|
|
The History of India has been whitewashed and distorted first by European rulers which after Independence were continued by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as Dark Age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous. (The subject of distortions of history had been dealt by me in brief in the article “Indian History and ‘Avarana’ [Masking] of Truth by Marxists” which I elaborate here)
Ram Swarup says- “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists”1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are-
1] Aryan Invasion Theory is True2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and the Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4
Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory [AIT].
The AIT was introduced to justify the presence of the British among their Aryan cousins in India, being merely the second wave of Aryan settlement there. It supported the British view of India as merely a geographical region without historical unity, a legitimate prey for any invader capable of imposing himself. It provided the master illustration to the rising racialist worldview-“the dynamic whites entered the land of the indolent dark natives and established their dominance and imparted their language to the natives; they established the caste system to preserve their racial separateness; some miscegenation with the natives took place anyway, making the Indian Aryans darker than their European cousins and correspondingly less intelligent; hence, for their own benefit they were susceptible to an uplifting intervention by a new wave of purer Aryan colonizers.”5
Dr.Koenraad Elst, in his “The Vedic Evidence”6 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence for Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes- “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia….” He further provides Astronomical and Literary evidences against the AIT in his other essays.
Jim Shaffer. Wrote “Current archaeological data do not support the existence of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archaeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural developments from prehistoric to historic periods…”7 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, a U.S. expert who has extensively studied such skeletal remains, observes- “Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity..”8
David Frawley while commenting on the Political and Social Ramifications concludes-“First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes)” He further concludes that- “In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary or archeological but political and religious that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice”9
Archaeological evidence in no way contradicts Indian tradition, rather it broadly agrees with it (except for its chronology). Whether from North or South India, tradition never mentioned anything remotely resembling an Aryan invasion into India. Sanskrit scriptures make it clear that they regard the Vedic homeland to be the Saptasindhu, which is precisely the core of the Harappan territory. As for the Sangam tradition, it is equally silent about any northern origin of the Tamil people. These clearly show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
About the alleged destruction of Buddhist and Jain temples by Hindus, Sita Ram Goel observes10- “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some Saiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang” He asks the eminent historians to produce epigraphic and literary evidences to suggest the destruction of Buddhists and Jain places by Hindus, the names and places of Hindu monuments which stand on the sites occupied earlier by Buddhist or Jain monuments. But, till today no concrete evidence has been given by the eminent historians to substantiate their claim.
But, there are enough evidences to show that Buddhist and Jain temples and monasteries at Bukhara, Samarqand, Khotan, Balkh, Bamian, Kabul, Ghazni, Qandhar, Begram, Jalalabad, Peshawar, Charsadda, Ohind, Taxila, Multan, Mirpurkhas, Nagar-Parkar, Sialkot, Srinagar, Jalandhar, Jagadhari, Sugh, Tobra, Agroha, Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila, Vaishali, Rajgir, Odantapuri, Bharhut, Champa, Paharpur, Jagaddal, Jajnagar, Nagarjunikonda, Amravati, Kanchi, Dwarasamudra, Devagiri, Bharuch, Valabhi, Girnar, Khambhat Patan, Jalor, Chandravati, Bhinmal, Didwana, Nagaur, Osian, Ajmer, Bairat, Gwalior, Chanderi, Mandu, Dhar etc were destroyed by the sword of Islam.11
It should be noted that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and sub-sects had heated discussions among themselves and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus also were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims seems to be an after-thought. Apologists, who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism.
The Islamic conquest has been described as the “Bloodiest”12, as “, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions.”13 And as “bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese”14
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes- “While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”
Dr.Koenraad Elst while while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders concludes15- “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like “punishing” the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
From Mohamud Quasim to Tipu Sultan, every Mohammedan invader killed, converted, taken as slave or put Jiziya on Hindus. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. While describing the conquest of Kanauj, Utbi sums up the situation thus: “The Sultan[Ghazni] levelled to the ground every fort, and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him. In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja”. The conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated.
About the Conversion of Hindus to Islam, K.S.Lal observes- “The process of their conversion was hurried. All of a sudden the invader appeared in a city or a region, and in the midst of loot and murder, a dazed, shocked and enslaved people were given the choice between Islam and death. Those who were converted were deprived of their scalp-lock or choti and, if they happened to be caste people, also their sacred thread. Some were also circumcised. Their names were changed, although some might have retained their old names with new affixes. They were taught to recite the kalima and learnt to say the prescribed prayers”.16
When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind in 1001-02, he took 500,000 persons of both sexes as captive[This figure is given by Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud Gahzni] Next year from Thanesar, according to Farishtah, the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin 200,000 captives[Tarikh-i-Farishtah, I, 28]. When Mahmud returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist of (besides huge wealth) 53,000 captives. The Tarikh-i-Alfi adds that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the total number of captives comes to 750,000. In 1195 when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak 20,000 slaves were captured, and 50,000 at Kalinjar in 1202. Sultan Alauddin Khalji had 50,000 slave boys in his personal service and 70,000 slaves worked continuously on his buildings. In the words of Wassaf, the Muslim army in the sack of Somnath took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000, and children of both sexes. Iltutmish, Muhammad Tughlaq and Firoz Tughlaq sent gifts of slaves to Khalifas outside India. To the Chinese emperor Muhammad Tughlaq sent, besides other presents, 100 Hindu slaves, 100 slave girls, accomplished in song and dance and another 15 young slaves. Firoz Tughlaq collected 180,000 slaves.17
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes -“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”.18
Some of the Temples converted into Mosques are19-
Epigraphic evidences-
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.
Literary evidences-
7. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
8. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters , , mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
9. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
10 Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
11. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
12. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
13. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
14. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
15. Malabar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
16 The Mosque at Jaunpur. This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi
17 The Mosque at Qanauj it was built by Ibrahim Sharqi
18 Jami (Masjid) at Etawah. it is one of the monuments of the Sharqi Sultans
19 Babri Masjid at Ayodhya . This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya
20 Mosques of Alamgir (Aurangzeb)
According to the reports of Archeological survey of India.
21 Tordi (Rajasthan)- early or middle part of the 15th century
22 Naraina (Rajasthan)- The mosque appears to have been built when Mujahid Khan, son of Shams Khan, took possession of Naraina in 1436 A.D
23 Chatsu (Rajasthan)- At Chatsu there is a Muhammadan tomb erected on the eastern embankment of the Golerava tank. The tomb which is known as Gurg Ali Shah’s chhatri is built out of the spoils of Hindu buildings. The inscription mention saint Gurg Ali (wolf of Ali) died a martyr on the first of Ramzan in 979 A.H. corresponding to Thursday, the 17th January, 1572 A.D.
