Nino Japaridze - Eng

Document Sample
Nino Japaridze - Eng Powered By Docstoc
					   Studying main terms for interrelationship, formation of civil position and
 integration in public life of Georgian, Azerbaijani and Armenian youth living
                                            in Georgia.

 Last period conflicts in Caucasus at first sight, is ethnic. Multi-nationality, which was cultural
characteristics of Georgia, turned out to be the most problematic for contemporary Georgia.
Though part of experts considers that reasons of conflict in Caucasus are not only ethnic. In their
view conflicts are caused mainly by the will of governing forces and claim on territories.
Georgia is resided by compactly settled Armenians and Azeris with different nations. Taking into
account interests and demands of this and other representatives of different nations, their social
and cultural adaptation and integration in Georgian public so that their national conscience,
language and cultural characteristic should be defended is significant for home policy of Georgia.
It is known in social psychology that estrangement among social groups, among ethnic groups
also, premises foe arousing prejudices and stereotypes among representatives of this groups which
in its turn may come the reason of contradiction.
Furthermore these factors are intensified by economic conditions. It is known that one of the
important factors, which cause formation of conflict, is the absence of communication among
sides or distorting information. Thus at the time of elimination of ethnic stereotype and prejudices,
which determine so called inter group non-acceptance spread of perfect dialogue among
representatives of different ethnic groups should be based on central and knot moments, which are
common and comprehensive for all participants involved.
The same time selecting youth as an object of empiric research is not incidental and on the one
hand is due to the fact that young people (adolescents 14-16 and 16-22) are more sensitive to extra
factors and on the second hand main human value orientations, priority system and fixed
dispositions according to all social aspect of life are forming exactly in this period.
The aim of our research is to study relationship of Georgian, Armenian and Azerbaijani
young people living in Georgia and also, to reveal factors which hamper their collaboration
and setting the same goals.
Come out of the aim the tasks of our research are:
   1. Definition of acceptable and non-acceptable ethnic groups for representatives of Azeris,
       Armenian and Georgian.
   2. Research of attitudes toward each other and different nations and states (Armenia, Georgia
       and Azerbaijan)
   3. Determination of attitude of representatives of Azerbaijani, Armenian and Georgian
       toward religion.
   4. Determination of attitude of representatives of Azerbaijani, Armenian and Georgian
       toward mass media.
   5. Research of attitude representatives of Azerbaijani, Armenian and Georgian toward
       interstate social institutions.
   6. Estimation of vote and inter political situation by representatives of Azerbaijani, Armenian
       and Georgian.
   7. Research of confidence of representatives of Azerbaijani, Armenian and Georgian in
       international organization and estimation effectiveness of their work.
   8. Study of interrelationship and value orientation of representatives of Azerbaijani,
       Armenian and Georgian young people living in Georgia.


Implementation of project takes into account the following stages:
   1. Theoretic analysis of inter-group relation and revealing main facts, which hinder peaceful
       coexistence.
   2. Analysis of performed research, which includes results of sociologic research received
       from CRRC. The research was performed in three regions Georgia, Armenia and
       Azerbaijan.
Analysis includes results of research performed in Georgia with youth of Azerbaijani, Armenian
and Georgian within the frame of H. Boell foundation. The research was performed in June-
September 2004. Analysis of data of CRRC research was added to analysis of research performed
in Georgia, where relationship of Armenian, Azerbaijani band Georgian respondents‟ towards self
and other nations are discussed. Dichotomy of „Others‟ and “Ours‟ within the aspect of ethnic
relationship. Summarizing of both data enables to determine role of ethnic and religious factors
within relationship of nations and conflict formation. Due to that research was performed only
with young people living in Georgia and the same time there was less number of respondents than
in CRRC, data should not be compared but research performed in Georgia will be included as
psychological conclusions in the main analysis. 265 respondents of both sexes were interviewed.
The age ranged from 14 to 22 in three independent selections taking into account ethnic groups.
The research was performed in Tbilisi, Akhaltsikhe, Akhalkalaki (Samtskhe-Djavakheti region,
which are settled compactly by Armenians considered to be the potential center of tension);
Dmanisi and Marneuli (Kvemo Kartli –This region are compactly settled by Azerbaijanians);
Telavi and Gori (Mainly Georgians). Representatives of three nations were interviewed. From
total selection Georgians were 38.8%, Armenians – 32.3%, Azeris – 29.5%. Mainly pupil and
students were interviewed.
Data was worked out by SPSS statistic program.
On the base of received main conclusions model of inter-group communication was launched and
approbated. It should be mentioned that it gave a good chance to conduct training groups after
qualitative research in summer school – camp that was organized by World Vision and Caucasus
House. Participants were from regions, which are settled compactly by Azeris and Armenians.
Their age ranges from 14 to 22. There was an attempt to keep balance of gender. According to
ethnicity participants were Georgians, Armenian, Azerbaijani, Russian, Jewish and Ukrainian
Focus - groups were performed in summer school-camp in July and September 2005. Retrieved
information and results enables to make deep analysis and prepare materials for training groups.
11 focus groups were conducted. Each focus group included ten participants. Primary eight
groups: two composed of respondents from Marneuli; 2 – Bolnisi; 2 – Akhaltsikhe and 1–
Ninotsminda and one from Akhalkhalaki. Tree groups were mixture: for instance Akhaltsikhe,
Bolnisi, Marneuli, or Marneuli-Akhalkalaki. As it was mentioned in parallel to the research was
performing training groups for mastering following skills: effective communication, assertive
behavior, leader and creative skills and guidance for conflict situation and resolution skills. There
were used elements of socio-dram and all those were directed to formulating tolerance as value.

   The analysis was prepared on two stages. Stage I – analysis of existent results and stage II-
   analysis of received materials from focus groups.

   Methodology of project is based on the following theoretic concepts and principles:

   1. 1. E. Cornell, A study of ethno-political conflict in the Caucasus, 2001
   2. H. Tedjfel, The theory of inter-group relation and social identity
   3. Sh. Nadirashvili, The theory of social identity
   4. Soldatova, Ethno-psychological attitude towards identification
   5. A. Zdravomislov, Theoretical principles of conflict sociology
   6. E. Moreno, Theoretical principles of sociometrics and socio-dram
Following materials are also used:
French journal „Ethno – nationalism in Western Europe‟
Domenic Kolla. Political sociology
Construction of Ethnicity /Edited by V. Voronkov/
Ethnic and religious intolerance in Media of Russia


                  Methods of research and procedure of conducting research
1. Bogardus modified version of social distance research method. The method researches other
nations‟ quality of acceptability, which is united according to ethnicity, culture and other sign.
Existence of more accepted and estranged members in a group (almost the same function has
Moreno psychometric tests. This method was used to research big social group.
2. Method of semantic deferential. This is a scale where specially selected antonyms – attributes
are set out polar, the context of them displays affective, cognitive and behavioral contents.
By the method of semantic deferential one should determine sympathy antipathy criterion and
quality and reveal inter-group and among groups stereotypes of attitude.


3. The method of social disposition formulated by Georgian psychologists under the guidance of
Sh. Nadirashvili. The method researches the role of social disposition and determine acceptability
zone among relationship of ethnic groups.


4. Block of questionnaires to reveal more spread ethnic stereotypes and ideological orientation.
This block also includes different attributes concerning ethnicity.


5. Focus groups will be based on principles of Belanovski focus group and Moreno socio-dram
methods.
                                        Analysis of data
The questionnaire consists of the following blocks:
      A Household general characteristic that includes number of people living in household
       (above 18), sex, birth date and education of as respondents as other members of family.
       Selection was made in accordance with Kirsch Table Method.
      D Demographic part
      E Education
      M Migration
      H Health
      P Political activity/views
      S Social Institutions
      R Crime
      C Economic Behaviour
In this work emphasis is placed on political activity/views and social institutions, nevertheless
there are data from other blocks.
Data was worked out by SPSS statistic program.
4461 respondents were interviewed in whole Caucasus. Percentage distribution for each region is
the following:
                       Geo


                       Azer


                 Armen


                             32,6            32,8           33               33,2         33,4         33,6            33,8




            It is noteworthy that the research was performed in capitals of regions: Tbilisi, Baku and Erevan.
            Here regions imply Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia and means that only capitals‟ population
            was interviewed.
            Explanation of demographic data starts with description of family.
            Average numbers of family members of respondent were four for each region.
            The first and the second members are the most frequent among interviewees of three regions. That
            means that heads of family, masculine and the second member of the family, feminine are
            interviewed mainly. In the first case the age ranges from 53 (Azerbaijan) to 57 (Armenia and
            Georgia) and in the second – from 44 (Azerbaijan) to 48 (Armenia and Georgia).


                       The number of respondent                                         The number of respondent                              The number of respondent

                       REGION:         1 1. Armenia                                     REGION:       2 2. Azerbaijan                         REGION:         3 3. Georgia
                                                                                                                                        700
                 700                                                            700


                 600                                                            600                                                     600


                 500                                                            500                                                     500


                 400                                                            400                                                     400


                 300                                                            300                                                     300


                 200                                                            200                                                     200
                                                                                                                            Frequency
Frequency




                                                                 Frequency




                 100                                                            100                                                     100

                  0                                                                 0                                                    0
                         1    2    3     4    5     6   7    8                            1   2   3    4   5   6   7    9   11                  1    2    3     4   5    6   7   8


                       The number of respondent                                         The number of respondent                              The number of respondent




            According to family status more than half of interviewee (55%) are married and live with
            husband/wife. According to regions 53.3% from Armenia, 57.4% –Azerbaijan, 56%–Georgia.
            Some of them have never been married Armenian – 21.3% Azerbaijanian – 22.2% Georgian -
            20%. Less percentage has widowers/widows - Armenian – 15.6%, Azerbaijani – 13.4%, Georgian
            – 12.4%.
            From a viewpoint of ethnicity within the whole region the following range is revealed:


               1. Armenian
               2. Azerbaijani
               3. Georgian
   4. Russian
   5. Leszgian, Ossetian, Yezidi
   6. Jewish
   7. Abkhazian, Assyrian, Greek, Kurdish, Talish
   8. Turkish, Belarusian, Tatar
   9. Chechen, Dargin, Laki, Mariyka, Gypsy
According to regions respondents are distributed by ethnic identify as following:


Region          Armenia           Azerbaijan             Georgia

Ethnicity       Armenian          Azerbaijani 90.7%      Georgian 86.4%
                                  Russian 6%             Armenian 6.3%
                96.7%
                                  Lezgin 1.2%            Russian 2.2%
                Russian 1.3%
                                  Talish 0.5%            Ossetian 1.2%
                Assyrian 0.6%
                                  Jewish 0.3%            Yezidi 1.2%
                Abkhazian 0.3%
                                  Kurdish 0.3%           Azerbaijani 0.6%
                Yezidi 0.1%
                                  Turkish 0.3%           Greek 0.5%
                Belarusian 0.1%
                                  Tatar 0.3%             Jewish 0.5%
                Other 0.8%
                                  Chechen                Kurdish 0.3%
                                  Dargin                 Tatar 0.3%
                                  Belarusian      0.1%   Abkhazian
                                  Lezgian                Assyrian
                                  Mariyka                Belarusian         0.1%
                                  Gypsy                  Lezgian
                                                         Mariyka
                                                         Refuse to answer



            From the table is evident that Georgia particularly Tbilisi is more multinational
             than Baku and Erevan. It should be mentioned that Baku population is
             characterized as multinational.




About language spoken in family majority of respondents noted:


              1. Armenian
              2. Azeri
              3. Georgian
              4. Russian
Region          Armenia            Azerbaijan              Georgia
Language        Armenain92.3%     Azerbaijani 91.8%        Georgian 87.5%
                Russian 6.6       Russian 7.6              Russian 5.2%
                Abkhazian         Lezgish, Talish          Armenian
                Assyrian          Turkish                  Kurds
                Other                                      Azerbaijani
                                                           Belarusian
                                                           Abkhazian
                                                           Assyrian
                                                           Ossetian
                                                           Turkish

            As it seems from the table attitude towards language is more liberal in Tbilisi than in
             two regions:
Majority of interviewees refuse using of second language. According to regions from Armenia -
68,2%, Azerbaijan - 76%, Georgia - 79,4%. Among them who use second language majority
mentioned (79-79%-Armenia and Azerbaijan; 63%-Georgia) Russian. Beside mentioned
languages there are noted: Hebrew, Yezidi, Tatar, English, Lezgish, Portuguese and German. It is
remarkable that almost all above enumerated languages, also European is indicated in case of
Tbilisi. Beside Georgia English was indicated as a second language by respondents from
Azerbaijan.
While defining citizenship 99.7% of interviewed respondents confirmed their citizenship. 98.9%
of respondents from Baku indicated that they are citizens of Azerbaijan, rest of them - Turkey
(0.7%); Russia (0,3%); Georgia (0,1%).
Concerning Erevan 97.3% indicated citizenship of Armenia. Rest of them mentioned –Russia,
Georgia, Karabakh, Iran, Serb, and USA.
From the viewpoint of employment frequency distribution forms the following picture - according
to more evident percentage indicator of regions.
Region           Armenia                              Azerbaijan                       Georgia

Employment Pensioner, including disabled (24%)        Employee in state organization   Unemployed and looking for
                 Employee in state organization       (23.3%)                          (26.7%)
                 (18.8%)                              Unemployed and looking for       Employee in state organization
                 Unemployed and looking for work      work (18.3%)                     (20.4%)
                 (17.7%)                              Pensioner, including disabled    Pensioner, including disabled
                 Employee in private organization     (16.5%)                          (17.7%)
                 (13.9%)                              Not employed and not looking     Employee in private
                 Not employed and not looking for     for work (15.2%)                 organization (11,9%)
                 work (12.5%)                                                          Not employed and not looking
                                                                                       work (10.8%)
  There are also presented responses: self-employed, without hired workers, employer, and student.
  In case of Azerbaijan – housewife, preparing for army, post-graduate student and being on
  maternity leave. Maternity leave is named as reason of unemployment in case of Georgia.
  Concerning Armenia there is not mentioned any separate answer (other than indicated in closed
  questions).


               Almost third of interviewed note that could not find the job and that is the reason of
                unemployment. From this viewpoint on the second place is Baku and third - Erevan. In
                Baku according to range on the first place are employees in state organization in
                Tbilisi and Erevan – second place. Incase of Erevan first place takes pensioner,
                including disabled.


  While naming reasons of unemployment question is missed by 70.2% from Armenia, 77.8%-
  Azerbaijan, and 62.4%-Georgia. Respondents who answer this question name the following
  reasons:


Region        Armenia                                Azerbaijan                             Georgia

Reason        Cannot find a job/there is no job at   Family reason 39.1%                    Cannot find a job/there is no job at
              all 36.6%                              Cannot find a job with appropriate     all 52.5%
for not
              Family reason 26.2%                    remuneration 23.3%                     Family reason 22%
working
              Cannot find a job with appropriate     Cannot find a job/there is no job at   Cannot find a job with appropriate
              remuneration 21.5%                     all 12.7%                              remuneration 17.7%



               As it was anticipated majority of interviewees (52.5%) who explained reasons of
                unemployment mentioned that they could not get a job. With the same range, but less
                percentage this reason is named in Erevan. In case of Baku this reason has less
                importance and is on the third place by range.


  Registration in the appropriate organs of employment in case of unemployment was given
  negative answer by 85.2% from Armenia (71.5%-missed), 88.6%-Azerbaijan (78.8%-missed),
  95.5% - Georgia (62.4%-missed)


  Majority of respondents (92.5%) from three regions do not answer probability of finding job and
  those who answer this question majority of them (68.6%) think that they would find a job
  according to their specialty.
While defining the most important factors necessary for getting a good job given factors were
distributed as following:


Region           Armenia             Azerbaijan                        Georgia

Factors for Connections              Money                             Connections

getting       a Money                Connections                       Education
                 Education           Education                         Professional abilities, talent
good job
                 Hard work           Professional abilities, talent    Money



             It is remarkable that respondents from three of region attach great importance to
              connections. This factor has primary meaning for interviewees from Tbilisi and Erevan
              and has no less importance in case of Baku (range II). Money is also significant factor
              in case of Baku (I place) and Erevan (II place). Respondents from Tbilisi attach less
              importance to money after education and talent and professional abilities. This
              indicates that there are significant changes in the system of education and employment
              in Georgia particularly in Tbilisi. Concerning Baku and Erevan education takes III
              place.


One of the factors for getting a good job was named – being young, woman, presence of will
(Armenia); achievements in political party, knowledge gained abroad, nationality (Georgian),
knowledge of computer and English (Azerbaijan) and so on.

Research of attitudes towards different groups gives the following picture according to regions:



Different groups             Armenia                Azerbaijan               Georgia
                             Yes    No     DK        Yes       No     DK      Yes      No      DK

1 AIDS diseased              24     59.8 16.2        8.9      77.3    13.8   49.6     39.7      It is
2 Drug addict                8.9    82.3    8.8      6.5      85.9    7.9      39     54.1      6.9
3 Homosexual                 11.8   77.3 10.9        4.9      86.7    8.3    29.2     63.5      7.3
4 Tubercular                 18     65.6 16.4       10.2      80.4    9.4    51.4     38.9      9.7
    patient
5 Chronical                  17.6   72.7    9.7      8.3      82.9    8.7    30.2       62      7.8
   drunkard
In the section what type of relations (Friendship, neighborhood, and cooperation) they agree to
have with above mentioned groups are calculated total positive, negative responses and
unanswered questions together and not separately according to categories - I do not mind to
become a neighbor of, to become a friend with and so on to reveal general tendencies. This
implies relationship. All respondents missed category living with


      It is noteworthy that the most tolerant were respondents of Tbilisi because majority of
       them (compare with other regions) agreed to have relation with others. In a viewpoint of
       acceptability respondents from Erevan have less acceptance than from Tbilisi. Azeris
       appeared to be less tolerant towards different groups.
      Respondents from Tbilisi have acceptability towards tubercular patient. Not the less
       tolerance was demonstrated towards AIDS diseased and drug addict. On the forth place by
       range is chronical drunkard and last is homosexual though acceptability towards this group
       demonstrated 1/3 of interviewees.
      Respondents from Erevan demonstrate acceptability towards different groups as following:


       1) AIDS diseased
       2) Tubercular patient
       3) Chronical drunkard
       4) Homosexual
       5) Drug addict
       As it was mentioned majority of respondents from Baku had negative attitude towards
       almost all groups. Though from a viewpoint of acceptability there is a slight range.
       1) Tubercular patient
       2) AIDS diseased
       3) Chronical drunkard
       4) Drug addict
       5) Homosexual


Herein is noted results of research carried out in Georgia where principles among other indicators
are formulated though is displayed attitudes of young people towards sexual minority:
          In opinion majority of respondents their friends and relatives regard „others‟ persons
           who are atypical, different from them and environment that affect negatively on their
           group.


Unacceptable groups are:
    -   Representative of sexual minority
    -   People belonging to different religious confession
    -   People expressing different views and opinions
   Sexual minority are most unacceptable for Azeris and Armenians; people
    belonging to different religious confession are unacceptable for interviewees from
    Georgia and Armenia
   People to belonging different religious confession are unacceptable for respondents
    from region
   Less irritation is expressed towards people and representatives of social groups,
    who cannot affect on their group significantly. In respondents opinion they are
    people with different mental capacity, from regions, different nationality, and
    social status.
   Economic factor is almost ignored by respondents. In their opinion it is criterion of
    differentiation.
   1/6 of respondents refuse existence of social groups, which are unacceptable
    according to any sign for their group. This position is shared by significant part of
    respondents from Tbilisi.
   Some cases of unacceptability of city-dwellers or other group were displayed.
   Interviewees of both sex displayed equal high quality of unacceptability of people
    belonging to different religious confession. The same time they have absolutely
    neutral attitude towards representatives of different nations, that was characteristic
    in case of Georgian respondents
   Majority of male respondents display unacceptable to sexual minority. Female
    interviewees demonstrate less unacceptability. Though they give more negative
    estimate to people expressing different views and opinions than male respondents
    who have neutral attitude towards them.


 The result is paradoxical respondents do not mind to relate to persons with
    contagious disease and generally, ill person. Especially when it concerns to
    cooperation, neighbourship and friendship and avoid relating with
    homosexuals who are not dangerous for health. Actually for Caucasians social
    norms is acceptable. Compare with them health and welfare have secondary
    meaning
            While discussing at which extent respondents are interested in politics the following picture was
            revealed:

                             At which extent are you interested in politics?
                                                                                                            At which extent are you interested in politics?which extent are you interested in politics?
                                                                                                                                                        At
                             REGION:             1 1. Armenia
                       500
                                                                                                            REGION:             2 2. Azerbaijan                                                   REGION:                3 3. Georgia
                                                                                                      600                                                                                800
                       400
                                                                                                      500

                       300                                                                            400                                                                                600

                                                                                                      300
                       200
Frequency




                                                                              Frequency
                                                                                                      200                                                                                400
                       100
                                          Ve




                                                                 No




                                                                                                      100
                                                                   No




                                                                                                                         Ve
                                            ry




                                                                                                                                                   N



                                                                                                                                                                 N
                                                                   tv



                                                                     ta




                                                                                                                           ry




                                                                                                                                                    ot




                                                                                                                                                                      Frequency
                                             m




                                                                                                                                                             ot
                        0
                                                                       er
                                              So h




                                                                       t a DK
                                              uc




                                                                                                                                                       v
                                                                                                                            m




                                                                                                                                                                at
                                                                                                       0                                                                                 200




                                                                                                                                                       er
                                                                          yi




                                                                                                                             So h
                                                                                                                             uc
                                                m in




                                                                           ll i




                                                                                                                                                                   al
                                                                                                                                                          y



                                                                                                                                                                   Rl
                                                                             nt




                                                                                                                               m in
                                                   ewe




                                                                               nt




                                                                                                                                                                     in



                                                                                                                                                                      eifn
                                                                                er




                                                                                                                                  ewe
                                                    t




                                                                                 er




                                                                                                                                                                         te



                                                                                                                                                                         uts
                                                      hra s




                                                                                   es




                                                                                                                                   t




                                                                                                                                                                           er
                                                                                                                                                                           re
                                                                                    es
                                                        e




                                                                                                                                     hra s




                                                                                                                                                                             ees
                                                         t ted




                                                                                     te




                                                                                                                                       e




                                                                                                                                                                              st
                                                                                       te




                                                                                                                                        t te
                                                                                        d




                                                                                                                                                                                ed



                                                                                                                                                                                 te
                                                                                                                                                                                              0




                                                                                                                                            d
                                                                                                                                                                                                  Very much interested      Not very interested
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Somew hat              Not at all intereste


                             At which extent are you interested in politics?                                At which extent are you interested in politics?                                       At which extent are you interested in politics?




