russian bases in Georgia in Lari. The Representatives in Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo Kartli (with the Azeri majority) were instructed to create special commissions monitoring the circulation of the national currency in their respective regions. Armenians from Javakheti do not speak Georgian, but Georgians there speak fluent Armenian. Leaders of the Javakhk consider that this has to do with the ethnic composition of the provinces and doubt the success of the state program of teaching the state language to the non-Georgian population(41). Most of the children in Javakheti go to Armenian schools. The Ministry of Education of Georgia approved that the history of Armenia be taught there, and the text-books for this purpose are sent from Yerevan on the basis of inter-governmental agreement. After leaving school, young people as a rule continue higher education in Yerevan's universities and other institutes of higher learning and some study at the Armenian faculty of Tbilisi Pedagogical Institute. A branch of Yerevan University opened in Ninotsminda, Akhalkalaki receives Armenian TV and the newspaper Javakhk is published occasionally. According to Filaret Berikyan, Javakheti's Armenians enjoy full cultural autonomy(42), however, Rstakyan indicates that the number of Armenian schools is inadequate and emphasises the absence of the guarantees for the protection of the rights of Armenians.(43) Javakheti in the Context of Regional Policy Ever since regaining independence, Georgia has striven to play the role of a bridge between the west and the former soviet Central Asia and serve as a transport corridor for the transportation of the Caspian oil and gas and be a factor of stability in the Region. The conflict in Nagorno-Artsax enhanced Georgia's role: when Armenian-Azeri border remains sealed, overland communications of Armenia with Russia and Azerbaijan with Turkey are carried out through Georgia. Striving towards independence from Russia and western orientation have been the priorities of Georgia's foreign policy. Following the defeat in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Georgia was forced to join the CIS and agree to have Russia's military presence. Under the new circumstances, Shevardnadze's aim became to maintain balance in the contacts with two groups of states: Turkey, Azerbaijan, Ukraine and the West, on the one hand, and Russia, Iran and Armenia on the other. Georgia managed to preserve good relations with all these countries(44). An agreement was reached between the EU and the governments of France, Georgia and Armenia on the rehabilitation of the road Poti - Khashuri - Borjomi - Akhaltsikhe - Akhalkalaki - Gyumri - Yerevan - Megri (a town on the Armenian-Iranian border). The Minister of Transport and Communications of Armenia Genrik Kochinyan informed the Parliament of Armenia on this on September 11, 1996(45). Georgia simultaneously pursued the policy of integration with the West. Shipping Caspian oil is linked with western investment which would allow her to conduct policy independently from Moscow. In 1996 Georgia, Azerbaijan and Ukraine signed an agreement on the cooperation in the field of construction and exploitation of the transport corridor between them in close cooperation with Uzbekistan and with the view of creation Tashkent-Baku-Kiev axis. The construction of the Eurasian corridor and also the rail-link Kars-Tbilisi(46) are additional signals of the weakening of Russia's control over the region. Investment in oil requires political stability, but Russia may attempt to destabilise the situation. Russia has already exerted pressure on Georgia through supporting the separatists and also by imposing its own military presence. From time to time, Russia used these two methods by placing Russian military bases in the places of compact settlement of ethnic or religious minorities. This is the case in Ajara where the Russian Army has a base and leases a military port. The situation is similar in Javakheti (base in Akhalkalaki and Russian border guards on the border with Turkey). If Kremlin decides to preserve South Caucasus in the zone of its influence at any expense, it would try to trigger a conflict in Javakheti. Such conflict would seriously damage Tbilisi's transport plans and would potentially lead to the cooling of relations between Georgia and Turkey.(47) Events involving Russian base in Akhalkalaki (base No 62 is part of the Group of Russian Troops in the Transcaucasus)(48) proves that such option is acceptable for Russia. Irakli Batiashvli, former head of Georgia's national security service alleges that the motorised infantry division positioned on the base helped in 1994-96 in the illegal shipment of Russian weapons to Armenia through Georgia.(49) The majority of military at the Akhalkalaki military base are local Armenians who adopted Russian citizenship (varios sources estimate their share at 70-90%). The base in Javakheti is, perhaps, the most important employer for the local population. In addition, part of the population earns their living from trade with the military. D. Rstakyan stresses the excellent relations between the command of the base and the Javakh movement (there exists a position of the Deputy Commander in the field of work with the local population which has no analogy in other Russian units neither outside, nor within Russia).(50) According to Rstakyan, if the Georgian Government demands the withdrawal of the Russian Army from Georgia, the local population would protest, as the base for them is a guarantor of their security. “We are afraid of Turkish aggression. Turks have at every opportunity assaulted us. It was them who in 1915 exterminated 1.5 million Armenians. Georgia is a small country which cannot insure our protection from the Turks. We would agree to the withdrawal of the base only when the world community provides guarantees of protection from the Turks and even in that case we would prefer that the Russian stay since we, the Armenians are Russophils. According to Karakhanyan, the Akhalkalaki military base is strategically more important than the base of Gyumri in Armenia, as it is a counterbalance against Turkey - the NATO member and therefore it is a factor of stability in the region. Karakhanyan notes that Javakhks are in a sense hostages of Moscow and Russia uses us as a bargaining chip, but we have no other option .