24 SaheTh-MaheTh (Uttar Pradesh)
25 Sarnath (Uttar Pradesh)- the inscriptions found there extending to the twelfth century A.D
26 Vaishali (Bihar)
27 Gaur and Pandua (Bengal)- The oldest and the best known building at Gaur and Pandua is the Ãdîna Masjid at Pandua built by Sikandar Shãh, the son of Ilyãs Shãh. The date of its inscription may be read as either 776 or 770, which corresponds with 1374 or 1369 A.D? The materials employed consisted largely of the spoils of Hindu temples and many of the carvings from the temples have been used as facings of doors, arches and pillars
28 Devikot (Bengal)- The Dargah of Sultan Pir, The Dargah of Shah Ata are the Muhammadan shrines built on the site of an old Hindu temple
29 Tribeni (Bengal)
These whitewashing of history, the policy of “Suppresio Veri, Suggestio Falsi” followed by ‘Eminent Historians’ of India is not only dangerous to national integration but also the future of the entire nation. It is time that, the self interests are kept aside and the facts of history is made known to the masses.
Footnotes-
1 Indian Express, January 15, 1989, quoted in book “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1” by Sita Ram Goel
2 For example, JNU historian Romilla Thapar.[Article titled “Romila Thapar Defends the Aryan Invasion Theory!” by Vishal Agarwal published here- http://www.india-forum.com/articles/60/1 ]
3 In letter published in The Times of India dated October 2, 1986, Romilla Thapar had stated that handing over of Sri Rama’s and Sri Krishna’s birthplaces to the Hindus, and of disused mosques to the Muslims raises the question of the limits to the logic of restoration of religious sites. How far back do we go? Can we push this to the restoration of Buddhist and Jain monuments destroyed by Hindus? Or of the pre-Hindu animist shrines? [ Quoted in book- Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence by Sita Ram Goel]
4 In his book Medival India [NCERT 2000], Satish Chandra writes- “The raid into India (by Timur) was a plundering raid, and its motive was to seize the wealth accumulated by the sultans of Delhi over the last 200 years… Timur then entered Delhi and sacked it without mercy, large number of people, both Hindu and Muslim, as well as women and children losing their lives.”, but Timur repeatedly states in his memoirs, the Tuzuk-i-Timuri, that he had a two-fold objective in invading Hindustan. “The first was to war with the infidels,” and thereby acquire, “some claim to reward in the life to come.” The second motive was “that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels.” He further says “Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the ulema and other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked.”
5 Koenraad Elst, in “The Politics of the Aryan Invasion Debate”
6 “The Vedic Evidence – The Vedic Corpus Provides no Evidence for the so-called Aryan Invasion of India” by Koenraad Elst
7 Jim G. Shaffer, “The Indo-Aryan Invasions : Cultural Myth and Archaeological Reality,” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
8 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, “Have Aryans been identified in the prehistoric skeletal record from South Asia ?” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
9 David Frawley, in “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”
10 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2-
the Islamic Evidence
11 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 -
the Islamic Evidence
12 Will Durant in “Story of Civilization” observes- “The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”
13 “Histoire de l’ Inde” – By Alain Danielou; he notes- “”From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.” Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, “was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked.” Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined.”
14 Francois Gautier
15 Dr. Koenraad Elst in “Was There an Islamic “Genocide” of Hindus?”
16 K.S. Lal in “Indian Muslims Who Are They”
17 K.S. Lal in “Muslim Slave System in Medieval India”
18 Sita Ram Goel, in “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence”
19 It is taken from the large list of places documented by Sita Ram Goel in his magnum Opus “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1- The Preliminary Survey”
Hate crime is legally used to refer to those crimes which occur when criminal acts are perpetrated to target a victim or victims on the basis of membership to a certain social group. The crimes are also referred top as bias or bias motivated crimes. The social group defined here may be defined by religion, nationality, race, sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity, disability, political affiliation or sexual orientation. Incidents in this crime may involve damage of property, physical assault, verbal abuse, insults, bullying, offensive letters and graffiti. This crime is generally seen to be motivated by hatred and prejudice. Analysts argue that hate crime is more than normal crime because it targets victims based on their inherent identities and discriminates them from enjoying society’s full benefits (Larry and Roger, 2010, p 26). This crime, according to analysts, causes more psychological harm than normal crime which is not prejudicial (Franklin, 1997, p.14). The crime, when it happens in societies without stable systems of governance has great potential of making communities turn against each other. FBI statistics show that about 30% of hate crimes reported was committed against property. These include stealing, vandalism, and robbing, setting fire to places of worship, stores or homes (CRS, 2008, p.1). Over 70% of the cases involve personal attacks ranging from rape, murder, simple assault and different forms of aggravated assaults. Hate crime has two perspectives, the physical attack and the attack on identity. This study will concentrate on hate crimes in the US with an aim of looking at their history, frequency and the legislation that have been put in place to curb their occurrences.
History of Hate Crime in the US
The first recorded case of hate crime in the US by FBI was in 1922 in Louisiana. The perpetrator was the Ku Klux Klan, a rising white supremacist movement. According to records, two people were murdered after kidnapping and torture. During the same incident, thousands of members belonging to one community received threats based on their identities. The racist group committed thousands of other similar crimes between that period and 2006. Some of the most vicious of such crimes occurred in the periods preceding World War 1, 2 and the Civil Rights movement. Inn July 1946 in Monroe, Georgia, two black couples, Dorothy & Roger Dorsey, and Mae & Roger Malcolm were viciously pulled from a car and viciously shot by approximately 20 white men. Records show that no arrests were conducted after the incident (CRS, 1997, p 1). In 1954, a 14 year old Negro boy, Emmett Till was attacked by more than 20 men with all manner of crude weapons in Chicago; Illinois. He was accused of whistling to a white woman who belonged to one of the perpetrators, Roy Bryant (CRS, 1997). During the court trial, an all white jury acquitted the accused on grounds that there was no enough proof that the dead boy was Till. The corpse had been badly mutilated, deformed and waterlogged, like a mutant that at his burial, the mother collapsed but insisted that the son would be buried in an open casket as a proof of the horror of racism. These and other cases are a pointer to the extremism of some hate crimes that have occurred and continue to occur (Larry & Roger, 2010). The Ku Klux Klan is one of the best documented organized groups that perpetrated widespread hate campaign and terror on their victims in the United States. During its foundation period in the early 20th century, the group focused its violence and anger on black Americans and any groups that were seen to support them (CRS, 1997). They later targeted other minority groups such as Catholics, Jews, homosexuals and other immigrant groups. Some of the possible reasons for this aggression were the perceived competition between these minority groups versus the economic interests of the low class whites who formed a majority of the group.