            Region                          Armenia                                                                             Azerbaijan                                                                  Georgia

            Interested in                   Very much interested 21%                                                            Very much interested 9.5%                                                   Very much interested 22.4%
            politics                        Somewhat interested 30%                                                             Somewhat interested 22.1%                                                   Somewhat interested 51.4%
                                            Not very much interested 25.3%                                                      Not very much interested                                                    Not very much interested 12.4%
                                            23.7%                                                                               30.4%                                                                       Not at all interested 13.9%
                                                                                                                                Not at all interested 37.9%



            Discussion of politics
            Region                          Armenia                                                          Azerbaijan                                                           Georgia

            Discussion of                   Very often 13.4%                                                 Very often 6.7%                                                      Very often 18.8%
            politics                        Rather often 24.5%                                               12.8%                                                                Rather often 27.6%
                                            Rarely 41.7%                                                     37.1%                                                                Rarely 45%
                                            Never 20.3                                                       Never 43.3%                                                          Never 8.7%




                                                                                                                                                                             How often do you discuss politics?
               How often do you discuss politics?                                           How often do you discuss politics?
                                                                                                                                                                                    REGION:            3 3. Georgia
                             REGION:         1 1. Armenia                                             REGION:          2 2. Azerbaijan

              Missing
                                                                                            Refus e                                                                      Never
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Very often
              DK                                                                            Nev er
                                                                                                                                                Very often
                                                                        Very often
              Never
                                                                                                                                            Rather often




                                                                    Rather often
                                                                                                                                                                         Rarely
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Rather often



                                                                                                                                                   Rarely
              Rarely
             The most politicized appeared to be respondents from Tbilisi, the most apolitical –
              interviewees from Baku. Interviewees from Erevan equal in being interested in politic
              as not interested. Accordingly Tbilisi‟ respondents discuss politics most frequently and
              interviewees from Baku – most seldom. It is possible that was due to existence of
              unchangeable leader.
The main sources for respondents to get information about politics news are:
                        1. Television
                        2. Radio
                        3. Newspaper


Less informative are considered:
                        4. Internet
                        5. Family members
                        6. Neighbors, friends
                        7. Workplace, colleagues
It appeared that majority of respondents (64. 4%) from three regions voted in last parliamentary
elections.
Region           Armenia                 Azerbaijan                   Georgia

Voting in        Yes 69.8%               Yes 53.2%                    Yes 70.1%
parliamentary    No 29.8%                No 45.7%                     No 29.8%
elections        Refuse to answer 0.3%   Refuse to answer 1.1%        Refuse to answer 0.1%
Rest of the respondents named reasons not voting in elections as following
Region           Armenia                 Azerbaijan                      Georgia

Reasons not      Useless                 Not interested in politics      Was not in the city/village
voting in        Was ill                 Do not know                     Was ill
elections        Was not a citizen       Family reasons                  Was at work
                 Didn‟t have time        Didn‟t have a passport          Family reasons
                 Was not registered      Was not a citizen               Was not a citizen
                 Was not in the list     Do no t remember                Didn‟t have time
                                         Didn‟t like any of the          Was not in the list
                                         candidates                      Due to religious confession
                                         Didn‟t have time                Guaranteed results was
                                                                         anticipated
                                                                         Was not in the territory of
                                                                         registration
                                                                         Was not in the list
                                                                         Due to procedure of marking
            There are responses such as: didn‟t like any of the candidates; was not in adult age; as a protest as
            protest
                                    As it seems respondent from Tbilisi take first place from the viewpoint of declaring
                                     civil or politic position.
            Concerning voting in last parliamentary elections 77.7% of interviewees from whole South
            Caucasus voted. Results are contrary according to regions.
            Region                            Armenia                                                      Azerbaijan                                  Georgia

            Voting in                         Yes 77.1%                                                    Yes 81.5%                                   Yes74.4%
            presidential                      No 22.7%                                                     No 18.4%                                    No25.5%
            elections                         Refuse to answer 0.2%                                        Refuse to answer 0.1%                       Refuse to answer 0.1%



            Almost the same reasons were named as in case of parliamentary elections.
                          In a view of participation in presidential elections president according to percentage
                           indicators (81.5%) respondents from Baku take first place and interviewees from Tbilisi
                           take last place conditionally.


            Participating in any kind of public politic activities during last 12 months; for example political
            demonstration, meeting, signing a petition and so on.
            Region                              Armenia                                                             Azerbaijan                                            Georgia

            Participation                       Yes, only once 3%                                                   Yes, only once 2.8%                                   Yes, only once 6.7%
            in public                           3.9%                                                                Yes, several times 1.3%                               Yes, several times 16%
            activity                            No 92.9%                                                            No 94.4%                                              No 76.5%
                                                Refuse to answer 0.1                                                Refuse to answer 1.2%                                 Refuse to answer 0.8%



                          Tbilisi‟ respondents are more involved in public politic activities than different regions of
                           South Caucasus.
            In respondents‟ opinion things in their country are moving


                                                                                                                     In your opinion, are
                      In your opinion, are things in our country movingIn your opinion, are things in our country moving in the right directiothings in our country moving
                                                                        in the right directio

                      REGION:            1 1. Armenia                                                 REGION:           2 2. Azerbaijan                            REGION:            3 3. Georgia
                                                                                                                                                             700
                400                                                                             600
                                                                                                                                                             600
                                                                                                500
                300                                                                                                                                          500
                                                                                                400
                                                                                                                                                             400
                200                                                                             300                                                          300
                                                                                                                                           Frequency
                                                                        Frequency




                                                                                                200                                                          200
Frequency




                100
                                                                                                                                                                             Th




                                                                                                                                                                             Th
                                                                                                                                                                             Th




                                                                                                                                                                             Th ar K




                                                                                                                                                             100
                                                                                                                                                                               D a
                                                                                                                                                                                in




                                                                                                                                                                                in




                                                                                                                                                                                R




                                                                                                100
                                                                                                                                                                                 in




                                                                                                                                                                                 in e m
                                                                                                               Th




                                                                                                               Th
                                 Th




                                 Th




                                                                                                                                                                                  o r
                                                                                                               Th




                                                                                                               T h are K
                                 Th




                                 Th a r e K




                                                                                                                                                                                   ef
                                                                                                                                                                                   gs




                                                                                                                                                                                   gs
                                                                                                                                                                                    gs




                                                                                                                                                                                    gs
                                                                                                                 Do a




                                                                                                                                                                                     no e




                                                                                                                                                               0
                                   Do s a




                                   Re




                                                                                                                 in




                                                                                                                 in




                                                                                                                 Re
                                    in g




                                    in g




                                                                                                                                                                                      us
                                                                                                                  in




                                                                                                                  in
                                     in g




                                     in g




                                                                                                                    gs




                                                                                                                    gs




                                                                                                                                                                                       ar




                                                                                                                                                                                       ar ovi n
                                                                                                                     gs




                                                                                                                     gs




                                                                                                                                                                                        t mmo
                                        fu




                                                                                                                                                                                        e




                  0
                                                                                                                     n o re m




                                                                                                                      fu




                                                                                                 0
                                         s
                                         n or e m
                                          sa




                                          s a ov i




                                                                                                                                                                                          e




                                                                                                                                                                                          e


                                                                                                                                                                                           to
                                           se




                                                                                                                         se
                                                                                                                         ar




                                                                                                                         ar
                                                                                                                          t m ov




                                                                                                                                                                                            ov n
                                            tm o




                                                                                                                                                                                            D
                                                                                                                                                                                             m




                                                                                                                                                                                             m gm
                                             re




                                             re



                                               to




                                                                                                                            e




                                                                                                                            e




                                                                                                                                                                                              an
                                                                                                                             to




                                                                                                                                                                                               ov




                                                                                                                                                                                               ov
                                                                                                                                                                                               e gm
                                                m
                                                D




                                                                                                                              o v i ng

                                                                                                                              D
                                                o v v in




                                                                                                                              m




                                                                                                                                                                                                vi
                                                 mo




                                                 mo




                                                                                                                               m




                                                                                                                               m
                                                  an




                                                                                                                                                                                                 sw
                                                                                                                                an




                                                                                                                                                                                                  at a
                                                                                                                                                                                                  in




                                                                                                                                                                                                  in
                                                                                                                                ov
                                                                                                                                 ov




                                                                                                                                 ov
                                                                                                                                 e m
                                                    e ag m
                                                     v in




                                                     v in a




                                                                                                                                                                                                     g




                                                                                                                                                                                                     g
                                                      sw




                                                                                                                                                                                                     al




                                                                                                                                                                                                     er
                                                                                                                                   in




                                                                                                                                   sw
                                                                                                                                   at a
                                                       ng




                                                                                                                                    in




                                                                                                                                    in




                                                                                                                                                                                                       in




                                                                                                                                                                                                       in
                                                        ta a




                                                                                                                                                                                                        l
                                                                                                                                     g
                                                          gi




                                                          gi


                                                          er




                                                                                                                                      g




                                                                                                                                      g
                                                                                                                                      al




                                                                                                                                       er




                                                                                                                                                                                                          a
                                                           m
                                                           ll




                                                                                                                                        m
                                                                                                                                        in




                                                                                                                                        in
                                                             n




                                                             n




                                                                                                                                        l



                                                                                                                                          a




                      In your opinion, are things in our country moving in the right directio
                                                                                                                                                                          In
                                                                                                      In your opinion, are things in our country moving in the right directio y our opinion, are things in our country mov ing in the right d
             Accordingly respondents from Tbilisi are more satisfied. In their view things in
              country are moving to the right direction. This opinion is shared partially by
              respondents from Baku. Concerning interviewees from Erevan their opinions are
              distributed equally among positive, neutral and negative evaluation.


Issues that are important for the country are attached equal importance by respondents with slight
range.
Region              Armenia                                Azerbaijan                           Georgia

Importance of       Social issues                           Economic issues                     Equally
issues              Economic issues                         Social issues and democracy
                    International issues and               building
                    democracy building                     International issues




Which of the following goals do you consider most important
Goals        Armenia                                     Azerbaijan                Georgia
                    Reduction of poverty and             Restoration territorial   Reduction of poverty
                           unemployment                  integrity of the
                                                         country
                           Increase income               Reduction of poverty                Reduce unemployment
                           Fight corruption                      Reduce             Restoration territorial integrity of the
                                                             unemployment                           country
                        Reduce inequality                Return refugees and                   Increase income
                                                         IDPs to their homes
              Restoration territorial integrity of the   Increase income                       Fight corruption
                               country
                      Reduce out-migration                  Fight corruption       Return refugees and IDPs to their
                                                                                   homes
             Increase access to health care              Strengthening military                  Reduce crime
                                                            capability of the
                                                                 country
                      Guarantee civil rights             Guarantee civil rights    Increase access to health care
                                                         and increase access to
                                                               health care
                  Guarantee political stability              Reduce crime          Strengthening military capability of the
                                                                                                    country
             Strengthening military capability of          Reduce inequality       Improve the environment and guarantee
             the country                                                           civil rights (freedom of speech, belief,
                                                                                   associations, etc) and rule of law.
                   Encourage re-migration            Guarantee political    Reduce inequality and guarantee
                                                             stability      political stability
                         Reduce crime                   Improve the                  Encourage re-migration
                                                        environment
                  Improve the environment           Reduce out-migration    Reduce out-migration and improvement
                                                                                      of interethnic relations
                            Other                      Encourage re-
                                                         migration
              Return refugees and IDPs to their       Improvement of
                            homes                   interethnic relations
             Improvement of interethnic relations




        Majority of respondents from Georgia and Armenia consider reduction of poverty and
         unemployment as the most important goals. These issues are important for interviewees
         from Azerbaijan after restoration of territorial integrity of the country. Respondents from
         three regions attach less importance to improvement of interethnic relations and
         encouraging re-migration (Azerbaijan, Georgia) and return of refugees and IDPs to their
         homes (Armenia). Maybe in respondents‟ opinion this issue is unsettled and any effort
         would be in vain.
According to regions respondents give advantage to cooperation with different countries as in
economic sphere as political sphere with the following range:
Region            Armenia                             Azerbaijan                          Georgia

                  Russia                              Russia                              Russia
                  USA                                 Turkey                              USA
                  European Union                      USA                                 European Union
                  Iran                                European Union                      Turkey
                  Turkey                              Iran                                Iran




            Respondents from tree regions give priority to cooperation with Russia. Also
             cooperation with USA and European Union is significant for respondents from
             Georgia and Armenia. Such magisterial country is Turkey for Azerbaijan. On the
             contrary Armenian‟ respondents evaluate neutrally or slight negatively the idea of
             cooperation with Turkey. The idea of Georgia‟s cooperation with Iran is evaluated
             quite negatively.
           Generally there was a will to cooperate with other countries. They are: Japan, Germany, Georgia,
           England, France, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Kazakhstan, Muslim Countries; all which support us Africa,
           Latin America, Pakistan, Egypt, Ukraine, CIS and so on.


           Attitudes towards cooperating with different Caucasus states are quite various: cooperation with
           Armenia in economic sphere was supported by 75.2% of respondents from Tbilisi. 95.3% of
           interviewees from Baku were fully against cooperating with Armenia. Concerning cooperation in
           political sphere there was the same picture. 73% of respondents from Tbilisi support cooperation
           with Armenia; 94.2 % from Baku are against. Cooperation with Azerbaijan in economic sphere
           are supported by 79.1 % of respondents from Tbilisi; significant parts of respondents from Erevan
           (47.9% 21.3% fully support and 26.6%) would cooperate with Azerbaijan in economic sphere
           Interviewees from Erevan 1/3 are against to cooperate with Azerbaijan in economic sphere.
           Concerning cooperation with Georgia as economic as in politic sphere (with slight percentage
           difference and sustaining the main picture) majority of interviewees from Erevan and Baku are
           fully supportive to cooperate with Georgia
           The most readiness of each region becoming a NATO member expresses Georgians: Majority of
           Tbilisi respondents (84.5%; fully supportive – 65.3% and rather supportive – 19.2%) support
           Georgia cooperation with NATO, and becoming a NATO member is supported by significant
           number of interviewees (83,7%; fully supportive - 66% and rather supportive – 17.7%) give
           positive estimate. Cooperation with NATO is also important for Azerbaijani respondents.
           Significant part of them (64.1%; fully supportive – 38.7 and rather supportive – 25.4%) supports
           Azerbaijan cooperation with NATO. Significant part of Baku respondents (62.1% from this
           34.3%) support Azerbaijan becoming a NATO member. Concerning Erevan respondents their
           opinion differs on the matter of NATO. Almost half of Erevan interviewees (49.1%; fully
           supportive – 25.2% and rather supportive – 23.9%) are agreed to cooperate with NATO. but the
           number of respondents who is supportive Armenia becoming a NATO member lessens (37.1%;
           fully supportive – 19.9 and rather supportive –17.2%)and grows who is against (27.7%).


           Respondents were quite tolerant while estimating different ethnic groups though there was a range
                          Armenia                         Azerbaijan                        Georgia
Group                     Positive   Neutral   Negative   Positive     Neutral   Negative   Positive   Neutral   Negative
1. Abkhazian              39.6       9.5       39.5       -            -         -          51.8       1.0.5     36.7
2. Armenian               96.5       0.9       1.9        -            -         -          53.6       8.6       37.4
3.Assyrian                49.6       7         35.1       -            -         -          46.2       6         39.1
4.Azernaijani             20.6       53.4      23.2       98.7         0.4       0.6        53.9       5.6       39.1
5. Georgian               50.7       19.5      27.5       -            -         -          94.6       0.5       4.6
6. Greek                  66.9       3.3       24.7       -            -         -          65.6       2.9       30.6
8. Iranian (66.4)                     45.2   20.5       30.1     -           -     -      -      -     -
9. Jewish (100)                       41.6   19.4       32.2     42.4        7     45.7   61.4   4.6   32.7
11. Kurdish                           35.1   20.5       38.8     -           -     -      51     8.7   38.7
12. Lezgian (66.4)                    26.3   10.3       38.4     -           -     -      -      -     -
13. Ossetian                          27.7   9.7        37.7     -           -     -      51.4   8.4   38.2
14. Russian (100)                     92.5   1.7        5.3      57.9        6.9   33.6   64.7   3.9   30.6
15. Talish (66.4)                     21.7   12.9       34.3     -           -     -      -      -     -
16. Turkish (66.4)                    16.4   63.5       17       -           -     -      -      -     -
17. Yezidi                            57.9   8.8        30.4     -           -     -      49.7   6.7   39.9



        As it was anticipated respondents from three regions give most positive estimate to the self-nation.
        In case of Armenian respondents estimate positively Russians. According to received picture the
        following range was revealed:
          Region             Armenia          Azerbaijan       Georgia

                             Armenian         Azerbaijani      Georgian
                             Russian          Russian          Greek
                             Greek            Jewish           Russian
                             Yezidi                            Jewish
                             Georgian                          Armenian
                             Iranian                           Azerbaijani
             Ethnic groups




                             Assirian                          Abkhazian
                             Jewish                            Ossetian
                             Abkhazian                         Kurdish
                             Turkish                           Yezidi
                             Azerbaijani                       Assyrian
                             Kurdish
                             Ossetian
                             Lezgian
                             Talish



          The research performed in Georgia, which aimed to reveal youth attitude towards other nations
          were conducting slight differently. Particularly respondents should name nation they desired to be
          or not. Then they ought to evaluate whom they make friends, neighbor, get married and cooperate
          by modified method of Bogardus (the last and this part of CRRC questionnaire was conducted by
          the same methodology).
 It should be noted majority of respondents gives priority to identification with
   Georgians as privileged nation. Representativeness of any European Country is more
   acceptable for them than identification with Europeans or Americans generally.
   Representativeness of foreign country is associated with welfare. Some of respondents
   show a will of belonging certain confession. Male respondents give advantage to
   Christianity and Catholicism. Generally Respondents also desire to be Armenian or
   Russian. Herein should be mentioned that male interviewees show a will to be Italian
   and Spanish. Concerning female respondents American, Greece, and German are
   desirable for them.
 Being Russian is relevant for respondents from regions. Tbilisi respondents give
   advantage to being Italian.
 Georgians gives priority to Italian, French and American. They also mentioned –
   Christian. Majority of Azeris and Armenians do no care nationality. Though part of
   them is not willing to change nationality and the part desires to be Russian. Armenians
   show a will to be Catholic. There is not mentioned Jewish, German and Arabian.
 Georgians and Azeris do not desire to be identified with Armenian. Georgian and
   Armenian interviewees refuse to be Turkish, Muslims, Azerbaijani and Tatar. Identity
   with Negro is unacceptable for Azeris and Armenian. Refusal of Azeris being Svan
   from many answers is evident. Georgians deny to be identified with Ossetian. Though
   significant part of respondents indicates that nationality has no importance and there is
   no bad or good nation there are exist bad and good persons.
 The same picture, received in common selection, is revealed by analysis of data
   according to sex. Nevertheless there is certain difference: Female respondents refuse to
   be Azerbaijani or „Tzigani‟. For male interviewees are unacceptable Negro and
   African.
 Tbilisi respondents display neutral attitude towards identity with Moslem. Though
   display negative tendency towards being Chinese, Russian and Georgian. They refuse
   to be „Tzigani‟. Identity with Negro, Svan and Ossetian are unacceptable for
   respondents from region.
 Majority of respondents desire to get married with representatives of self-nation.
   Accordingly the first three places take three nations selected by us. The first place
   takes Georgians. Seldom is mentioned that nationality has no importance. (Mainly this
   idea is shared by Armenian and Azerbaijani respondents) because decisive is factor of
   intimacy. Georgians do not deny to get married with Europeans. Majority of
   interviewees are not willing to be married with Armenian (Georgian and Azerbaijani
   respondents) Azerbaijani (Georgian and Armenian respondents) Jewish and Russian.
     Concerning partner at rest respondents name first Georgian then Russians, Americans,
       Armenians and Azeris. Some respondents (particularly male respondents) give
       advantage to go on a voyage with Russian for entertaining. Fourth of interviewees
       mentioned that they do not care nationality when it concerns rest. Part of respondents
       name nations who they do not desire to go on a voyage, particularly Armenian
       (Georgian and Azerbaijani respondents), Azerbaijani (Georgian and Armenian
       respondents), Jewish, German and Russian. It is remarkable that mainly ambivalent
       attitude is expressed towards Russian. (However positive attitude towards Russian is
       expressed by male respondents)
     Perhaps friendship requires long time relationship majority of respondents, first give
       advantage to self-nation, however here is mentioned that nationality has no importance
       while choosing friends. Within this context priority is given to relation with Russians
       and Europeans. Responses of female and male respondents almost not differ from each
       other.
     According to data of common selection Georgians turn to be the most desirable and
       privileged. Priority is given to Americans and Germans too. Particularly female
       respondents who differ from male ones give advantage to the abovementioned nations
       over Armenians and Azeris. As in the abovementioned case majority of respondents
       note that in cooperation nationality has no importance- “Essential is presence of a
       work”
     Third of respondents do not care nationality in friendship and cooperation. In answers
       where are named undesirable nations for making friends and cooperating the first place
       take nations, which were indicated early most frequently in discussing forms of
       interpersonal relationship.


