Jump to content

Aram.Garabedian2

Forumjan
  • Posts

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Aram.Garabedian2

  1. http://www.djavakhk.com/galerie/disp_serie...=42&stat=ok
  2. Ask President Saakashvili The president is our guest on the Have Your Say programme on Sunday 8 October at 1406GMT. It's your chance to ask him a question. He is in Charge of Javakhk, of the Appartheid policy, etc.... http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jsp...n=2&ttl=200 __________________________________________ Arten Haryouravor hartzer yen trvadz Shakakin, BBC etchoum. Yete tchek garogh krel, miyayn seghmek ess hartzi dag: _____________________________________ Added: Friday, 6 October, 2006, 16:09 GMT 17:09 UK Renewed escalation in the Georgian-Russian row has worsened the already dire lot of the ethnic Armenians in Samtskhe-Javakheti. Today, your government actively pursues policies of georgianization, political discrimination, and economic isolation in this province. When will your administration recognize the self-determination of these indigenous people and provide them their deserved political autonomy? Nikola G. Skopje, Republic of Macedonia NIkola G, Skopje Recommended by 16 people Sign in to recommend comments Alert a Moderator _________________________________________ Arten 16 hoki seghmel yen. Sa amenitz chad seghmadz hartzen e. Intchkan chad mart seghmi, etkan ssdibvadz ge linen harze dal http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jsp...=20061006234143
  3. Ask President Saakashvili The president is our guest on the Have Your Say programme on Sunday 8 October at 1406GMT. It's your chance to ask him a question. He is in Charge of Javakhk, of the Appartheid policy, etc.... http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jsp...n=2&ttl=200 61006164953
  4. Ask President Saakashvili The president is our guest on the Have Your Say programme on Sunday 8 October at 1406GMT. It's your chance to ask him a question. He is the man in Charge of the welfare in JAVAKHK! http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jsp...n=2&ttl=200 61006164953
  5. http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=0&id=4046&l=am http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=0&id=4045&l=am http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=0&id=4038&l=am http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=0&id=4037&l=am
  6. Вано Туманишвили: О позиции США и Великобритании в ООН по проблемам конфликтов на Южном Кавказе http://www.regnum.ru/news/713766.html Вано Туманишвили - свободный журналист США и Великобритания не могут связывать с ареной ООН урегулирование конфликтов в Молдавии и на Южном Кавказе. Обе страны, так же как и Россия, детально представляют себе различные стороны данных проблем и не испытывают совершенно никаких иллюзий относительно наличия политических подходов в их решении. Государства-сопредседатели Минской группы ОБСЕ, а также Великобритания, располагали всеми возможными рычагами давления и принуждения в процессе урегулирования карабахской проблемы. Проблемы Абхазии и Южной Осетии, конечно, не рассматривались в рамках столь институционального механизма, как Минская группа, но имеющиеся механизмы также представляются вполне адекватными. Грузинские конфликты длительное время находятся в сфере внимания международного сообщества, такие организации, как НАТО, ЕС и Совет Европы, неоднократно высказывались и принимали участие в рассмотрении данных проблем. С самого начала развертывания инициативы по рассмотрению данных проблем в ООН, причем в приоритетном порядке, особенно после соответствующего заявления главы российского МИД Сергея Лаврова, ни один из ведущих экспертов, функционально задействованных политиков на Западе, не попытался опровергнуть или проанализировать сомнения, которым была подвергнута данная инициатива. По мнению американских и британских экспертов, после столь подробного обсуждения данных проблем в европейских структурах, трудно представить их предметное и приближенное рассмотрение в ООН, которая не имеет механизмов проведения данной деятельности в рабочем режиме. Предполагается, что ООН должна создать специальную структуру, группу или комиссию для дальнейшего рассмотрения данных проблем, что, в любом случае, приведет к длительному бюрократическому и непродуктивному процессу. В процессе обсуждения могут произойти самые неожиданные события, возникнуть очень неприятные для ведущих мировых держав прецеденты. По мнению британских экспертов, никто из британских и американских экспертов не причастен к соответствующей рекомендации. По их мнению, после провала попыток принудить Армению к принятию схемы урегулирования, предложенной Международной кризисной группой зимой 2006 года, определенная группировка в правительстве Великобритании, возглавляемая представителем премьер-министра на Южном Кавказе Брайаном Фолом, уже в апреле 2006 года предложила предпринять попытку переноса обсуждения карабахской проблемы в ООН. Идея рассмотрения в ООН конфликтов в Молдавии и на Южном Кавказе возникла несколько позже. Однако, именно Брайан Фол обсудил эту инициативу с главами внешнеполитических ведомств Грузии, а затем Азербайджана (именно в такой последовательности). Уже после данных обсуждений возникла идея выдвижения данной инициативы в ООН странами ГУАМ. Не вызывает сомнений, что ключевым фактором выдвижения данной инициативы и сопричастности к этому США и Великобритании является игра вокруг грузинской политической тематики. Роль карабахского и приднестровского факторов имеют вторичное или подчиненное значение. В связи с этим следует рассмотреть иерархию тех задач, которые решаются, по замыслу инициаторов. Данная идея также была обсуждена с представителями ряда государств Европы и с высокими должностными лицами в Комитете Министров Европы и в ОБСЕ. По имеющимся сведениям, Великобритания, Польша и Литва провели в Европейской комиссии и Европейском парламенте большую работу по вопросу политики России в отношении Грузии. Предполагается, что данная работа имела определенный успех. В Еврокомиссии и Европарламенте отмечается активизация работы по изучению этого вопроса, даны соответствующие поручения рабочим аппаратам подготовить по данному вопросу предложения. Видимо, предложения включают оценки политике России и ситуации в российско-грузинских отношениях, включая проблему миротворческих сил в Абхазии и Южной Осетии. Скорее всего, имеет место политическая заготовка инициатив Европейского Союза в связи с параллельными инициативами ГУАМ в ООН. Ставится задача обеспечения политической солидарности США и Европейского Союза в отношении задач по России. Такая принципиальная договоренность между европейцами и США имеется, но ограниченно условиями обсуждения каждой инициативы в отдельности. Практически, Великобритания и страны Восточной Европы пытаются обойти позиции Франции и Германии, использовать потенциал Европейского Союза в деятельности против России. Британские политики считают, что ПАСЕ и ОБСЕ не являются действенными механизмами для проведения восточной политики, так, как сама Россия использует эти арены для отстаивания своих интересов. Россия пытается использовать ПАСЕ и ОБСЕ для легитимного обсуждения ряда проблем, которые связанны с ее вмешательством в дела различных государств, сохранением ее присутствия в зонах конфликтов. Поэтому, выбран Европейский Союз, где Россия не имеет формального влияния. В связи с этим, представляет интерес мнение экспертов "Института Ф.Шиллера" (Гессен, Германия), занимающего в значительной мере антибританские позиции. По мнению экспертов данного Института, Великобритания испытывает значительные проблемы с Россией по вопросам нефтяного бизнеса. Несмотря на хорошие позиции в России, британский капитал может встать перед серьезными проблемами в части резервирования запасов и доступа к крупным месторождениям. Кроме того, видимо, речь идет о каких-то специальных проблемах. Например, тандем США-Великобритания очень волнует российско-германско-французская интеграция в сфере энергетики. Кроме того, США и Великобритания весьма обеспокоены возможностью "заговора" России, Германии, Франции, а также, возможно, других европейских государств, в отношении Украины, в том числе расширения НАТО. Поэтому, Великобритания пытается заручиться поддержкой восточно-европейских государств в консолидации ЕС в антироссийском направлении. Поэтому британская политика развертывает сценарии нового давления на Россию. В связи с данными сюжетами, было бы оправданным рассмотреть версию "Британского кавказского проекта", как глобальную инициативу давления на России на Южном стратегическом направлении. Именно в рамках данной версии, можно рассматривать инициативу ГУАМ в ООН. Снижение угроз в режиме поддержания напряженности Конфронтация между Грузией и Россией, и соответственно в зонах конфликтов Абхазии и Южной Осетии превзошла управляемый уровень и стала сильным фактором угроз и рисков на Южном Кавказе, где функционирует американско-британский энергетический комплекс. Европейскому сообществу не удалось предпринять усилий по снижению данной конфронтации, многие инициативы только продемонстрировали не реалистичность подобных попыток. США и Великобритания, довольно, продолжительное время вели игру на гашение конфликтности до завершения сооружения нефтепровода Баку - Тбилиси - Джейхан. После завершения проекта, обе державы попытались оказать давление на Россию, с целью решения проблем, не связанных с Южным Кавказом. Данные цели гораздо ранее были сформулированы и являются элементами стратегии США и Великобритании в Евразии. Последние месяцы ими проводилась политика управляемой конфронтации, что стало более, чем опасным. Россия не пошла на уступки ни на одном из направлений, и не подавая Грузии и ее партнерам никаких сигналов в направлении снижения конфронтации. Стал необходим решительный ход, с целью переноса ответственности за происходящие процессы на столь высокую арену, как ООН. В результате должна быть максимизирована интернационализация данных конфликтов, рассматривать Россию, как участницу данных конфликтов, и по возможности, институционализировать