(51) Yerevan does not support the idea of Javakhk separatism, despite the fact that Armenians are involved. At any price, it tries to quell the situation in Javakheti, as the conflict in the province would put Armenia in a difficult situation: damaging of the relations with Georgia - the only neighbour apart from Iran whose border is not sealed - would mean shutting off of overland communications via Georgia to the Black Sea and would also put hundreds of thousands of Armenians living in Tbilisi and other parts of Georgia in a difficult situation. Armenia confronted with Azerbaijan and blockaded by Turkey, cannot afford this. Yerevan is also against the idea of Javakhk that the region of Javakheti must be a separate entity under Georgia's new administrative division and prefers Samtskhe-Javakheti region. This region (specifically its Meskheti part) borders with Ajara with which Armenians have exceptionally good relations (according to some Georgian politicians, better than between Batumi and Tbilisi). Any other administrative division would hamper Armenia's access to the sea. In late spring 1997 presidents of Georgia and Armenia, Shevardnadze and Ter-Petrossyan met in Javakheti. The joint communiqué stated that the right of local Armenians for cultural autonomy are observed and there are no problems with regard to national schools. The Armenian leader emphasised that attempts to destabilise the situation in Javakheti would not be supported by Yerevan. The Dashnaktsutyun party is one of the most influential political forces in today's Armenia (the party was established in Tbilisi 1890). After the Bolshevik coup, the Dashnaks worked in emigration and they have great influence among the Armenian diaspora. Uniting Javakheti with Armenia is in the program of Dashnaktsutyun: “Armenian lands indicated in the Sevr Agreement (the peace agreement of August 10, 1920 -V.G.), also Nakhichevan, Akhalkalaki and Artsax regions should be part of the united Armenia.(52) Activists and co-thinkers of the Dashnaks are among Armenians of Javakheti, although no one officially admits this. It is quite likely that comments in the Georgian press regarding Javakhk separatism are inspired by the official Tbilisi: being cautious about radical steps in the province and knowing Yerevan's position (under Ter-Petrossyan), Tbilisi wants to resolve the situation in the country's south with the hands of Armenians. Two years ago after the Congress of the Javakhk, Tbilisi newspapers wrote that the Dashnaks dominated the leadership of the movement. Since Dashnaktsutyun was an opposition party in Armenia, these publications could have been aimed at prompting Yerevan to excert pressure on the Javakhk. Perhaps with this goal in mind, one of the Georgian newspapers reported in August, 1997 about Rstakyan's meeting with Levon Ter-Petrossyan where, reportedly, the date for holding a referendum in Akhalkalaki on the independence of Javakheti was set. According to Rstakyan, he has never met Ter-Petrossyan. All that is related with the return of Meskhetian Turks to Javakheti will affect the situation in Javakheti. So far, however, this question remains purely theoretical.(53) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: * Voitsekh Guretski - post-graduate student of the Academy of Sciences of Poland Under the current new territorial arrangement of Georgia, Meskheti and Javakheti are united in one region of Meskhet-Javakheti. The other name of the region is Samtskhe-Javakheti. These territories were formerly part of the Samtskhe-Saatabago principality. The same censusestablished that Armenians made up 2.3% of the population in the Kutaisi province (The Russian empire devided Georgia into two provinces - the province of Tiflis and the province of Kutaisi). Overall, Armenians accounted for 9.2% of the entire Georgian population. Refer to: B. Baranowski, K. Baranowski, Historia Gruzii, Wroclaw, 1987, pp.170-173; Y.D. Anchabadze, N.P. Volkova, The Old Tbilisi, the City and itsDwellers in the 19th Century, Moscow, 1990, p.33. Miroslava Zakrzewska-Dubasova, Historia Armen, Wroclaw, 1990, pp.168-179; The Issue(Case) of Armenia. Enciclopedia. Edit. K.S. Khudaverdyan, Yerevan, 1991, A.Melkonyan, article "Akhalkalak", pp 67; A. Melkonyan, article "Akhaltska", pp 67-68 Refer to Anorzej Maryanski, Przemiany Ludnosciowe w GSRR, Warszawa -Krako, 1995, pp.185-191 According to the census of 1989, 76,541 Armenians (14.6% of the population) lived in Abkhazia Data for 1989 Newspapers Eri (in the Georgian language), April 10,1991 and the Russian language Panorama Nedeli (panorama of the week), No.32, 1997 cite 2.5% of Georgians in Javakheti Informetion on the refugees from Georgia's regions. Official note of August 15,1996 of the acting Chairman of the Migration Service of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania Meskhetian Turks - a mystery for ethnologists. The present article does not deal with the theory of their origin, yet it must be noted that they are mentioned in the works of Herodotus and Strabo and both Turkish as well as Georgian elements participated in the ethnogenesis of this people. According to the census of 1989, 207.5 thousand Meskhetian Turks lived in the Soviet Union. Refer to: The Peoples of Russia, Enciclopedia, edit. V. Tishkov, Moscosw, 1994, article Y. Broiso, I. Prokhorov "Turk-Meskhetians", pp.342-344 Refer to Vadim Tutunik's "Turks from Meskhetia: Yesterday and Today. This is How it Was." National Repressions in the USSR. 1919-1952. Repressed Nations Today. Editted by Svetlana Aliyeva. Vol. III, Moscow, 1993, pp. 145-163. IBIDEM. Nodar Broladze, "Meskhetian Turks are awaiting the opportunity to return. Propaganda of the ideology of islamic fundamentalism is preventing the repatriation." Nezavisimaya Gazeta, No. 135, July 25, 1996. Meskhetian Turks consider that the 78 km. frontier zone was created with the aim of preventing their return to the native land. Refer to V. Tutunik p. 155. Interview with F. Berikyan. Interviewer V. Guretski. Yerevan, August 28, 1997. Interview with G. Karakhanyan. Interviewer V. Guretski. Interview with G. Karakhanyan. Interviewer V. Guretski. IBIDEM. According to D. Rstakyan, voting on the independence of Javakheti was a response to President Gamsakhurdia's statement during his visit to Akhaltsikhe that Armenians are guests in Georgia. This statement was regarded in Javakheti as the official policy targeted against ethnic minorities. Rstakyan claims that with the exception of this incident, independence was never mentioned "even at rallies" Rstakyan maintains that bloodshed was averted by the "Javakh" which at that time was in full control of the situation in the province. According to Rstakyan,, the conflict would have occured if the Georgia units had crossed the border of the Akhalkalaki district (this is how war was unleashed in Abkhazia) Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan Berikyan maintains that the Merab Kostava Foundation tried to persuade the Old Believers to leave Georgia and purchased their houses V. Guretski's interview with M. Areshidze, Tbilisi, August 15,1977 Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan The Constitution of Geogia adopted August 24,1995. "Svobodnaya Gruzia", November 7, 1995 Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan Under the Georgian Constitution, the right of legislative initiative is vested in the president, members of the Parlament, parliamentary factions and commissions, supreme representative bodies of Abkhazia and Ajara or 30,000 electors Leaflet "Dear Javakhks" Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan. Karakhanyan says that despite the region's "unconstitutional" nature, the formation of its governing bodies is underway where predominantly ethnic Georgians are employed. He claims that most of them, including the drivers are from Tbilisi which increases budget expenditures. Accorging to Karakhanyan, the total salary of the emplyees of the regional (local government) structures amounts to 40 thousand USD, which is almost equal to the pensions fund of the Akhalkalaki district. Interview with M. Areshidze Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan Interview with M. Areshidze Interview with G. Nikolaishvili. Tbilisi, September 7, 1997. Interview with M. Areshidze. IBIDEM A. Kukhianidze "Armenian and Azeri Minorirties in Georgia. On Georgia's Internal and Foreign Policies", Ethnic and Regional Conflicts in Eurasia. Book I. Central Asia and Caucasus. (Edited by A. Malashenko, B. Coppiters, D. Trenin). Moscow, Ves Mir Publishing House, 1997, p. 180; The following excerpt from Revaz Sakvarishvili's article should be quotted: "A new conflict is looming is the south of Georgia. Armenian population of the region is demanding autonomy"; The Segodnya newspaper reported on September 6, 1996 that "The Georgian leadership does not want to admit the problem (Javakheti-V.G.). Apparently with two unresolved conflicts, Georgia fears the third one". Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan. According to D. Karakhanyan, joint Georgian-Armenian and Georgian-Russian enterprises could operate in Javakheti, using the equipment from the Russian military base in Akhalkalaki. For obvious reasons, the Georgian authorities have no interest in such "joint-ventures". Many local Armenians work at the Russian military base in Akhalkalaki. According to Areshidze in addition to the absence of jobs, excessive population of Javakheti due to the overpopulation represents one of the major reasons for emigration. Svobodnaya Gruzia, August 12, 1997. Refer to Givi Inasaridze's "teaching Georgian will be enhanced in Samtskhe Javakheti and Kvemo Kartli", Svobodnaya Gruzia, September 6, 1997. Interview with Berikyan. Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan. Georgia is closer with Azerbaijan due to the Transcaucasus transportation corridor and simillar problems related with the loss of part of their territories. Because of this Georgia and Azerbaijan both give priority to the principle of "territorial integrity" over the principle of "the right of nations to self-determination." On the other hand Georgia tries to maintain good relations with Yerevan and it managed to remain neutral vis a vis the Artsax conflict. Refer to the Lragir newspaper, September 14, 1996; Transcaucasian Media Project. Annotated Daily Headlines of the Transcaucasian press. - Compiled by the Caucasian Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development (CIPDD) in collaboration with the VERTIC-IWRP Media Resourse Center in Tbilisi. September, 1996 This railway, besides the motorways through Batumi and Akhaltsikhe, is a reponse to the increse in the trade with Turkey, currently the largest trading partner of Georgia; it would also have great significance for Armenia. Jacek Cichocki, "Rosyjskie zaangazowanie militarne na Zakaukaziu", Analizy, Osrodka studiow wschodnich, No 19, 16.06.1997. The author writes that "Russia's military engagement in the Transcaucasus will in the first place depend on the results of the fight between the power elites in the Kremlin who uphold different conceptions of the policy of the state regarding foreign investment. In the event of opening up of the post-Soviet "geopolitical space" to foreign investors, the role of the military factor in the policy of Russia with regard to the states of the South Caucasus would probably be weakened. If the Russian elite recognises keeping the CIS countries in the zone of Moscow's influence to be its principal aim, Russia would attempt to undertake a number of military actions in the region" One can say that there is no legal basis for the presence of Russian troops in Georgia. During the visit of the then Minister of Defense Pavel Grachev to Georgia, Eduard Shevardnadze agreed to the Russian bases, but the agreement with Russia has not been ratified by the Georgian Parliament Giorgi Dvali, "Georgia corrects the geopolitical list. For this Shevardnadze travelled to Armenia", Komersant -Daily, May 6,1997. On the shipments of the Russian weapons to Armenia, refer to: Jacek Cichocki Interview with M. Areshidze Interview with Rstakyan and Karakhanyan Programme of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation "Dashnaktsutyun" The Turkish press often writes about the Meskhetian Turks, emphasising that their return home would lead to the escalation of anti-Turkish sentiments among Armenians in Georgia and hightening of tensions in the region. Refer to :"Javakhk Union President's Comments on Article of Turkish Newspaper", Yerevan Times, 21 August,1997

Turks, Greeks agree joint 2008 bid Tuesday, August 28, 2001 By Mark Bentley ISTANBUL, Aug 28 (Reuters) - Turkish and Greek football authorities agreed on Tuesday to launch a joint bid to host the 2008 European soccer championships in a sporting reflection of recent warming of relations between the two historic rivals. 'The signing of this letter of intent is no less than a historic development in relations between Turkey and Greece,' Turkish Football Federation chairman Haluk Ulusoy told reporters at a signing ceremony in a hotel in Turkey's biggest city Istanbul. 'When we present our bid, we will work in an organised fashion. I believe these efforts will be a message to the world,' said Greek counterpart Vassilis Gagatsis. Aegean neighbours Turkey and Greece almost went to war in 1996 over a disputed set of islands and are at odds over a range of territorial issues, as well as the divided island of Cyprus. But since earthquakes hit both countries in 1999, EU member Greece and membership candidate Turkey have begun a slow dialogue process to ease the tensions, even though resolution of thorny disputes still looks a distant prospect. 'I believe that sport and particularly the attraction and charm of football will solve the problems between neighbours Turkey and Greece,' Ulusoy said. 'We are taking the first steps in achieving a dream.' But Greece and Turkey will face stiff competition from competing bids, including a joint Nordic Euro 2008 bid from Finland, Sweden, Austria and Denmark. Scotland and Ireland are also set to present their own joint bid for the finals and Hungary have decided to go it alone after talks broke down with potential co-hosts Croatia. DIFFICULT JOURNEY 'Our journey is a long and difficult one but, with good intentions and effort, I believe we can achieve our objective,' Gagatsis said. The deadline for applications to European soccer's governing body UEFA to host the championship expires at the end of 2001 and a final decision is due in March, 2003. The next European championship will be held in 2004 in Portugal. Mirroring efforts of football's world governing body, UEFA has encouraged countries with small and medium-sized economies to join forces and share the burden of the bidding costs. Belgium and the Netherlands were the first countries to jointly host the European championships last year and South Korea and Japan are co-hosting the 2002 World Cup finals. Ulusoy acknowledged that not all the necessary infrastructure was in place in Turkey but said the country had grounds in several cities that he believed were of a good standard. The two federations will set up working groups to look at possible venues and infrastructure needs. Neither side, though, gave any hint as to where the final would be held if the joint bid proved successful.