   It should be mentioned that respondents name nations other than noted in questionnaire.
    Though Bogardus method is frequently criticized due to its tendency In spite of this the
    abovementioned method gives a chance to reveal deep dispositions. On the contrary
    respondents did not mention nations, which were not noted in questionnaire and not
    indicated that nationality had no importance in certain form of interpersonal relationship.
Respondents assess their trust towards social institutions in the following order:
                      Armenia                               Azerbaijan                          Georgia
                      Army                                  President                           President
                      Religious institutions                Army                                Army
                      Educational system                    Media                               Media
                      Market economics (business)           Educational system                  Religious institutions
                      Media                                 Market economics (business)         Parliament
                      Health system                         Prime minister and ministries       Market economics (business)
                      President                             Police                              Human rights / Ombudsmen
Social Institutions




                      Local NGOs                            Health system                       Prime minister and ministries
                      Human rights / Ombudsmen              Court / Justice                     Educational system
                      Police                                Religious institutions              Health system
                      Prime minister and ministries         Parliament                          Court / Justice
                      Court / Justice                       Human rights / Ombudsmen            Local NGOs
                      Political parties                     Local NGOs                          Police
                      Parliament                            Political parties                   Political parties




An institution, which is functioning most effectively. According to region the following picture was
revealed:
Region                             Armenia                                 Azerbaijan                    Georgia

Three                              Army                                    President                     President
institution                        Religious institutions                  Army                          Army
which are                          Educational system                      Media                         Media
functioning
effectively
Information about International organizations
Region                             Armenia                                 Azerbaijan                    Georgia

International                      EBRD                                    EBRD                          EBRD
organizations                      IMF                                     USAID                         USAID
                                   USAID                                   IMF                           Eurasia Foundation
                                   Eurasia Foundation                      Eurasia Foundation            UN agencies
                                   OSCE                                    World Bank
                                   World Bank                              CIS
                                   Council of Europe                       OSCE
                                   CIS                                     Red Cross
                                   UN agencies                             Council of Europe
                                   Red Cross                               UN agencies
Erevan and Baku respondents are more acquainted with international organizations then Tbilisi-
dwellers. The same time respondents from three regions have the most acquaintance with
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Quite significan position has USAID
international Development Agency according to recognition. Concerning Eurasia Foundation
Tbilisi respondents have information abouit it then Baku and Erevan interviewees.


Majority of respondents from three regions refuse to be a member of any political party.
          Armenia           Azerbaijan         Georgia
 Yes          2.6                6.2              4.5

 No          97.3               92.5              94.4



Respondents who are a member of any political party name the following:


          Armenia                                         Azerbaijan       Georgia
Parties   Orinats Yerki (Country of Law)                  New Azerbaijan   Nationals
          HZHK(Armenian Democratic Party)                 party (YAP)      Laborist party
          Communist Party                                 AMIP             Party of Entrepreneurs
          ARF(Armenian Revolutionary federation           MUSAVAT          New-right wing party
          Dashnakthutyun)                                 ISLAM            Burdjanadze-Democrats
          ZHK(Democratic Party)                           KOMMUNIST        Communists Party
          Ardarutyun (Justice Bloc)                       ABP              Christian-Democrats
          AZhM (National Democratic Union)                KP               Lemi
          National Unity                                                   Unity
          Nor Zhahanakner (New Times)                                      Traditionalists
          Hanrapetakan (Republican)                                        United Democrats
          HZhAM (Democratic - Liberal Union of                             Association of handicapped Eris
          Armenia)                                                         Tkivili
          Arzhanapativ Apaga (Worthy Future)                               Kostava Society
                                                                           Party of Zviad Gamsakhurdia
                                                                           Party of Koko Gamsakhurdia


There are few respondents who are members of local NGOs.


Region           Armenia                           Azerbaijan                          Georgia
No              98.1                               97.1                                98.6


Concerning religious confession diversity of identity is mostly in case of Tbilisi. The leading
religious confession is Christian Orthodox (90.4%). According to diversity of religious identity
number of Erevan respondents slightly differs from Tbilisi dwellers. However different from
Tbilisi in case of Erevan 87% indicate belonging to Armenian Apostolic Church 92.8% Baku
respondents is characterized as belonging to mono-religious confession
                                                Armenia          Azerbaijan   Georgia
Christian Orthodox Church                            1.7              4.4          90.4

Catholic Church                                      0.3              0.5          0.5

Armenian Apostolic Church                            87                            4.3

Islam                                                0.2              92.8         0.7

Jehovah‟s Witnesses                                  0.6                            1

Evangelical Church                                   0.3                           0.3

Judaist                                                               0.2          0.3

Baptists                                                                           0.1

Moloccans                                            0.3

Other                                                0.4

Sun-worship                                                                        0.4

Yezidi                                                                             0.1

Christian Taoism                                                                   0.1

None                                                 8.9               2           1.8

Refuse to answer                                     0.5



In the viewpoint of attending religious services the picture changes. Azeris attend religious
services the most frequently (10%) and they also take first place among who never attend
(46.3%). Erevan respondents (65.3%) mainly attend religious services from time to time. The
same should be mentioned about Georgians (54.7%) however frequency of attending is the
following: once a week or once a month (14.3% - 14.7%).


Attitude towards representatives of different religion confessions is displayed according following
priority


           Armenia              Azerbaijan           Georgia
           Armenian                   Islam          Christian Orthodox
           Apostolic Church                          Church
           Christian Orthodox   Christian Orthodox         Catholic Church
           Church               Church
           Catholic Church       Catholic Church     Armenian Apostolic
                                                     Church
        Islam                          Judaists          Islam
        Judaists                                                    Judaists
        Baptists                                         Evangelical Church
        Evangelical Church                                          Baptists
        Jehovah‟s                                        Jehovah‟s Witnesses
        Witnesses


It is reasonable to mention that Jehovah‟s Witnesses are estimated extremely negatively by
Georgian and Armenian respondents (especially ones living in Erevan). The same time
respondents living in Georgia make very positive estimate only to representatives of Christian
Orthodox Church and the rest is given mid or less than mid estimate. Respondents from Armenia
give equally positive estimate to representatives of Armenian Apostolic Church, Christian
Orthodox Church, Catholic Church. The rest is given mainly mid or less than mid estimate.
Concerning interviewees living in Azerbaijan make extremely positive estimate only to
representatives of Islam.


Georgians and Armenian turn to be more informed about family income, expenses than Azeris.
             Armenia         Azerbaijan            Georgia
                80.6            73.1                86.5




While listing operating items Georgians appeared to be the most prosperous compared with other
regions‟ representatives. In case of Georgia items considered as means of material welfare is most
evident according to percentage. Azeris turned to live the most avariciously.
                                              Armenia              Azerbaijan            Georgia

                  Property               1. Yes    2. NO         1. Yes   2. NO   1. Yes       2. No




1    Own flat                          75.5       24.5       73.5         25.7    73.6        26.4
2    Own house                         20.7       79.3       28.3         70.9    30.5        69.5
3    Dacha                             8.5        91.5       5.6          94      30.4        69.6
4    Vehicle                           25.5       74.5       19.7         80.1    28.6        71.4
5    Computer                          15.1       84.9       5.8          93.5    14.2        85.8
6    Telephone                         86.1       13.9       75.8         23.9    79.3        20.7
7    Cell phone                        21.6       78.4       48.3         51.5    51.4        48.6
8    TV /video set                     93.5       6.5        75.1         24.8    94.1        5.9
9    Automatic washing machine         20.1       79.9       23.1         76.8    62.5        37.5
10    Internet access                  7.5          92.5     2.1           97.8    12.2        87.8
11    Video camera                     7.4          92.6     4             95.8    8.3         91.7
12    Central/local heating system     6.2          93.8     9.6           89.9    13          87
13    Satellite dish                   2.7          97.3     5.2           94.4    3           97
14    Air conditioner                  4.7          95.3     32            67.7    10.9        89.1
15    Microwave                        9.7          90.3     18.6          81.1    20          80
16    Cable TV                         1.3          98.7     3             96.5    40.9        59.1


Indicating the main sources of h/h income 4 priority sources of income were revealed for each
region. Those are common and specific, characteristic for region sources of income.




                       Armenia                             Azerbaijan                         Georgia
Salary from the main place of employment      Salary from the main place of       Salary from the main place of
Pensions                                      employment                          employment
Financial help of relatives/friends           Pensions                            Pensions
Income from business                          Occasional contracts                Income from business
                                              Financial help of                   Financial help of
                                              relatives/friends                   relatives/friends




Family average income for three regions is 166.44.
Indicating how much spend typical h/h on different activities Georgians appeared to spend most
and Azeris least.


                                                  Armenia           Azerbaijan     Georgia
       Expenses                                             Average amount
 1     Education                             36.23                 11.99          53.31
 2     Health                                25.33                 12.43          42.36
 3     Utilities                             28.55                 14.05          38.54
 4     Food                                  95.2                  84.44          99.11
 5     Flat rental                           59                    9.02           42.79
 6     Clothing                              45.17                 25.65          58.25
 7     Babysitter/Housekeeper/Driver         75.08                 5.80           44.9
 8     Recreation                            60.03                 11.08          85.82
 9     Leisure                               33.22                 8.94           49.14
 10    Transport                             25.83                 17.66          43.6
 11   Cell phone                         33.03            11.72        35.72
 12   Other                              22.75            13


Tbilisi respondents spend much money especially on rest, education, health, dressing and
transportation. Erevan respondents spend comparatively much on babysitters, servants or drivers
and flat fees. Interviewees from Baku spend much on food.


Describing current economic condition majority of respondents from three regions make
assessment poor (fair 49.7%; very poor 30.7%) Azeris estimate economic condition more
positively. Nevertheless they are avaricious while naming means of material welfare and spend
less money on them. Though incomes of three regions equal. Majority of Azeris (54.4%) describe
their economic condition as fair. The same evaluation is made by respondents from Tbilisi and
Azerbaijan but less percentage indicator (Armenia 45.6%, Georgia 49.2%). Indeed very small part
of Baku respondents (6%) describes economic condition as very poor. The number of these
respondents is two-three times less than Tbilisi respondents and Erevan (Armenia 18.6 %, Georgia
15.6%)


Describing economic condition of household in respondents‟ opinion within the scope of region
(36.8%) remained the same during the last three years or became a little better (25.9%). Also
economic condition of their household did not change during the last year (49.5%). Though there
is slight optimistic estimation in their responses because more than third part of respondents
(35.1%) within the scope of regions deems that their economic condition will become a little
better. Nevertheless almost the same number of respondents (33.4%) regards that economic
condition will remain about the same. There is slight optimistic estimation concerning three years
prognoses. Respondents regard that economic condition will become a little better (33.4%) or will
remain about the same (23.3%).


Majority of respondents from three regions consider that their household belongs to middle part of
the middle level and lower part of the middle level. 48.9% of Erevan respondent, 50.6% of Baku
respondents and 57.9% of Tbilisi think that their household belongs to middle part of the middle
level. 31.5% of Erevan, 29. % Of Baku and 31.2% of Tbilisi considers that their household
belongs to lower part of the middle level.


If socio-economic condition in the countries (Georgia-Armenia-Azerbaijan) does not improve in
the next three years a third of respondents (30.5%) barely can do anything. Almost the same part
(23.5%) finds more profitable profession. majority of respondents (64.3%) gives negative
estimation to migration inside the country or migration from the country (50.9%).


It is essencial for Georgia to settle inter political problems and make effective foreign politics,
such as close political, economic and cultural relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan. In spite of
these three states are in the common Caucasus space they are estranged; Espacially Armenia and
Georgia. Concerning to Azerbaijan and Armenia these two region are contradictory.
In its turn close relation with Georgia is the premise reason of settling many problems as in the
viewpoint of economic as regulating Armenia-Azerbaijan political problem. Georgia may play the
role of mediator. More prospectively may be described relationship of Azerbaijan and Georgia. In
the viewpoint of economic Baku Jeihan project serve as a joining chain of these two states.
Concerning Armenia-Georgia relationship cooperation of these two states is important for Georgia
in resolving Abkhazeti issue and Armenia in the viewpoint of economic. On its turn correct
interstate policy of Georgia in the aim of public integration of compactly settled representatives of
Azerbaijanian, Armenian may serve as the premises of more wide scale activities.
Taking into account all above-mentioned problems we regard it important to conduct research
with Armenian, Georgian and Azerbaijanian adolescents living in Georgia mainly in Kvemo
Kartly and Samtskhe –Javakheti. In focus groups are discussed topical questions of regional
qualitative research.
                        Discussion and analysis of focus groups data

Alienation from a group or situation
Almost none of the respondents from all groups have ever suffered from a sense of alienation.
Alienation according to any sign is not named in Akhalkalaki group. Regarding Ninotsminda - at
the beginning they felt alienated from Georgian environment where they could not make self-
presentation.
Some of them suffered alienation due to religion.
From Bolnisi I and II groups an Armenian felt alienated from Russian neighbors at the concert
(from the first camp). An Armenian suffered from a sense of alienation among Georgians mainly
Svans in the Patriots Camp (II camp). The same camp is named by one of respondents from the
compound group where the respondent felt alienated only one day.
Some cases of suffering from a sense of alienation in Russia are noted in the group of Marneuli. In
respondent‟s opinion Russians dislike him because he is from Caucasus. On the contrary,
interviewees from Marneuli II consider that suffering from a sense of alienation is depended on a
person.
In the compound group (Bolnisi, Marneuli, Akhaltsikhe) Georgians from Bolnisi note „I do not let
them … Its my hearth and my birthplace, and they act as host in villages of Bolnisi‟. Bolnisi
dwellers complaint about misappropriation of Georgian cultural-historic treasure by Armenians
and Azerbaijanis, for example, Bolnisi Sioni and Shota Rustaveli.
According to a representative of Bolnisi there are not contradiction between Azerbaijanians and
Georgians. However Azeris do not form majority in this rayon. Herein is discussed one serious
problem Tatars hanged a head of pig and feet of dog on Tamari Castle and insulted Christian
church. It is also mentioned that Azeris did not allow them to enter Tamari Castle „they say that it
is their territory. It is practically their possession‟.
Respondents from Marneuli state that they attached Nariman the same importance as Shota
Rustavely and their monuments were built side by side. One of Marneuli representatives from the
same compound group note that lands in Marneuli and whole Kvemo Kartli are under lease. At
present in the Parliament it is under consideration lands to be allotted to private individuals and if
it is adopted the whole Kvemo Kartli will be practically lost due to fact that Azeris hold lands
under lease.
According to respondents there is not contradiction between Armenians and Georgians in
Akhaltsikhe rayon. Nevertheless one of the interviewees notes that he saw a map of Republic of
Armenia made by Armenian, which includes Akhalkhalaki and Akhaltsikhe.
One of respondents from Akhaltsikhe focus group mentions „there was a problem of returning
Turkish - Meskhetian in Georgia. It's impossible even to think about it.‟ Herein they take into
account the demand of Euro-council – „Euro-council demands this to be executed by 2012 year‟.
„If there is necessity of their returning let them settle among Georgian population and not
compactly or in places which is less compound, for example, West Georgia. „This is our country
they could go everywhere they like‟.
In the view of compound group Georgians are superciliously warmhearted in our own motherland
and we are guilty in everything we suffer. I do not think if any Georgian lives in Azerbaijan the
way Azeris are in Georgia‟. An example was mentioned: „In a village people look Georgians with
irritation at the wedding party of Azeri neighbor then Georgian and Azeri quarreled‟.
Herein is noted that this is not on a large scale. There are some Azeris who are better than
Georgians.There are Azeris who were born in Azerbaijan but say that Georgia is his or her
Motherland. Certain part of Azeris does not belong to Christian Orthodox Church but goes to
church in Dmanisi rayon and worship with „Mama Zenon‟. The same is the situation in Bolnisi
Sioni and Tamari Castle in Marneuli. However, couple was beaten because they had been
christened and wedded. Azeris forced them to leave the place.
According to participants of compound group it should be started to make Azeris, Armenians and
all kind of foreign people learn state language. Like Fereidan Georgians and Georgian Diaspora
are not allowed to learn in Georgian schools and each citizen have to learn state language the
same demand is made for foreigners living in Georgia. „Why do they learn Russian to
communicate us and not Georgian? There is not Soviet Union any more. This is independent
Country. They leave in our country and must know Georgian language‟.
In the opinion of interviewees the reason of ignorance Georgian language is compact settlement of
ethnic minorities. „They know their language because they live close together. If they are scattered
and the same time it gives Georgian peasant a chance to work on fruitful lands. Azeris wanted to
built a mosque. There are Armenian schools in Bolnisi and Azeris demand to have theirs‟.
Participants make negative assessment of poly-religious environment, for example, standing
Christian church and mosque side by side. They also make negative evaluation of Bairam ritual
when roads are closed and worshipers are walking through roads beating with chains. They insist
as the way out making national minorities learn Georgian language and settling them less
compactly. „You cannot forbid them perform a ritual…they must not settle compactly‟. However,
there is a different opinion expressed „why they live in Marneuli when they have Azerbaijan and
Baku. They should go there.
They are not Iranians not Turkish. They were settled in the reign of Shahabas. They must go in
Iran. In parallel extremely positive evaluation is made about Baku dwellers. Azeris from Baku are
characterized as well brought up, educated, and having broad point of view and tidy people. On
the contrary local Azeris are characterized as dirty and uneducated.


      Thus alienation is denied by majority of participants especially in the environment, which
       is comparatively mono-ethnical, for example, Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda, which is
       mainly settled by Armenians. Representatives of Akhaltsikhe majority of which is
       Georgian refuse facts of alienation and unacceptability. The same picture is in the group of
       Marneuli. Very little number of respondents names alienation in Russia. Azeris form a
       majority of the population of Marneuli. Most frequently cases of alienation are mentioned
       by Bolnisi respondents, particularly relating to national sign. Concerning compound group,
       which consists of particularly Georgians while discussing alienation underline unnecessary
       tolerance of Georgians. This factor is regarded as one of the main reason of oppressing
       Georgians by Azeris and Armenians. They state some samples particularly
       misappropriation of Georgian purities and lands. Respondents consider aggressors not only
       Azeris and Armenians but also potential inhabitants-Turkish Meskhetian. They deem
       implementation of national policy as the way out from existing situation. That implies to
       settle national minority less compactly and teach them Georgian as state language.
   Actually while discussing sense of alienation Georgian adolescents generalize issue and speak
       about privileges of Georgians that implies reduction in rights of national minorities on
       behalf of Georgians. In fact while discussing alienation an accent is put on alienation of
       other nations by imposing uncomfortable conditions.


Who you and your elatives consider to be unacceptable?
      According to majority of respondents unacceptable for their circle is a person who is
       inappropriate for their family and environment, person having bad behaviors, it implies
       prostitute. Unsociable, modest, unfriendly, calm, peculiar, unpurposed, uneducated, cruel,
       disputatious, coward, stranger are also named. A person who does not respect self-
       cultures. One of the reasons is named material factor – poverty. Several respondents say
       that they try to put up with everyone and no one is stranger for them, and herein is added
       that nationality has no importance. As it seems from the above mentioned unacceptable
       and stranger is named in regard to characteristic and social signs; less importance is
       attached to national sign. There is not differentiation according regional and ethnical signs.
       This evaluation is share by absolute majority of respondents. This evaluation differs from
       previous indicator. Concerning alienation respondents speak about big groups - Russians
       in Russia, Svans, Georgians, Azeris and Armenians, and in case of unacceptable person for
       their circle is always named a specific person and not a group.
Akhaltsikhe group gives the following definitions: who is inappropriate for my family, has bad
behaviors, unsociable person. There are expressions such as shyness, unfriendliness, unsociability,
and incapacity of demonstrating skills, person having such ideas which are unacceptable; having
different life-stile; is shy and is incapable of expressing his or her ideas, peculiar, close-mouthed,
prostitute, unpurposed, self-alienated, uneducated, capricious or modest. „Person who is
unpurposed is difficult to deal with‟. „I try to put up with everyone‟. I do not like boys who fear
for something and shy girls‟. „Persons having different characters from me and to whom I cannot
put up and have quarrel frequently and do not make friend‟. One could be unacceptable due to
poverty. Persons who pay back in cruelty are also unacceptable. Person oriented on money and
one who cannot try to make friend with others are also mentioned.
In case of Bolnisi group the following evaluations are made: nationality dos not matter. One
should relate to a person according to his or her character. Person who treats me like a stranger is
unacceptable.
Marneuli respondents note: it depends on a person and nationality; if you like a person at first
sight you should not treat her as a stranger; one might have a stereotype and than change you
opinion; at first you feel alienated and than make friend in regard to his or her characters.
Mixed (Bolnisi-Marneuli-Akhaltsikhe) group: first of all appearance is important than behavior;
unsociable and alienated person is unacceptable; if one does not know my language and we could
not understand each other; young people who do not like Georgian culture; you should not
discriminate a person; the most important is his viewpoint.
Representatives of Akhalkalaki give the following definitions: one who is unfriendly and insult
others due to nationality; coming here I thought that I knew Georgian. Five Georgian language
adolescents live with me in the room. I discovered that they are good persons and we made
friends.
Ninotsminda group: everyone is acceptable for me and if they love us we have the same feeling.
In case of Akhalkalaki – Ninotsminda group people who cannot make a friend and has a bad
character are named unacceptable. Acceptable is person who respects our rules. There are some
Armenian adolescents who do not identify Armenian.