эту роль России, как "субъекта" конфликта. Этим, предпринимается попытка, одновременно, продолжить давление на Россию, вместить конфронтационный вектор в рамки контроля, создать предпосылки для продолжения геополитической и геоэкономической экспансии в Кавказско-Каспийском регионе. Удовлетворение амбиций государств-партнеров США и Великобритания, хотя и успешно игнорировали интересы своих партнеров на Южном Кавказе, навязывая им некие имитационные процессы урегулирования, они не могут совершенно лишить их благоприятных ожиданий в части разрешения проблем. Помимо надежд, подаваемых правящим элитам, данные элиты в свою очередь должны подавать надежды своим народам, от чего зависит устойчивость правящих режимов. Все правящие режимы стран-членов ГУАМ переживают серьезный политический кризис и нуждаются в системной поддержке из вне. Технология убеждения США и Великобритания не обладают рекомендациями в решении конфликтов в Молдавии и на Южном Кавказе в сложившихся геополитических условиях. Принуждение армян, абхазов и осетин к подчинению соответствующим государствам приведет либо к возобновлению военных действий, либо к геноцидным действиям и тому, что принято называть гуманитарной катастрофой. В резерве политики Западного сообщества на Кавказе нет методов принуждения. Большая часть истории урегулирования, США и Великобритания пытались убедить Грузию и Азербайджан в невозможности решения этих проблем политическим способом и недопустимости - военным путем. Это очень сложная задача для западных партнеров данных государств, поэтому процесс обсуждения в ООН может стать интересной ареной для подведения правящих команд и народов Грузии и Азербайджана в части их убеждения в отсутствии политических решений, по крайней мере, в обозримой перспективе. США и Великобритания, безусловно имеют соответствующие разработанные сценарии в отношении рассмотрения данных проблем в ООН. Несмотря на то, что детальная информация по этим сценариям пока отсутствует, можно допустить, что речь идет о продолжении опыта имитации процесса урегулирования конфликтов. Укрепление и усиление позиций ГУАМ ГУАМ, несмотря на ряд попыток придания данному блоку действенного характера и конкретных геополитических функций, не стал и не может стать таковым, так, как представляет собой союз слабых государств, которые являются носителями очень противоречивых, взаимоисключающих интересов, и не имеет сильного лидера. США пытаются придать ГУАМ некоторые конкретные функции, прежде всего по защите энергокоммуникаций и противостоянию России, что не очень импонирует Украине, Молдавии и Азербайджану. Кроме того, Украина, хотя и стала делать односторонние заявления в пользу Грузии и Азербайджана, делает это робко, не стремясь включиться в военные и политические задачи по решению этих проблем. Формирование единых политических задач стран ГУАМ является важной задачей американской политики. На закрытом, режимном семинаре в "Американском институте предпринимательстве" (мозговом центре республиканцев и правых сил США) в сентябре 2006 года ассистент Государственного секретаря Пола Добрянски (дочь украинского анти-советчика), обрисовала задачи США по ГУАМ. Данные задачи предполагают, прежде всего, вовлечение стран блока в общие для всех государств-участников политические проекты, прежде всего, в отношении создания новой политической реалии в Евразии, а также в вопросах безопасности. Пола Добрянски, как одна из докладчиков, имела в виду, что политика членов ГУАМ должна отражать политику государств, принадлежащих к демократическому миру. По ее мнению, Украина призвана стать лидером данных государств, имея в виду ее экономический и военный потенциал. Поэтому от политической судьбы Украины зависит положение на огромном пространстве Восточной Европы и Евразии. Выступавшая на семинаре представитель "Национального совета по разведке" и директор программы Института им.Брукингса Фиона Хилл, сообщила, что ситуация с безопасностью в Черноморско-Каспийском регионе далека от нормальной, нерешенность старых конфликтов не позволяет странам региона успешно развиваться. Сложившаяся в регионе ситуация требует мер по разрядке напряженности, что невозможно без активного участия международного сообщества. До сих пор, лишь решение частных вопросов безопасности не привело к установлению в регионе стабильности. Отмечалась возможность усиления роли ООН и ОБСЕ по снятию напряженности. При этом не было сказано ничего определенного об урегулировании конфликтов, как таковых. Выступавший директор "Института Центральной Азии и Кавказа" Фредерик Старр, отметил, что формирование ГУАМ и других региональных блоков не может решить вопросов безопасности региона. Так или иначе, необходимо принять решение о вступлении данных государств в НАТО и исходя из этого нужно выстраивать стратегии США в регионе. Любые сомнения по этому поводу вызывают многие разочарования в странах региона. По его мнению, международное сообщество не вовлечено необходимым образом в решение конфликтов в Южном Кавказе. По общему мнению участников семинара, в настоящее время возникла необходимость привлечения к решению данных проблем ООН. Практически, целью семинара было подтверждение некой идеи о выводе проблем региона на арену ООН. Проблема расширения состава НАТО США являются сторонниками о включении Украины и Грузии в НАТО, даже ценой снижения принятых в альянсе оборонных, политических и экономических стандартов. Это стало предметом принципиального обсуждения в НАТО, в которое вовлечены не только ведущие европейские государства, но и другие государства альянса. Франция и Германия, хотя и не уделили большого внимания данному вопросу во внутренней политике, то есть, в порядке парламентского или политического обсуждения, но однозначно выразили свое мнение, отметив негативные цели, которые высматриваются за новым этапом расширения. Несмотря на то, что правительство Великобритании и генералитет в целом поддерживают эти планы, но в британском истеблишменте, включая также политиков из правящей партии, имеются серьезные сомнения в этом. По оценкам британских экспертов либерального направления, бюрократия НАТО вдохновлена опытом пребывания в альянсе государств, которые до сих пор не соответствуют требованиям, и тем самым не успешно участвуют в разных инициативах, поставляют воинские контингенты в очаги угроз. То есть, ведущие государства НАТО вполне удовлетворены этой ролью новых членов альянса. Данные противоречивые позиции весьма беспокоят США, поскольку пока нет надежд на успешное вступление новых членов в НАТО. Расширение НАТО требует новой аргументации, в том числе обоснование новых угроз. Для США представляется очень важным создание мирового общественного мнения о реальности угроз, исходящих от России, прежде всего, в региональных направлениях. Россия должна предстать как страна, блокирующая решение конфликтов, оккупирующая территории государств под видом сохранения миротворческих сил, проводящая политические диверсии в отношении правящих режимов, использующая энергетические ресурсы в политических целях. Вместе с тем, их всех этих заданных целей, вывод миротворцев из Грузии и войск из Молдавии является приоритетной. США и Великобритания стремятся развернуть в ООН длительный процесс пропагандистского назначения. Абсорбция Армении США рассматривают Армению, как страну, которая все еще не определилась с геополитической ориентацией. По признанию американских администраторов и экспертов, влияние США в Армении значительно более значительно, чем в Азербайджане и в некоторых других странах - партнерах США. Геополитическое блокирование Армении, с помощью блока ГУАМ, подвело бы Армению к пониманию безальтернативности западной ориентации. С помощью карабахской проблемы США не могут достичь цели и добиться переориентации Армении. Поэтому, карабахская проблема не интересует США с точки зрения геополитики и безопасности. Американцы делают ставку на изменение геополитической ситуации на Южном Кавказе. Совместная инициатива ГУАМ в ООН представляется многоцелевой, весьма эффективной с точки зрения солидарной внешней политики. США не ставят задач в отношении карабахской проблемы, так как ее раскрутка не дает никаких преимуществ в стратегическом плане, хотя в части пропаганды это, также, может придать данной кампании дополнительные аргументы. США необходимо решить некоторые задачи по Молдавии и Грузии. Выводы По приближенным оценкам британских экспертов, совместное обсуждение приднестровской, абхазской, югоосетинской и карабахской проблемы в ООН невозможно, даже если допустить, что в результате определенных решений будет создана некоторая рабочая структура. Данная инициатива имеет очень неопределенные перспективы. США и Великобритания не будут настаивать на принятии чрезмерно категоричных решений. Не исключено, что Грузия и Молдавия будут настаивать на решении об оккупации Россией части их территорий, на выводе из зон конфликтов или ротации миротворческих сил. По данному вопросу, целью является создание крайне неблагоприятной ситуации для России, международное осуждение ее политики. Не исключено, что государства Европейского Союза поддержат антироссийскую позицию стран-инициаторов и дадут определенные оценки и решения, направленные против России. Следует принять во внимание, что проектирование южнокавказской политики происходит в очень тесных рамках - аппаратами верховного комиссара по внешней политике и безопасности ЕС Хавьера Солана и ассистента Государственного секретаря Даниэля Фрида. То есть, данное проектирование носит весьма келейный характер, практически не связан с парламентами и гражданским обществом. Следует принять во внимание, что решения ООН по вопросам конфликтов будут приниматься в условиях сильного противостояния, что вызвано позицией различных государств в отношении США, например, мусульманских государств. Азербайджан, видимо, будет пытаться выдвинуть данную инициативу в интегрированной форме, объединив вопросы конфликтов в одну проблему. Грузия, несомненно, попытается представить свои проблемы изолированно по прагматическим соображениям. Молдавия не будет пытаться спешить и попытается идти в общем русле развития инициативы.