Historical Hate Crimes
The prevalence of hate crimes is a global issue and they have occurred in different magnitudes in other parts of the world. Some of the best documented massive hate crimes were:
The holocaust- the organized extermination of Jews in Europe in the 30’s and 40’s that left 5.7 million Jews dead and millions deported from their countries
South Africa Apartheid- A racial segregation policy in South Africa that separated groups into races and determined the infrastructure that such groups would use.
The Ottoman genocide in Armenia-The organized attacks of Armenia natives around 1925 that lead to the death of approximately 1.5 million Armenians and other groups (Mark,1992)
Bosnia ethnic cleansing-the army led incursion in 1992-1995 where areas carrying more Muslims were shelled to forcefully remove them from Serbs territories. More than two million people could have lost their lives.
The Rwanda genocide- Took place in Rwanda in Central Africa and pitted two ethnic groups against each other, Hutus and Tutsis. Lasted for approximately 100 days of pure massacre and casualties are approximated to 800000 people.
The Darfur crisis (Southern Sudan) – an ongoing crisis pitting government forces and Sudanese People Liberation Front which accuses the government of favoring the Arabs in the North. The UN estimates deaths to 300,000 and over two million people displaced (Edith, 2008).
Perpetrators of Hate Crimes
The general perception about perpetrators of these types of violence is that they are committed by organized groups such as KKK or other organized groups. Available evidence however points to different statistics. For instance, out of 1,459 such crimes committed in Los Angeles in the period 1994 to 1995 less than 5% were committed by members of hate groups (CRS, 1997). According to a psychologist in Los Angeles, University of California, Dr, Dunbar Edward, hate crimes are committed day to day by young people, who are normally law abiding, and have no conscience about their actions. Though alcohol and drugs have been identified as contributors of these crimes, the primary determinant is self prejudice against certain groups of people. This prejudice blinds the person and blurs their judgment on the morality of their actions. This prejudice is normally foddered by environments that harbor negativity against other groups. For instance, it has been found that aggressors against homosexuals feel as if they have the backing of the society in attacking homosexuals. People who engage in hate crimes are likely to be common offenders with clear cut anti social behaviors. One example of this occurred in Texas, in Jasper in June 1998, when three men gave a lift to a black man who had a limp. The perpetrators beat up the man, dragged him on the road until his body got dismembered.
Frequency of Hate Crimes
Data available on hate crime is only comprehensive in the US from 1991 when the Act on Hate Crime Statistics was established. Before then, different states used to report these crimes differently and were often grouped together with common crimes such as murder, rape, arson, homicide and robbery (CRS, 1997). The Federal Bureau of Investigation is the agency mandated to gather statistics on these crimes by the Senate (Dunbar, 1997). In 1996, 9,759 such cases were reported from 49 states and Washington D.C. The figures by the Federal agency however are much smaller as compared to the numbers provided by civil right groups and human watchdogs such as Anti—defamation league and NAPAL consortium which reports much higher figures and are more comprehensive. The 1998 Hate Crime prevention Act was introduced in the senate (S. 1529) and the House as (H. R. 3081) sought expansion on the federal jurisdiction on hate crimes (Dunbar, 1997). If expanded, the act would allow federal authorities to seek information, investigate and prosecute possible hate crimes including those where the victim was engaged in activities that are not necessarily protected by the federal government. Federal protected activities in the USA may include activities such as going to school, voting or crossing over from state to state. The expansion also thought to include coverage of categories that were not initially covered in the Act of protection against hate crime. The new inclusion would include hate crimes based on disability, gender orientation, or sexual crimes. A barrier to obtaining information on these crimes is the fact that reporting such crimes is completely voluntary and there is sufficient evident that most victims do not report such cases. It is assumed that the victims in most cases are able to identify perpetrators and are usually afraid of retaliatory attacks from other like minded perpetrators if such a case is reported. There is also a lot of inconvenience in the way states document such crimes (Larry & Roger, 2010, p. 126). There is also an inconsistency in the time duration within which such crimes are reported. Some of the cases documented by FBI are normally reported in irregular times making state action complicated. For instance, in 2006, in a survey to assess jurisdictions documentation of hate crimes, 84% had zero records of such crimes, this, despite their rampant occurrence in different states (Dunbar, 1997, p.27). According to Dr. Dunbar, the psychologist whose survey is used in this study argues that victims of more severe hate attacks such a aggravated sexual assaults are least likely to report out of fear of possible future contacts with perpetrators. Another theory on why such crimes are not reported is the victims’ lack of faith in the systems of justice. In such a case the victim feels that the systems of justice are biased in favor of the perpetrators making reporting of such cases futile. The La Raza National Council is of the view that Hispanics mistrusts the police system as biased and therefore are reluctant to report such cases to them (CRS, 1997, p.1).
Reasons for committing hate crimes
Hate crimes are different from other crimes. They are message crimes that are perpetrated and intended to communicate a coded message, for instance, that a certain community or group is not welcome in certain community, neighborhood, school, or work place (Franklin, 1997). The strongest biases that have been critical in some of the most heinous hate crimes have been racial discrimination, discrimination against ethnic minorities, disdain for the disabled, and prejudice for lesbians and homosexuals and gender based prejudice.
Shopping for palladium wedding bands? Fine Jewelry, Designer Jewelry and Modern Jewelry by Tacori
Tacori jewelry is synonymous with first rate custom jewelry design that combines time-honored tradition with cutting-edge, space-age materials and techniques. Whether you are seeking a set of tungsten carbide wedding rings, palladium wedding bands or men’s jewelry, there are none finer in terms of quality than Tacori rings – and the story of Tacori jewelry is almost as fascinating.
The Odyssey of Haig Tacorian
Armenia, a small Christian nation located in the middle of the Islamic world, has had a long and tragic history; like that of the Jews, the Armenian Diaspora has resulted in the migration of these remarkable people to nearly every place on Earth.
Some Armenians, fleeing the genocidal war waged upon them by the Ottoman Empire in 1915, wound up in Eastern European countries like Romania. Haig Tacorian, whose family is now famous for custom jewelry design, escaped from that country with his family when that country was under the boot heel of the murderous fascist dictator Nicolae Ceau?escu in the 1970s.
Young Tacorian enrolled in college in the U.S. 1975, working his way through as a part-time jewelry salesman. Before long, Haig Tacorian realized he was making more money each week than his father earned a month. The rest, as they say, is custom jewelry design history…
Tacori Jewelry Today
Tacori jewelry is perhaps the most coveted on the market today. Blending the old and the new with materials like tungsten-carbide and palladium and design based on the post-Victorian elegance of Edwardian England and the clean, industrial-inspired Art Deco movement of the 1920s and 30s, Tacori engagement rings and palladium wedding bands are among the finest bridal sets available.