Youth Problems
      Among main issues the followings are revealed: problems related to education and going
       to university. Participants of Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda especially complain about
       educational reforms due to lack of knowledge Georgian language they cannot pass
       National Examinations. Problem related to entertainment there is no place for young
       people to meet each other such as cinema, theater, café, disco or even park. They are
       speaking about problems like drag addiction and toxicomania due to unemployment;
       cleaning the city; planting trees and gardens; pollution of environment; ecological issues;
       roads;   absence    of   healthy lifestyle   and    sport‟s   centers;   financial   problems;
       disrespectfulness of adults and teachers negative attitude towards pupil; social and
       communal problems; problem of interrelationship of girls and boys related to age –
       conflicts among boys due to girls; violation of human rights. Problems related to conflicts
       based on nationality, especially in Marneuli between Azeris and Georgians are also
       named.
Among stated problems the following characteristics are revealed for each region:
Akhaltsikhe: problems related to education, entertainment, dirtying the city; aggression and drag
addiction caused by unemployment; carelessness towards people; absence of healthy lifestyle and
sport‟s centers; lack of cultural activities. Financial problem- „poor people could not get perfect
education. School Village do not adhere standard of National Examinations. Teachers are not paid
adequately‟.
The following problems are voiced in Bolnisi group: differentiation young people according to
social sign; social problem generally, for example, water supply problem- damaged water
pipeline; teacher‟s bad attitude towards students. „They treat children like an object‟. There are no
place for entertaining – concerts are not held; there is no billiard room, tennis court, clubs and
café, even discotheque. You have to stand in a street. They voice concerns relating to finances.
Bolnisi rayon ecology is the major problem. „Not only Mashavra but also air is polluted. There are
gold mines near Kazreti in Bolnisi rayon. Every second human in Bolnisi dies from cancer. We
have not a problem of entertaining. There are cinema and theatre. Though life is dull in our city
and if there is not electric power the whole month no one will protest‟. However, in case of
Bolnisi different attitudes were demonstrated towards social problems: „we have 24-hour electric
power. There is no problem of water and natural gas supply. The only problem is the filter.
Gamgeoba ought to allot money from budget and buy the filter. The most important is the air to
be fresh. We know that it is too expensive but in the gold mines in one night might be earned the
money needed‟.
Concerns voiced in Marneuli group: boys quarrel frequently due to girls; violation of youth right;
going to University. Social problems – poor people are getting poorer; gender problem – „Parents
do not let children out, particularly girls and make them marry in the age 13‟. Police violate
human rights. Respondents express complaints about polluted environment, trees and gardens; the
roads are in a state of disrepair; level of studding is too low. Unemployment and poverty are also
mentioned. „In Marneuli theatre was burnt because it could not pay debt to Government‟.
„Georgians and Azeris are opposed to each other. Azeris have people in the government and the
deputy of Marneuli is Azeri also Mayor. Gamgebeli is Georgian but he is worse than Tatar… We
should try to grow up next generation without disgust of Azeris‟. „Azeris are engaged in business
such as drag addiction, prostitution, speculating…They possess bazaar, Red Bridge,
Sadaxlo…There are only two Georgian villages Tsereteli and Tamarisi in Marneuli. The rest are
Azeri villages. Georgian villages are formed mainly by settlers from Sachkhere and Tchiatura.
Akhalkalaki: Roads are a major concern amongst respondents of Akhalkalaki. They also name
entertainment, for example, there is no disco, sport‟s center; education in university. Respondents
voice complaint about bribing teachers      at schools. „It is necessary the wage of teachers to be
increased‟.
Representatives of Ninotsminda express concerns related to unemployment „all conflicts are
caused because of free time. Global conflicts are provoked by poverty. Majority of residents left
Ninotsminda. Neighbors may quarrel for land or fence or so‟. „Conflicts may break out due to
girls‟. „There is a possibility to go to disco only once a week. There are no theatre and cinema‟.
Concert might be held only once in a year and parents do not let girls go there‟. „No buildings for
cultural activities are there‟. „Priority must be given to education. Instead of staying in Georgia
they are made to go to Erevan because they do not know Georgian‟. „National examinations were
held perfectly but it was very difficult for Armenians. Examinations were to be passed only in
Georgian. This problem should be solved by learning Georgian language‟. „I suggest opening
higher state establishments for national minority in which Georgian language would be learnt.
We have two Institutes in Ninotsminda where are Armenian branches‟. „Free of charge state
centers should be opened, where only Georgian language are studied‟. „We ought to be supplied
with sport equipment and there must be held sport competitions even once in a month or year‟.
‟During Soviet Union period our sportsmen had great achievements because they were supported
from the center‟.


How do you appreciate multinationality? How much is it supporting and interfering?
          In Georgian participants‟ opinion, particularly of Akhaltiskhe rayon – Georgian is
           tolerant. They consider that Georgians form minority in this region and are more
           oppressed accordingly: Armenians, Russians, Jewish, Azeris and Turkish are settled in
           Akhaltsikhe rayon. „Georgians do not create a problem. Armenians give rise to
           conflicts‟. „Everybody knows Armenians‟ anti-Georgian attitudes. We feel aggression
           from Armenians‟. „There was an occasion ten years ago one of Armenians supported
           Georgian while disputing about church. Armenians killed him and filled 30 years old
           man‟s lungs with hay. Peak of conflict was the last year. There was a dispute over a
           church‟. „35000 residents live in Akhaltsikhe rayon. 23 000 of these are Armenians.
           Georgians are in minority. Approximately 80000 are Georgians. The rest of these are
           various nations. They want to be superior in Georgia. And this fact is unacceptable for
           us; and this factor gives rise to conflict. Though there are Armenians who have good
           relation with Georgians‟.


          According to respondents from Akhaltsikhe Georgia would be stronger if more
           Georgians and less other nations live here. In their opinion representatives of various
           nations are not as patriotic as Georgians. Armenians and Azeris live in Georgia but
           they do not take care of the future of Georgia. Because they do not regard Georgia as
           motherland, they are temporary residents. Even old Armenians have not good attitude
           towards Georgian. They voice complaint about not only Armenians but also Turkish-
           Meskhetian, who have not been repatriated yet. „People are against their settlement in
           Georgia; there were even protest actions several years ago. They are settling in the
           territory of Georgia and do not agree to confess Christianity or Georgian. A TV
           program aired on this issue: Majority of     Turkish - Meskhetian says that they are
           Turkish and demand to return in Georgia. This fact may lead to a split on the base of
           religion‟. „Perhaps Armenians come to Georgia to multiply and occupy our country.
           They might have such a goal. An Armenian historian stated that he had made a map on
           which territories of Georgia was not demonstrated. He added that Armenia had
           included Georgia and it was separated afterwards‟. „We should not blame only
    Armenian. There are occasions when Georgians address „You Armenian‟ and insult
    them‟.
   Respondents from Akhaltsikhe have alternative opinions about this issue: „Georgia is
    an international country. We cannot solve this problem. I know Armenians who insist
    being Georgian and care of the future of our country. You should meat a bed or a good
    person in every nation‟.
   Azeris, Armenians, Georgians are mainly concentrated in Bolnisi. They bear
    relationship to Georgians and live friendly side by side. A respondent Armenian in
    origin states: „there are occasions when you are insulted due to you nationality. I have
    never told bad things about Georgians. I always say that my birthplace is Georgia and
    it is my motherland‟.
   Respondents from Bolnisi rayon Georgian in origin share opinion of Akhaltsikhe
    group – „only Georgians should live in Georgia, but we are multinational country and
    ethnic minorities live here we could change nothing‟. This region faces different
    problems - ethnic minorities are oppressed by Georgians. „Local Georgians have bad
    attitude towards Azeris because they are deemed as Tatar‟. „There are villages where if
    Georgians step they would be beaten. Georgians are oppressed in their own villages. In
    Bolnisi while Tatars are driving a car Georgians seek for reasons to quarrel with them.
    Georgians feel hostility towards Azeris‟.


   Participants of Bolnisi focus group express different opinion. They deem teaching of
    Georgian to national minorities as the way out. „Every person who lives in Georgia
    must know Georgian‟.
   According to respondents of Marneuli multi-nationality is obstructive because it is
    dangerous. „Azeris form majority in Marneuli. They are too many and some of them
    make fun of Georgian‟. „Exceptions are in every nation‟. „Stupid persons can be found
    in every nation and they may have bad influence‟. „We studied their culture, language
    and tradition and many of them do not like our language‟. On the contrary Azeri
    respondents state: „frankly, Georgians do not show respect to Azeris not only in
    Marneuli but generally. Perhaps due to religious confession they have bad attitude
    towards us, not Marneuli dwellers we have good relationship with Georgians living in
    Marneuli, generally in Georgia. There is spread such definition like 'They are Tatars'.
   Neutral evaluations are made by Marneuli dwellers, for instance there are frequent
    conflict situations and tension in Tsalka but not in Marneuli. I dare say it is good that
    Georgians and Azeris live together. Generally, I am pleased relating to various nations
    but it is unacceptable when Georgians get married with representative of other nations.
   It should be noted that Azeri interviewees express more positive attitude towards the
    issue: 'I think it is good for intellectual development because one has a chance to study
    various cultures, get acquainted with various nations and their traditions; and as much
    international Georgia is as much better. I think we are not different. There are not
    conflict situation. We live in peaceful atmosphere. Here is much more better than in
    our country‟‟. „I can tell the same when my family members leave for Armenia local
    Armenians do no meet them with pleasure‟. „Baku dwellers do not like Azeris living in
    Georgia. They have different rules. Azeris consider us undeveloped and do not pay
    respect. The rules they have differ‟. „Generally, conflict might be provoked anytime
    but we should try to live friendly. Nevertheless I am Armenian in origin I have never
    been in Armenia. They try to avoid us. I feel better here. They are cold-hearted.
    Georgia is multinational. Armenians, Georgians and Russians live here and all show
    respect to us‟.
   Concerning Georgians in some cases extremely negative position were declared,
    particularly Georgian respondents from Marneuli group openly opposed Azeris.
    'Azeris live in the territory of Georgia. They form 80% and act as if they were on their
    self-territory. Azeris dominate over Georgians. In my village all inhabitants are
    engaged in farming and one Azeri household possesses 0.3 hectares while Georgian
    only 0.1. hectares. This might be due to the fact that many Azeris work at gamgeoba.
   Armenian interviewees from Akhalkalaki, Ninotsminda and Akhaltsikhe alike
    Georgian respondents have different attitude towards Georgia's multi-nationality. They
    declare their neutral and distinctly negative position. However, this position refers to
    only Saakashvili‟s policy.
   Akhalkalaki: 'This issue does not suffer us because majority of residents are Amenians.
    They form 90%. After 'Rose revolution" number of Georgians have been increased.
    During the Shevardnadze period Georgians were fewer and there was not
    contradiction. Nationality does not matter. I live in town and I have never felt that this
    is not my territory...‟ 'There were quite enough conflicts between Armenians and
    Georgians. Though conflicts break out there time after time. There are much more
    conflicts between Georgians and Armenians. The truth is that conflicts between
    Armenians are more frequent than in Georgians. I have Georgian friends and it is
    easier to relate to them'. Respondents from Ninotsminda share this opinion: 'Armenians
    form 99%. Only 3% or 4% is learning Georgian language. For studding Georgian
    language one should have relationship with Georgians… It is better Georgia to be
    mono national though people might come into conflicts.
   Group of Akhaltsikhe –Ninotsminda should be marked out where negative attitudes are
    distinctly expressed. According to respondents it is difficult being representative of
    other ethnic groups. After Saakashvili‟s electing as a president policy towards
    Javakheti Armenians has changed. 'Current policy is target that we should be isolated
    from Armenians and mix with Georgians to abolish our nationality. This is not agreed
    not only me but also whole Javakheti. In case of continuation such politics mass
    rebellion might be broken out. I read that they want to change Armenian schools into
    Georgian and teaching in schools be carried out in Georgian. In this way we could not
    keep our traditions. Perhaps it is not incorrect but it is earlier. This should be carried
    out step by step. Georgian language should be studied from the first class...‟ „I have
    heard that if you graduate in Armenia you cannot use Diploma in Georgia. If you are a
    professional doctor, for instance, it does not matter we you study. The most important
    is to operate patient. According to international standard education is on a higher level
    in Armenia than in Georgia. Step by step they are carrying out reforms but they are
    rather anarchic than democratic. The president speaks about democracy and demands
    freedom from Russia, and withdrawal military forces and dictates himself. He is the
    second „Hitler‟. Before his coming we live in peaceful coexistence. Many rebellions
    broke out as a result of his politics last period. I do not know how much it is true but if
    Armenian marries Georgian government grants them 4000 Gel. My brother heard this
    information. This is a state program. Our electric power station is under the
    supervision of Americans. They have their terms‟. „In the town people obey some kind
    of rules and situation differs in villages. There are not common rules. No one controls
    residents of villages. Here is an advice for the president and all of high ranks of
    Georgian government - they should not sell anything from the resources of Georgia.
    After 10 – 12 years they will have already wasted received money and their heirs will
    have to obey foreigners. We do not study history of Armenia. We have three or four
    times in a week history of Georgia. When representatives of president visited our
    school they answered my question. -'If you‟d like gather and study'. Learning history
    of Armenia ought to be obligatory. They also reduce hours of Russian language. I do
    not agree with them. Ministry of Education does not work so well. Branch of Ivane
    Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University was opened but lectures are not given, as it is
    necessary. One of the major problems is unemployment and reduction of state
    establishments. Concerning unemployment there are people who have higher
    education but no one provides them with appropriate work. They applied to
    appropriate organization as state as NGO but without any result. It should be
    mentioned that Georgian language teacher are paid more than Armenian Language
          teacher. They must be paid equally. Teachers who are not local residents are paid
          wages from President Fund.


Three acceptable and unacceptable nations
      Adolescents from Akhaltsikhe give priority to Georgian, Russian, Greek and Italian as
       temperamental, emotional. „They are from south and correspond with Georgian
       temperament and character‟. There are also named American, Ukrainian; concerning
       Spanish – according to several respondents they have features that are characteristic of
       Georgian traditions. Englishman, Swedish, Polish and Armenian are named as acceptable.
       „Armenian, Russian and Ukrainian are acceptable due to the sameness of religion. Three of
       them are Christian‟. Jewish is acceptable because representatives of this nation have been
       living here for 26 centuries and have good attitude towards Georgia, consider it second
       motherland and are put up with Georgian community‟. „Greek and Russian have the same
       religion and due to this fact might easily understand each other. Only local Armenians are
       acceptable‟.
      Ambivalent attitude was expressed towards Russians, Americans, Armenians and Jewish
       people –I prefer Armenian to Russian. One can understand Armenian but not Russian; I
       could not adjust Americans wearing an earring on their nose; Armenian is unacceptable
       because they do not recognize Georgia; Japans and Chinless people are unacceptable due
       to their appearance.
      In the category of unacceptable nation respondents from Akhaltsikhe name: Moslem,
       Turkish, Arabians, Armenians, Tatars, Germans, Turkish-Meskhetian, and Negroes. In
       their opinion the most important is not to be Moslem. „Unacceptable is not this religion
       itself but its rules. We are Christians but we do not bother others with our worship. Let
       them worship but silently as not to disturb us‟. Jehovah's Witnesses are deemed as
       unacceptable. One of the participants who demonstrate positive attitude towards Turkish
       and correspondingly Moslem notes: „I am Armenian-Georgian-Russian. These three
       nations are acceptable. In spite of Armenia-Turkish conflict I like Turkish people‟.
      Interviewees from Bolnisi name Russian and Armenian due to their religious confession in
       the category of acceptable nation.
      In the category of unacceptable nation Moslem and accordingly Azeris are named in case
       of Bolnisi. „Azeris are unacceptable because they are Moslem. Georgians are unable to
       relate to Tatars. There are considerable differences between them. First of all religion than
       Tatars have not culture. Many centuries are needed to develop culture in them and become
       civilized country. Like in the fifth century man and woman walk separately and do not eat
       together. Georgians cannot agree with this‟. „What the reason of the conflict is between
    Bolnisi dwellers and Tatars. In 1990 year Tartars came in Bolnisi. Local residents decided
    to throw them out and that fact gave rise to conflict. There was a severe struggle and at last
    Georgians achieved to push them out somehow. Since that they have been in contradiction.
    Azeris and Georgians live in peaceful coexistence side-by-side on a street and neighboring
    before. Azeris were going to occupy Bolnisi. They wanted to rename Rustavi. Azeris were
    in our country and were struggling against us. As I know a household which had been
    pushed out cursed the place and no one would live in happiness there.
   The mixed group (Marneuli, Bolnisi, Akhaltsikhe) declares quite ambiguous position: „All
    nations are acceptable the importance is given to personality‟. „In Marneuli we can more
    easily relate to Armenians than Azeris. When we come into conflict with Azeris
    Armenians support us. These two nations have historic dispute‟. „I receive more support
    from Azeris than from Armenians because I regard them trickster. By the way it is historic.
    I know history quite well and Armenians frequently were the reason of betrayal. I
    experienced treachery of Armenians‟.
   The position of the mixed group (that is natural) is shared by Marneuli dwellers. That
    implies not to make difference according to nationality. „I have many Armenian, Georgian
    and Azerbaijani friends. I insist that every nation includes good and bad persons. So, one
    cannot conclude this or that nation is bad or good‟. „I agree, I have many Azerbaijani,
    Armenian and Russian friends‟. „We have special relation with Russians and Armenians
    because we have the same culture and religion‟. „Culture is not the same but looks alike. I
    have more Azeri friends than Russians and Armenians but this does not mean that Azeris
    are better than Armenians or vise versa‟. „Every nation has negative features as any
    human. Good and bad persons are in every nation. It depends on you who you choose to
    make a friend with‟. There is an exception: „I prefer to relate to Georgians. It is hard to
    have relation with Azeris‟.


Representative of which nation would you marry and which not?
   Regarding marriage respondents from Bolnisi name particularly Georgian. Though there
    are different answers: „If there is no way out, for example, Armenian is acceptable‟.
    Neutral attitudes are also stated: „I do not care nationality. The most important is love‟.
    Negative evaluation is mentioned within the context of religion: „I cannot marry Tatar due
    to religion there may raise a problem that causes divorce. A girl had married Moslem and
    after a child was born they quarreled about christening him. This fact should be taken into
    account‟. „If they love each other religious confession does not matter‟.
   Participants of the mixed group (Marneuli-Bolnisi-Akhaltsikhe) share the opinion of
    Bolnisi respondents. Though they oppose the idea of Georgian getting married to
    representative of different nations and religious confession. In their opinion advantage
    should be given to Georgian: „Georgian should get married only to Georgian. Perhaps
    Italian‟. „In my view representative of any nation is acceptable. The most important is to
    love‟. „Just imagine if you marry Tatar you ought to forget you traditions and confess his
    religion. This should be taken into consideration‟. „In most cases woman change her
    religious confession‟. „Georgians marry Armenians. When two Georgian wives of
    Armenians meet each other they do not speak in Georgian. We are very few. When I was
    in Marneuli depressed because everyone spoke in Russian and you could hardly hear
    Georgian language. I felt a sense of not being in Georgia‟. „Concerning marriage I prefer
    to get married to Christian. One might marry but does not change religious confession‟.
   Comparatively liberal attitude have respondents from Marneuli. „Perhaps I marry
    American, French, Englishman, German, Russian and Georgian‟. „It depends on love. It
    does not matter if you love‟. However, Georgian respondents refuse to marry
    Azerbijanian. „I do not marry Azeri because they have different rules. Such a family may
    be broken. We have different rules that are the reason why they could not adjust each
    other. The major is religious deference. We Christians and Muslims have little alike‟. „I
    prefer to marry Georgian, Svan is Georgian too but I do not want to get married. I do not
    marry a person who belongs to other religious confession. After some years husband make
    you change religion. Our religion forbids as to get married to Muslim. I can make a friend
    and deal with different nations‟.
   Attitude of Azerbaijanian respondents towards this issue are different: „I know many
    families of Azeri and Georgian they have no problem in spite of their religious difference.
    I consider that one can get married to any nation. There are problems only with Armenians
    and little with Russians. Our generation has different attitude. Our forefathers did not
    agree to marry a representative of other nations. The best is to get married with a
    representative of self- nation but if there is a love nothing matters‟. „I marry only
    Azerbaijani because I do not want to aRreva mix my blood with other‟s, stranger,
    Christian. We have quite different religion. Christians are allowed to marry Armenians or
    others, but we could not. Azeri must marry only a representative of Azerbaijanian nation‟.
    „I marry only Azerbaijani. If I go another country it is possible to get married with other
    nation. In Marneuli I cannot dare. In our household we are all Azeris.
   One of Georgian respondent reacted strongly on this matter and called Azeris two-faced: „I
    Georgian but I could not insist not to marry representative of other nation. They deny
    marrying Georgian categorically. How could you explain the fact that almost every Azeris
    in my school love Georgian girls. If they have such kind of problem why they love
    Georgians. Azeris girls love Georgian boys and I have never heard on the contrary. This
       raises a doubt that Azeris are not frank. They are double-faced I know many of them and I
       dare say Azeris are double-faced‟.
      Armenian respondents turn to be radical regarding different nations: „I would get married
       to a representative of my nation, not only Armenian but Georgian too. The most important
       is to be Christian. Azeris have quite different religion. We cannot adjust each other‟.
      Representatives of Ninotsminda give priority to self-nation: „I marry Armenian. It is my
       mother tongue. We would have the same tradition, culture.‟ „If I like do not care
       nationality. Georgian women are pretty Russians are too. „I do no marry Turkish, Negro
       and Muslim‟.
      Respondents from Akhalkalaki put accent on human features: „If he is a good person and I
       love him anyone is acceptable‟. „Bad or good person is in every nation. I love Georgian
       girl but she does not‟. Armenian, Russian, Georgian, and American – all of them is
       acceptable. Among unacceptable nations Turkish was named „because all of them are
       terrorists‟; Japanese due to appearance.
      Armenian respondent from Akhaltsikhe-Ninotsminda mixed group prefer to marry
       representative of self-nation: „I would get married only Armenian‟. Some respondents
       have neutral position: „The most important is personality‟ „Importance is given to kindness
       and respect nationality does not care‟. Georgians share this opinion. In negative category is
       named Turkish. „Turkish do not confess genocide. This is disrespectful. They ought to
       apologize‟.