  7. http://www.yerkirtv.org/arm/index.php# Loook the topic 22:43 date 29/9/2006 I mention date and topic, because Yerkir Media keeps archives only for 5 days.
  8. http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=0&id=3785&l=am
  9. 25.09.2006 15:19 На автодороге, ведущей в Бакуриани (Грузия), произошел конфликт между проживающими в регионе Грузии Самцхе-Джавахк молодыми армянами и грузинскими военнослужащими. 6 грузинских военнослужащих, охраняющих участок нефтепровода Баку-Тбилиси-Джейхан остановили автомобиль марки "Опель", принадлежащий 22-летнему Владимиру Мурадяну. В ходе проверки документов, выяснив, что находящиеся в машине водитель и пассажиры - армяне, не говорящие по-грузински, солдаты стали издеваться и оскорблять их. Завязалась ссора между солдатами и находящимися в машине 23-летними Артюшей Ирацяном и Амбарцумом Овакимяном. Солдаты даже начали угрожать армянам оружием. Убедившись, что грузинские военнослужащие не оставят их в покое, находящиеся в "Опеле" водитель и его пассажиры уехали обратно в село Табацхури, передает PanARMENIAN.Net со ссылкой на «А-Инфо».
  10. http://www.yerkir.am/arm/index.php?sub=news_arm&id=26461
  11. http://www.djavakhk.com/galerie/disp_img.php?id_img=1439 This fish was from the Arax Reservoir in Occupied Nakhitchevan
  12. http://www.djavakhk.com/galerie/disp_img.php?id_img=1439
  13. Azerbaijan makes scandals for minimal details, when they sea Armenian names still used for lands they aneexed. We must ask ourselves, why the Republic od Armenia is so inactive, when its towns are called by Turkish names, never registered enywhere: Thus, according to Google Earth (World's biggest satellite mapping system), the Capital of Syounik, is calles 'Kafan', and not Gaban, as it is spelled in Armenian. This name is directly Turkish, since, it was never used. In soviet times, the town was called 'Ghapan'... The town of Vayk, in the Vayotz Tzor marz is called 'Azizpekov', in glory of a bolshevic azerbaijani butcher. It can't be because of 'old' data, since Gyoumri and Vanazor, etc... are well registered according to 'new' data. Stepanakert is registered as 'Khankandi', Shushi as 'Shusha'... Same is the case of lot of topographic names, all using turkish terms... And we look at the photos, all accurate spots on sensitive areas are available: Thus you can sea every aircraft of Armenian Air Force deployed on its Air baze of Yerevan. You can easily count the 17 Mig 29s, the Mi 8 and Mi 24 attack helicopters... Same is not the case in Turkey, where you have hundreds of Air bases, but none is clear, and those that are somehow seen, they are 'empty' of any aircraft. Similar is the case of Azerbaijan and Georgia, where not a single Air base is seen, apart from one useless Air base, in central azerbaijan, where only outdated and scrap Aircrafts are seen... NKR is one of the most photographed zones, every destoyed azeri roof is seen, while not a single occupied Armenian region is available. You can identify NKR self defense army's positions, trenches, facing all along the frontline, thoose of Azerbaijan's. For a trained eye, it is clear, that the Azeri's 'advanced' in the No man's land, by opening advancing trenches and new lines, some incomplete, thank's to our 'hunter/snipers'. Theese images confirm exactly what the NKR army was saying for years, explaining azeri attempts to advance (at one point they came 150 m close), and the resulting casualties...
  14. Basasskhan tchi ssdanalov 'Ariaci' kotchetzial anbadasskhanadou antzen, jarahad, tzez yem timoum: Ssdorev, Ariaciyin oughargadz namagess, Azadakrial darazknerou ngarnerou Tourkeroun hramtzenelou kdzov: _______________________________________________ Hello I'm new on the Forum, and you do not know me. Neither I have no idea about your interests, way of thinking and personality. I can only have a guess, from your nickname?? Eny way, I'm righting to you, because of your posts of the Akhdam ruins, specially the twho panoramas you have shot from the minaret of the mosque, and the shot from the inner part of Dikranakert/Shahboulagh artificial fortress. You must know that it is a fake fortress built by Haydar Aliyev in the 1970s.., pretending to date from their damned Panah Khan... Sincerely, I can't get why you put theese photos? Is it a pretention for bravery? A katchakordzoutioun? Or you want to denonce the 'barbarian nature of Armenians'?? I taught about it, and I see tree possible scenarios: A- You are a non Artzakhian Armenian, having been for a very short period in Artzakh, and amazed by the scene, you are willing to share your impression by fellow Armenians on the Internet!!!!!!! B- You are a kind of human right activist, or a follower of Gdridj Sartarian and Ashod Bleyan. You were outraged by the deeds of your kin in Artzakh, and you want to help the Turkish propaganda, by giving them new shots, permitting comparisons, etc... C- You have an ideology, I can presume from your name, and you want to share 'the might of your people' with the rest of the world??? In the first case, you are ignorent of the rules in NKR, and you are unaware of the damage you are doing to our National Cause, by your irresponsible act. The NKR law says, that no photographs can be shot in military closed zones. It's strictly forbidden. And for your info, all liberated territories, and first of all Agdam, is a military restricted area. [--------- ] You had the chance to take thoose photos, just because you are Armenian by origin, and because the soldiers around the Mosque are undisciplined, when it comes to apply discipline to Armenian 'tourists', because most of the soldiers are unaware, that a digital camera, might end in irresponsable hands of an 'Armenian', who will have no other bright idea, than posting it on the internet, and thus helping the enemy on its propaganda work... Thus, just for your information, I will bring you a simple example, you will very easily check by yourself, and decide by your conscience. Nearly a decade ago, a young American Armenian, named Raffi Kojian, owner of the site Cilicia.com, decided to proove his 'value', by making a scoop. He posted photos from the minarets, ruins, etc... Months later, thoose photos wer at the OSCE table, and till now orn virtually all State organised Azeri sites on the web. By the way, all are managed by same server in Baku, no matter different apellations... If you do not believe, just check it by yourself. If it is your case, then you must ask yourself. What did you do for your Nation? How many villages have you liberated, by loosing your friends for each hill?? Do you know how many of our boys died, for you to take thoose shots? And then, what gives you the right, to undanger what they achieved?? In name of what?? And to achieve what?? You've been to Artzakh, and you found nothing else to shoot apart from that? If that's your problem, tell me, I will give you thousands of super shots, you could put under your name.... B- Now, if you are Ashot Bleyan's, or a kind of Helsinki club activist, I can hardly do enything, but to deplore your existance... And ask you one question: it is a too easy mission, using the cover of your Armenian appearrance, to betray a tiny people, who accomplished miracles, no one else whould have done for him. And if you were brave, you would Go to Gedashen, Verishen, Tchaylou, Leninavan, Panantz, Garmiravan, and shoot photos from what they did to our towns. You would go to Gulistan and shoot the blown church.. Or may be Jugha, if you are afraid from mines.. Haven't you asked why no Azeri has ever posted a shot from all our villages they have captured??? May be, because their race is supperior to ours, and they do not fabricate underdevelopped brains like Raffi Kojian's, or Ashot Bleyan's??? C- I can hardly imagine this scenario, because if ever it was the case, that would mean, that you have absolutely betrayed your principle, by helping the enemy you pretend to fight.... To end. You do not know me, and vis versa. But as a citizen of my state, as an ordinary Guy having lived on thoose lands you have shot for a second, I feel the duty, towards all my friends on or six feet under that land, to ask from you the remooval of those 4 shots. Toun ou Ko Khighdje.