Tacori engagement rings as well as bridal and wedding sets are sold as semi-mounts. Essentially, Tacori sets all the side stones and smaller accent gemstones, but does not mount a center stone (such as a diamond) until the ring has been purchased. This means that when you purchase (for example) a set of their fine tungsten carbide wedding rings, the choice of center stone is yours!
Men’s jewelry at Tacori is limited at present to wedding sets; traditional men’s jewelry such as cufflinks and shirt studs does not appear in the current Tacori jewelry catalogue. If you are planning a proposal and subsequent wedding however, consider Tacori jewelry for value, style and durability.
A Bird’s eye look at the historic ‘Israeli – Arab conflict’
Around 2,000 years ago, 70 AD, the Romans that have conquered Israel, the Jewish people, the Jewish land, (after killing Jesus) destroy Jews’ second temple, massacre hundreds of thousands following a revolt against Rome’s oppression and prohibition on practicing Judaism , mass torture and a complete suffocating siege on Jerusalem [an armed rebellion, one which was disapproved by the rabbis & by any religious leaders], they expell the majority of Jews out of the land [as was expected ahead of time, throught the Jewish prophets, because God expects from his people - the Jews much more than from other nations, still, the cruel Romans "carried" out the evil deeds].
The Romans have also renamed Israel as ‘Palestina’. The land however was mostly deserted and mainly survived by some Jews who still lived there.
Many years later, at the beginning of the 600’s, an Arab named Muhammad will create a new religion called Islam, he will massacre the Jews of Madina for not following him, lead attacks first on Arabs themselves and on all who has not accepted him, this battle on non-Muslims still continues on today, he will later on also claim that he had a dream that he was in the Jewish city of Israel: Jerusalem. Meanwhile, in Christianity, Jews’ refusal to change their religion to which [Jewish born] Jesus came up with caused resentment among Christians, and hatred brought the belief that it was the Jews who “caused” Jesus to die, then this fanatical religious hatred even gave birth to all kind of imaginary “theories”, stereotypes blatant lies and libels, persecution, mass murder, etc. Later on in persecuting the Jews in Europe, they were expelled time and time again (often called to return after being expelled, for their urgent need of Jews’ talent, intelligence and seriousness in life – vital for Europeans economy).
Many European haters have called upon them to return to their homeland Israel.
This traditional hatred was used by Adolf Hitler in his delusional “Aryan” supremacy to use Christians who still hold that hatred, against the Jews he was so obsessed with in his animosity, as he came up with most criminal idea ever known to mankind [Though, already in biblical times, between the first and second Jewish temples, it was the WICKED Haman who planned total extermination, genocide, as stated in the holy book of Esther, where Hebrews / Israelites were already referred to as JEWS], so far as implementing a ‘final solution’, aka, to exterminate all Jews (no matter if they are religious, or not, communists or not, Zionists or not, secular, atheists, Jews with no ideology at all, men, women, children, babies, all were doomed by the infamous criminal number one in history, that has caused a total of around 50 million deaths, whereas at least 6,000,000 were Jews, murdered for no other reason then for pertaining to one particular root, being, simply, Jews). Muslims fight Christians for decades, long and bloody battles. The Turks had a stronghold on the holy-land after defeating the Christians.
Jews were generally not persecuted under the Turkish Ottoman rule in Israel “Palestine”. In the late 1800’s Jewish immigrants and Arab immigrants, both rose to a new level, as Zionists started to cultivate the land, in the early 1900’s under the British colonialism & occupation, Jews were restricted in entry to their historic land but Arabs were not, a vicious rule that has continued during and after Hitler’s holocaust, when poor Jewish victims tried to escape], this imbalance “policy” by the British which was pushed by the Arabs out of racism and bigotry to “others”, has “made” the Arabs a majority for a while.
One of the main Arab racist & Islamic fascist agitators was Haj Amin Al Husseini the infamous ‘Mufti’, he was behind such massacres as in Hebron 1929 where innocent unarmed Jewish were sloughtered by Arabs Muslims, he was also behind the 1941 ‘Farhud’ pogrom on the Jews of Baghdad. Prior to attacking the Jews, he participated in the Islamic genocide on Armenian Christians in 1915, where 1.5 million were murdered. He was the one Arab (though not “Aryan”) leader that made a pact with Hitler and led a Bosnian Muslim division of the SS to carry out atrocities against the Serb Christians and against Jews.
The United Nations founded post WW 2, after 2,000 years of persecuting the Jews and so many millions murdered [before the six millions murdered by Germany's nazis, all throughout history in Europe there were countless victims], gave “permission” to the Jews to re-establish their homeland Israel, along side an Arab state, basically a two states solution.
The Jews agreed, all they wanted past and present, is to ‘live and let live’, but the Arabs refused, the bigots wanted all of the land for themselves. 1948 Israel is re-established, ALL Arab nations vow to destroy Israel, declare war on this little newborn state, Arab leaders vouch for genocide! to “Throw the Jews into the Sea”. Arab leaders call upon Arabs residing in Israel-”Palestine” to evacuate their homes for a while until “mission — of throwing into the sea– is accomplished”. Tiny Israel heroically defends itself and thwarts gigantic Arabs’ attacks. A phenomenon of “Arab refugees” is born, but also a larger refugees population, that from the Arab on Jews, between 800,000 & 900,000 Jews are expelled from Arab Muslim countries: Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, etc.
Their land, properties confiscated. The contrast however how Jews dealt with Jewish refugees and how Arabs have dealt with Arab refugees is huge, Jews are completely absorbed into Israel, Arabs have rejected the Arab refugees, keeping them down, and using them as a foot ball against Israel.
As the Saudi Arab king Fahd said: “Next to the Jews, we hate the ‘Palestinians’ the most”. Arabs terrorize Jews, attacking the innocent, as Arab terror intensifies & Arab leaders threaten again and again to annihilate the Jews, the 1967 war breaks out, Israel that had enough, succesfully conquers some Egyptian land and more land pertaining to Israel – historically and Biblically but not granted by the UN, though the Arabs illegally defied the UN in rejecting Israel and UN’s two states solution. The balance of world’s powers plays out in the middle east, USSR supports and arms the Arabs, US is on Israel, [the surviving David vs Goliath] side.
The local Arabs [which most of their parents or grandparents have immigrated to the holy land] start to call themselves as “Palestinians” (PS no connection to “Philistines” who were NOT Arabs nor spoke Arabic, and are all gone, absolutely nothing remained from them). Continued Arabs’ attacks targeting unarmed civilians, rose in the 1970, such as the massacres of school children in Avivim, Maalot and other attacks, more famous in the 1972 massacre of Israeli Athletes in Munich by the Egyptian born: Yasser Arafat, the leader (somehow…) of the Arab “Palestinians”. He is in Jordan and as a trouble maker creates the “Palestinian” intifada attack on Jordan’s government, 1970 – ‘Black September’, but Jordan quickly oppresses even more the “Palestinians”, kills many, makes mass arrests, in 1971 the PLO is expelled.