Which religious confession is acceptable or unacceptable for you?
      Acceptable religious confession for participants of Akhaltsikhe is Christian Orthodox and
       generally Christianity, Catholicism. „Catholicism is close to Christian Orthodox Church‟.
       It is noteworthy that participants confuse religious identification with ethnic and they are
       frequently mentioning: „Acceptable is Catholic nation and Christian nation because this
       religion comes from IV century. Those sects were established only two centuries ago and
       acceptable are Christians‟. The same time young people give importance to devotion to
       belief: „I respect anyone who is devoted to serving God‟.
      Respondents from Akhaltsikhe consider Jehovah's Witnesses particularly unacceptable and
       different sects and regard it as imposing religion upon others: „I hate dictated religion‟
       „Buddhists and pagans are unacceptable‟. „My relatives gave us a book about Jehovah's
       Witnesses and I tore and put it in the bin‟. „Buddhists have their traditions and struggle for
       saving their soul. They do not impose their religion on you and Jehovah's Witnesses bother
       with their nonsense‟. As it was mentioned participants confuse confessional and ethnical
       identities, for example, „I do not love Jewish people. They sold their God. That is the
    reason why they undergo torture even now‟. Nevertheless they express ambivalent attitude
    towards Jewish people: „I do not hate them. Hebrew people were first Christian. Only one
    of them was a traitor‟. Muslims are unacceptable for participants: „A driver told us that he
    was forced by his boss not to make the sign of the cross and after his refusal he had to left
    the job‟. „Muslims are unacceptable because they have different belief. They have such
    traditions unacceptable for Georgian society. Muslims forbid drinking, eating meat and
    head of fish. They have such rules that are unacceptable for a brave man‟. „Christian
    Orthodox Church let only one time to get married. Islam ignores this. If Muslims and
    Georgians live side by side they may fall in love. This case Georgian woman has to change
    her religious confession in order to get married‟.
   Respondents from Bolnisi are more tolerant towards various religious confessions and they
    note differences only in rituals: „it does not matter. The important is to believe in God.
    God is one. Every human has religion and you shouldn‟t make him or her change it. Every
    human being has this right‟. „Director of our center (Lutheran after religious confession)
    said good words: Christianity is one house with different rooms, which you may enter and
    it does not matter how‟.
   Nevertheless respondents from Bolnisi name unacceptable religious categories. They
    consider unacceptable Jehovah‟s Witnesses and Muslims: „I belong to Christian Orthodox
    Church and Jehovah‟s Witnesses and sects are unacceptable for me‟. „Baptists are
    unacceptable‟. „Christians have never related to Muslims. Only business deal is possible…
    My uncle is a priest and he christened some Tatars in Marneuli. Tatars took revenge on
    him. They hang a death dog in the yard of the church and insulted him‟. „I know many
    Muslims who were christened but they had problems with their family members. They
    were e alienated from their relatives. This is natural. I do not agree my relative become
    Jehovah‟s Witness. This is inadmissible... Nowadays Christians are less than Muslims and
    we are in minority. Of course it is good for us but it causes dissatisfaction in Muslims‟.
   Participants of the mixed group Marneuli-Bolnisi-Akhaltsixe express the same opinion: „I
    was in Armenian Apostolic Church and could not notice any difference… Difference is in
    rituals‟. „First of all Christian is acceptable for us, though Catholic is Christian too‟. „If I
    do not love my religion I cannot respect others. Any person belongs to this or that religious
    confession and you should respect others religion. I do not differentiate Catholicism and
    Christian Orthodox Church. When it concerns to marriage I prefer Christian‟. In spite such
    acceptability they generally complain poly-religious environment: „there are mosque
    among almost six or seven Christian Orthodox Churches.             While Christians worship
    mullah is crying three times a day. A voice of mullah is heard in Sioni or Metekhi‟. „In
    Akhaltsikhe Armenian Apostolic Church is next to Christian Orthodox Church but no one
    is against it‟. „By the way Georgians and Armenians were quarreling on Ivlite‟s Catholic
    Church. Georgians started building and was accomplished by Armenians‟.
   Azeri respondents from Marneuli declare neutral or slight positive position on different
    religions and give priority to Islam: „every body belongs to this or that religious confession
    and you ought to respect any. For me Islam is acceptable.‟ „I do not differentiate persons
    according to religion. Bed person is bed and good one is good‟. „Islam is acceptable. I do
    not care others. God is one. Everyone worship in its way. In business it has no importance
    but concerning marriage there comes a problem‟.
   Georgian participants from Marneuli share the opinion of Azeris: „I would give advantage
    to religion and not nationality. I belong to Christian Orthodox Church, but even David
    Builder who was fighting against Muslims inclined his head to mosque. He used to go to
    mosque and worshiped there. You should respect your and others religion. I Respect all of
    religions but Christianity is acceptable‟. „Any religion is acceptable for me because our
    religion teach us that every religion is acceptable and Human Right says that we ought to
    respect all Religious confession. But if it concerns to marriage attitude differs‟. Slight
    different opinion is expressed: Some Russians do not love Georgian due to conflict but we
    belong to one and the same religious confession that could not be said about Jehovah‟s
    Witnesses and Muslims‟.
   Respondents from Ninotsminda and Akhalkalaki express extremely negative attitude
    towards Turkish people. There is confusion of confessional and ethnic identity: „Turkish
    people were enemy of Armenia. Armenians do not agree to make friends with Turkish. We
    do not like Muslims precisely Turkish, due to genocide this is an everlasting pain‟.
   On the background of unacceptable groups more positively seems rest confessions
    particularly in case of Ninotsminda. This fact is explained by living in poly-religious
    environment: „Christian Orthodox Church, Armenian Apostolic Church, Catholics are
    acceptable‟.
   On the contrary Muslims were evaluated positively in the mixed group from Akhaltsikhe-
    Ninotsminda. This fact was explained by watching soap operas about Muslims: „I like
    Muslims they dance beautifully. They are very strict worshipers. Muslims worship five
    times in a day and have strict rules. There is only slight discrimination on the ground of
    gender‟.
   In the same mixed group only some respondents deem Muslim as unacceptable.
    Aggression is expressed mainly towards Georgian: „it is said that Georgians want to
    change Armenian Apostolic Church into Christian Orthodox Church. There was a case in
    „Didi Samsala‟ when Georgians wanted to change the church and that gave a rise to
      conflict. In Akhalkalaki schools children broke windows because near the Armenian
      Church Georgian was digging a hole to bury a Georgian. If such policy continues the
      response would be more severe‟.


How do you characterize Georgian, Armenian and Azerbaijani?
         Respondents from Akhaltsikhe characterize Georgians according following sign: they
          are followers of traditions and strong believer accordingly; they are very hospitable,
          love to have a feast, joyful and clever; our dance is real surprise for the entire world;
          Georgians are proud and hardworking people; they are warmhearted; Georgians could
          not stand slavery; love household; are educated people. „Georgian mother grow up
          child and teach them all traditions and hospitability. Georgian nation are friendly;
          Armenian and Azerbaijani are closed‟.
         Negative features of Georgians were also named: During Football match of Georgia
          and Greek Georgians behaved terribly. I was ashamed being Georgian. They do not
          know how to behave; are very hot-tempered; are lazy. „Georgians do not save money
          for necessity. They build houses, buy cars and if he looses his job have no money
          saved‟. They are very ambitious people; do not care about future; are very
          overweening.
         While characterizing participants of Akhaltsikhe compare Georgians with
          representative of Armenia. In their view negative or positive evaluations are caused not
          only by relationship between Georgians and Armenians but observation of foreigners.
          They state an example from the fiction of Duma. There are also presented an
          ultimatum towards representative of national minorities: „we must demand them to
          respect our language and our religion. In spite of living in Georgia during years they
          come to us and speak in Armenian. Why should I speak them in Armenian in my
          motherland? His forefather settled in Georgia several centuries ago. Not he is obliged
          to respect our language, religion and my motherland and its traditions, which has been
          given asylum for so many years‟.
         Speaking about Armenians and Azeris both nations are compared with each other that
          is explained by the lack of information about these nations and resemblance: „I have
          little information about Armenian but taking into consideration my neighbors they are
          good people, warmhearted. Perhaps they feel envious‟. I am not well informed about
          Armenian. Women are good cook‟. „I do not know Azeris. I have never deal with them
          and have no information‟. „Concerning Armenians and Azeris they are very much
          alike‟. „Armenians are more hardworking people. Azeris could do a job that Georgians
          deny to‟. „Azris are greedy. Armenian and Azeri women are more restricted than
    Georgian‟. „Armenian and Azeris are greedy. They work hard but live in poor houses.
    They keep money and buy gold‟. „Armenian and Azeris are longsighted. They do not
    waste money and keep it‟. „If you show respect to Georgians they pay it back. Azeris
    are the same type of people‟. „Georgians are greedy too. One could not characterize
    precisely this or that nation. „Armenian and Azeris do not care what kind of work they
    do‟. „I cannot characterize Armenian because I have not close relation with them. But
    they are perspicacious people‟. „Concerning Azeris they are unacceptable for me on
    the ground of religion‟. „We have no contacts with Azeris. Some Armenians are
    joyful‟. „In every nation should be found clever and talented person‟. „Armenians give
    priority to their nation and do not care damaging others in order to be saved‟.
    „Armenian may not help a friend in need due to money‟. „There is an Armenian who is
    better than Georgian‟. „In our camp Azeris are not openhearted. They are unsociable‟.
    „If Armenian move to new place he does not try to relate to neighbours‟. „If there is a
    problem of electricity no one try to do something. In the entire street from 30
    households 25 are Armenians and no one supply 5 households with electricity. They
    do not care. Armenians can afford to buy a generator. This problem should be solved if
    we go in the street and say a word‟. „Armenians are more perspicacious people, for
    example Georgian study for diploma. If we think a little cook earn more money than
    lecturer. They prefer to work hard and earn more money‟.
   While respondents characterizing Armenian some of participants try to defend them:
    „do not speak aggressively about Armenians because there is many foreigners whose
    forefathers settled one or two centuries ago and do not know Georgian. We have our
    traditions. They have theirs. We think that we have good traditions and this is true but
    they think the same‟.
   Respondents from Bolnisi share the same opinion: „It is difficult to characterize due to
    nationality. Bad and good is in every nation‟. Nevertheless they give advantage to
    Georgian: Georgians are very hospitable; like feast, joyful life. „Armenians are
    swindler and cunning‟. „I am Armenian and do not agree this opinion my family is
    different‟. „Hospitable persons are in Azerbaijan nation‟ „I have never heard about
    Azeris‟. „Azeris have their rules, for example men and women sit separately‟. „Azeris
    are hardworking people‟.
   The same opinion is expressed in the mixed group Akhaltsikhe–Bolnisi-Marneuli. „In
    every nation is bad and good person‟. Nevertheless representatives of Armenian nation
    are given more negative evaluation. One of the Georgian participant mentions that
    Armenian girl blamed her in breaking the thing, which was damaged by her. „ I had an
    Armenian group mate and every time when we went somewhere he always tried to
    ruin than day‟. „It depends on personality. I have good Armenian neighbors‟. „If you
    treat Azeri kindly he will support you in need. This is not characteristic of Armenian‟.
   According to respondents from Marneuli: „Armenian is cunning, Azerbaijani
    hardworking, Georgian joyful and hospitable‟. ‟I have good relation with Azeris. They
    have good features and you are willing to relate to them. Armenians are different‟.
    „Armenians support each other when they are in need. Georgians do not behave the
    same way‟. „It is easier to make friend with Azeri than with Armenian. Azeris support
    each other‟. „Georgians and Armenians belong to one religious confession. This is an
    important factor‟. „In every nation you may find good or bad person‟. „One could make
    a friend with Russian. There are only language differences‟. „People are the same in
    any nation‟. „Descriptions come from history and people‟s experiences. If Armenians
    are not crafty how could they achieve to capture Karabakh'. „I do not differentiate.
    Aeries, Armenians and Georgians are the same‟. „Many Azeri girls live in my building
    and they don not walk with us. Concerning Armenians they are friendly‟. „The
    essential is his or her character and nationality does not matter‟. „The most important is
    mutual understanding. Less importance is given to religious confession‟. „I
    characterize Aeries... I cannot make a friend and deal with them. For me it is easier to
    make friend with Russian and Armenian. I characterize Russian and Armenian more
    positively‟. „I do not deal with Azeris and Armenians but regard them as initiator of
    disputes‟. „Azeris girl return home very early‟. „Most of Georgians characterize
    themselves hospitable. But Azeris are hospitable too‟.
   Respondents from Ninotsminda and Akhalkhalaki share the opinion that three of
    nations are the same and characterizing them is difficult: „Armenians, Georgians and
    Azeris are old brothers and they should be together and stay friends‟. „Azeris have
    different lifestyle. They are kind, tidy, and generous and clever. „There are kind and
    cruel persons among Georgians and Armenians. It is difficult to characterize this or
    that nation generally‟. „Kind or silly persons might be in every nation. When one
    behaves worse this does not mean that whole Armenians are bad‟. „If I give someone a
    job they say that Armenians are good people‟. „I have relation with Azeris and
    Georgians I like all of them. We resemble each other. Even the words resemble:
    „Matsoni, Changali, Shakari‟. „We are all musical, have the same temperament‟. „I like
    Azeris and Georgians‟. „Frankly I have never related to Azeris and consider them as
    unsociable and unfriendly. I imagined them in different dressing as in „Clone‟. I
    thought that they would begin worship at the afternoon. Perhaps they are worshiping
    but we cannot notice‟. „I do not know Azeris‟. „Armenian can do any type of work‟.
          „The definition that all Muslims are terrorists comes from Television‟. „I do not like
          their saying „kill 10 unbeliever and you will be allowed in paradise‟
         The mixed group from Akhaltsikhe-Ninotsnimda characterizes Georgians positively.
          Their hospitality is particularly pointed out. Though respondents speak about negative
          features. „Georgians are hospitable but they have bad feature when I ask in Russian
          they give answer in Georgian‟. „I do not know Azeris. Azeris are friendly and joyful‟.
          „Georgian should know Russian to communicate‟. “They must not study English and
          acclaim as state language. They should take into account that during Soviet Union
          Russian was a state language‟. „Georgian are friendly‟. „Armenians suffer many pains.
          They have been living in Armenian after genocide and maintaining their traditions,
          schools and churches‟. Participants of this group underline positive factors of
          unification of Georgia and Armenia. „I may be mistaken in case of Azeris but I know
          precisely about Georgian that they are –hospitable, friendly and supportive nation. And
          if they achieve unification against enemy like Turkish at the beginning of XX century
          they would destroy…there are known many facts in history that empires were
          destroyed and small countries as Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan were saved and I
          hope this will last in the future‟.


Characterize states of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan
         While characterizing Georgia respondents from Akhaltsikhe accuse state: „In Georgia
          employees are not paid accordingly‟. „Our artists were in America and they feel like a
          human‟. „We are beggars. We go to America and work with Negro‟. They also speak
          about persons with higher education who work as a worker or as a driver: „our state
          does not care about us and we are to go in Russia and work as a worker. In Georgia
          number of unemployed are more than employed‟.
         According to Bolnisi respondents Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan had good
          relationship before but now they are opposed, particularly Armenia and Azerbaijan.
          Participants of this group characterizing three sates as following: „Now Georgia is
          reviving; Armenia and Azerbaijan is almost revived. In view of economy and also in
          other fields‟ Azerbaijan is the first. „In view of cleanness and protecting environment I
          could not agree. My relatives came from Azerbaijan and they said that the sea was
          very dirty; streets are full of papers‟. Herein they try to show their advantage: „Guests
          were from Akhalkalaki and said that Bolnisi is a clean town. They got accustomed not
          to throw something down‟. Respondents from Bolnisi have less information about
          Azeris and describe Armenia in detail: in view of geographic location Armenia is in
          bad conditions. It has no sea. Though it have better economic conditions. Georgia is
           more democratic. It is a pity that we have such good conditions, even this black sea
           and in spite of this our country are lower in the view of economic. All European
           countries are more developed. It‟s due to inactiveness of our governments. We have
           gold mines near Kazreti in Bolnisi and much money could be earned from it… Georgia
           is a very rich country but they sell everything lands, citruses, rivers. There are many
           rivers hydroelectric power plant to be built on. We do not need to buy electric power.
           We are very rich country in the view of natural resource.
          The mixed group: Bolnisi-Marneuli-Akhaltsikhe they discuss the issue within the
           context of tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan: There is tension between
           Azerbaijan and Armenia. Armenians are beaten in Azerbaijan. Proceeding from this
           states are opposed too. Both of the countries ought to compromise.
          According to participants of Marneuli Georgia is the most democratic country in
           Caucasus. „Armenia is under the supervision of Russia. Georgia is guided by
           America‟. One Azerbaijanian respondent regard Azerbaijan as motherland:
           „Azerbaijan is my Republic but there is corruption there. Armenia is separative and is
           subordinated to Russia. In Marneuli participants‟ opinion Georgia is democratic
           country. „If not „rose Revolution‟ Georgia would be subordinated to Russia‟.
          Respondents from Akhalkalaki consider that Georgia have friendly attitude towards
           Armenia and Azerbaijan. But Armenia and Azerbaijan are opposed. Politics of
           Armenia is characterized as the most positively: „it is only one country, which is not
           striving to European and American states. Armenia is under development. They are
           doing their best‟. Less information is given about Azerbaijan. Interesting view is
           expressed by one of interviewees: „we have not experienced living in Georgia or
           Azerbaijan so we could not appreciate them‟. „I was born here and in spite of it is
           undeveloped I like it‟. „Our natives will not leave for Russia if they have a job here.
           After visa regime going Russia became more problematic‟.
          Respondents from Ninotsminda characterized Armenia positively: „Armenia is a mall
           country but in the sphere of economy it is developing faster than Georgia. The major
           problem of Armenia is having no reach to the sea. We have no idea about Azerbaijan.
           We have to visit Armenia frequently because it is our second motherland. Our relatives
           live there. Majority of us study and are welcome there‟. Herein they speak about
           problem of language, which humble them to continue studying and establish in
           Georgia.


What is your attitude towards politics and will you vote in elections or not?
        Majority of Akhaltsikhe respondents are less interested in politics, though they
         consider it necessary to express their opinion, especially when it is to decide destiny of
         the country. According to their opinion everyone should declare his or her position „to
         elect president.‟ Nevertheless sceptic opinion was also expressed on elections: „We
         could not believe that 99% of population voted for Saakashvili‟. Nevertheless majority
         of participants said that they supported politics of Saakashvili but they were frustrated:
         „We also supported Saakashvili but today is quite different‟. „I supported
         Shevardnadze‟. „I might participate in election. Perhaps people expected more‟.
         „Saakashvili gave bribe to voters‟. „I may vote but I am not interested in politics‟.
         Generally while discussing politics opposition is ascribed as weak and is implied
         Labourist and Ahead Georgia, on the background of which they anticipate supporting
         governmental parties. Though in case of Republicans becoming more active events are
         to develop into different direction.
        Participants of Bolnisi and the mixed group express the same attitude towards elections
         and politics. They regard it as their duty to vote but in their opinion politics is dirty.
        Respondents from Marneuli also consider their duty to vote. They are interested in
         political issues. Participants criticize policy carrying out by our government and
         reforms, particularly education reform. In respondents‟ opinion: „President takes
         decision only by his intuition and does not care about others‟ According to their
         opinion reforms should be carried out in politics. The view of opposition must be taken
         into consideration. Decision ought to be taken proceeding from the welfare of people.
         While discussing education reform Marneuli adolescents note that under the guidance
         of Russia the later were taking language, land, and belief from Georgians‟. „Despite
         Americans do not force Georgians English language is getting more acceptable in our
         country. This is not good‟.
        Adolescents of Akhalkalaki are going to vote in order to improve conditions of the
         city. They will vote for deputy and city gamgabeli because “We are tired of one and
         the same faces. Akhalkalaki is dividing into two sides. We want fairness‟. While
         discussing politics they are talking about necessity of studding history of Armenia and
         reduction of hours of history of Georgia. „We do not study history of Armenia in
         Akhalkalaki only history of Georgia. I am interested in studding history of my people.
         At present we are learning newest history‟.
        Ninotsminda: „We will participate in elections and vote for a candidate who can do
         best for our country. Our future depends on them‟.