Turkey Fights Economic Free Fall Economic woes stymie the strategically located country, but new financial leadership and international loans offer hope for reform. By Diane Lindquist In April, after shutting plants in the Netherlands and France and halving production in Spain, Carrier Corp. inaugurated a new production base for the heating and air-conditioning systems it sells in the European Union. It put the factory in Turkey, a bold choice for the Farmington, Conn., company. Few other global corporations are investing in Turkey these days. In the minds of most investors, Turkey's economic uncertainties outweigh the country's strategic location. In the last 18 months Turkey has staggered through a three-year disinflation program backed by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank that was initiated in January 2000, abandoned by the Turkish government in February of this year, and relaunched by the IMF in May. Although there are glimmers of hope for reform, foreign companies still are more likely to locate European operations in Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, countries that like Turkey offer potential manufacturers low wages and, as EU candidate countries, tariff exemptions on goods sold in Europe. Each of the other nations nets about $10 billion in foreign investment a year. Turkey gets only about $1 billion. Ishak Alaton, chairman of the Alarko Group, a diversified manufacturing and construction concern and one of Turkey's largest corporations, says foreign companies shun his country because its ruling regimes (there have been three in the last two years) are corrupt and inept. "Turkey is a country with fantastic potential, but it is probably one of the worst-managed countries in the world," he observes. Political leaders long have afflicted Turkey's enterprise economy. In February President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Prime Minister Bullent Ecevit sent the country into free fall when they exchanged insults over the pace of corruption reform. The value of the Turkish lira dropped by a third. The stock market plunged. The IMF loan arrangement fell apart. And capital flight drained the central bank's reserves. Despite attempts to halt the slide, Turkey still is reeling. Devaluations are chipping at the currency and the banking sector is tottering on the edge. The situation looks so dismal Standard and Poor's has lowered the country's credit rating to the level of Mongolia's. It is a far cry from Turkey's magnificent past as the center of far-flung military and trading civilizations. Palaces, minarets, and ancient ruins testify to the nation's rich history. But ever since its independence in 1921, Turkey has been a curiously introverted, nearly self-sufficient country. However, as a key NATO member and U.S. ally, it occupies a strategic global position as a bridge between Europe and the emerging nations of Central Asia. Selling Reform Plan This year's financial upheaval has served to fortify the need for fiscal reform and EU membership. Government officials persuaded World Bank Vice President Kemal Dervis to return to his native land and take charge of the economy. Since arriving in March, Dervis has made the rounds at the World Bank, IMF, Bush Administration, Paris Club, and German banks to sell a new structural reform plan that requires at least $12 billion in aid to bolster the banking system and kick off real privatization efforts. "Hope came with Kemal Dervis," says Alaton. "We hope he will bring an end to this utter mismanagement and corruption." Alaton himself is an important and unusual figure in Turkey. As a young man he migrated to Sweden and worked as a mechanic in a home-furnace business. Upon his return, he and partner Uzeyir Garih cofounded Alarko in 1954 to make heating devices. They since have built the enterprise into one of the country's largest conglomerates with 6,000 employees. Although Alaton remains chairman, he recently turned daily activities over to other executives so that he could devote time to the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation. The independent think tank, funded partly by the World Bank and the Turkish Interior Ministry, is probing corrupt practices in Turkey's government and business. "I am very often reproached by my own managers [who say] I am a negative factor in their work because my openly critical posture is not appreciated by politicians and they feel the pressure," he says. "It's a dilemma, but at least there are enough people who are honest and interested enough to tackle the country's problems." Three years ago, Carrier hitched its fortunes to Alaton and the Alarko Group by forming a joint venture to make, sell, and service heating, air-conditioning, and ventilating units in Turkey. The United Technologies Corp. subsidiary paid $42 million for 42% of the enterprise, called Alarko-Carrier Industry and Trade Inc. Alarko retained 42%, and the remainder was floated on the Turkish stock market. "We've been doing $100 million a year in sales with a 16% profit. This year we expect $120 million in sales," notes Alaton. With the completion last year of a 215,000-sq-ft factory on 15 acres in the Gebze Organized Industrial Zone outside Istanbul, he says, sales are expected to climb to $200 million next year as the enterprise exports more products. "We see Turkey as an emerging market that will grow [at a] better-than-average [rate]. But through this venture, we also intend to grow our market share in Europe," says Ted Amyuni, Carrier's president of European transcontinental operations. "The European market is doing well for us. It rebounded suddenly last year." Despite pressure from business to strengthen the country's ties to the European Union, Turkish leaders have remained ambivalent, mainly because they have been reluctant to undertake the economic and political reforms required for full membership, says Volkan Vural, the country's Secretary General for EU Accession. Among reforms necessary for EU membership: abolishment of the death penalty, a new penal code, and further efforts to preserve human rights and freedom of expression, especially for the Kurds and non-Turkish-speaking immigrant groups, says Vural. And the country must eliminate its budget deficit, reduce inflation, and remove subsidies and domestic-market barriers. Turkey's potential perhaps is best demonstrated