He finds a safe heaven in Syrian’s occupied Lebanon, he adds more destruction to the already tense relations between Christians & Muslims in that country. He Islamizes the Christian Bethlehem, oppresses Christian Arabs in general. In 1973 Israel is again attacked by Arab nations, mainly by Egypt and Syria, a delicate date is chosen, the cruel Saadat and his advisers chose Yom Kippur a Jewish fast day, the vicious Arabs chose the time of day, towards the end of the day (before breaking the fast). The attack was in a surprise, many were killed, although Israel managed to win the war (as all wars), still the Arabs saw it as “victory”, as a blood thirst cult, for the simple reason that many ‘Jews were killed’. In 1976, amidst civil war between Christians and Muslims in Lebanon, the Muslim “Palestinians”, PLO – Arafat, and the Syrians carry out the massacre of Christians in Damour, this was the reason for Christian Arabs massacring “Palestinians” in Sabra Shatila in 1982. 1978-1979, Israel’s leader Menachem Begin & Egypt’s Anuar Sadaat break a peace agreement in which Israel shall give back the land conquered in 1967, Sinai that is [which so it did], and the Arabs give nothing, just a “promise” not to attack, and so a cold peace comes in place between Israel – Egypt.
Syria refuses to ’sit down for any peace negotiations’ and leads many in the Arab world against Egypt & its more moderate stand. Goliath Arabs using it’s oil power, intimidate nations to be against Israel in boycotts, and in the United Nations.
Basically hijacking the UN for the Arabist agenda, of bashing Israel no matter what it does.
This Arab control worldwide intensifies as the years pass by and expands into all international bodies. On another front, in Iran, the Shah rules, he is an ally of the United States but he is not exactly a democratic leader, US president (called by so many the worst ex president) Jimmy Carter pushes pressure on Iran.
In 1979 a revolution happens, not what the US wanted nor what most in the world have wished for, an Islamic revolution, a militant Islam, a Shiite extremism, headed by the Ayatollah Khomeini. Immediately, the American embassy is hijacked, the workers kidnapped for 444 days, until US has a better leader, a courageous Ronald Reagan. Iranian Satanic Mullahs declare that the United States is the “big Satan” and Israel is the “little Satan’. Millions of Iranians are oppressed under Islamic Republic, standing out even in the “usual’ Islamic dictatorships standards.
Asides from killing of minorities such as Ahwazi, Kurds, Druze, which even information is so scarce out of that jail house known as state of Iran. They are behind creating, training and arming the Islamic Hezbullah in Lebanon, the ‘Party of Allah’, whose goal is creating a militant Islamic Shia theocracy in Lebanon with [no Christians or any non Muslims' in Lebanon, and ultimately in the entire middle east including "liberating Jerusalem" as they call it], Hezbollah carried out terror attack such as on US marine barricades in Lebanon in 1983, the US was stationed there to keep peace between Christians & Muslims figting civil war. Israel, its civilians being attacked by Arafat’s terrorists – based in Lebanon (as a practical ‘Palestinian’ army there), enters that country in 1982 to root them out, at first is received by local Arabs, Muslims with candies and flowers, as most Lebanese want the “Palestinian” troublemakers out, but the operation ‘Peace for the Gallilee’, turns into a long and bloody war, all while Syria still occupies Lebanon, PLO & [Iran's & Syria's backed] Hezbollah causes many deaths among all sides.
The main base of Arafat’s terrorists infrastructure. Yasser Arafat declares two “intifadas” (1987 & 2000), bloody violence on Israel’s unarmed men, women and children, targeting the most crwoded places, in a clear attempt to cause as many civilinas deaths’ as possible = Genocide bombings.
“Palestinian” mainstream and official media in demonizing Jews, in glorifying mass murder and “martyrdom” is full force, the death cult of camps for children to be ‘human bombs’ is greased by Saudi Arab oil with large payments for every parent that sends its kid to die via killing many innocent Israelis.
In order to create public sympathy, the Arab Muslim “Palestinians” make sure the kids are pushed on the front lines, often with “stones”, to cover for adult terrorists with machine guns.
The tactics of using kids as human shields by “Palestinian” terrorists proved to be effected, as the global media rarely puts the blame on the Arab adults and leaders and not on Israel trying to defend, to survive. Israel complies with UN’s resolution for Israel to leave Lebanon and for the Hezbollah’s army to dissolve, Israel exists but the Hezbollah remains armed, moreover they portray Israel’s . In 2000, the most powerful Christian leader, the Pope has issues the Church’s formal apology to the Jews of the 2,000 years of constant persecution and bloodshed. September 11, 2001, the Islamic attack that butchered 3,000 innocent people in the United States of America, reinforced the recognition of radical Islam’s war on the west, their ‘plan’ for a global repressive Islamic empire (recognized even by left wingers such as Barack Obama in 2007). So was the continuous Islamic massacres, including the one in Bali 2002 on Australian youths. 2005, Israel gives a big gift for Arab “Palestinians”, sacrificing a huge steak, giving away of it’s vital borderline own land, the Gaza strip.
The Arab “Palestinians” react very traditionally, the more you give them the more they get radicalized, they vote — overwhelmingly — for the Islamic Jihad party of Hamas, who does not “recognize” Israel, vouch for it’s destruction and its members promise to “drink Jews’ blood”. The Hamas-tan Islamic Apartheid creates more Islamization, persecuting Christians, often threatening individuals to “change” their faith, practice. “Palestinians” via Hamas express more publicly their “plan” of Islamic world repressive domination [Caliphate]. The civil war between Hamas & Fatah (who’s still has under its wings the terror group ‘Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade’, but Hamas is still more on the extreme with it’s genocide aims), intensifies in 2006 – 2007 2006 Iran & Syria decide to send it’s Hezbollah Islamic army to attack Israel, a war breaks out, Israel hits Hezbollah which uses ‘Palestinian’ tactics of human shields to cause as many Arab kids’ deaths possible, in order to create a media shift in the Arab world towards more Anti-Israelism. In November 2007, there’s an attempt by US’ president George W. Bush to break a peace agreement between Israel and the Arab “Palestinians”, Fatah is present, Hamas denounces.
The agreement is still based mainly on that first UN’s resolution of 1948, a two states solution, which the Arabs ILLEGALLY have rejected then until now.