  15. Look at the protector. The US Government's main priority, is to force the Armenian Government, originally leading virtually a Monoreligious country, to have a total religious chaos, with hundreds of 'exotic' sects, most originally from the US, like : - The Jeyova's Witnesses: a hegemonic group endangering our National security, and 'restricted' even in Europe, labeled as a dangerous sect.. - The Protestant/Evangelical sects, led by a supra Proselytist named 'Rene Levonian', who's number 1 objective is to use Diaspora money to transform the orphelin's of Artzakh into Gospel singers in his 'camp' in the Gargar valley... Hewas given the post of Adviser of the President in religious affairs! - All the illuminated sects of '7 th day witness', etc.... - The Krishnas, etc.... - The Mormons, a huge sect, virtually state level in the US, South Lake City being its capital... - ..... If enybody from the police, dares to tuch one of these foreign Proselyters, or their local agents, the State Department of the US will call Kocharian, as you can read in the bellow document: ( Of course, No one will ask the same freedom for the more than 2 Million Islamised Armenians of Turkey, or the Javakhetians, Tifflissahays..) __________________________________________________________________ All American Patriots (press release), Sweden World : Armenia: International Religious Freedom Report 2006 Posted by Patriot on 2006/9/16 14:23:01 (42 reads) Armenia: International Religious Freedom Report 2006 Released by the US Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor This report is submitted to the Congress by the Department of State in compliance with Section 102(b) of the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) of 1998. The law provides that the secretary of state, with the assistance of the ambassador at large for international religious freedom, shall transmit to Congress "an Annual Report on International Religious Freedom supplementing the most recent Human Rights Reports by providing additional detailed information with respect to matters involving international religious freedom." Armenia: The constitution, as amended December 8, 2005, provides for freedom of religion; however, the law places some restrictions on the religious freedom of adherents of minority faiths, and there were some restrictions in practice. The Armenian Apostolic Church, which has formal legal status as the national church, enjoys some privileges not available to other religious groups. There was no overall change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report. Some denominations reported occasional acts of discrimination by mid- or low-level government officials and isolated incidents of police harassment. An amendment to the 2004 law on alternative military service took effect on January 26, 2006, criminalizing evasion of alternative labor service. Conscientious objectors maintained, however, that military control of the alternative labor service amounted to unacceptable military service. The generally amicable relationship among religious groups in society contributed to religious freedom; however, societal attitudes toward some minority religious groups were ambivalent. The U.S. government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government as part of its overall policy to promote human rights. During these discussions, the U.S. government emphasizes to authorities that continued eligibility for the $235 million Millennium Challenge Compact remains contingent upon the Government's performance in meeting good governance indicators, which include standards of respect for religious freedom. Section I. Religious Demography The country has an area of 11,500 square miles and a population of 3 million. The country is ethnically homogeneous; approximately 98 percent of the population was ethnically Armenian. Many Azeris left the country during the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh from 1988 to 1994, increasing the country's religious and ethnic homogeneity. Religious observance was strongly discouraged in the Soviet era, leading to a sharp decline in the number of active churches and priests, the closure of virtually all monasteries, and the nearly complete absence of religious education. As a result, the number of active religious practitioners was relatively low. For many citizens, Christian identity was an ethnic trait, with only a loose connection to religious belief. An estimated 90 percent of citizens nominally belonged to the Armenian Apostolic Church, an Eastern Christian denomination with its spiritual center at the Etchmiadzin cathedral and monastery. The head of the church, Catholicos Garegin II (alternate spelling Karekin), was elected in 1999 at Etchmiadzin with the participation of Armenian delegates from around the world. There were comparatively small communities of other religious groups. There was no reliable census data on religious minorities, and reports from congregants themselves varied significantly. The Government does not provide official figures for numbers of religious adherents, but congregants offered the following unconfirmed estimates: Catholic, both Roman and Mekhitarist (Armenian Uniate) (120,000); Yezidi, an ethnically Kurdish cultural group whose religion includes elements derived from Zoroastrianism, Islam, and animism (40,000 nominal adherents); unspecified "charismatic" Christian (10,000); Jehovah's Witnesses (8,750); Armenian Evangelical Church (8,000); Molokan, an ethnically Russian pacifist Christian group that split from the Russian Orthodox Church in the 17th century (5,000); Baptist (2,000); the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) (2,000); Greek Orthodox (1,200); Seventh-day Adventist (950); Pentecostal (700); Jewish (600); and Baha'i (200). There was no estimate of the number of atheists. Yezidis were concentrated primarily in agricultural areas around Mount Aragats, northwest of the capital, Yerevan. Armenian Catholic and Greek Orthodox Christians were concentrated in the northern region, while most Jews, Mormons, and Baha'is were located in Yerevan. In Yerevan there was also a small community of Muslims, including Kurds, Iranians, Indians, and temporary residents from the Middle East. Several minority religious groups sponsor missionary programs in the country, including both expatriate and local participants. Levels of membership in minority religious groups remained relatively unchanged. Section II. Status of Religious Freedom Legal/Policy Framework The constitution, as amended on December 8, 2005, provides for freedom of religion and "the exclusive mission of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church as a national church in the spiritual life, development of the national culture and preservation of the national identity of the people of Armenia." The law stipulates some restrictions on the religious freedom of adherents of faiths other than the Armenian Apostolic Church. The constitution also provides for freedom of conscience, including the right either to believe or to adhere to atheism. The 1991 Law on Freedom of Conscience, amended in 1997 and again in 2001, establishes the separation of church and state but grants the Armenian Apostolic Church official status as the national church. Extended negotiations between the Government and the Armenian Apostolic Church resulted in a 2000 memorandum providing a framework for the two sides to negotiate a concordat. Although they had not concluded negotiations by the end of the period covered by this report, the Government and the church used the memorandum as a basis for dispute resolution and policy agreements. The law requires all religious denominations and organizations to register in order to operate without restrictions. There were no reports of the Government refusing registration to religious groups that were qualified for registration under the law. The Department of Religious Affairs and National Minorities, which replaced the former Council on Religious Affairs (CRA), oversees religious affairs and coordinates activities with the cabinet's chief of staff. A high-ranking official from the former CRA serves as the prime minister's advisor on religious affairs. The Office of the State Registrar registers religious entities, and the Department of Religious Affairs and National Minorities performs a consultative role in the registration process. To qualify for registration, petitioning organizations must "be free from materialism and of a purely spiritual nature," and must subscribe to a doctrine based on "historically recognized holy scriptures." A religious organization must have at least 200 adult members. Religious groups are not required to register, but unregistered religious organizations may not publish newspapers or magazines, rent meeting places, broadcast programs on television or radio, or officially sponsor the visas of visitors. By the end of the period covered by this report, the Government had registered fifty-six religious organizations, some of which were individual congregations within the same denomination. Yerevan's one surviving eighteenth-century mosque, which was restored with Iranian funding, was open for regular Friday prayers. Although not registered as a religious facility, the Government did not restrict Muslims from praying there. The law permits religious education in state schools. Only personnel authorized and trained by the Government may teach in schools. The history of the Armenian Apostolic Church forms the basis of this curriculum; many schools cover global religions in elementary school and the history of the Armenian Apostolic Church in middle school. Students may choose not to attend religious education classes. Religious groups are not allowed to provide religious instruction in schools, although registered groups may do so in private homes to children of their members. On occasion, priests from the Armenian Apostolic Church teach classes in religious history; however, the use of public school buildings for religious "indoctrination" is illegal. The military employs Armenian Apostolic chaplains for each division, but no other religious groups are represented in the chaplaincy. The Government's human rights ombudsman and the head of the Department of Religious Affairs and National Minorities met with many minority religious organizations during the period covered by this report. Restrictions on Religious Freedom During the period covered by this report, most registered religious groups reported no serious legal impediments to their activities. However, the 1991 freedom of conscience law prohibits "proselytizing" (undefined in the law) and restricts unregistered groups from publishing, broadcasting, or inviting official visitors to the country. The prohibition on proselytizing applies to all groups, including the Armenian Apostolic Church; however, the term used for proselytizing implies that someone has been taken away from a "true" faith, and the prohibition effectively restricts only minority religious groups. According to the head of the Department of Religious Affairs and National Minorities, some minority religious groups, including the Molokans and some Yezidi groups, have not sought registration. Although the law prohibits foreign funding of foreign-based denominations, the Government has not enforced the ban and considers it unenforceable. A 1991 law required all religious organizations, except the Armenian Apostolic Church, to obtain prior permission to engage in public religious activities, travel abroad, or invite foreign guests to the country. In 2001 this law was rescinded by presidential order and, in practice, no travel restrictions were imposed on any religious denomination. On July 13, 2005, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) officials reported that police officers briefly detained, harassed, and threatened two foreign missionaries. The missionaries said that one of the officers, after warning them to leave the country, placed the barrel of his unloaded gun against one missionary's head and pulled the trigger. Church officials filed a police report, and the Government opened an investigation. According to the Department of Religious Affairs and National Minorities, Armenian Apostolic Church officials filed a counter-complaint against the Mormons within a week of the incident, alleging the missionaries were illegally proselytizing on church grounds. Police officials claimed the officers questioned the missionaries and asked them to stay away from the church but denied that the questioning constituted harassment. On October 4, 2005, a police inspector sent Mormon representatives a letter informing members that the national police