by the gains the automotive and textile industries made after the country became part of the EU Customs Union in 1995. Both sectors initially opposed the move but then experienced export booms. "In the last six years, Turkey has become a one-stop shopping center in the textile industry. We've become competitive with the Italians and other Europeans," says Reyhan Benzes, who with her sister, Nilufer, manages APS Textile and Trade Co., a family-owned apparel-manufacturing company. Their sales quadrupled from 1997 to 2000 by targeting only the export market. They produce more than 450,000 pairs of trousers a month for manufacturers and retailers including Banana Republic, Ann Taylor, and Liz Claiborne in the United States. This year the sisters expect sales to jump from $33 million to $45 million. Their eight-story factory in Icerenkoy on the outskirts of Istanbul employs 558 workers, who are paid about US$400 to $500 a month -- slightly more than the minimum wage. An additional 12 to 15 subcontractors employ 2,500 workers. Both women -- Reyhan is 26 and Nilufer is 25 -- say a new generation is determined to change Turkey. "They're smart, they're well educated, and their numbers are large. They know that under the right circumstances, Turkey has a great potential to grow," says Reyhan Benzes. http://www.industryweek.com/CurrentArticle...?ArticleId=1102

The reconciliation commission was long overdue. A lot of work has to be done to bring two neighborly people together. How long are we going to stay adversaries? We must remember that Turkey is a neighboring country and having normal relations with neighboring country is vital for the development of our country. Whatever bad blood was between two neighborly people let’s leave in the past and concentrate on the future. Such controversial meetings have to start in small groups and then gradually expand to include other interested parties. I have had the honor in my life to meet three members that participate in talks, Van Krikorian and Andranik Migranyan, and Alexander Arzoumanian and can attest that these are extremely knowledgeable and patriotic people. All interested partiess of Armenian people are represented in the commission. Van, represents Armenian Assembly and Spurk, Alik, represents the interests of the people that reside in the Republic of Armenia, and Mr. Migranyan, represents the interests of Inner Spurk. The time for revolutionary parties is long gone, and ARF has to either transform itself from national socialist ideology, or must fade away, like Hnchaks have done. The nationalist ideology of ARF and its anti-Turkish hysteria works against the interests of the Republic of Armenia.

FACTBOX-Main Caspian oil production and pipeline projects MOSCOW, July 10 (Reuters) - Competition to export the oil and gas wealth of the Caspian Sea will hot up in August when the first oil from Kazakhstan's giant Tengiz field finally flows out of a consortium-built pipeline at Russia's Novorossiisk port. The Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) line is the first major new pipe built to export oil from a region with estimated hydrocarbon reserves of up to 250 billion barrels. But many other schemes will follow. Below is a list of the main fields, followed by production and pipeline projects in the Caspian region: FIELDS -- TENGIZ is one of the world's largest oilfields with total reserves of about 25 billion barrels. It is developed by the Tengizchevroil joint venture, led by U.S. oil major Chevron (NYSE:CHV - news) with 50 percent. Kazakhstan holds 20 percent of the venture, ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM - news) 25 percent and LUKArco five percent. -- KASHAGAN is a more recent Kazakh oil find which, according to some estimates, could contain as much as 50 billion barrels of oil, making it possibly the largest field to be discovered in the past three decades. It is being developed by an international consortium OKIOC, with Italy's ENI (Montreal:ENI.M - news) as the project operator. -- AZERI-CHIRAG-GUNESHLI is operated by BP (quote from Yahoo! UK & Ireland: BP.L) and belongs to the Azerbaijan International Operating Company. The complex's output will be ramped up to at least 450,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2005 and one million bpd by 2010 from a current 100,000-130,000 bpd. -- There are two blocks on Russian Caspian territory -- the Severny, owned by LUKOIL , and a block offshore from the Volga Delta, owned equally by LUKOIL, Gazprom and YUKOS . The Russian Ministry of Natural Resources estimates reserves in the Russian sector at 4.4 billion barrels. -- Turkmenistan also has big oil and gas deposits, but so far has been unable to attract much international investment. It disputes Azerbaijan's ownership of the Azeri and Chirag fields and threatens legal action if Baku continues working them. PIPELINES -- The CASPIAN PIPELINE CONSORTIUM is a 1,500-km (930 mile) link from Tengiz to Novorossiisk. Initial capacity will be 560,000 barrels per day, rising to 1.35 million barrels a day. Shareholders are Chevron, the Russian, Kazakh and Oman governments, LUKOIL, Rosneft-Shell Caspian Ventures (quote from Yahoo! UK & Ireland: SHEL.L) Mobil (NYSE:XOM - news), Agip , BG (quote from Yahoo! UK & Ireland: BG.L) Kazakhstan Pipeline Ventures and Oryx . -- ATYRAU-SAMARA: an existing 690 km (430 mile) pipeline along which Kazakh oil is currently being pumped. It goes from the Tengiz field to Samara in Russia and thence to the Druzhba pipeline system. Its capacity is around 200,000 bpd. -- BAKU-CEYHAN: a proposed line of around 1,700 km (some 1,000 miles) from Azerbaijan to Turkey via Georgia, expected to cost $2.8-$2.9 billion. BP leads the sponsor group which plans to build the one million bpd capacity pipeline by 2005. The project is also heavily backed by the United States. -- BAKU-SUPSA: Some 100,000-130,000 bpd of oil from Azerbaijan's Chirag field is already being exported along a line from Baku to the Georgian port of Supsa. -- SHAKH DENIZ: Another BP-led consortium plans to build a link to feed gas from Azerbaijan's 15 trillion cubic feet Shakh Deniz gasfield into Turkey. -- KASHAGAN TO IRAN: TotalFinaElf is supporting a study of a pipeline from Kashagan across the Caspian to the Iranian border. A further pipeline could then be built to pipe Kazakh crude across Iran to Tehran's Gulf Export Terminals.