If you were an adviser of the President of Georgia what would you advise him first to do?
   Respondents from Akhaltsikhe advise president about strengthening economic of
    Georgia, opening factories and creating workplaces in order to employ people, fighting
    corruption, employing experienced staff: „People who have experience and
    professionalism. There is no need for minister to be 25 years old. Experienced gained
    abroad may not be useful for us. Our country follows up Europe and do not take into
    account its possibility. Taxes have been increased to 200 and 300 Gel while wage is
    only 30 Gel‟. According to them no one care of economy of the country. „If a country
    has strong peasants it is provided with everything‟ „if Armenian was in government he
    would care of people and raise salary and enable them to pay taxes accordingly‟.
    „Staffs should not be changed so quickly. One reform is not completed when new
    starts‟. „I advise president not to trade Georgia. He has sold everything. Trading
    everything is disadvantageous. Instead I would invest money in Port of Foti, which
    will be profitable. They sold Borjomi-Kharagauli Park to Germans and Georgians
    cannot afford to have a rest there.
   Adolescents reckon that it better Saakashvili spend money on education rather than
    army.   One of the participants cites an example: „I studied economic of China.
    Chinless people were in need and borrowed money from America. They invest it in
    education. Educated people created strong economic of the country and could afford
    paid money back‟. Nevertheless some participants think that army should be financed.
    Respondents speak about vicious tendencies of finding a job. Knowledge gained
    abroad and connections are the most important factors for getting a good job: „there is
    a tendency that you should be experienced abroad even a month and know English or
    you could not get a good job. If you have not connection... This reform leads us to the
    fact that after five or six years there will be no chemist or mathematician in Georgia.
    Only English, knowledge of computers and abilities-skills are paid attention. History
    of Georgia is given less importance; it is a shame that Georgian do not know history of
    the country‟.
   Participants of Akhaltsikhe complain that government does not care about regions and
    social problems. „This government cares for only Tbilisi. I think president were
    everywhere except Akhaltsikhe while it is the center of Samtskhe-Javakheti. He does
    not think about people‟. „The president does not care that people are in need because
    they have little monthly income, which is not enough even for transportation. They do
    not regard Akhaltsikhe historic. It is close to the border. No one worry about us. When
    your Governor is a singer... The government cares about Borjomi welfare. Roads are
    destroyed in Akhaltsikhe. We are having water supply problem‟. „I think all this
    problem is due to passive role of residents of Akhaltsikhe in „Rose Revolution‟. „We
    are having no electricity during two months and no one is going to protest it‟.
    Respondents stress need for installing private meter „When they decided to take protest
    action they were scared by specialized forces‟. „People are frustrated. Let‟s speak
    about drinking water often with deleterious effects on their health. Though it should be
    mentioned that supply of water has been recently improved.
   Adolescent voice general issues as strengthening national conscience from the side of
    state leaders. „Process of globalization is going on all over the world and Georgia is the
    participant of it, but this should not be understood as abolition of our nationality. I do
    not like that there are no sign of nationality in a passport. I also do not agree with carry
    out such politics that everyone is allowed to choose a surname. In this case one might
    loose his origin and accordingly representatives of different nations living in Georgia
    may take this or that Georgian surname particularly Bagrationi. Time passes and there
    will be blood mix. Our religion does not allow this‟.
   Bolnisi respondents as advisers name the following problems: The primary is financial
    problem. It follows granting a pension, giving aid to patients, employment of people,
    restoration of territorial integrity of the country, improving relations as inside of the
    country as outside. They also speak about social problems: „I know that people must
    live 50 kilometers far from gold mines and we are settled near Kazreti‟ Electricity,
    water, gas supply is also a major concern amongst respondents. Bolnis respondents
    stress the need to clean up environment „Mashavera is polluted and it can be cleared
    but we need support. There is a need of experienced person who would study the
    question and inform the governor and the parliament about this problem‟. „If I had
    much money I would help my relatives who are in need, clear polluted river and than
    buy a filter‟. „There are many unemployed and they are forced to do something bad.
    Instead of employing people almost every day nearly ten men are resigned in Bolnisi
    rayon. Due to unemployment some of them trade narcotic and some entertain with
    different things‟. „Young people watching TV and get only bad information‟. Herein
    are also mentioned negative undertakings of the president; „He is not in his country
    and journeys over the word‟.       „He appoints inappropriate persons to this or that
    position‟. Respondents from Bolnisi speak about tendency of appointing „theirs‟ to
    positions and mainly from Tbilisi. „There is not need to invite „others‟ from Tbilisi to
    be appointed‟. Respondents also mention the credit of Saakashvili establishing new
    system of police service. „I have a sense of defense and are not scared of anything‟
   Participants of the mixed group (Bolnisi-Marneuli-Akhaltsikhe) advise the president
    the same. It differs only in the form of ultimatum: „Salary must be increased. He must
    care about people and share their problems, pay attention to education. Staff should be
    professional and experienced. There are people who cannot make even a resolution‟.
   Respondents from Marneuli place emphasis on economic issues, operating factories
    and employment of people. Though they also mention that economic conditions could
    not be improved unless support from other country and they imply Russia. Herein is
    expressed different opinion „Georgia should use its forces and than ask for aid‟.
    Participants consider that America get much profit form Georgia.
   Respondents from Akhalkhalaki also pay attention to naming problems: repairing
    roads, broadening economic, improving relation with Russia, creating working place,
    raising salary and pension, improvement teaching in schools, entertainment and
    education, building sport‟s centers in Akhalkalaki. They also voice concern relating to
    schoolbooks, which are received from Russia and Armenia. Concerning roads they
    consider that there should be built roads that enable them to reach Tbilisi more quickly.
    Participants compare Russia to America and note the priorities of Russia: „America
    does not give much. If we look through the history of Georgia we will discover that
    Russia often supported our country when it was in need‟.
   It could be said that respondents from Ninotsminda continue the issue. They advise
    president: „Let Russians stay in Georgia and do not destroy „Garadok‟, repair roads,
    employ people and do something interesting for youth, build more sport‟s center and
    swimming pools‟. They evaluate critically Russian army leaving Georgian territory.
    Respondents from Ninotsminda insist that „conflicts will break because this rayon are
    settled with representatives of different nations. Georgians and Armenians were friends
    during Soviet Union. We live in peaceful coexistence. When relationship between
    Russia and Georgia broke off Georgians did not love Armenians any more. Armenians
    get money in Russia and Armenia have been supported by Russia‟. Economic factor
    play a certain role in establishing such situation. „Factories being operated before are
    closed now‟. „If Georgia is developed economically we would study here‟. Concerning
    education participants note other difficulties: „we have no secondary school. After 10th
    form pupils leave for Erevan. There is not Armenian Institute in Georgia‟.
   Participants of Akhaltsikhe-Ninotsminda mixed group complain about president‟s
    politics and their advices are much more a note: „let hold referendum on severe issues
    and people should have a choice, this is democratic country not anarchic‟. In parallel
    rude interference of Armenia in the foreign policy of Georgia is mentioned: the most
    severe problem is poor quality of roads. Armenia want to repair roads in Javakheti but
    Georgia does not allow. The road is terrible to the direction of the border‟. „I advise
    him maintain good relationship with Russians and Armenians, give freedom of speech
          and allow young people to study anywhere they like‟. Somehow they pose a threat to
          president relating to break off relation with Russia: „if I were a president I would leave
          Georgia because there is a danger of war. If he carries out a good policy this might be
          prevented‟. The same time regulated relationship with Russia is associated with
          number of solved problems. Respondents show good knowledge of economic:
          „Customs clearance for cars was in Borjomi before now only it is possible in Tbilisi.
          That raised difficulties‟. „This summer young people rested in camps and much money
          was wasted on that project. The better this money to be spent on other projects, for
          example repairing roads. Furthermore there are resources of land, water and tourism. If
          hydroelectric power stations would be built we have not to buy expansive electricity
          from Armenia and Russia. If we had good attitude towards Russia gas price would be
          lower. The price of gas is increasing and it might be fatal for country economic. There
          are different opinions expressed: „Georgia ought to restore territorial integrity of the
          country, roads are in a state of despair, concerning education - we have old school
          books while pupil are given new ones in Tbilisi‟.



Which country should Georgia strive to receive support from?
         Participants from Akhaltsikhe consider Russia and America: „we should have good
          relationship with Russia and America. We need support from any country‟. One part of
          them name Russia and take into account knowledge of language: „We ought to have
          good relation with neighbor country new comer brings new troubles‟. „No one help us
          better than Russia we have the same religion‟. „We have bad attitude towards Russia
          because during years it was our patron‟. „Russian language was spread all over the
          world before and everyone spoke in Russian. Now Georgians do not know Russian. It
          is a shame. They pay 200$ for studying English and do not know Russian at all‟. „If
          one knows English and computer can find a good job. There are many
          parliamentarians who do not know Russian. First you should know language of your
          neighbor‟. „Russia is a stronger country and we belong to the same religious
          confession and have friendly relationship‟. „Russia always supports Georgia‟. Part of
          respondents deems America as country, which support Georgia mostly: „when we have
          friendly attitude towards Russia everything was in Russian language‟. „Friendship with
          Russia is not useful for Georgia. Russians were not responsible none of treaties they
          signed and broke all of them. Ossetians and Chechens follow Russians‟ example. They
          ratified many peace treaties, which were broken afterward‟. According to several
          respondents Georgia should not ask for help‟. „No one give a present of money to
    Georgia. They are buying everything step by step. Georgia is in need of entering in
    European Union to be protected. America aim to get something from us. Otherwise it
    does not support us‟. Only several respondents express different opinion. They
    consider Ukraine the most prospective partner. „There is a tension between Russia and
    Georgia and it is better to relate to Ukraine at that moment. Our presidents have
    friendly relationship‟.
   Participants of Bolnisi chose Russia and America though quite contradictory.
    Respondents who chose Russia, place emphasis on its territorial closeness: „If war
    break out Russia is closer and we ought to have good attitude towards it‟. The same
    time respondents reckon that misunderstanding between Russia and Georgia is due to
    somebody‟s will: „I consider that conflict between Russia and Georgia expresses
    conflict between persons, I mean appointed officials. People have good relationship. I
    know that there is a need for Russian bases to leave our territory but it is of interest to
    private persons. Russia is near us and why should we sever relationship. We belong to
    the same religious confession.‟ „Our president has such relation with America that it do
    not refuse to help us‟. There were general type definitions and Turkey was also named
    among neighbor countries. „First of all Georgia should ask for help strong and friensly
    country. Russia is acceptable but Turkey is nearer and prosperous‟. Georgia ought to
    make friend not only with America but any country. Aid might be financial, military
    with equipment.
   Representatives of the mixed group (Marneuli-Bolnisi-Akhaltsikhe) consider that
    Georgia should have friendly relations with every country especially with
    neighbouring ones but must not bear influence. „We ought to establish good relation
    with all countries especially with neighbor country. Russia is a strong and neighbor
    country. Importance is given to the same religious confession‟. „First of all we must
    relate to neighbor countries – Azerbaijan, Armenia, Russia‟. „Georgia should not be
    under the supervision of America or Russia. During entire history Georgia was always
    under the influence of other country. America does not need Georgia if it is no
    anticipating something in return. This country has its interest in Georgia‟.
   According to Marneuli interviewees received financial support should be used
    reasonably: „Painting buildings makes a city beautiful but Georgia has $4 million in
    debt of international organizations and states. People should be employed and
    industries be paid attention‟. In view of cooperating with America various opinions
    were expressed: neutral- Saakashvili has been in America and already made his
    decision and it was a right choice; negative- They wanted to build an aerodrome in
    Marneuli and if a war breaks between America and Iran Georgia would be bombarded.
          Concerning Russia one of Georgian participant evaluate relationship critically and
          have dispute on this issue with representatives of other national minority: „I am
          Georgian and Russia was trying during a century to capture language, land and
          religion‟.
         Youth from Ninotsminda-Marneuli give priority to Russia and Armenia. – „Russia is a
          big country and as I know from history it protected Georgia form the enemy and gave
          us economic support‟.
         Respondents from Akhalkalaki share the opinion about relationship with Russia:
          „Georgia must have friendly relation with Russia because many inhabitants of
          Akhalkalaki leave for Russia to work there. Majority of residents are employed by
          Russian base. If Georgia have good attitude towards Russia it will be useful for its
          development‟.
         Participants of the mixed group from Akhaltsikhe- Ninotsminda generally speak about
          good relation with neighbor country and criticize military politics of America:
          „Neighbor country surely. Georgia should have good relation first of all with Armenia
          and Azerbaijan, Turkey too. They are Geographic neighbors‟. „America is far from
          Georgia. It is conducting war and takes army from here. Georgians think that they are
          depended on Russia. The same would be in case of America. Better make a friendship
          with Russia, Armenia and other neighbor than America‟. „Thousands of people will be
          resigned but if they are assured of safety do not hamper leaving of Russians military
          bases‟.



Name source of information and evaluate working of this or that information channel.
         According to participants of Akhaltsikhe they obtain information from mass media:
          TV, radio and press. Kviris Palitra and Alia were named. There was revealed
          characteristics of receiving information Georgians and Armenians, which is related to
          ignorance of language: „we have no Russian channel. After switching off Russian
          channels number of satellite receivers has been increased. All of Armenians launched
          satellite receivers in order to watch Russian channels. They do not watch Georgian
          ones‟. „We can watch public broadcasting, Rustavi 2 and Imedi. Armenian programs
          are only on the public channel‟. Within this context after discussing freedom of speech
          respondents speak about politics: Only two channels are accessible in Akhaltsihke –
          Cronika and Kurieri (Imedi and Rustavi2). We receive information mainly from these
          two channels…If people are allowed to reveal the truth everybody says „Misha go!‟
          But they could not dare. Government should be elected legally. There is no need of
    revolution. Adolescent express positive attitude towards Imedi and evaluate negatively
    Rustavi2 accuse of bias: „I like programs of Imedi concerning politics. But I do not like
    Kurieri because it is irritating. It repeats one and the same information in every hour.
    We also have the channel the first but watch only Imedi…George Targamadze is brave
    hearted, Inga Grigolia too. He speaks about issues that government forbids to be
    discussed. He is very educated. Inga Grigolia reveals secrets of everyone. If I were
    Inga I would be scared. George Targamadze speaks about people in need. One
    program was about homeless children who take a smell of glue. Army could not save
    these children‟. Functioning of mass media is evaluated in connection with its attitude
    towards government: „everything is not shown on television; for example, we have no
    electricity for long. I think if we make a protest action mass media would be interested.
    There was an action but unorganized and had no result. That action was on TV. Only
    three participants Armenian in origin were aired. It is unbelievable that only three
    Armenian made the protest action. It was not covered objectively. Besides Rustavi 2
    has positive attitude towards government and support it. There are issues, which are
    aired more objectively than Rustavi 2 does. I do not like while journalists severe
    situation by their expressions. I do not like manner of speaking. How could not mass
    media air such a problem as pension?
   According participants of Bolnisi there are multiple channels. The main source of
    information is television, radio and press- Kviris palitra and 24 Saati. The following
    channels are mentioned: Tbilisi, Chennel I, Imedi, Baku, NTV, PTP. There is a channel
    Azer,i which is named as a source of information about Turkey. According to
    adolescents Azeris watch particularly Baku and Turkish channels. „They are not
    interested in other issues. I mean Azeri villages‟. Like participants of Akhaltsikhe
    Bolnisi respondents deem that Rustavi 2 misrepresent information. „Imedi air facts
    more precisely. Journalists of Rustavi 2 are more aggressive and try to show negative
    side of situation. This is done to carry on intrigue‟.
   Participants of the mixed group state that they obtain information particularly from
    friends. Parents and relatives are also named as source of information. „The news are
    spread very quickly through the city‟. The following channels are named: Rustavi 2
    and Imedi, NTV, Tbilisi, Bolnisi channel the fifth. Sarke, Kviris Palitra, 24 Saati are
    named as the most acknowledged newspapers. Different evaluations are made of mass
    media accordingly: „I mark five…not five three because sometimes they are not
    objective. They are trying to say something sensational in order to attract attention‟.
    „Majority of journalists attaches importance only to headlines to make reader read this
    or that article‟. According to participants many of residents know Georgian but they do
    not speak: „they receive information from us. When we speak they can understand
    everything but do not speak‟.
   Respondents from Marneuli watch particularly Russian channels: Novosti, Vremia,
    Moscow, ОРТ, Channel I. „everyone watch Turkish channels. They know Turkish‟. „I
    like Georgian channels Imedi and Adjara. All Russian channels are good‟. „I watch
    Imedi and my father translate for me. I regard Imedi the best channel‟. One of sources
    of information is considered gossip: „there are people in Marneuli who obtain
    information quickly. People gather and exchange information‟. Lack of information
    and obtaining it only from Russian channels on the one hand and spreading gossip on
    the other give a raise to misunderstanding in micro social group. That was expressed in
    one of the focus group from Marneuli. Georgian respondent met with a reaction
    attempt of an Azeri participant to show advantage of friendly coexistence with Russia
    compare with America. They were speaking about 8 helicopters, which had presented
    by America. Each of them cost 8 000 000$, total 64 000 000 $. Besides „Georgia sent
    bomber to Russia to be repaired and 20 000 $ was to be paid for each, total 100 000 $.
    Russia did not let Georgia take them back on condition that it would pay the debt
    during some years. Which one is more reliable a neighbor which does not rely or a
    country which grants 64 000 000 $‟. However polemic was not ceased. Azeri
    participants went on citing facts confirming advantage of Russia. According to them
    severing relation with Russia would cause interruption of electricity and gas supply.
    „At the given moment 70$ of population earn money in Russia‟. Georgian participants
    go on maintaining their position and on its turn are speaking about interest of Russia:
    „If it was not profitable for Russia it would not sell electricity… Azeris take potatoes in
    Russia. So, Russia is depended on Georgia‟. „Borjomi is not realized in Russia but
    America and 26 countries‟. At last they begin quarreling and Georgians indicate
    ethnicity and Azeris cleverness of their nation:
    -Azeris live in Georgia and have better lands and more money than Georgians.
    -Azeris are clever
    -This is not due to cleverness. More Azeris work in gamgeoba. They also bribe
    officials.
   Respondents than speak about countries which Georgia should strive to cooperate: „We
    should make friends with America, France, Italy and Russia‟. „America invested much
    money in BTC project‟. „America would receive this money back. It dos not care about
    us. America bought part of Marnuli‟. „This is not true‟. Azeri respondents go on
    speaking about information they are receiving: „I watch world channels- Russian,
           European, sometime I obtain information from Internet, I do not watch Azeri channels.
           I watch Imedi.
          Participants of Akhalkalaki name as sources of information books and latest news.
           Armenian and Russian newspapers are also named. Though it is mentioned that youth
           does not read newspapers. The most popular turn to be Varskvlavebi. They watch
           mainly ОРТ, РТР, НТВ, Amedi, Adjara, Rustavi 2, Channel I, and Armenian channels.
          Akhalkalaki respondents different from participants of Akhaltsikhe and Bolnisi
           appraise positively Rustavi 2, which have Armenian programs so that everyone could
           obtain information about current situation. Positively is evaluated НТВ, ОРТ.
           Adolescent also consider that information is distorted on television. „Georgians and
           Russians televise news differently. Two different versions of one and the same
           information might be heard, for example mass meeting was held. Georgians and
           Russians understood it differently due to distorted information. Russia televise as it is
           useful for the country‟.
          Sources of information for participants of Ninotsminda are books and gossip. They
           particularly watch Russian channels - НТВ, ОРТ, Armenian - Channel I, Georgian –
           Imedi, Channel II and I. Participants evaluate positively channels of Russia especially
           ОРТ. „Sometimes local channels are on the air and one can listen terrible Georgian‟.
          Akhaltsikhe and Ninotsminda receive information from TV: „we obtain information
           from channels of Russia and we know only one side of a problem. If we have
           possibility of receiving information from second side we would make a comparison
           and conclusion‟.