intended to drop the investigation and leave the incident unresolved. Other religious groups reported isolated events involving police officials questioning missionaries and their acquaintances about their activities. Abuses of Religious Freedom The law on alternative military service took effect in 2004 and allowed conscientious objectors, subject to government panel approval, to perform either noncombatant military or civil service duties rather than serve as conscripted military personnel. The law was applied to subsequent draftees and those serving prison terms for draft evasion. Conscientious objectors maintained, however, that military control of the alternative labor service amounted to unacceptable military service. An amendment to the law, which took effect on January 26, 2006, criminalized evasion of alternative labor service. According to leaders of Jehovah's Witnesses in Yerevan, twenty-five members of their religious group remained in prison for refusal, on conscientious and religious grounds, to perform military service or alternative labor service. An additional eighteen members signed statements saying they would not leave the country pending the completion of preliminary investigations, and six more were assigned conditional punishment ranging from one to three years. Representatives of the Jehovah's Witnesses stated that all of the prisoners were given the opportunity to serve an alternative to military service rather than prison time, but that all refused because the military retained administrative control of alternative service. Twelve of those in prison reportedly received two-year sentences. There were reports that hazing of new conscripts was more severe for minority group members such as Yezidis and Jehovah's Witnesses. Some Yezidi leaders reported that police and local authorities subjected their religious community to discrimination. Other Yezidi leaders denied the allegations. There was no officially sponsored violence reported against minority religious groups during the period covered by this report. Other than Jehovah's Witnesses who were conscientious objectors, there were no reports of religious prisoners or detainees. Forced Religious Conversion There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of minor U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States, or of the refusal to allow such citizens to be returned to the United States. Section III. Societal Abuses and Discrimination The generally amicable relationship among religious groups in society contributed to religious freedom; however, societal attitudes toward some minority religious groups were ambivalent. The Armenian Apostolic Church is a member of the World Council of Churches and, despite doctrinal differences, has friendly official relations with major Christian denominations, including the Eastern Orthodox churches, the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, and some Protestant churches. Suppressed through seventy years of Soviet rule, the Armenian Apostolic Church has trained priests and committed material resources to fill the spiritual void created by the demise of communist ideology. Nontraditional religious organizations are viewed with suspicion. Representatives of foreign?based denominations frequently cited as evidence statements including "one God, one country, one church," noting they had been warned against "stealing souls" from the Armenian Apostolic Church. Societal attitudes toward most minority religious groups were ambivalent. Many citizens were not religiously observant, but the link between religion and Armenian ethnicity is strong. According to some observers, the general population expressed negative attitudes about Jehovah's Witnesses, because the latter refused to serve in the military, engaged in little understood proselytizing practices, and because of a widespread but unsubstantiated belief that they pay the desperately poor to convert. Jehovah's Witnesses continued to be targets of hostile sermons by some Armenian Apostolic Church clerics and experienced occasional societal discrimination. The press reported a number of complaints for allegedly illegal proselytizing lodged by citizens against members of Jehovah's Witnesses. Some members of the press stoked suspicion of nontraditional religious organizations. On April 4, 2006, an opposition newspaper published a short editorial alleging that "a top police official" had information that "religious sects" including Mormons and Pentecostals had enlisted well-known criminals to protect the "sects'" interests against the Government. The paper's publishers claimed the unnamed source of the article was "credible" and that the allegations were factual, but despite repeated requests, they declined to elaborate on them. On April 5, 2006, a pro-government tabloid published a short editorial entitled, "Is the American University of Armenia being Mormonized?" The writer claimed that the newspaper had learned from sources that "a Mormon" would be appointed vice rector of the American University. According to the authors, if the rumors were true, the country would have taken a serious step, negative in the tabloid's view, toward "Mormonization." Flanked by Armenian Apostolic priests during an April 19, 2006, press conference, Armenian Center for Rehabilitation and Assistance to Victims of Destructive Cults Director Alexander Amaryan continued his public assertions that the presence of nontraditional religious institutions "threatens the spiritual life of Armenia." Armenian Apostolic priests alleged "religious sects," which they identified as Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, "conquered members of our flock" by "abducting children and church members, and criticizing national traditions." Unlike in previous years, the Jewish community reported no incidents of verbal harassment during the period covered by this report. On March 18, 2005, a court issued a three-year suspended sentence to the leader of the Union of Armenian Aryans, in response to his conviction on charges of public hostility for calling for the country to be "purified" of Jews and Yezidis. Section IV. U.S. Government Policy The U.S. government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government as part of its overall policy to promote human rights. The U.S. ambassador and embassy officials maintain close contact with the Catholicos at Etchmiadzin and with leaders of other religious and ecumenical groups in the country. During the period covered by this report, U.S. officials consistently raised the issue of alternatives to military service with government officials. The embassy also maintained regular contact with resident and visiting regional representatives of foreign-based religious groups such as the Mormons and raised their concerns with the Government. Embassy officials closely monitor trials related to issues of religious freedom and take an active role in policy fora and nongovernmental organization roundtables regarding religious freedom. The U.S. embassy hosted several roundtable meetings and receptions in honor of U.S. representatives of religious organizations. Leaders of local minority religious groups were regularly welcomed at these events. Released on September 15, 2006 Source: US State Dept.
  16. Follow an extract from the 'JAVAKHK FORUM', that might be interesting for some..: Roupen Ter Minassian He was more than a Great man. We had a lot of braves. Lot of heroïc Titans. But we had unfortunately very few international level strategists. And even few, with the military experience of Rouben. Before his work in 1918-20, we tend to forget what an exeptional formation he had. After all, he was the second of Kevork Tchavush. He did what most big Fedayi commanders have done. But since he had survived, we tend to forget him, when talking of Kevork, Serop, Hrayr.. He had the huge clear sight, by identifiying the trap of the Young Turks in 1908. Against all, and even against a big portion of his fellow party comrades, he refused 'the peace'. He had to leave the Erkir, just to return in 1914, pressenting the catastrophy.. He lead the self defense of Daron-sassoun, in catastrophic conditions. Even if there was not the success of Van, because of the treachery of the Russian command, he did miracles. In Talin, they still swear by his name... And then he managed the Erkir in 1917, whith Aram.... He had a rare Charisma, capacity to lead, to organise..., to plan, as a Chess player. If ever there was not the damned Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, Roupen's would have built a marvelous futur for our Nation. He was one of the few, if not the unique Strategist we had. A real analytical mind, based and fed by experience. His work 'Hayassdan mitch Tzamakayin Oughineri Vra', is still actual and a masterpiece today.. He was ment to be our De Gaulle.. Unfortunately our people was too underdevelopped, our Intelligentzia of 'School teachers' too outdated and lacking knowledge... Enyway, he gave his best. He saved the tiny little Armenia we have today, cleaning it from the inner snakes. Alas, time lacked, he couldn't deal with his native land. It's on Orjonikidze's orders, that Nadirize destroyed his house. It was then levelled during the 30s. For me, he is our 'Ideologue', we tend to forget too often. His analyses are still actual, and Artzakhtzis learned a lot of him... The One's who planned the operations in 90-93, had all his memories on their back. I saw the same 7 books in many homes in Javakhk... Concerning Akhaltzkha. I did not know that. But Russians treached Javakhk more than once... even harming their own National interests, just to realise too late and regret. It's time Javakhktzis learn the lesson their biggest Son taught so well to Artzakhtzis. Forget about the rest of the World. And first forget Yerevan, then our 'more or Less Big Allies'. No one will ever serve Javakhk for the sake of its 'eyes'. Surely not Yerevan, nor the Diaspora. Javakhktzis must learn, that they are the owners of their Land, and no one else. They have to decide what they nead, and they have to act for their own interests. The rest will follow, willy or nilly. That's exactly what Zangezur did in 1921, against all ods. They Imposed their will. That's what Artzakhtzis did in 1987-88. Do you not remember Demirchian Karen in February 1988??? Later in 1993 April-May, do you not rember the fury of Levon??? No one will serve you better than yourself. This, on an Individual level, on a family level, Javakhktzis master, better than enybody. It is a fact that the most work lover people are thosse of Javakhk. Even in total economical chaos today, in a Siberian climate, eny Javakhtzi family is richer than any Artzakhtzi family, sitting on a brand new highway, electricity 24/24h, and paradise climate But on the other side, Javakhktzis have to learn from the Artzakhtzis the value of collective strugle. That one, unfortunately, Javakhktzis have to learn.... They are still far away, nearly in the same psychological climate that prevailed in the end of XIXcent; hoping for a saving hand, trusting this or that, result was obvious... Javakhktzis won't revive, and have a bright future, untill they will understand, that they have to count on themselves first. That the most precious thing they will ever have, is their land. It might not be a climatic Paradise, but it is the only one they have, and the only place where they can develop as collective 'Massa'. The only land no one has the right to claim. The only force, that will insure their prosperity and future. They will have to understand, what all big Nations need: that at some points, individual (family) interests must be sacrificed, for a better future, collectively. This is a very hard process. It takes centuries for people to reach it. Till now, the Georgians, as a Nation, did not achieve it. No Mingrelian minds for a Kurian, etc... They count on outside help. Let them count on it. They were lucky most of the time, till now... On the contrary, Turks master this psychology. that's why they turned from a little nomadic clan into huge Empera! So, let's forget about the others. If we decide that Akhaltzkha must be renamed, why should we ask someone? First rename it in our minds, and the rest is just a detail... Taugh on this special case, and given the actual situation, I think it would be very unwise, if not stupid, to rename the capital of Javakhk after Garin, for evident reasons. In the futur, when things will be defferent, may be?? But I think it will be better to give its historic Armenian Name to Akhaltzkha (ask Samvel Karabetian or Ashot Melkonian, and even if they can't find, then call in Alexan Hakopian! ), since we will meet in Garin Next Year!