Financial Times Oil prospects darken for Azerbaijan July 8, 2001 6:28pm Azerbaijan's position as the centre of the Caspian oil and gas industry this week suffered a further blow, after ExxonMobil reported a dry exploration well, and speculation rose of other failed offshore drilling. An ExxonMobil official announced this past week that the first exploration well in the Oguz offshore concession, once believed to contain some 95m tonnes of crude, would be abandoned because "no commercial accumulation of hydrocarbons were encountered". "At the moment there are no plans for future drilling," the official added. ExxonMobil, under its contract with Azerbaijan's state oil company Socar, is committed to drilling two wells in the structure or pay compensation. The US multinational's announcement is the third piece of bad news this year for the ex-Soviet state of Azerbaijan, which only a few years ago was being touted as the next Kuwait. It comes as industry analysts have raised expectations that Chevron is soon to announce similar bad results at offshore drilling sites. A consortium run by Italy's Agip failed to find sufficient amounts of hydrocarbons January in its first well in its Kurdashi concession in the south Caspian. TotalFinaElf, the French group, recently annouced failure in the Lenkoran Talysh-Deniz structure near by. Chevron is widely expected to reveal less-than-positive results in its Absheron offshore field this week. The site was earlier believed to hold up to 1,000bn cubic metres of gas, making it one of the largest natural gas fields in the world. Industry analysts said that the US company found only a "very thin gas layer". Azerbaijan in fact has yet to strike oil since exploration in its offshore sector began three years ago. Azeri officials are quick to point out that the worldwide petroleum industry registers only a one in 10 success rate and claim that the country may still become one of the main oil and gas producers this century. Azerbaijan at the same time already boasts two world-class offshore projects in the Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli oilfields and the Shah Deniz gas structure, both operated by BP, whilemore than a dozen fields are still to be explored. Many observers, however, are not convinced. "The jury is still out on whether Azerbaijan will be a major oil and gas provider," says Gavin Graham, a Shell official, whose company has interests in all five Caspian countries. Others see the balance of gravity already shifting north, thanks to a gargantuan oil discovery in Kazakhstan's Kashagan offshore structure and two smaller finds in Russia's Caspian sector. Thane Gustafson of the Cambridge Energy Research Associates sees the northward shift as creating a possible change in the choice of oil export routes, as Russia becomes more of a player.

The first republic indeed had claims on Javakheti. Richard Hovhannisian discusses this issue in his “Republic of Armenia” book. MJ you are indeed right Georgians did introduce their troops to the region first, but their influence was extremely limited. Javakhetians are mountainous people, and like many other mountainous people they are extremely brave and militaristic. A few hundred poorly armed Georgians were not a serious match against Javakhetians. If it wasn’t for German interference Armenian troops would not only get Javakhk but also Bolnisi, Dmanisi and Southern outskirts of Marneuli. Armenian side has unsuccessfully tried to bring to the attention of world powers the borders of Caucasian states in 1919. In Paris Peace Conference the delegation of Republic of Armenia led by Avetis Aharonian has presented the borders of the proposed Armenian state and the map in Richard Hovhannisian’s book shows that Armenian government did indeed have claims on Javakhk. In order to avoid a conflict in the region Georgian government must take drastic steps. I personally think that if Georgian state stays as weak as it is now, than Javakhk will automatically integrate into Armenia. Geographically it’s cut off from Georgia with high mountains. The only road that takes to Tbilisi is in a very bad condition. Most of the agricultural products from the region are brought to Armenia and sold in bazaars of Vanadsor and Gyumri. Armenian Dram is the unofficial currency of the region. The only way Georgia will avoid disintegration and conflicts on its borders is by becoming a federative republic and giving Javakhk, Adjaria, Megrelia, and other regions autonomous status, similar to the relationship of states and federal government in Germany.

Finanicial Times Turkish markets buckle on IMF loan delay By Paivi Munter in London Published: July 6 2001 16:13GMT | Last Updated: July 6 2001 17:14GMT Turkish financial markets fell sharply on Friday after Kemal Dervis, the economics minister, failed to secure Turkey the next $1.5bn loan tranche from the International Monetary Fund after talks in Washington. Amid a panicky sentiment, the lira fell to an all-time low TL1,334,000 to the dollar, some 50 per cent below its value before the currency’s devaluation in February. Meanwhile, the ISE National-100 stock index gave up fell 9 per cent at to 10,168.80. The sides’ disageement between the IMF and Turkey centres the structure of on a supervisory board being created to oversee Turkish Telecom, the country’s dominant operator, slated which is being preparted for privatisation under the IMF-led, $15.7bn rescue programme. The IMF has questioned the professional credentials of some of the members appointed to the board, but representatives of the nationalists in Turkey’s coalition government insist Ankara has met all its obligations under the loan programme. But analysts said on Friday that the spat disagreement was risking was threatening to provoke another collapse on Turkey’s financial markets - after the crises in November and February - a prospect that would threaten the country’s political stability. "If it (the dispute) continues it could be pretty terminal for the Turkish markets," said Timothy Ash, emerging markets economist at Bear Stearns in London. Mr Ash said the biggest risk to Turkey’s financial stability lies on the domestic debt market. where Any further delay with the IMF loan installment would seriously damage sentiment and thus increase the govenment’s already challenging debt servicing costs. "The programme will fall if they don't manage to square the domestic debt equation," said Mr Ash of the IMF package. "You'd end up with the lira going through the roof and probably hyperinflation," he added. Yields on the government’s benchmark lira-denominated bonds soared to 91.81 per cent from 87.95 at Thursday’s close, and judging by deal value-dated to Monday, next week’s prospects appear even worse. Turkey’s domestic debt totals about 60 per cent of the country’s gross domestic product and is likely to rise to approximately 70 per cent by the end of the year, Mr Ash said.