Characterize social institutions Parliament, Police, Political parties, Religious institutes,
Court, Media, Army, Educational system, Ministries
          It should be mentioned that while characterizing social institutions respondents were
           not with one mind, for sample there working of Patruli is evaluated positively. On the
           contrary one of the participants cites an example when Patruly pass through turned
           over car carelessly. They are unanimous on the issue of Army. In their opinion much
           attention is paid to army. „Army is needed for Samachablo and Abkhazia. Better is to
           raise salary of teachers. Education is necessary for the state. Abkhazia is not willing to
           integrate because Georgia has no economic. President trade and invest money in
           something that is unprofitable. He sold Port of Foti and spent received money on army.
           You should strengthen your country, as Abkhazia is willing to integrate. But there is
           no progress. It is better to negotiate with enemy than to use army‟. Current government
           was criticized in comparison with previous one. Respondents place emphasis on
    employment of people and paying attention to peasants and social problems generally.
    „The government should care for peasants and let them produce production. Georgia
    has potential for strong economic. There are conditions for vineyards. But no one care
    about it. Why should French wine cost 15$ and Georgian 2$. Borjomi is recognized
    over the world‟. „People are in need. There are problem of water supply. People
    complain that they were not in such bed conditions during Shevardnadze period.
    People are frustrated‟. They criticized not only president but also entire government
    and its politics: „Aslan Abashidze was building and did not let him complete. He did
    not interfere in business. There was corruption but he spent much money on Batumi.
    The city was supplied with electricity‟. „If you visit Akhaltsikhe and see drinking
    water you will feel disgust. We are not „Negro‟. President was everywhere except
    Akhaltsikhe‟. While evaluating ministries: „I line out to working of Cabinet Minister
    and ministries accordingly. At present appointed officials are very young and have no
    experience. They were appointed due to education got abroad. Activities of ministers
    are very unacceptable for me. Bendukidze is carrying out non-Georgian politics.
    President should dismiss such officials. Trading of Port or other state establishment
    would not be useful for Georgian nation. This could be done bit by bit. At present we
    need money. It is unreasonable to waste received money. We should invest it
    otherwise. We should encourage enterprises or organizations and employ people. But
    one-time activities are unreasonable just like paying pensions or granting 20 liters oil
    to peasants. Corruption is in the country‟. Respondents complain about western
    orientation in educational system: „concerning education only history was change with
    foreign language. This indicates that Georgian traditions are changing with foreign
    step by step. If Georgian does not know history of ancients why would he know
    foreign languages?' Respondents made pessimistic prognoses about Parliament. In
    their opinion not only majority composed of unprofessional staff is accused in creating
    difficult situation but also inactive opposition members of which care only their
    welfare. „There are parliamentarians particularly sportsmen who have never dealt with
    politics but their names are used. More often in parliament are gathered people who
    have no idea about laws and make decisions in correspondence with the will of
    majority. Due to there absence of strong opposition a draft whether good or bad is
    always adopted. Concerning political parties they are not struggling for the welfare of
    the country‟.
   Respondents from Bolnisi evaluate the most negatively functioning of healthcare
    system. They note that despite ambulance is free of charge rights of patient are
    violated. There is a low level of medical service in Bolnisi. In Tbilisi some doctors
    take bribe. Respondents cite some occasions happened in Tbilisi. Quite positively is
    evaluated functioning of local NGO's police and police. They are less informed about
    Court.
   Participants of the mixed group from Akhaltsikhe-Bolnisi-Marneuli declare sceptic
    position on functioning of Justice due to corruption and Georgian mentality:
    „Corruption is everywhere and a decision is not made without money. When someone
    kills a man he is not guilty if money is paid‟. Positive evaluation is made about reforms
    carried out in the Ministry of Defense. Different evaluation is made about educational
    reforms: 'I like reforms carried out in the Ministry of Defense. I also like reforms in a
    field of education even National examinations. There was worse situation when I was
    passing‟. „I experienced that there was more corruption. I have passed National
    examinations this year. I have had high scores but was sent to Marneuli. Many
    mistakes were made. Cameras were recording but observers managed to help some of
    entrants. I do not like these reforms. They are feint‟. „But I think knowledge would be
    appreciated. At present is better situation. When I was passing examinations they
    demanded 500 dollars for going to university‟. „The Model was taken from America.
    But it does not work in Georgia because education is not on the same level. America is
    stronger country and this project was successful. The country is economically strong
    and youth are more educated than in Georgia. Only students who want to get
    knowledge go to foreign universities‟. Participants of the mixed group characterize
    army negatively, which is due to mainly old stereotype: „I have no desire to enter the
    army. I used to be told that if I did not study would have to enter the army‟. This view
    being stereotypic is revealed in expressions of female interviewees: „I am a girl but
    have a good attitude towards army and I have often declared my will to enter the army.
    I like to serve in the army, particularly commando army‟. 'My brother does not allow
    me not enter army. He thinks that going to army is obligatory‟. „Some people think it
    waste of time to serve in the army. It is true to a certain extent. I reckon that they get
    accustomed to independence and discipline in the army. If I decide to enter the army
    my family would not hinder me‟. Working of police is evaluated positively by
    participants of the mixed group: „People have high hope of Patruli. They support us in
    case of need‟.
   Interesting opinion is express by participants of Marneuli. There is declared divergence
    between wills and views of surrounding: „I want to enter Academy of Police but my
    relatives do not let me. People have bad attitude towards this profession in Marneuli.
    Police are called „dogs‟. Generally working of police is evaluated positively,
    Parliament negatively and army ambivalently. „Police works well now. The situation
    has improved. Parliamentarians do nothing but quarrel and criticize each other. One
    could pay money and avoid from going to the army before. But now it is obligatory to
    serve in the army during one year. At the age of 18 I will enter the army. Many young
    people feel shame at going to the army and pay money to stay home. We must defend
    our country‟. „Everything is not as well as it is shown on TV. Rooms are closed and
    when journalists visit they open rooms only then. My cousin is in the army now and I
    know. He had to sleep on a dirty mattress. They did not let him go home and see a
    doctor‟. „The condition has changed. An incident has happened in Mukhrani. Many
    things were done. Much is to be done but the situation has become better‟.
    „Concerning the army if I live in Georgia I ought to defend my motherland. Certainly,
    no one wants but we have to do. This is our duty. 90% of Azeris do not enter the army.
    They are afraid of being beaten in the army. There was battalion of Tetritskaro rayon
    during Shevardnadze period and I used to visit it. Azeris and Georgians were treated
    equally‟.
   Concerning education system particularly young representatives of ethnic minority
    indicate problems. This fact give a raise to protest of Georgian participants: „I think
    things are moving in the wrong direction in education system, for example it is said
    that in one or two years all Russian and Azerbaijanian schools will be changed into
    Georgian. I was told that all Russian branches were closed in Tbilisi. I study at Russian
    school the sixth and part of school is Georgian. Second part of school is occupied by
    the Institute of Zoology in which some branches are Russian. You have recently noted
    that Georgia is an international state hence there should be Azerbaijanian, Russian and
    Georgian schools‟. A Georgian participant reacts strongly. „As Azeri as Georgian may
    have a will to study at Zoo technical University. One Georgian six Azerbaijanian, two
    Russian schools are in Marneuli. Only one school is Georgian in Georgian land. It is
    noteworthy that none of Georgian from Marneuli has ever entered Russian or
    Azerbaijanian school but Azeris study at Georgian schools. If they do not need why do
    they learn Georgian language and history? They want to be appointed in gamgeoba‟.
    Herein Georgian participant cite an example of selecting good pupils. According to
    him two Azeris went on a voyage to Turkey. They were so called „boy of father‟. A
    criterion of selection was being a good pupil. Young respondent is speaking so
    emotionally that he cannot take into account the fact indicated by Azeri participants
    'Azerbaijanian and Turkish languages are alike'. Azeri respondent tries to declare his
    position: „If all schools are Georgian after some years America would occupy Georgia
    and there will be only English schools. Your children will be studied History of
    England and they would not know Georgian. Would it be better?‟ Working of police
    and parliament was evaluated negatively: „Police works badly. The house of my
    neighbor was robbed twice‟.
   In view of Akhalkalaki respondents police and healthcare system functions well: New
    hospital has been built. Perhaps it is not equipped with modern equipment but we have
    good doctors‟. Respondents complain about Parliament and evaluate activity of
    gamgebeli positively: 'To say truth parliamentarians are not clever. We had gamgebeli
    Murdiani before. At present he is in Tbilisi. He was very fair. On the one hand it is
    better young people to be appointed but on the other they are not experienced‟.
    Functioning of court is evaluated negatively „Court is bribed too‟. „While
    characterizing Religious institutes they are speaking about different sects and Muslims
    are characterized negatively: „Religious institutes work well. We belong to Armenian
    Apostolic Church‟. „Better being atheist. But everyone does not think this way‟. In my
    opinion God is one and it does not matter which religious confession one belongs‟.
   Concerning army an issue was raised the way Armenians were treated in Akhalkalaki
    one month ago. „Colonel and general arrived. One can bribe an official and does not
    enter the army. I would not go to the army‟.
   Respondents from Akhalkalaki have no information about Defender of Human rights
    Organizations. They also do not know activities of NGO‟s. „There are NGO‟s in
    Akhalkalaki but we are not informed how they work‟.
   Representatives of Ninotsminda deem that the most difficult is politics. Officials
    working in this sphere is responsible to people. The same should be said about medical
    personnel and police: „There are hospitals but no one addresses them. People do not
    trust doctors. Patients go to Armenia to see doctors. There was no ambulance and it
    was called from Armenia. Sometimes they could not arrive in time and patients were
    died. Now we have two ambulances‟. According to participants not only healthcare
    system but president and parliament does not work well. They bring up issue of the
    army. Respondents point out importance of Russian army: „our boys are beaten and
    insulted in the Georgian Army. Armenians escaped from the army. They were beaten
    to death‟. At the age of 18 I‟ll have to gather money not to enter the army. Everyone
    should have the same rights whether Georgian or not. There is small number of
    soldiers there. Such conflicts doe not take place in our rayon. The incident had
    happened a month ago. If Russian Army leaves Akhalkhalaki many residents would be
    unemployed. The most beautiful place in the city is „Garadok‟ where Russians live‟.
   Akhaltsikhe-Ninotsminda - 'Nurses and doctors have the lowest salary. Technical
    conditions are on a low level in hospitals. The worst medical personnel come to work
          there. Nevertheless the situation has changed. Hospitals are supplied with modern
          equipment, salary of doctors are increasing. However, the issue is severe and should be
          settled as soon as possible. Part of received funds from other states and NGO ought to
          be spent on healthcare system. Only the state with high-qualified medical personnel
          should be considered democratic. Our doctors cannot perform difficult operations and
          patients are to go to Tbilisi or Erevan. The way is long and the patient might die'.
          'Concerning the army we must go because this is our country and we ought to defend.
          There was on TV how Georgians were insulting and beating Armenians. Armenians
          may be insulted in everywhere but in Georgian army there are not comfort and needs
          for soldiers. Even Russia has not reached European standards. The best conditions are
          in Khazakheti and Armenia. It was on channel ОРТ'.


What factors provoke and might resolve conflicts?
         According to participants of Akhaltsikhe conflicts are provoked by the state. They cite
          an example when in the same conditions some pay the charge of electricity and some
          do not. The government create such problems that neighbors are made to come into
          conflict. In their opinion people are so irritated that they could get angry at even
          insignificant problem. „They live in such a bad economic condition that one might
          quarrel with his neighbour without having any reason‟. 'The key role ought to be
          played by state in resolving conflict. State ought to crate work places for population‟.
          „I reckon that this controversy between Armenians and Georgians would not be
          resolved. Mainly young people come into controversy and have ethnic problems in
          Akhaltsikhe, particularly adolescents and in awkward age'. „The problem was raised on
          a church. But it is not severe. It can be solved‟. „Conflicts ought to be resolved by
          negotiations. There was a case when Army of Russia had to leave Akhalkalaki and
          Adjara. Some people were against it but when representatives of Georgia visited
          Russia and carried negotiation the problem was solved. At this stage we should choose
          a good negotiator, for example we want Abkhazia return Georgia. Neither side is going
          to compromise. None of them hope that negotiation will produce any result. Time is
          needed for resolving conflict‟. 'Interpersonal conflicts are due to different views, aims
          and interests. Concerning interstate conflict the reason might be desire of
          establishment in the world, coming into the international market or territorial factor'.
          'War as a possibility of resolving conflict is unacceptable. I reckon conflict ought to be
          resolved by negotiation. Proceeding from that each side has its demands and position
          they can hardly compromise. So I think international organization ought to interfere in
          conflicts and playing their role in resolving. Both sides must compromise anywhere'.
   Bolnisi respondents consider that people cannot understand each other, have different
    point of view. 'They cannot reach an understanding and do not compromise. In most
    cases conflicts are due to violation of rights. Conflicts might be between persons or
    states on the ground of economic or other issues, for example religious'. 'Ossetians
    want to have independent republic but Georgia does not allow and they comes to
    conflict'. 'Armenians and Azeris are enemy for long time. There was an incident an
    Armenian sportsman went to America. After some time he disappeared. Soon it was
    discovered that an Azeri had killed him. It was on NTV a month ago. When he was
    asked the reason he answered: „it was an enemy of my forefathers and I took revenge.
    His friends were very proud of him. He was acclaimed as hero by his nation. Parents
    teach children that they are enemy. Accordingly people have prejudices. State ought to
    enter into an agreement. Not leaders but people ought to conclude an agreement‟.
    „Both sides must compromise in order to reach an understanding. Sometimes the
    reason of conflict might be insignificant. There is no guarantee'. 'Sometimes I come
    into conflict with Jehovah's Witnesses on the ground of religion‟. „Ethnic conflict
    comes from history. Even at present when we are discussing ethnic, national or
    territorial issues children start quarrel, for example issue of Kharabakh… one is
    shouting it is mine… this idea might be childish but when he grow up he would have
    the same opinion. If the conflict is not historic…‟ „Muslims and Georgians can never
    enter into an agreement‟.
   Participants of the mixed group note that conflicts in Georgia were always provoked
    by the third side. „Conflicts of Georgia has always been provoked by the third side. It
    tries to encourage conflict. Such conflicts are profitable for Russia‟. „Russia is a
    neighbor country and we should have good relation with it. It imports good. All kind of
    conflicts can be resolved. Other state should interfere to resolve a conflict‟.
    Respondents note the key role of third side in resolving conflict as well. „More
    developed state ought to play a role of mediator. Without a mediator they cannot
    resolve a conflict. Information might be distorted and cannot come to an agreement.
    They have been resolving conflicts for 13 years but without any result due to changing
    mediators. There were cases when it negotiation was close to decision but someone
    interfered. In this case I think it is preferable that representative of two populations and
    not government enter into negotiations‟.
   Speaking about conflict Marneuli respondents cite such examples: In case of dispute
    between Georgian and Azeri they gather their groups and conflict would be raised.
    Such conflict is lessening at present‟. Azeri respondents consider that most cases Svans
    give a raise to conflicts. „They protect Georgians. If they do not protection Georgians
    have difficulties in Marneuli. Some Svan girls wear a knife due to much dispute. They
    are the first class warriors. 90% of the population is Azeris. We do not know language.
    Some Georgians have Azeri friends‟. „My brother have Tatar friends. They do not
    know Georgian but my brother studied Tatar language. They dislike when they are
    called Tatar‟. „There are Georgians who know perfect Azerbaijanian. And we Azeris
    do not know Georgian. I arrived in Marneuli two years ago and I‟m will learning‟.
    There was no oppression before. Now we are to learn Georgian language, it is
    necessary. It is better to learn without impact. We live in Georgia and need Georgian
    language‟. „They cannot study Georgian only at school. They ought to have relation
    with Georgians. They are citizens of Georgia. They should have this relation in the
    centers‟. „We go to these centers and now I know little Georgian. Many Georgians
    know Azerbaijanian while Azeris do not know Georgian language‟.
   Participants from Marneuli consider reasons of conflict different opinions, political
    ideology and demand on territories. „Conflicts are raised due to controversial ideas. In
    the viewpoint of ideology. There is conflict between majority and opposition in
    parliament‟. „Much of conflicts arise due to lands. All states want to posses much
    lands. First arise conflict and then comes decision to receive the result‟. „Russia is
    blamed in the conflict of Abkhazia. Abkhazians are not so strong not to be defeated. If
    Russian military base leave Abkhazia will return Georgia. I believe Saakashvili will
    restore territorial integrity of our country. Police and not army ought to enter Sokhumi.
    When our government entered the army this meant starting the war. That was the
    reason of loosing Abkhazia. Before the war started Abkhazia had been already sold‟.
    „This is not only my problem this is a problem of everyone (he indicted Azeris). They
    live in Georgia and are citizens of it. As it is painful fore me as for them‟.
   According to Akhalkalaki respondents conflict break out: „when they could not
    understand each other and do not respect. I reckon that at present America tries to
    separate Commonwealth of Independent States from Russia‟. „For resolving conflict
    understanding is important‟.
   Respondents from Ninotsminda consider social problems as reasons of conflict: „Due
    to poverty. Neighbours are disputing about lands‟. „Due to misunderstanding‟. „They
    should come to one conclusion.‟ „Many people go to Russia for work but there are
    problems of receiving a visa‟.
   Akhaltsike-Ninotsminda: „When I asked Azeri from Bolnisi about Kharabakh he
    blamed Azeris and considered it as national conflict‟. „Conflicts break out due to low
    level of education, because they do not know democracy; person should feel equal‟.
Have you heard about foreign organizations oriented on resolving conflicts and how do you
apprise functioning?
          Respondents evaluate positively functioning of NGO‟s. „In Akhaltsikhe instead of
           standing in streets boys come to World Vision and learn photography, computer,
           English. There is center of women, Mercy Corp. There are girls‟ club where they are
           given chances to conduct activities and compensate 20$‟. „Urban program assist
           gamgeoba. It granted several dustbins. They play significant role in development of
           the city: schools are financed, city is cleaned, … and computers were granted to
           adolescents. Last year urban institute and IFS took action related to tidying‟.
           Participants name the following NGO: Peace corp. UN, Red Cross, European Council
           Only Soros is not in our city. „I am a member of „Hera XXI‟ and BP. I think it
           necessary International organization to interfere in resolving conflicts
          Bolnisi- United organization, which protects human rights; United Nation; European
           Union; NATO; All of them might have the way they are functioning. All of them
           would try to play the role of mediator; at present America play the role of mediator
           between Russia and Georgia and the later compromise. For example our organization
           World Vision, United Nation and public defender in Tbilisi. Resolving conflict- in
           particular United Nation, European Council. I evaluate functioning of CIS, European
           Union and United Nations is positively because they try much.
          The following organizations are named in case of the mixed group: United Nations,
           CIS, and European Union. Respondents deem that these organizations are working
           effectively. I regard that they are regulating and keep the peace in regions where are
           conflict. I hardly remember resolved conflict. Such organizations have no influence. I
           think that they play the role of mediator but could not reach agreement.
          (Marneuli) European Council and USA play the significant role. Such organizations
           ban the starting a war in the world.
          (Akhalkalaki) United Nations, NATO, OSCE
          (Ninotsminda) I do not know how much effectively they work. There is no such
           organization.
          (Akhaltsikhe-Ninotsminda) NGO, UNICEF, United Nations, NATO, OSCE and World
           Vision
Summary
Considering received results and proceeding from the main goal of the report -studding
interrelation of Georgian, Azerbaijani and Armenian young people living in Georgia and revealing
factors which hamper their collaboration, formation of civil position and integration in public life
- lead to the following conclusions.
       Random selection of respondents from three regions was performed in the equal
    conditions that make comparison easier and describe picture more adequately. In the process of
    selection attention was paid to number of family members, age, sex, family status and
    ethnicity. Tbilisi is more multinational city than Baku and Erevan. It should be mentioned that
    Baku population is also characterized as multinational. Spoken language beside native is
    Russian in three regions. Attitude towards using different languages is more liberal in Tbilisi
    than in two regions. English as a second language is widely used by respondents of Tbilisi and
    Baku. There is also a tendency of using this language.


According to received results from focus groups, young people mainly from Russian language
regions (Marneuli, Akhalkalaki, Ninotsminda) voice complaint about establishing English
language step by step. In their opinion Russian is being changed by English and here arises a
problem of Americanization. Finding a good job is depended on the knowledge of English
language and computer that is difficult to get in rayon.


       Almost third of interviewees name not finding the job as the reason of unemployment. In
    this regard on the second place is Baku and third – Erevan. According to range on the first
    place are employees in state organization in Baku. Tbilisi and Erevan according to such
    employees are on the second place. In case of Erevan first place takes pensioners including
    disabled.
       Respondents from three regions (particularly from Tbilisi and Erevan) attach great
    importance to connections for getting a good job. In case of Baku (place I) and Erevan(place II)
    importance is given to money factor. Respondents from Tbilisi attach less importance to money
    after education and talent and professional abilities. This indicates that there are significant
    changes in the system of education and employment in Georgia particularly in Tbilisi.
    Concerning Baku and Erevan education takes III place.


Data received from focus groups show that participants face the same abovementioned problems
related to finding job in rayons (particularly in Bolnisi and Akhaltsikhe). Besides important
changes in the sphere of education in Georgia is proven by the fact that Georgian participants of
the focus groups give positive estimate to reforms. Russian language participants (Marneuli,
Akhalkalaki-ninotsminda) evaluate changes negatively.
       Majority of respondents from three regions consider their household to belong to middle
    part of the middle level and lower part of the middle level. 48.9% of Erevan respondent, 50.6%
    of Baku respondents and 57.9% of Tbilisi think that their household belongs to middle part of
    the middle level. 31.5% of Erevan, 29. % of Baku and 31.2% of Tbilisi considers that their
    household belongs to lower part of the middle level.
    While listing operating items Georgians appeared to be the most prosperous compared with
    representatives of other regions. In case of Georgia items considered as means of material
    welfare is most evident according to percentage. Azeris turned to live the most avariciously.
    Salaries and pensions are indicated as the main sources of h/h income in case of three regions.
    Respondents name the additional sources: financial help of relatives/friends, income from
    business and so on.
Indicating how much spend typical h/h on different activities Georgians appeared to spend most
and Azeris least.
Describing current economic condition respondents from Georgia made more optimistic
estimation than Azeris and Armenians. These data form a certain picture of economic condition of
regions. It is noteworthy that accent was put on economic while discussing important issues for
the country.
       Majority of respondents from Georgia and Armenia consider reduction of poverty and
    unemployment as the most important goals. Azerbaijanians give priority to restoration of
    territorial integrity of the country. Respondents from three regions attach less importance to
    improvement of interethnic relations and encouraging re-migration and return of refugees and
    IDPs to their homes. Maybe in respondents‟ opinion this issue is unsettled and any effort would
    be in vain.