  17. Parev. Let's make an effort first. Ban this Arabic word (Arz el Roum), imposed by the Genocider Nation. We called it Garin, our generations fell all over Armenian land, spelling its name as a symbol, of bright future. The Pan Armenian Meeting of 1919, held in Yerevan, decided after days of heated debates, the edification of a United Armenia. (And it was a major echievement for thoose days, to convince a Sassountzi that his country was to obey the same rules than that of an Artzakhtzi, etc... given the huge differences of thoose days, specially in mentality. Let's not forget that there are short sighted, if not sold 'leaders' in Yerevan willing to see differences, even nowdays...). During this same meeting, wich could be considered as the most important of our modern history, the funding session of our Modern Nation, it was decided that Garin would be the capital of United Armenia. And this was not an easy task, since there were very serious contenders, mainly the Yerevan option (for practical reasons, and for Arevelahays), and the Van option (fiercely defended by supra 'localists' that are the Vanetzis. And this was a very strong wing, since the only saved Intelligentzia from Western Armenia was from Van, that there were more than 300 000 Vasbouragantzis in Yerevan at that time, etc... not talking of economical aspects in favor of Van). And this was even a harder option since Garin was the most Genocided province in Armenia, and vertually there were no survivors from its intelligentzia (Armen Karo, and a handfull). Plus, it was the most Islamised province of all Western Armenia.... Nevertheless, our Intelligentzia had the strenght and the will to make such a clear-cut decision. For decades to come, Armenians meeting or leaving each other, used to prononce: 'Next Year in Garin' ( A motto taken from Zionists, a new European movement then, using this same phrase for Jerusalem, to spread and symbolize their National aspirations ...). If you read the 'Memoirs' of many everyday Armenians of 1920s and 30s, you will see this kind of details. So Garin, more than eny other town or province, was turned into the most aspired and dreamed symbol of those having survived the Genocide. Let's respect them, and respect us. Let's ban the footprint of the enemy from the very symbol of our dearest Aspiration. Let's Call it by it's Unique name: GARIN. And Garin is not the motto of just Garintzis, it is our national Symbol. Our holiest wish, our Jerusalem. Sooner or later, watever the costs, and watever the ways, we will be back. We will be back, and the Cathedral of Garin will come out of the ashes from that awfull mirats they build on it. Let's not doubt about it. If we want, we can. And the clifs of Karin Dag, the canyons of Karvadjar are here to testify from what we can, provided we hang on our will. 'NEXT YEAR IN GARIN' ! CONCERNING JAVAKHK: As I explained, Garin is sacred, and we will never let it down nor forget about our roots. But here we must be wise. The Georgians, knowing us much better that we know them, and this by no common measure, set a trap. During all the soviet era, they stressed by all means, and everywhere, the Garintzi origin of some Javakhktzis. Knowing our visceral attchment to that symbol, and the blindness, if not the complicity of our 'Intelligentzia' during Beria's years, they managed to convince all Armenians, that Javakhktzis were all Garintzis. The aim was one: to claim the original property of Javakhk, just as the Azeris claim Artzakh or Nakhitchevan, by manipulating the records of migrations during early XVIII-XIX centuries. Has enybody asked why all Javakhktzis remember Garin, while they left it 200 years ago, while no one in Martouni or Gavar talks about Alashkert? Why no one in Gyoumri, where there are as many Garintzis as in Javakhk never talk about, even do not know about? Why no one in Gyoumri talks about Kars, while 70% of its people are Karsetzis, and they left it 80 years ago??? Why no one in Yerevan knows about its Western Armenian origins, while 90% of its people are Western Armenians, and they left their villages 90 years ago?? Even the ultra regionalist Vanetzis, forget about their original Van, when it comes to the young generations. Why??? Why the Abarantzis or Ijevantzis, installed in Yerevan for one generation only, forget about their origin?? Why Javakhktzis of Yerevan, living in town for less than 20 years forget about their Javakhk & Garin Origins??? At least when asked at first hand??? The Answer is clear: Systematic and well planned state propaganda !! That the Javakhktzis remember Garin, it is normal, specially since it is a National symbol and a sense of pride. Let's not forget that all Spyourkahays remember their origins, since clear of propaganda, and Western assimilation might be a kind of it. What is Not Normal, is that Yerevantzis or Gyoumretzis forget about their Van and their Kars, Paghesh or Manazkert! This is the result of state propaganda, during soviet years and then under HHSh.. (29 000 and forget the rest...) Only the stubbern and 'hasdagogh' Sassountzis resisted Beria's propaganda. But no one in Talin, where 100% are Sassountzis, will ever refer to Talin as a 'secondary' homeland! They will blow you up, if ever enybody dares to question the identity of Talin, as faster as if you had questioned Sassoun.. No, Javakhktzis are not all Garintzis. Far from that. There are Mushetzis, etc.... but most off all, there are 'Original/Autochnone Javakhktzis' +++ http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=1&id=1603&l=en Javakhk is as Armenian as the Sevan Bassin. Can enybody dare to question the identity of Gavar?? Sevan?? It was our National Tragedy, that a 'mini' Genocide was committed in Javakhk by the retreatin Turks in 1827-28. But nevertheless, its fate was similar to many other provinces, like Sevan Bassin or Chirag. The Javakhktzis did not 'colonise' a foreign land, as did their Hamshentzis brothers in Abkhazia or Krasnodar. They settled on their land, terribly shaken by the Genocider Turks. But this was just as the same way Alashkertzis settled in Martouni, "bayazedtzis" in Gavar, etc... The Merit of Archbishop Pakradouni was that he spared his people the fate of so many Spyourks. But this changes nothing, when it come to the rest of Javakhtzis. Javakhk was mainly Armenian before 1827, and remained so after it. No one else, than some Islamised Armenians named 'Mtzkhet Turks' or wathever lived in Javakhk before 1827 and the 'Big Exodus'. http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=1&id=1605&l=en And surely not Georgians! This is a fact. History knows it. But Stalin's chauvinistic propaganda, still continewing nowdays by inertia and shortsitedness, added to natural pride 'of Garintzi' goes on, tending to label Javkhktzis=Garintzis. Let's be wiser. Garin is our National pride and Aspiration. Most Javakhktzis have roots going to Garin (not less because of mixed marriages between indegenous and refugees). Garin's parpar prevails in Javakhk, because the refugees imposed their parpar, being more numerous and more educated, and because at that time, 80% of all Armenians living in Armenia (West+East), used to spell in Western Armenian! It was just natural that Western Armenian would prevail, just as Eastern Armenian prevailed in Soviet Armenia when state sponsored eradication of Western Armenian was organised. If Javakhk was incorporated to Armenian SSR, than undoubtedly, no one would have used the Garno parpar today, same would have been the case with Artzakh, if ever it was incorporated.... The Garno parpar is a Pan Armenian Treasure, a relique that must survive, for the future. Because it is notting else than original Western Armenian, deprived from Turkish and Greek influences and consonences, 'traditional' Western Armenian acquired in Bolis, where the Inteligentzia lived. It must survive for our future Generations, for the day we will be back, as a Nation in Garin.... etc.... But nevertheless, Javakhktzis are first and before enything Javakhktzis. The inhabitants and the owners of Javakhk. No other Nation can claim that land, wheter Georgian, 'Mtzkhetian' or Marsian. Javakhk is as related to Georgia, historically, that Ani or Gyoumri, Lori and Kars. (Interestingly they claim all these lands, even Yegheknazor and Kantzag, from time to time... it's just necessary to add an 'i', making Karsi..., and for Ani, Lori or Gyoumri, it's even not necessary ). Political Situation is one thing. Administrative borders are one thing. But National consioussness is another. Borders change, we are well placed to know it, unfortunately or fortunately... But National Consioussness prevails and must not be altered. Javakhk is Javakhktzi's, and all Javakhktzis are all from Javakhk. Their particular roots, wheter going to Garin or to Poka, Moush or Akhaltzkha, Ardahan or Vartzounik, is our internal, historical matter. We should not fell in the trap. Why, in a city like Akhalkalak, there is only one 'Armenian' statue, that of Archbishop Pakradouni ??? May be because the 'other' one is that of Okroyan, a man so 'proud to claim his Georgianouss' (sic!!!) 1/ All JAVAKHKTZIS are from JAVAKHK. 2/ JAVAKHK BELONGS only to JAVAKHKTZIS. 3/ As a Nation, we must do whatever possible, or IMPOSSIBLE, to Preserve JAVAKHK as our National Heritage and FUTURE. 4/ Tiny little Republic of Armenia can be under pressure from all known and unknown players, but we nevertheless have 2 Jokers: :lol: A- JAVAKHKTZIS B- Our DIASPORA TODAY in JAVAKHK, next Year in Garin!