Javakhk has never been part of Armenia proper. Most of the Javakheti Armenians are the immigrants from Erzurum that settled there in 1829 after Russian conquest of the region. During the periods of Greater Armenia it was part of Gugarac bdeshxutyun, which had an autonomous status. Gugark has always been a disputed territory between Armenia and Georgia. The latest conflict over that territory was in 1919, where Armeia got the Southern Gugark, Lori (neutral Zone), and Georgia retained control of Northern Gugark, Javakhk. If anyone has been in Javakhk the overall impression is that one is in Armenia not Georgia. If you have met Javakhetians, you would have immediately noticed that they are typical mountainous people, somewhat simple in their view of the world, very traditional, nationalistic, and militaristic. Actually a lot of Javakhetians have participated in Artsax War, and Javakheti clan is very powerful in Yerevan. A lot of Yerkrapah have roots in Javakhk. During the Soviet era when weapons were in general prohibited by the state, most of the Javakheti Armenians had weapons in their homes. A few years ago Georgian army tried to enter Javakhk for military exercises and Armenians blocked their way and did not let that happen. It showed the power of local population. I think both Georgia and Armenia realize that conflict will be devastating for both countries. They need our energy and we need their transportation routes. Georgian authorities also realize that Georgian state is weak and its eventual disintegration is imminent, unless something drastic happens. They are just trying to slow down the process. Abashidze by himself has successfully achieved independence for Ajaria. Official Tbilisi does not have a lot of power in Batumi. Javakhk is de facto independent also. In Akhalkalaki Armenian Dram is more accepted than Georgian Lari. There has never been an official discrimination against Armenians in Georgia. The only time Armenians have been somewhat discriminated in Georgia was during the Gamsakhurdia rule. There was a deliberate government policy against minorities in those years, and Armenians were not singled out, they were just part of minority group. I think going after our neighbors will antagonize us, and will make Armenia a pariah state. We should accept the existence of Armenian minorities in our neighboring states, but should not use them to interfere in internal affairs of those states. The example of Hungarians in Transylvania should serve as a model of how to treat national minorities.

The Armenians of Javakhk, Georgia: An Interview With Haigaz Alvertsian Interview conducted by Jason Sohigian The following interview was conducted on April 5 at the offices of the Armenian Relief Society (ARS) in Watertown, MA. Haigaz Alvertsian was visiting communities throughout the Diaspora to discuss the social and economic conditions of the Armenians in Javakhk. Alvertsian was born in Javakhk and studied philology at Yerevan State University. He is a professor at the Yerevan State Academy of Arts. For additional information, or to make a contribution to assist the Javakhk-Armenian community, write to the ARS of Eastern USA Javakhk Fund, 80 Bigelow Avenue, Suite 200, Watertown MA 02472, USA. Jason Sohigian: As you have found during your visits to various Armenian communities, there is not much information here about Javakhk. What is the size of the Javakhk-Armenian community? Haigaz Alvertsian: Javakhk is a historic part of the Armenian nation, and it is actually composed of four regions--Bogdanovka, Akhalkalak, Akhaltsekha, and Asbintza. There are more than 120 Armenian villages in these areas, with an approximate population of 120,000, of which 110,000 are Armenians. After the Sovietization of Armenia, Stalin made Javakhk a part of Georgia, and gave Artsakh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan. Since then, the Georgian authorities have always neglected this Armenian-populated region. As a way of reducing the Armenian majority, they attached Javakhk administratively to an eastern and a northern region. This was not logical because these regions are geographically divided from Javakhk by a mountain range in the east, and a river in the north, but it served their political purpose of diminishing the Armenian presence. This artificial region of Georgia, known as Samtskhete-Javakhetia, has a population of 200,000, of which 150,000 are Armenian. JS: Can you describe the living conditions in Javakhk? HA: During the Soviet era, the Communist Party reported to the Kremlin that Javakhk was one of the least developed regions in the Soviet Union. The economy consisted mainly of light industry in Javakhk, but there was ongoing neglect of the region on the part of the Soviet and Georgian authorities. Now, the population face very difficult living conditions because of electricity shortages and the lack of adequate infrastructure. The roads and communication networks are very poor or non-existent, so it has always been difficult to develop the area. This has created widespread poverty among the people. Georgia controls the supply of energy to Javakhk, but Armenia does try to help. Armenia sells electricity to Georgia at a low rate, so the Armenian community there can enjoy some of the basic necessities of life, but they do not often benefit from this generosity. JS: Does Javakhk provide Armenia's lifeline through Georgia? As a result of the blockade of Armenia by Turkey and Azerbaijan, does Armenia rely on Javakhk for its northern transport route? HA: Yes, the road and gas pipeline to and from Armenia pass right through Javakhk, so the area has tremendous strategic importance for Armenia. There is some assistance from Armenia to the community there in the form of educational materials and some electricity, and now also from the ARS, as they look after the interests and well-being of this important Armenian community, which is in danger of perishing unless action is taken to reverse these trends. JS: What about the social and cultural life in Javakhk? Are there Armenian churches and community organizations functioning there? HA: There are more than 100 Armenian churches in the villages throughout Javakhk. Many of the churches are affiliated with Etchmiadzin, and the Catholic Church has a significant presence there as well. Javakhk has always been part of the Armenian nation, so it is full of ancient Armenian monuments. The Georgian government has done nothing to preserve these artifacts, so many of them are in a state of decay or being destroyed by the elements. Georgia is also trying to erase the Armenian presence in the region by allowing this to happen. They have systematically tried to alter the monuments and revise their history to make them seem Georgian instead of Armenian. The authorities have also been caught various times by the local population. The locals have seen them