Not only are they exploiting again Israel’s kindness and its urge to give for any chance for peace, but these Arabs even make the Jewish eternal capital Jerusalem an issue for Muslims, as if this was ‘always an Islamic thing’. As it stands now, the main real issue Israel still struggles with, is survival against the twin diabolical intolerance that motivated – motivates Arab Muslims, the Arab racism & Islamic Jihad. the Arab racism and Arabization also claims millions of victims in Africa, including Sudan, Mauritania, Chad and more, so are all non Arab minorities in the middle east paying the price of persecution, then the Islamic Jihad´s war on the world is the cancer everywhere on the globe, main victims are: Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and other non Muslims or ‘infidels’, or ‘kuffars’. Worth mentioning that Israel is by in large a secular State, most of its very religious Jews, the Ultra Orthodox do NOT serve in the Israeli Army out of principles.
The first to try to negotiate a peace treaty with the Arabs was the Ultra Orthodox Jew, Professor Dahan, it was prior to the reestablishment of Israel, he was murdered.
Still, this community’s children are as much a target by radical Muslims terrorists. Too late but better late than never, Arab ‘moderates’ start to realize that a nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran is a danger to all.
For the first time within an electoral period international intermediaries – co-chairs of the Minsk OSCE Group on Nagorno-Karabakh settlement (Russia, the USA, France) have gained the opportunity to proceed consulting the parties in and outside the region, as stated in the review. During the meetings held the international intermediaries intended to extend direct contacts of the Parties to reach an agreement on the basic principles of the conflict settlement. Armenian-Azerbaijani meetings at the summit level were held twice (on June 6th in Saint-Petersburg and on November 2nd in Moscow).
Repeated summits of the Russian Federation President Dmitry Medvedev with his Azerbaijani and Armenian colleagues Ilham Aliyev and Serge Sarkisian included detailed discussions of Nagorno-Karabakh problem and promoted the leading role of Russia in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement, as underlined in the document.
The meeting of the confronting states in Moscow, held under the invitation and with participation of the Russian President, concluded with the adoption of three-party declaration directed on peaceful Nagorno-Karabakh conflict regulation by political means, – states the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. This is first document referring to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that was signed by the Heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia, noted in the document.
According to APA, the review also underlines, that 2008 was marked by a stable development of relations and intensive political dialogue between Azerbaijan and Russia. It’s specified that the re-election of Ilham Aliyev as the President of Azerbaijan promoted more extended cooperation between the two countries.
The President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev officially visited Baku in July of 2008, where the Presidents signed the Declaration of friendship and strategic partnership. Russian-Azerbaijani trade-economic relations have also developed intensively. The goods turnover between Azerbaijan and Russia has reached almost 2 billion dollars for the first time in 10 months.
However, one of the leading American political analyst Zbigniew Brzezinski is not that optimistic over the possibilities of the USA and Russia to regulate Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. The settlement of territorial conflicts in South Caucuses depends greatly on the willingness of the Parties to conflict to compromise, rather then on the wishes even of the kind of world-powers as the USA and Russia, considers the leading American political analyst Zbigniew Brzezinski.
“I’m convinced that neither the USA nor Russia can solve these problems on their own”, – stated the former Counselor to National Security issues of the President Jimmy Carter Administration to Trend News.
There are two unsettled conflicts in South Caucuses – between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territorial claims for Nagorny Karabakh; recent conflict of Georgia over the separated territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In addition, in 1993 Armenia and Turkey broke diplomatic relations because of the anti-Turkish campaign of Yerevan, connected with the so-called “genocide of Armenians” and occupation of 20% of Azerbaijani territory by Armenia.
Brzezinski considers that the countries, directly involved into the conflict, have a choice either to reach a compromise or to insist on status-quo for one reason or another. He considers that this means, that they are able to settle the conflict without anybody’s assistance, but the attitude of the Parties involved into the conflict towards the process of conflicts regulation is still important.
“Their willingness to compromise – is an extremely important element in this complicated process, – he said. – That’s why one shouldn’t underestimate how constructive settlement of “frozen” conflicts depends on the USA or Russia”.
Despite that Moscow directly participates in Georgian processes, it doesn’t give it a potential to settle the so-called frozen conflicts, assumes Brzezinski. He thinks that Russia can contribute into this conflicts regulation, by demonstrating diplomatic initiative and supporting existing international principles, which include territorial integrity and respect of national sovereignty.
“The same benefits can present the United States of America”, – considers Brzezinski. However, the productivity of the leading co-chairs of the Minsk OSCE Group presented by Russia and the USA seems to be miserable. The thing is that they can’t still choose the approaches to the conflict settlement, corresponding with the principles mentioned above by Mr. Brzezinski. But this is only a half of problem. They even have no courage to point in public the violator of the regime of cease-fire during international monitoring.
The head of the USA mission at OSCE Kyle Scott made an announcement on behalf of the co-chairs of Minsk OSCE Group, that stated: “We call for the Parties to the conflict to follow the principle of cease-fire rigorously and we are sincerely sorry about the death of 30 people and about injuring of 50 people in 2008 as a consequences of the cease-fire violation”.
We are strongly condemn the cease-fire violation during the OSCE mission monitoring, especially considering that local commanders have provided written guarantees of OSCE monitoring security not long before the beginning of monitoring on February 26th.
We demand for the Parties to explain how could this outrageous violation of cease-fire possibly happen.
We regret that not all the Parties agreed on recommendations, that were sounded by the co-chairs of the Minsk OSCE Group during the Council of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs in Helsinki in December 2008 on withdrawal of sniper shooters from the line of contact.
We express absolute support and admiration by the work of personal representative of the current OSCE chairman Andrzej Kasprzyk and his team. We also emphasize the importance of monitoring within the line of contact as a measure of confidence enhancement between the Parties”, – states the declaration.
And some experts specify the possible influence of Turkish-Armenian dialogue on the settlement of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict around Nagorny Karabakh. Peace negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan through mediation of the Minsk OSCE Group and meetings on different levels on Armenian-Turkish relations – these are two processes, that are able influence each other, thinks the project manager of the program on Eurasia International Alert Desislava Rusanova (Trend News).
“The improvement of one of these processes can positively affect each other, and finally, influence peaceful regulation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.”, – said Rusanova. “Each of these processes has individual aspects. These are parallel, but separate processes. But their success will influence positively the dynamics in general”, – considers Rusanova.
According to the expert, the peaceful settlement can be achieved only if the dialogue proceeds.
“There is no definite prescription of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict regulation. The decision should be approved by all the Parties. The achievement of this decision is a complicated process and demands responsible moves and liabilities of all Parties, their Leaders and peoples.” – said Rusanova.
As she stated, the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia expressed their firm commitment to proceed negotiating on political way of the conflict settlement. “The Presidents admit that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict regulation is a complicated objective and anticipates the establishment of conditions to enhance confidence between the Parties”, – assumes the expert.