  18. http://www.djavakhk.com/cartes.php?l=fr
  19. http://www.djavakhk.com/videos_en.php?l=am
  20. No matter what Turkey thinks, sooner or Later, it will loose Norther Kurdistan too... You just can't keep control over 20 million Kurds having a State next dorr! http://www.djavakhk.com/galerie/disp_img.php?id_img=1304
  21. http://www.djavakhk.com/detail.php?r=1&id=1598&l=en THE TRAGEDY OF PAKOURIAN / COMPLICITY IN GENOCIDE This is the Black page of the Georgian History. Known as ‘The Big Taboo’, this page of History is the ‘Pandora Box’ of Armeno-Georgian relations, a box never to be opened. For successive ‘Supreme State Interests’, very often paradoxical ones, this box remains hermetically sealed till nowadays. Apart from a small circle of initiates and historians, few people know the details of this story. Very few, if we dare not to notice a small exception: the people of Javakhk! Although the majority might not know the mechanisms that led to the ‘Tragedy of Pakourian’, they all carry the aftermaths tattooed on their skin, similar to each descendant of the survivors of 1915. Here too, ‘the post trauma silence' played in favour of the preservation of the taboo, in a certain way. In fact, on this month of May 1918, there were not three fronts, but four. Except of Sardarabad, Gharakilissa and Pach Abaran, there was also Akhalkalak..... The Turkish High command had two main objectives. To end the Genocide by exterminating the last Armenians in Eastern Armenia, and to reach Baku as soon as possible. Indeed, even if the October Revolution gave an unbelievable as much as unexpected chance to the ‘Young Turk’ Genociders, transforming a military defeat resulting in the effective liberation of the Erkir since 1916 into a crushing Turkish victory, permitting not only the reoccupation of all the lost provinces, but added by Kars, Ardahan, etc,.. the overhaul situation was still as critical as ever on the European and Arab fronts. In spite of the successes in Armenia, Turkey knew itself condemned to a defeat, without major changes in the situation. That’s why, it was necessary to complete the extermination of the Armenians at all costs, hoping to reach Baku before the Allies reached Istanbul…. First, Baku represented half of the oil extracted at that beginning of that XX sc. But above all, Baku was the incarnation of Turan. That is, a new Empire. The much dreamed future of the Ottomans. The dream which inspired Talaat and Enver, the motive of the Armenian Genocide! Or, to reach Baku from Kars, only three itineraries were possible. a/ Kars - Alexandrapol - Gharakilissa - Ghazakh - Gantzak - Baku. b/ Kars - Alexandrapol - Yerevan - Nakhitchevan - Goris - Chouchi - Baku. c/ Kars - Akhalkalak - Dzaghga - Tiflis - Gantzak - Baku. Given its haste to reach the main target, the Turkish High Command, now used to deal with disarmed and panicked populations inapt to resist, did not hesitate to disperse its forces on four fronts, to try all options simultaneously. As we saw in the ‘Victories of May 1918’, the first two options failed thanks to the three decisive Armenian victories. But what happened on the Northern road, the one passing by Akhalkalak? Let’s return to May 15, 1918, and the tragic fall of Alexandrapol (Gumri). Armenia has not declared its independence yet. In theory the SEIM still exists, but in practice, after the fall of Kars due to its failure, the Armenians do not believe in it any more. The command of the Armenian forces tries to organize the defence of the remaining tiny piece of Eastern Armenia. Meanwhile, since the fall of Kars followed by Alexandrapol, Javakhk is cut of from the rest of the country. Consequently, the Javakhk Government asks for help, simultaneously from the ‘Armenian National Council’ based in Tiflis, and from general Nazarpekian, commanding the Armenian troops. On his turn General Nazarpekian, orders Antranik, at that time located in the vicinity of Alexandrapol, to ensure the defence of Javakhk, by heading with his men to Akhalkalak. Unfortunately, since the fall of Garin, and especially that of Kars, the relations between the legendary commander of partisans, namely Antranik, and the career officers inherited from the Tzarist army are disgusting. Antranik blaming the career Generals their lack of courage, and the latter not supporting the indiscipline and not less legendary furious angers of the first. Thus, leaving the region of Alexandrapol, Antranik moves well to the North, but once in Ashotsk, instead of passing to Javakhk according to his orders, he decides to shift East, towards the plain of Lori, and relocates in current Stepanavan (alias Tchalaloghli). Indeed, on his estimates, the danger would come from the North. His plan was to resist in the deep gorges of the Tepet and Tzoraked. As for Javakhk, he sent to one of his officers, Hagop, originally from the province. The latter was supposed to organise a massive mobilization among his compatriots and to coordinate the defence. But during the night, following his arrival in the town of Akhalkalak, Hagop is murdered by a treacherous hand..... As a result, the Turks perfectly informed from the absence of any organised defence in the plain of Javakhk, send in a part of the Second Corpus commanded by Yaqub Chevki Pasha. First from Ardahan towards Akhaltzkha, and another part from Batoum, trough the mountains of Ajaria towards the same Akhaltzkha. The situation of Akhaltzkha and the villages around was desperate, since the enemy’s advanced from the West and the South with superior forces, was aggravated by the closure of the road towards Akhalkalak for weeks now, thanks to Mskhet Turks, who took the control of the Kour valley, attacking the villages of the plateau, like Vatchian or Gumbirda. Despite everything, the Tachnak mayor of Akhaltzkha Zori Zorian, by the matter of facts transformed into a commander, decides to resist whatever the costs. Rejecting evacuation, Zorian organizes the self-defence of the city, and the 15 mountain villages situated South of it. He digs trenches, orders rationing of the food, organizes turns of duty, and launches an arms manufacture. Making own the slogan ‘Mah gam Azadoutioun', the Akhaltzkhatzis decide to die rather than to give up their land. Simultaneously, after the occupation of Ashotsk, the Turks move from the South, towards the Big lakes, sending most of their troops from Kars to the Lake Dzourdzouna (Tchelder), and from there to the Gardzakh pass on May 7, 1918. Thus they manage to by pass the trenches of the defenders, lined along the heights dominating the Kour valley. The detachments of self defence, few and badly armed, succeed in organizing a short resistance close to the village of Gardzakh. The battle took place on the slopes of the mount Kyoktagh. Lieutenant Arakelov, instead of going to the front, ‘leads' the operations from Akhalkalak, 30 km on the rear. Following the orders of Jordania and the SEIM, the Georgian regiment, abandons the front, and is withdrawn without fighting. Fierce resistance is showed by the detachments directed by demobilized career officers, Ludwig Temirdjian, Khoren Mnoyan, Zarmayr Khanoyan, as well as the men of Boghos Apelian, arrived from Tiflis. Same abnegation is showed by the men of a Russian officer, Reznikov. At this stage, the fighting was no more for the defence of Javakhk, but for the evacuation of its inhabitants... in extremis. All the Verin Javakhk falls, within a few days. The inhabitants of the Northern part of the province, 40 000 men move Norther, towards Pakourian and Borjom. Those of the Southern portion, 35 000 men, take the direction of Dzaghga. The topography of the region, a large plain with no natural obstacles plays in favour of the Turks. Once the Gardzakh pass crossed, there are no more strongholds for a resistance. This explains the speed of the invader’s progression and the catastrophic conditions of the evacuation. Whereas Javakhk was considered as Armenia’s potato and corn rloft, almost all the reserves are abandoned in the cellars, and the Refugees hardly have for a few weeks of provisions. The 61 Armenian villages migrate. Only remain Molokan Russian and some turkish-speaking Armenian villages. The Turkish army supported by the Mskhet Turks will plunder during weeks the villages. The latecomers are massacred by hundreds. Nearly a thousand valid men are sent to Turkey for forced labor. More than one thousand elders are gathered and exiled to the refugee camps of Pakourian. The villagers of Khorenia and Takhtcha, moving towards Dzaghga, are convinced by Turkish agents to turn back. Thus 800 villagers from Khorenia and 300 from Takhtcha return to their homes. Once back, the Turks force them in the cattle sheds, and burn alive. Terrible massacres took also place in the villages of Medz Arakeal, Gumbirda, Apoul, Pejano, and in the city of Akhalkalak