Tweet
ECHOES OF IVANISHVILI'S ARMENIAN VISIT
http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/2783_january_24_2013/2783_edit.html
By Messenger Staff Thursday, January 24
The PM's recent visit to Armenia brought to the forefront several
interesting issues. The Messenger has previously touched on some of
them, but there is one other issue that is worth addressing.
On January 17th, while meeting in Echmiadzin with Armenia's Patriarch
Garegin II, the Georgian PM was asked by Garegin II to introduce the
History of the Armenian People as a subject in Georgian schools. This
is not an extraordinary request, as every school in Georgia can
introduce and teach a subject as an optional issue at school. However,
in this case, what becomes intriguing is the question: what kind of
manual will be used while teaching this particular subject?
The previous Georgian administration appeared to go through great
pains to remove Armenian written history manuals in schools in
Georgia. The explanation is very simple; in the Armenian written
manuals the historical events sometimes are interpreted and stated
in a very different form compared to the manuals written by Georgian
authors. Georgians by the way, translated Georgian written history
books into the Armenian language, recommending teaching regional
history according these manuals. For example, some Armenian written
history books declared that Javakheti is historically Armenian-owned
land. They claim that this territory was seized by Georgia in 1918.
Therefore it launched a war with Armenia. Georgian written books
however, state that the war in 1918 was initiated by the Armenian
side, and that Armenia aggressively tried to occupy Georgina owned
territory. It is worth mentioning here, that the ethnic Armenian local
population never participated in any kind of military hostilities
during those periods, neither did they later.
Some Georgian analysts believe that the introduction of Armenian
history manuals in Georgian- Armenian language schools will hinder the
integration of ethnic Armenian Georgians into Georgian civil society.
Furthermore, it can stimulate the development of separatist
tendencies. Of course, neither of the sides will benefit from such
possible conflicts and both parties will have serious problems.
Furthermore, an increase in such studies will trigger similar
claims from the Azeri population in Georgia. Occasionally there are
territorial claims from the Azeri side as well, against Georgia-
for example the David Gareji Monastery complex.
Some analysts also believe that such a distinct division between the
ethnically different Georgian populations could facilitate growing
antagonism between the Azeri and Armenian ethic population within
the country. Of course this is not in the interests of ether of the
nations, neither Armenians nor Azeri, and of course not in Georgia's
interest either.
It would have been ideal if the historians of all three countries
could sit together and by interpreting different facts, find a common
solution. At least the history books should not contribute to hostility
and ethnic intolerance. Certainly it is very difficult to achieve
such an ideal situation, so the current Georgian administration and
the Ministry of Education in particular, should pay extra attention
to this issue, so that this does not become a greater aggravation.
http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/2783_january_24_2013/2783_edit.html
By Messenger Staff Thursday, January 24
The PM's recent visit to Armenia brought to the forefront several
interesting issues. The Messenger has previously touched on some of
them, but there is one other issue that is worth addressing.
On January 17th, while meeting in Echmiadzin with Armenia's Patriarch
Garegin II, the Georgian PM was asked by Garegin II to introduce the
History of the Armenian People as a subject in Georgian schools. This
is not an extraordinary request, as every school in Georgia can
introduce and teach a subject as an optional issue at school. However,
in this case, what becomes intriguing is the question: what kind of
manual will be used while teaching this particular subject?
The previous Georgian administration appeared to go through great
pains to remove Armenian written history manuals in schools in
Georgia. The explanation is very simple; in the Armenian written
manuals the historical events sometimes are interpreted and stated
in a very different form compared to the manuals written by Georgian
authors. Georgians by the way, translated Georgian written history
books into the Armenian language, recommending teaching regional
history according these manuals. For example, some Armenian written
history books declared that Javakheti is historically Armenian-owned
land. They claim that this territory was seized by Georgia in 1918.
Therefore it launched a war with Armenia. Georgian written books
however, state that the war in 1918 was initiated by the Armenian
side, and that Armenia aggressively tried to occupy Georgina owned
territory. It is worth mentioning here, that the ethnic Armenian local
population never participated in any kind of military hostilities
during those periods, neither did they later.
Some Georgian analysts believe that the introduction of Armenian
history manuals in Georgian- Armenian language schools will hinder the
integration of ethnic Armenian Georgians into Georgian civil society.
Furthermore, it can stimulate the development of separatist
tendencies. Of course, neither of the sides will benefit from such
possible conflicts and both parties will have serious problems.
Furthermore, an increase in such studies will trigger similar
claims from the Azeri population in Georgia. Occasionally there are
territorial claims from the Azeri side as well, against Georgia-
for example the David Gareji Monastery complex.
Some analysts also believe that such a distinct division between the
ethnically different Georgian populations could facilitate growing
antagonism between the Azeri and Armenian ethic population within
the country. Of course this is not in the interests of ether of the
nations, neither Armenians nor Azeri, and of course not in Georgia's
interest either.
It would have been ideal if the historians of all three countries
could sit together and by interpreting different facts, find a common
solution. At least the history books should not contribute to hostility
and ethnic intolerance. Certainly it is very difficult to achieve
such an ideal situation, so the current Georgian administration and
the Ministry of Education in particular, should pay extra attention
to this issue, so that this does not become a greater aggravation.