bury Georgian artifacts in Javakhk so archaeologists can come later to find them. The residents dig them up and bury them somewhere else as an act of resistance to their nefarious plans. As far as social or organizational life, there is not much activity in this area because most of the people are struggling for their very existence. If people have no jobs or food for their family, it is difficult for them to think about cultural activity. There have been a few newspapers over the years, but because of the shortage of energy, paper, and distribution problems, it has not been very successful. They do receive newspapers from Armenia, but not on time. Yerkir and a few other papers are delivered to Javakhk, but it is not on a daily basis. There has been some activity there by the ARS, and they have a number of projects planned to assist the local population. JS: What types of projects is the ARS Javakhk Fund involved with? HA: Of course, it would be better to ask the ARS Chairwoman, Maro Minassian, but I can tell you at least something. The conditions of the schools are very poor, and there are no hospitals in Javakhk, so people have to travel great distances over very poor roads to get medical care, which often they cannot even afford. The ARS is planning to improve the medical and educational situation in Javakhk. JS: How would you characterize the relations between the Armenians and their neighbors? HA: Historically, the Armenians have always gotten along well with their Georgian neighbors. However, after years of neglect the Armenian population has become much poorer, and is often looked down upon by Georgians. Armenian schoolteachers are paid lower wages than Georgian teachers. This type of economic disparity is creating tensions between the two populations. There is also a new threat to the community. As a condition for joining the Council of Europe, the Georgian authorities have signed an agreement to resettle the more than 40,000 Meskhetian Turkish refugees who were sent to Azerbaijan by Stalin. There is talk that Georgia will settle these refugees in Javakhk, instead of their original homes in Meskhetia, which is now inhabited by Georgians. This would mean that Armenians will have to be removed from the area to accommodate them, and there is a fear that the Armenians will leave because of the poor economic conditions. Already, Armenian families are trying to sell their property for next to nothing so they can start new lives in Russia or elsewhere. If the Meskhetian Turks are settled there, on the border with Turkey, it would certainly be a threat to Armenia. And the Armenians living there must be allowed to remain in their homes and have access to the basic necessities of life. JS: Is the goal to allow this region to become a part of Turkey, and what about the proposed plans for the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline route through southern Georgia? HA: The Armenians should not allow these refugees to be settled in Javakhk if it means the native population will be displaced, and they will never allow their land to become part of Turkey. The proposed pipeline route is actually through Javakhk, which has caused concern. If the plan goes through, the security of the pipeline will have to be guaranteed by NATO or Turkish forces, which will threaten Armenia from the north. Already, Armenia is isolated by Turkey on the west and Azerbaijan on the east, so this will not be a positive development for the country. This proposed pipeline does show the tremendous value and importance of the Javakhk region. JS: Are there still Russian military bases in Javakhk, or have they been relocated to Armenia? HA: Georgia has been trying to move the Russian bases out of their country, but the Russian bases are still in Javakhk and they will not be relocated. This is good for the local population, because the bases support the local economy. The bases buy products from the local markets every day and provide jobs for the people. JS: Why are we hearing about Javakhk now, and what do the people of Javakhk want? HA: It was very difficult to speak out during the Soviet era, but the Armenians of Javakhk, managed to maintain their distinct ethnic identity. Since 1988, much of the Armenian community has been focused on the struggle in Artsakh for self-determination. The Armenians of Javakhk are seeking autonomy within Georgia, and not independence or reunification with Armenia. If they achieve the right of self-determination, this will allow them to be more self-sufficient and less of a burden to Georgia. During the 1990s, a constitution for an autonomous region of Javakhk was published in the local press, but there has not been much movement beyond that. The scenario is similar to that of Adjaria, where Georgia would become a federal republic. JS: How would you respond to Georgian President Edward Shevardnadze's comments last month that he would have a commission establish a plan for the development of Javakhk over the next decade? Was this a response to calls for autonomy from the local population, and increasing attention from Armenia and the Diaspora in the region? HA: I don't know if he was specifically responding to the words of the Armenian community, but it is no secret that the region has been neglected by the authorities for decades. My opinion is that since such promises have been made by the Georgian authorities in the past and nothing has been done, they have not been acted upon, and the living conditions have not improved, it is up to the Armenian community to help these people themselves. President Shevardnadze has said that he understands why Armenians are interested in this region, and why they are expressing concern for its well-being, since it is another part of the Armenian community. In light of all of this, I would encourage the Diaspora to help the Armenians of Javakhk through the ARS Javakhk Fund. JS: If people do support the Javakhk-Armenian community through the ARS Javakhk Fund, what do you think will be the response of the Georgian authorities? HA: I think the Georgian authorities will be thankful that the Armenian community is willing to help its people living in Javakhk. In essence, they are taking this burden off the shoulders of the Georgian government, and taking it upon themselves to help their own community. For this they will undoubtedly be thankful, appreciative, and supportive of this world-wide ARS initiative.

I went to their concert in Anaheim on April 23, and can honestly tell that it was the best concert I have ever been. Bono rocks and U2 put on a truely memorable show. I love that band. They are THE BEATLES of our era.

European Bank of Research and Development (EBRD) provides a great overview of Armenian economy and promising industry sectors. Below is the link to the EBRD study pertaining to Armenia. http://www.ebrd.com/annualmeeting/cp2000/arme.pdf