itself. Losses could have been worse, if in some places, in spite of the lack of means, the population hadn’t shown resistance. The most important battle was waged by the villagers of Satkha, at the entrance of their village... Nevertheless, in spite of very heavy losses, 40 000 Refugees manage to save their lives and move towards the town of Borjom, in the North, from where the railroad led to Tiflis or Abkhazia, and then Russia. The passage of the Treghk Mountains, during the season of snow’s melt is very difficult, especially on the Northern slopes, in the dense forests of Pakourian. Some 35 to 40 000 others, from the region South of Akhalkalak and the basin of the Lake Parvana, moved towards Dzaghga. On the 5th of June, with the last refugees, the detachments of self-defence left the area around Akhalkalak for Pakourian. But once arrived, the refugees and their defenders, expecting to find a helping hand, are surrounded by the Georgian army deployed in Borjom. Its commander-in-chief, the General Artchevanitze, not only refuses to provide weapons for the volunteers of the self-defence detachments, willing to return and face the Turks, but moreover, he disarms till the last Javakhktzi. Indeed, the Georgian General declares: ‘From now on you are on the territory of the Republic of Georgia, and thus under the protection of the Georgian National Army. Thus you have neither the right, nor the need to have arms'. Exhausted by the exodus, the Javakhktzis are disarmed by a regular army, naively. They are far from imagining the hell that the Nationalist Government of Jordania reserved for them! Indeed, according to of the Georgian National Council, Artchevanitze forbade the Javakhtzis from settling in the town of Pakourian. The latter, being a summer cure station, had hundreds of empty houses in this season. He also forbade their move towards other destinations, or from using the train to join their families in Tiflis or in Russia. In a matter of days, the survivors of the massacres find are parked in refugee camps in the forests, without any protection against the bad weather, and encircled by the Georgian army, which forbade any move. The pretext used first, is the ‘risks of epidemics' the refugees could have propagated to the rest of Georgia. However, this argument is absolutely nonsense at that time: June 1918. Indeed, the villagers of Gumbirda had saved from the ‘Turkish Yatagan' the inhabitants of four small Georgian villages of the Kour valley, and had taken them to the North. These ethnic Georgians having lived during weeks with the Javakhetian Refugees, are nevertheless chosen one by one, and admitted inside the Georgian borders…. In spite of the hermetism of Artchevanitze’s encirclement, some families succeeded in passing through the breaches of the net, either by using remote paths, or by bribing the Georgian guards. They are denounced in Borjom, or Khachouri, are arrested and brought back in the camps of Pakourian. Worse! About one hundred Javakhktzis had even succeeded in arriving to the central station of Tiflis, by using the train. They were stopped and returned towards these real ‘Death Camps’. It should be noted that almost simultaneously, the Turkish army, so predisposed in massacring Armenians without second taught, ‘saved’ almost 1500 elders captured in the villages of the Plain, gathered them, and after exhausting them by inflicting a long march, will bring them to the same camps of Pakourian, just to increase the burden of the refugees. By now, it was clear, that the attitude of the Georgian State had shameful aims, and was surely not motivated by sanitary considerations. The Georgian State, accepting voluntarily Germany’s supervision, ally of Turkey, had acted in concert with the Turkish command. The two armies, Turkish and Georgian, carried out a common plan, simultaneously, and in a complementary way! Later, the pretext used will be the ‘risks of Hunger’ caused by the poor 80 000 Javakhktzis on the 2 Million inhabitants of Georgia, from which almost the third were Armenians at this date. However, it was Georgia and its army, that plundered these luckless victims, by organizing forced ‘exchanges’ with grain at the beginning of June. Thus several hundreds of thousands of cattle and sheep, plus all the precious values saved from the Turks were ‘exchanged’ by Georgian inhabitants of the neighbouring provinces of Koutaïss, Borjom and Gori, backed by the bayonets of their army, against some bread, hardly enough for a few days. Later, these same ‘merchants' turned into plunderers, always backed by their army and their police forces. The situation in the camps turned from worse to apocalyptic, as soon as the first rains began, at the end of August 1918. Whereas until that date, the mortality due to the diseases was not great, and the most worrying problem was the hunger, in a matter of weeks, epidemics such as the Cholera, the Dysentery, Tuberculosis or Syphilis exploded. The death tall was already more than 100 per day in Pakourian. In spite of the Chaos which reigned in the rest of the Caucasus, the famine decimating by hundred of thousands the Refugees from Western Armenia, the Armenian Government did not stop from pleading to the Georgian authorities, trying to save its compatriots in Pakourian. Same was the case of the Armenian community in Tiflis, and of ‘Armenian National Consil' still based in Tiflis at this date... all these efforts resulting to a waste of time and energy. Georgia categorically refused any passage of humanitarian aid, whether food or medicine.... The authorities of Yerevan demanded the lifting of the siege for the Javakhktzis, either a permission to step down from the icy montains of Pakourian into the Kour valley, famous for its paradisiacal climate, or at worst, the possibility of a return back to Javakhk, even if the Turks were still there! After all, it was better to face with bare hands the Turks, rather than accepting the certain death orchestrated by Georgia. Tiflis rejects categorically, pretending a Turkish refusal to the return of the Javakhktzis. Or at this date, the Ottoman Empire, at the verge of collapse, was forced to stop its expansionism in Eastern Armenia. The Turkish army had already left the plain of Javakhk, and was even on the point of evacuating Kars and Alexandrapol! A few days later, ‘The Evil’s Empire’ signed its capitulation in Moudros, with the French and English Allies. Contacted by the Armenian Government, the Turks, stunned by the fear of an Armenian revenge, accepted the return of Javakhktzis, and refuted any previous refusal from their side. In spite of all these evidence, The Georgians forbade by their army the return of the Refugees to Javakhk. In the mean time in Pakourian, epidemics and hunger, joined by now by storms and the snow, raised the death toll to hundreds per day…... The Georgian civil population and its soldiers contemplate the extinction of these starved skeletons, refusing ‘to move a small finger'.... Finally, just before of the ratification of the Peace in Moudros, and the beginning of the total Turkish withdrawal from Eastern Armenia, Georgia will propose: ‘Javakhktzis can’t return to Javakhk any more. They must either be transported to the heart of Armenia, or to Russia'.. There were virtually no survivors remaining in Pakourian. In this Death Camp alone, between June and November 1918, the death tall was of 18 000! At the beginning of the spring 1919, the total death tall in the camps of Pakourian, Mankliss and Dzaghga exceeded 40 000... The fewest losses were registered in the camp of Dzaghga. Because here, in spite of the ban and the barrage of the Georgian army, the Armenian villagers of the district, helped with all possible means their brothers. Starting from the end November 1918, small groups, succeed in making trough the siege, begining the return to Javakhk. Sstarting from the end of December, most of the dying survivors were forced by the Georgian army to sign declarations admitting the incorporation of Javakhk in Georgia, and acceptance Georgian nationality! The people of Javakhk, having under each tree of Pakourian’s forests the tomb of one of its kin, refer to this period by stating: ‘What the Turk did not succeed to achieve, the Georgian did’..... In his memories, Archak Djamalian, Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia in Georgia, will detail the negotiations, and the cynical attitude of the Georgian Government. He will mention ‘We do not detail these facts to revive our wounds, but to prove that Georgia never regarded the Inhabitants of Javakhk or Dashir (Armenian Portchalou) as its citizens'.
  22. http://www.djavakhk.com/galerie/disp_img.php?id_img=765 Irentz khelkov Trka-vratzagan tashinke Meghrin arten gtzel yen irentz!
  23. http://www.djavakhk.com/index.php?page=1&r=13&l=en
×
×
  • Create New...