R.Mirkadyrov
Armenia receives most of its gas supply from Russia and, like some other republics of the former Soviet Union, has had to face sharp price rises. Armenia has registered strong economic growth since 1995, with double-digit growth rates in the past 6 years. Armenia is not a significant exporter of conventional weapons, but it has provided substantial support, including materiel, to ethnic Armenian separatists in the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh located within Azerbaijan’s borders.
Armenia and Azerbaijan continue to observe the cease-fire that has been in effect since May 1994, and in late 1995 both also agreed to OSCE field representatives being based in Tbilisi, Georgia, to monitor the cease-fire and facilitate the peace process. Armenia was a tribal society, which means thatthe social and political units arelooselyorganized; old tribes disappear as new ones come into being, dependingon the situation.
Armenia’s reputation as a stable, democratic country in a troubled region has taken a battering recently. The Armenian massacre is considered the first genocide in the 20th century. An Armenian diaspora has existed throughout the nation’s history, and Armenian emigration has been particularly heavy since independence from the Soviet Union. The Armenian language is part of the Indo-European family but its alphabet is unique. Conversely, Armenia is richly endowed with potential as a tourist destination and recent figures indicate that some success is being achieved in attracting visitors.
The Government of Armenia’s stated aim is to build a Western-style parliamentary democracy as the basis of its form of government. In addition, the effects of the 1988 earthquake, which killed more than 25,000 people and made 500,000 homeless, are still being felt, though international donors and diaspora Armenian groups continue to fund reconstruction efforts in the earthquake zone. The Armenia Nuclear Power Plant (ANPP) provides around 40% of electricity generation for the country, and hydro and thermal plants provide roughly 30% each.
Peace talks in early 1993 were disrupted by the seizure of Azerbaijan’s Kelbajar district by Nagorno-Karabakh Armenian forces and the forced evacuation of thousands of ethnic Azeris. Historically Armenia and Azerbaijan have been long associated with Asia and the Middle East. Among the important rivers that take their rise in Armenia are the Euphrates, the Tigris, and the Araxes. The modern period of Armenian literature can well be dated from the renaissance of letters among the Armenians in the twelfth century.
The religious orders among the Armenians are of but comparatively recent origin and are not very prosperous.
One of the world’s oldest civilizations, Armenia once included Mount Ararat, which biblical tradition identifies as the mountain that Noah’s ark rested on after the flood. It was the first country in the world to officially embrace Christianity as its religion (c. A.D. 300).
In the 6th century B.C., Armenians settled in the kingdom of Urartu (the Assyrian name for Ararat), which was in decline. Under Tigrane the Great (fl. 95–55 B.C.) the Armenian empire reached its height and became one of the most powerful in Asia, stretching from the Caspian to the Mediterranean Seas. Throughout most of its long history, however, Armenia has been invaded by a succession of empires. Under constant threat of domination by foreign forces, Armenians became both cosmopolitan as well as fierce protectors of their culture and tradition.
Over the centuries Armenia was conquered by Greeks, Romans, Persians, Byzantines, Mongols, Arabs, Ottoman Turks, and Russians. From the 16th century through World War I major portions of Armenia were controlled by their most brutal invader, the Ottoman Turks, under whom the Armenians experienced discrimination, religious persecution, heavy taxation, and armed attacks. In response to Armenian nationalist stirrings, the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in 1894 and 1896. The most horrific massacre took place in April 1915 during World War I, when the Turks ordered the deportation of the Armenian population to the deserts of Syria and Mesopotamia. According to the majority of historians, between 600,000 and 1.5 million Armenians were murdered or died of starvation. The Armenian massacre is considered the first genocide in the 20th century. Turkey denies that genocide took place, and claims that a much smaller number died in a civil war.
After the Turkish defeat in World War I, the independent Republic of Armenia was established on May 28, 1918, but survived only until Nov. 29, 1920, when it was annexed by the Soviet Army. On March 12, 1922, the Soviets joined Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan to form the Transcaucasian Soviet Socialist Republic, which became part of the USSR. In 1936, after reorganization, Armenia became a separate constituent republic of the USSR. Since 1988, Armenia has been involved in a territorial dispute with Azerbaijan over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, to which both lay claim. Also in 1988, a devastating earthquake killed thousands and wreaked economic havoc.
Armenia declared its independence from the collapsing Soviet Union on Sept. 23, 1991. In 1992–1994, Armenia successfully fought Azerbaijan for control of Nagorno-Karabakh. The majority of the enclave is Armenian Christians who want to secede from Azerbaijan and either becomes part of Armenia or gain full independence. Enormous casualties were involved.
An Armenian Diaspora has existed throughout the nation’s history, and Armenian emigration has been particularly heavy since independence from the Soviet Union. An estimated 60% of the total 8 million Armenians worldwide live outside the country, with 1 million each in the U.S. and Russia. Other significant Armenian communities are located in Georgia, France, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Argentina, and Canada.
Are you looking for a book on Armenia? Would you like to read the latest periodicals published in RA on linguistics, history or armenology? Perhaps you need dictionaries, phrasebooks or CDs to help you while learning Armenian? Or you just need a nice present for your children, like an illustrated alphabet?
Anyway, if you cannot afford visiting the country just now, there is good news for you. It is now possible to get plenty of first-hand information on almost all imaginable aspects of Armenia via books, newspapers, magazines, CDs, DVDs and other materials recently published in Armenia.
Perhaps you are already planning a visit to that unique country in the near future. Then you might need some information before your plane takes off, as you always need to manage a lot during the stay. Of course you can find some practical information like the exchange rate or the weather forecast on the Internet. Still you might want to learn more, for example about the local customs and the cuisine, the laws or the “must-see” sites in the capital and all over Armenia. You can also find high-quality publications on contemporary art in Armenia, including the works of Armenian photographers.
Booksfromarmenia.com is the site to give you a general idea of the publishing news in Armenia as well as to help you choose publications suited to your needs. The list of available publications is continuously extended with fresh and valuable items. It includes sections on almost anything that might interest you about Armenia.
So, whether you are Armenian by descent or you just want to learn something new about Armenian culture, language, history and more, you are welcome to use all of the resources we provide.
If, after all you don’t find what you need at our site, no problem! We are based in the capital of Armenia. You can email us about your specific interests and we will easily make enquiries in the best bookshops and publishing houses of Yerevan and suggest you some interesting items.
Booksfromarmenia.com,
“Bringing You the Best Armenian Publications, Wherever You Are”
Attempts to reconcile Armenia and Turkey with a “roadmap” towards the restoration of full diplomatic ties have delighted some villagers near the countries’ border – and angered others.
Armenia’s border with Turkey has not been open since 1993 – and it shows.