According to analysis of conducted focus groups in Georgia while answering question which
problems should be settled first respondents accented economical issues. They gave importance to
opening factories, reducing unemployment, fighting corruption. Settling problems related to road,
ecology, staff, salary and attracting experienced staff in state structures are also essential. Young
people complain about selling state property, spending much money on the army and carelessness
of government. In their opinion government pay much attention only to Tbilisi.
Factually problems of youth are one of the important questions in the list of priority issues:
problems related to education and entering university. Respondents particularly in Akhalkalaki
and Ninotsminda expressed complaint about education reforms. Due to lack of knowledge of
Georgian language they cannot pass National Examinations. There is no place for young people
to gather: cinemas, theatres, clubs, discos, sport centers, cafés or parks. Environment pollution,
ecological, financial, generally social and communal problems were also named. Age related
problems of relationship, gender issues and violation of human rights was given also great
importance. Problem related to conflicts arisen on national ground is also mentioned. Addiction
to drugs and toxicomania is a topic question. Respondents also mentioned teachers’ disrespect to
pupils.
         According to regional quantitative the most politicized appeared to be respondents from
          Tbilisi, the most apolitical – interviewees from Baku. Respondents from Erevan equal in
          being interested in politic as not interested. Respondents from Tbilisi and Erevan take first
          place from the viewpoint of participating in parliamentary election. In a view of
          participation in presidential elections president according to percentage indicators (81.5%)
          respondents from Baku take first place and interviewees from Tbilisi take last place
          conditionally.
          Respondents from Tbilisi discuss politics most frequently and interviewees from Baku –
          most seldom accordingly. It is possible that was due to existence of unchangeable leader.
          Respondents from Tbilisi are more satisfied with the government course. This opinion is
          shared partially by interviewees from Baku. Concerning interviewees from Erevan their
          opinions are distributed equally among positive, neutral and negative evaluations.


Focus group attitude towards politics is demonstrated as following: majority of respondents are
less interested in politics though they think it their duty to vote in elections and express an
opinion. Majority of participants recognize that they supported Saakashvili’s politics nevertheless
they were frustrated. Opposition parties are characterized as ‘weak’.
In the view of Georgian respondents Russia was depriving language, religion and lands from
Georgia. Nowadays Americans do not compel but bit- by- bit English is becoming acceptable
language.


         The main sources of political news for CRRC respondents are: television, radio and
          newspaper. The less information is received from Internet, family members, friends,
          neighbours, workplace and colleagues.


Concerning results received from focus groups participants receive information from the
following sources: television, radio, newspaper and television programs of their country. Russian
and local programs were also named. Young people give priority to programs of Imedi,
particularly Droeba. They evaluate Rustavi2 negatively accusing it of close connection with
government.
Respondents name gossip as one of the sources of spreading information. Lack of information and
obtaining it only from Russian channels on the one hand and spreading gossip on the other often
leads to misunderstanding among micro-social groups. That was factually displayed in one of the
Marneuli focus groups. Georgian respondent met with a reaction attempt of an Azeri participant
to show advantage of friendly coexistence with Russia compare with America.
Adolescents from Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda consider that information is distorted on
television for instance Georgians and Russians televise news differently. Two different versions of
one and the same information might be heard.


      According to CRRC data cooperation with different countries as in economic sphere as
       political sphere respondents are given priority in the following range: Respondents from
       tree regions give priority to cooperation with Russia. Also cooperation with USA and
       European Union is attached importance by respondents from Georgia and Armenia.
       Turkey is such magisterial country for Azerbaijan. On the contrary respondents from
       Erevan evaluate neutrally or slight negatively the idea of cooperation with Turkey. In this
       regard Tbilisi‟ respondents attach less importance to cooperation with Turkey and Iran.
       Generally there was a will to cooperate with other countries. They are: Japan, Germany,
       Georgia, England, France, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Kazakhstan, Muslim Countries; all which
       support us Africa, Latin America, Pakistan, Egypt, Ukraine, CIS and so on.


Respondents of focus groups name America and Russia as the country Georgia should strives to
receive support from. Nevertheless there are slight differences in their answers. Respondents who
named Russia placed emphasis on its territorial closeness. Only few ones expressed different
opinion they suppose Ukraine the most perspective partner. As neighbour countries Azerbaijan,
Armenia and Turkey were also considered.
According to their opinion the most important is to spend received money on developing
economics. Russian language participants give priority to Russia and Armenia.


      Attitudes towards cooperating with different Caucasus states are quite various: cooperation
       with Armenia in economic sphere was supported by 75.2% of respondents from Tbilisi.
       95.3% of interviewees from Baku were fully against cooperating with Armenia.
       Concerning cooperation in political sphere there was the same picture. 73% of respondents
       from Tbilisi supported cooperation with Armenia; 94.2 % from Baku were against.
       Cooperation with Azerbaijan in economic sphere were supported by 79.1 % of respondents
       from Tbilisi; significant parts of respondents from Erevan (47.9% 21.3% fully support and
       26.6%) would cooperate with Azerbaijan in economic sphere. Interviewees from Erevan
       1/3 were against to cooperate with Azerbaijan in economic sphere. Concerning
       cooperation with Georgia as economic as in politic sphere (with slight percentage
        difference and sustaining the main picture) majority of interviewees from Erevan and
        Baku were fully supportive (Erevan – 77.6%; Baku – 81.8%).


Participants of focus groups ought to characterize each of the country – Georgia, Armenia,
Azerbaijan. While characterizing Georgia respondents complain about low salary, unemployment
and undeveloped economics and accuse Government. Due to geographic situation Georgia might
be more developed compare with Armenia. In their view Azerbaijan is more advantageous. Three
of countries had had friendly coexistence that was changed later particularly between Armenia
and Azerbaijan. Georgia is the most democratic country in Caicasus. Armenia is under the
supervision of Russia. Georgia is guided by America
Herein is mentioned problems related to education of ethnic minorities for instance history of
Armenia, which is the essential subject for entering University of Armenia, is not taught in
Georgian schools.


       According to regional research the most tolerant towards diseased were respondents of
        Tbilisi. In a viewpoint of acceptability respondents from Erevan have less acceptance than
        from Tbilisi. Azeris appeared to be less tolerant towards different groups. Respondents
        from Tbilisi have acceptability towards tubercular patient. Not the less tolerance was
        demonstrated towards AIDS diseased and drug addict. On the forth place is chronical
        drunkard and last is homosexual though acceptability towards this group demonstrated 1/3
        of interviewees.
In Georgia attitude towards sexual minority is very careful. Majority of respondents and also their
friends and relatives put into the category of „others‟ persons who are atypical, different from
them.
According to research conducted in Georgia list of unacceptable groups are the following:
               -    Representative of sexual minority
               -    People belonging to different religious confession
               -    People expressing different views and opinions
         Majority of respondents do not mind to relate to persons with contagious disease and
        generally ill person, especially when it concerns to cooperation, neighbourship and
        friendship. Avoiding relation with homosexuals who are not dangerous for health.
        Actually for Caucasians social norms is essential.


As focus groups results show unacceptable and stranger is named in regard to characteristic and
social signs; less importance is attached to national sign. Majority of respondents have the same
opinion. Unacceptable person for their circle is always a specific person and not a group.
Majority of respondents have not ever suffered from a sense of alienation particularly in mono-
ethnic surrounding, for instance Akhalkalaki, Ninotsminda. Georgians while discussing alienation
put emphasis on unnecessary tolerance of Georgians. This factor is regarded as one of the main
reason of oppressing Georgians by Azeris and Armenians. They deem implementation of national
policy as the way out from existing situation. That implies settlement of national minority less
compactly and teaching them Georgian as the state language. Actually while discussing sense of
alienation Georgian adolescents generalize issue and speak about privileges of Georgians that
means reduction in rights of national minorities on behalf of Georgians. They explain alienation
by numerousness of representatives of other nations who might be alienated by imposing
uncomfortable conditions.


      Respondents were quite tolerant towards different ethnic groups though there was a certain
       range. As it was anticipated respondents from three regions give most positive estimate to
       the self-nation. In case of Georgia and Armenia respondents estimate positively Russians
       and Greeks. Tbilisi and Baku respondents express tolerance towards Jewish people. Tbilisi
       respondents put representatives of Armenian and Azerbaijani into neutral category.
The research, which aimed to reveal young people‟s attitude towards other nations were
performed slight differently in Georgia. Majority of Georgian respondents stress advantage of
Georgians. Representativeness of any European Country is more acceptable than identification
with Europeans or Americans generally. Representativeness of foreign country is associated with
welfare. Some of the respondents show a will of belonging certain confession for instance,
Georgians give advantage to Christianity and Armenian to Catholicism. Generally Armenians or
Russians are acceptable for some respondents and Italian, Spanish, American, Greek, German
more acceptable for some. Herein should be mentioned that male interviewees show a will to be
Italian and Spanish. Significant part of respondents (particularly Azeri and Armenian participants)
indicates that nationality has no importance and there is no bad or good nation. Bad and good
persons exist.
                 Georgians and Azeris do not desire to be identified with Armenian. Georgian
   and Armenian interviewees refuse to be Turkish, Muslims, Azerbaijani and Tatar. Identity
   with Negro is unacceptable for Azeris and Armenians. From many answers Azeris‟ refusal to
   be Svan is evident. Georgians deny to be identified with Ossetian.
                 Majority of respondents desire to get married with representative of self-nation.
   In this regard the first place are taken by Georgians. Seldom is mentioned that nationality has
   no importance. Mainly this idea is shared by Armenian and Azerbaijani respondents because
   decisive is factor of intimacy.
                     Concerning partner at rest respondents named again representative of self-
    nation. Russians and Americans were named after Georgians. Fourth of interviewees mention
    that they do not care nationality when it concerns rest. Part of respondents name nations who
    they do not desire to go on a voyage, particularly Armenian (Georgian and Azerbaijani
    respondents), Azerbaijani (Georgian and Armenian respondents), Jewish, German and
    Russian. It is remarkable that mainly ambivalent attitude is expressed towards Russian.
                     The same opinion was expressed in case of making friends and cooperation.
    Nevertheless advantage is given to Americans and Germans after Georgians.
Participant of focus group ought to appreciate multi-nationality as supporting or interfering
factor.
Georgian participants especially from the region they form minority (Akhaltsikhe, Bolnisi,
Marneuli) evaluate multi-nationality negatively. Georgia would be stronger if more Georgians
and less other nations live here. There is also an attempt of finding alternative way out. This is to
teach Georgian language to non Georgians. Part of the respondents (Georgians) from regions
where majority is non-Georgians (Marneuli) considers that multi-nationality is interfering. Some
of them (Azerbaijanians) reckon that multi-nationality gives a chance to get acquainted with
different cultures.
Herein must be mentioned that Russian language participants do not feel fine in Baku and
Erevan. Dwellers of these cities do not like Azeris and Armenians living in Georgia. They are
considered to be undeveloped.
Interviewees from Akhalkalaki, Ninotsminda and Akhaltsikhe have different attitude towards
multi-nationality. They declare neutral and distinctly negative position. However, this position
refers to only Saakashvili’s policy and not Georgians. In their opinion such policy should be
carried out step by step. Interests of local inhabitants should be taken into consideration.
Respondents give quite different responses in case of indicating three most acceptable and non-
acceptable nations. Answers depend on interrelation, aims and confession of the nation. Christian
part of respondents put into the acceptable category Georgians, Russians, Greeks and Ukrainians
as belonging to Christian Orthodox Church and Europeans (particularly Italians) and Americans
as Christians generally. Muslims are unacceptable for these participants.
Ambivalent attitude is demonstrated towards Russians and Americans. In negative category
Georgian respondents name Azeris and Armenians. It is noteworthy that participants confuse
national and confessional identity and instead of naming nationality indicate confession.
Part of focus group reckons that concerning marrage nationality is not decicive and put accent
on personality. But when it concerns family relations, rules, customs, religious factor and so on
majority of respondents prefer to get married to representatives of self-nation. To marry
Georgian, Armenian, American, European is acceptable for Georgian language respondents
(Marneuli-Bolnisi-Akhaltsikhe) and is absolutely unacceptable to get married to Azerbaijanian.
Ambivalent attitude was expressed towards Russians and negative towards Armenians. Armenian
respondents give advantage to Armenian, Georgian, Russian and American. Azerbaijanian,
Chinese, Turkish and Negro (that is not a nation) is unacceptable. In case of Turkish accent is not
put on religious factor but genocide. This indicates strong ethnic identity.
Answers to the question how do you characterize Georgian, Armenian and Azerbaijani are almost
one and the same. Respondents noted that it is difficult to characterize representative of this or
that nation. Though certain characteristics were revealed.
Georgians - followers of traditions and strong believers, hospitable, love to have a feast, joyful
and clever, warmhearted, proud, lazy and do not care future.
Azerbaijanians – kind, clever, closed, large-hearted, maintaining their traditions, hardworking.
Azeris support each other, and women are more restricted than Georgian. Azeris and Armenians
work harder than Georgians.
Armenians are characterized as quick-witted, hardworking, longsighted, cunning and hospitable.
Georgian respondents characterize Georgians separately and compare Armenians and Azeris
with each.   While Armenians (Ninotsminda-Akhalkalaki-Akhaltsikhe) try to find common
characteristics with Georgians. That is temperament and common history.


      Concerning religious confession diversity is characteristic of Tbilisi. The leading religious
       confession is Christian Orthodox (90.4%). According to diversity of religious identity
       number of Erevan respondents slightly differs from Tbilisi dwellers. However different
       from Tbilisi in case of Erevan 87% indicate belonging to Armenian Apostolic Church
       92.8% Baku respondents is characterized as belonging to mono-religious confession.
It is reasonable to mention that Jehovah‟s Witnesses are estimated extremely negatively by
Georgian and Armenian respondents. The same time respondents living in Georgia make very
positive estimate only to representatives of Christian Orthodox Church and the rest is given mid or
less than mid estimate. Respondents from Armenia give equally positive estimate to
representatives of Armenian Apostolic Church, Christian Orthodox Church, Catholic Church. The
rest is given mainly mid or less than mid estimate. Concerning interviewees living in Azerbaijan
extremely positive estimate is made only to representatives of Islam.
Which religious confession is acceptable or unacceptable for you? - Answer to this question was
unequivocal. Acceptable religious confession for participants is the one they belong to. Herein
must be mentioned that their attitude towards different religion is quite loyal. Majority of
respondents consider Jehovah's Witnesses particularly unacceptable. They regard it as imposing
religion upon others.
Acceptable religious confession for Georgians is Christian Orthodox and generally Christianity,
Catholicism, Armenian Apostolic Church. It is noteworthy that participants confused religious
identification with ethnic one and mentioned frequently: ‘Acceptable is Catholic nation and
Christian nation’. The same time young people give importance to devotion to belief.
Jehovah's Witnesses and different sects are particularly unacceptable. Respondents express
ambivalent attitude towards Jewish people. Muslims are unacceptable for participants.
Azerbaijanian respondents display neutral or slight positive attitudes towards different religion
and give advantage to Muslim.
Respondents from Ninotsminda and Akhalkalaki express extremely negative attitude towards
Muslims and Turkish people. There is confusion of confessional and ethnic identity.


       According to regional research respondents‟ attitudes towards social institutions in the
        regard of effective functioning the following order was revealed: President, Army, Media
        (Azerbaijan and Georgia). In Erevan respondents assess their trust towards social
        institutions in the following order: Army, Religious institutions and Educational system. In
        this regard the worse position took (according to range) political parties, local NGO's
        (Azerbaijan and Georgia) and Parliament (Armenia).


It should be mentioned that while characterizing social institutions respondents were not with one
mind.
Pro-western course of Georgia’s foreign policy which majority of non- Georgian respondents
does not agree is one of essential questions. Georgian respondents evaluate positively reforms
carried out at the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Ministry of Defense.
Representatives of national minority complain about functioning of the Army due to bad attitude
towards ethnic minorities.
Negatively is estimated questions related to studding Georgian language mainly by non-
Georgians.
Respondents voice complaints about Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs. This concerns
to low salary and qualification of medical personnel, low quality technical equipment, low level of
emergency service and corruption in hospitals.
Within the context of Ministry of Defense they are interested in issues concerning rights of
representatives of national minorities.
Respondents complain about Parliament, which is consisted of unexperienced staff and inactive
opposition parties and corruption in courts. Generally working of the government is evaluated
positively particularly functioning of Patruli. Positively is evaluated working of religious
institutions and local NGO’s.
      Georgians expresses readiness becoming a NATO member: Majority of Tbilisi
       respondents support becoming a NATO member. Cooperation with NATO is also
       important for Azerbaijani respondents. Concerning Erevan respondents‟ opinions differ on
       the matter of NATO. Almost half of Erevan interviewees are agreed to cooperate with
       NATO but the number of respondents who is supportive Armenia becoming a NATO
       member lessens. Number of respondents who are against is not low (27.7%).
Erevan and Baku respondents are more acquainted with international organizations then Tbilisi-
dwellers. The same time respondents from three regions have the most acquaintance with
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Quite significant position has USAID
international Development Agency according to recognition. Concerning Eurasia Foundation
Tbilisi respondents have information about it then Baku and Erevan interviewees.


Focus groups discussed information about international organizations participating in conflict
resolution and evaluate their work accordingly. World Vision, which organized summer camp,
was named most frequently. Concerning organizations working on conflicts resolution
respondents mentioned: United Nation; NATO; European Union; OSCE; Red Cross; European
Council; CIS. Functioning of European Council and United Nation was evaluated positively.
Respondents also named organizations not working on this issue: ‘Hera XXI’, Urban Institute,
IFS, Ombudsmen, Peace Corp, UNICEF.
Discussing reasons of conflicts respondents name unsettled social problems and unemployment
as the main factors. In their opinion main role must be played by state and people should
support.
Interpersonal conflicts are due to different views, aims and interests. Concerning interstate
conflict the reason might be the desire of establishing in the world, coming into the international
market or territorial factor. War as a possibility of resolving conflict is unacceptable for the
respondents. They reckon that conflict ought to be resolved by negotiation. In some cases conflicts
are due to violation of rights, on the ground of religion. Concerning conflicts raised on an ethnic
ground respondents reckon that such conflicts are based on history and territorial issues. In most
cases prejudices and language barrier raise conflicts. Respondents also mentioned that conflicts
in Georgia were always provoked by the third side.
                                           Recommendations


     According to received results the following recommendations should be taken into account:
1. Much attention should be paid to the problems of region and rayon - majority of respondents
      complain about paying much attention to Tbilisi and ignoring problems of rayon. It is
      desirable to work out municipal programs in Kvemo Kartli and Samtskhe Djavaxeti and to
      visit representatives of government to these regions.
2. It is important to study problems of each region and give response timely. Problems are
      related mainly to social issues: unemployment and low salary, corruption, roads
      (Akhalkalaki-Akhaltsikhe), ecology (Bolnisi), electricity, water supply and so on.
      Concerning youth issues entertainment and rest, education and entering University are the
      most problematic.
3. More activities should be provided to teach state language in Kvemo Kartli and Samtske
      Djavaxeti rayons, which is settled mainly by non-Georgians. It is desirable to train local
      teachers. To provide encouraging activities for teaching Georgian language, for instance
      studding English and computer free of charge but in Georgian. To teach history of the
      country of ethnic minorities in rayons which are settled compactly by non-Georgians.
4. To provide training courses related to human rights in schools and institutes of Samtskhe
      Djavakheti and Kvemo Kartli. Accent would be put on rights of children and gender issues.
5. Conducting sociological research in the army to study conditions of ethnic minorities.
6. To carry out healthcare reforms in these rayons in order to restructure and optimize medical
      establishments.
7.     To solve the problem of unemployment. It is desirable to establish organizations that on the
      one hand have the list of employers and on the other select young people according to
      requirement.
8. Providing synchronize translation of programs of leading TV companies even in Russian
      language – Imedi, Rustavi2 in order to prevent information vacuum and distortion. Mainly
      for the regions which is settled by non- Georgian inhabitants.
9. Readiness to establish closer relation with different countries particularly neighbour ones in
      parallel with western policy of the state. It is noteworthy that respondents have positive
      attitude towards united economic space of south Caucasus.
10. Relation among Georgian, Armenian, Azerbaijanians is not strictly stereotyped in focus
      groups. Though there are prejudices that make relations difficult. Participants put accent on
      religious confession than on ethnical identity. In this regard religious institutes can work to
      increasing ethnical acceptability.
11. As it was mentioned focus groups were conducted in specially made summer camps. It is
   noteworthy that attitudes were changed after finishing activities. Such type of activities as
   co-existence of representatives of different nations in the camp and so on make weaker
   prejudices and support to establish open, friendly relation among participants.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:26
posted:7/19/2011
language:English
pages:77