The path to an old rusty kiosk, where once people would have had their passports stamped, is overgrown with weeds.
Russian border guards and Armenian soldiers keep watch for anyone trying to cross illegally. And in a startling echo of the Cold War, troops from Nato member Turkey look back from the other side.
The lush border village of Margara is about as far south as you can go in landlocked Armenia. But residents are now hopeful that an open border could change everything. Gharnik Kharibyan is in favour of it.
“The prospect of a border opening is not only a personal issue. It will help everyone. We want to become friends with the Turkish people – they are our neighbours,” he says.
From the end of his garden you can see across to the Biblical Mount Ararat, whose snow-capped peaks rise above lush vines and tomato plantations in Turkish Anatolia.
Mr Kharibyan points across to Ararat, and turns to me with an air of nostalgia.
“You see the mountain?” he asks. “A lot of our history is rooted there on the other side of the border, and it will be good to be able to go there again.”
Armenians look forward to the day they can visit Mount Ararat
|
The chapter of history Mr Kharibyan refers to is the time when hundreds of thousands of Armenians were killed during their mass deportation from Anatolia, in World War I. Armenia wants the atrocities to be internationally recognised as genocide.
Turkey does not see them as systematic killings.
That is why some Margara residents, like Sonik Ghazaryan, still have concerns – even though now she is prepared to move on.
“We are very sensitive about this issue because we remember the stories [about the killings] our ancestors told us,” she said.
“But we are ready for change. I think it is important that Armenia and Turkey become friends again.”
Football diplomacy
A thaw in relations has been taking place since September 2008, when the Turkish President, Abdullah Gul, visited the Armenian capital Yerevan to watch a football match between the two countries.
In April, the Armenian President, Serzh Sarkisian, announced a rapprochement with Turkey. The two countries agreed a roadmap to restoring diplomatic ties which, if adhered to, would pave the way for the border reopening as early as this autumn.
Turkish President Abdullah Gul visited Armenia in September
|
But some Armenians believe this must not happen without Turkey’s acknowledgement that the killings amount to genocide.
At recent demonstrations in Yerevan, supporters of a prominent nationalist party, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, burned Turkish flags to register their anger at the rapprochement.
The party also pulled out of the governing coalition over the divisive issue.
“Our position is that our government should not give in to what Turkey is asking for – that Armenia should not pursue the international recognition of the Armenian genocide,” Giro Manoyan, a leading member of the party, explained.
“If Armenia gives in to these preconditions, it will only be on the losing side. It will gain nothing.”
Mr Manoyan also says there are other prerequisites to the border reopening – namely that Armenia’s unresolved conflict with Azerbaijan over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh must be settled first.
Despite international mediators’ efforts, many are pessimistic that this will happen soon.
Social benefits
It is not just politicians who have been lobbying hard for genocide recognition, but also members of Armenia’s huge diaspora.
Arpi Vartanyan, who represents the Armenian Assembly of America in Yerevan, says there is still a degree of uncertainty about the issue of the border reopening.
“The Armenian genocide took place less than 100 years ago. People have not forgotten. There is concern about the sincerity of the Turks. There’s concern about the safety of Armenians,” he says.
“Some just don’t know what it is going to represent and a fear of the unknown is sometimes paralysing.”
Some of the diaspora – many of them direct descendants of victims of the mass killings – still live in Turkey.
Others, like Khachatur Terteryan, have returned to Yerevan. He now runs a restaurant there designed to make fellow Turkish Armenians feel at home – and to bring down the barriers between the two nations.
As Turkish-style shish kebabs sizzle under a hot grill, he explains how his opinions changed when he came to live in Armenia.
“I started to think as local people think – that recognition of the genocide will come from the Turkish people, probably before the Turkish state. The Turkish intellectuals will soon come round to that opinion,” he says.
Few doubt that landlocked Armenia – whose borders are closed with Azerbaijan as well as Turkey – would benefit economically from improved relations. In Margara, Gharnik Kharibyan says it would have social benefits, too.
“The border opening will help the two nations to become friends,” she says.
“It might help us expand our horizons too. There is currently no entertainment in this village. But in the future, who knows? Maybe we can forge a new society with our Turkish neighbours.”
Turkey and Armenia have set themselves a tight timetable for their path to friendship. The presidents of the two countries are due to meet for a second time this autumn.
If they fail to stick to that plan, the rusty barbed wire border fence in Margara may remain in place for some time.
If they succeed, a brand new chapter in Armenia’s history could be written very soon indeed.
US Congress warned over Turkey-Armenia ‘genocide’ vote
Armenian-Americans have lobbied for official use of the world “genocide”
|
The Obama administration has called on a Congressional panel not to describe the killing of Armenians by Turkish forces during World War I as genocide.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee to hold off a vote on the issue, the White House said.
She said the non-binding resolution would harm talks between Turkey and Armenia.
The resolution is fiercely opposed by Turkey, a key ally of the US.
In 2007, a similar resolution passed the committee stage, but was shelved before a House vote after pressure from the George W Bush administration.
Turkey has warned of consequences for US-Turkey ties if the latest resolution is passed.
During his election campaign President Barack Obama promised to brand the mass killings genocide.
‘Too important’
On Thursday, committee chairman Howard Berman urged fellow members of the committee to endorse the resolution despite the White House warnings.
“I believe that Turkey values its relationship with the United States at least as much as we value our relations with Turkey,” he said.
The Turks, he added, “fundamentally agree that the US-Turkish alliance is simply too important to get side-tracked by a non-binding resolution passed by the House of Representatives”.
Even if the committee approves the resolution, it is unclear whether it will go forward to a vote in the House of Representatives.
A Turkish parliamentary delegation has gone to Washington to try to persuade committee members not to approve the resolution.
It calls on Mr Obama to ensure that US foreign policy reflects an understanding of the “genocide” and to label the World War I killings as such in his annual statement on the issue.
Nationalist sentiment is intense in Turkey and, if the resolution passes, there will be an emotional reaction, even by those who have been arguing for reconciliation with Armenia, says the BBC’s Jonathan Head in Istanbul.
In October last year, Turkey and Armenia signed a historic accord normalising relations between them after a century of hostility.
Armenia wants Turkey to recognise the killings as an act of genocide, but successive Turkish governments have refused to do so.
Hundreds of thousands of Armenians died in 1915, when they were deported en masse from eastern Anatolia by the Ottoman Empire. They were killed by troops or died from starvation and disease.
Armenians have campaigned for the killings to be recognised internationally as genocide – and more than 20 countries have done so.
Turkish officials accept that atrocities were committed but argue they were part of the war and that there was no systematic attempt to destroy the Christian Armenian people.
|
|
We are ready for change. I think it is important that Armenia and Turkey become friends again 
