From the Armenian village of Aygepar, the houses of the Azeri village of Alibayli are visible. Only a distance of 100-150 meter separates the two villages, but there is a bigger distance between them - fourteen years that obliterated the friendship that once existed between them, that turned them into them enemies.

A pair of films by Armenian and Azerbaijani filmmakers was presented at the Golden Apricot International Film Festival. The films, which share the title In That Distant Neighboring Village and are each 25 minutes long, document the lives of the people in the two border villages.

The films were co-funded by the Armenian Branch of Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the Armenian Round Table Foundation (ARTF) and the Inter-Church Organization for Cooperation Development (ICCO) of the Netherlands.

The Armenian film was produced by Shoghakat TV (script writer - Tigran Paskevichyan, director - Ara Shirinyan); the Azerbaijani film was produced by Azerbaijan's Internews organization (script writer - Eljan Mamedov, director - Ayaz Salaev).

The filmmakers on the both sides agreed that the structure, the shooting process, and the future destiny of the films would be strictly symmetrical. They agreed not to have any off-screen narration-the villagers themselves talk about their lives "before" and "after".

In the first part of the film, the villagers remember their prosperous and friendly life together before the war started.

Aygepar was a city-like village, had factories that produced canned goods, wine, and cigarettes. In Alibayli, most people were farmers or cattle-breeders.

'We used to buy flour from Armenians and Armenians would buy fruit from us,' a man from Alibayli says.

'We never distinguished between ourselves, this is an Armenian, that's an Azeri,' a villager from Aygepar says.

'They trusted Armenians; we would take goods and promise to pay for them in, say 15 days, and they would never ask us our name or address.'

'There was never a wedding or funeral in our village without an Armenian there.'

'There were Azerbaijanis working in Aygepar.'

'People from Aygepar would come and help us with the harvest.'

In the second part of the films, the villagers talk about how the situation changed after the war began. The residents of the both villages seem confused, as if they have failed to understand what happened in the end.

'We were friends; I don't know where that hostility came from. It started with Karabakh.or Sumgait, I don't know,' says a woman in Aygepar.

At first, the inhabitants of two villages who had been forced to become enemies would warn each other about coming attacks. Then the military action reached full speed and the link between the two villages was broken once and for all.

'They killed our children, how can we forget it? It will take centuries.'

'A tank destroyed our house.'

'I went deaf because of the shooting.'

'My husband lost his leg when a mine exploded.'

'Armenians are dushman (enemies).'

'We cannot pasture our animals; there are trenches everywhere.'

There is hatred in the voices of some villagers. But it is mainly abstract hatred of those who started the war, not of each other. The villagers remember names of their former neighbors, wonder whether they are alive, and express a timid wish to see them again.

'I don't known about other Armenians, but the people who live in the village (Aygepar) want peace just like we do.'

'It wasn't us or the Armenians in the next village who started the war; someone someplace started it, I don't know who.'

The villagers don't know how to get out of the deadlock either. But the films don't aim to find a solution. Rather they cast an objective look at those distant, neighboring villages, without intruding, to reveal distorted fates and human relations, to provide the opportunity to exchange perceptions.

The films were also screened at the program Directors without Borders . The Armenian audience's perception of the films was rather negative, and discussions following the screening were stormy.

One participant in the discussion referred to the woman in the Armenian film who says that it all started from Karabakh and exclaimed emotionally, 'What are you doing? You're playing into the enemy's hands! OK, you want to show the truth. I know people in Yerevan who say we are to blame for all of this, but we can't air these peoples' views in a film; Don't be that naïve!'

'Azerbaijanis described Armenians badly on purpose and told lots of lies about Armenians in the film. They described themselves as victims, but we are the only ones who suffered in that war,' a friend of mine said.

Many agreed with him. Thus they don't accept the idea dialogue that easily yet.

An interview with Tigran Paskevichyan, the scrip writer of the Armenian film

Mr. Paskevichyan, how was the idea of the project born and why did religious organizations sponsor it?

I've had the idea for a long time. Several months ago the Armenian Round Table Foundationmentioned the idea of a project involving regional cooperation on the religious plane. Then we thought that doing it that way wouldn't be right, because it wasn't clergymen who participated in the conflict; the war did not start on religious grounds. But at the same time, religious leaders can be mediators in finding solutions to the conflict.

So we chose around twelve topics: stories of the neighboring villages, captives and refugees on both sides, the attitudes of the cultural and scientific figures who were in touch with each other before the war. We decided to take the stories of the neighboring villages as pilot films. We found our colleagues in Azerbaijan, met them in Tbilisi, discussed the main approaches and principles, and chose the villages.

We both wanted to have villages that could see each other to make the idea of that distant, neighboring village more visible: the people see each other but have been absolutely not in touch for fourteen.'

During the discussions, it was unanimously agreed that the Armenians are presented as more pacifistic than the Azerbaijanis.

I can say with confidence: go to Aygepar, knock on any door and you will be told the same thing I was. We did not aim to show anything. We agreed from the beginning that what we were doing do would have an essential impact on the conflict. But it could be a way, a method. We decided, first, not to have any narration, and second, not to color anything.

The word pacifism is inappropriate here. The non-aggressive position of the villagers (of Aygepar) has its reasons. First, we are, in one way or another, the winners in the war; second, Aygepar was like a city, they had factories, and all roads passed through the village. One of the villagers even said, "We were the center of the world." And now they have become remote, cut off the entire world. So they have nostalgia for their once-flourishing life. The economic factor is more significant to them than the political factor.

The Azerbaijani film features children, but the Armenian film doesn't. Why not?

The Armenian children were not aware of the Azerbaijanis at all. The teenagers have a very rough idea about them. There are two ways to explain the thing to children; you either take a kid to someone and say, I would like you to meet him, this is our friend, or you point at someone from afar and say, this is our enemy, be careful. In the village they did not need to teach the second, and did not have the opportunity to teach the first. In general there was an atmosphere of indifference in the village. About the Azeri children, when they say Armenians are dushman , it's just a product of propaganda. But you can see in the film that those people have the same joys and the same problems.'

At the discussions I was there for, the views of the Armenian audience regarding both the idea and the films were mainly negative, in some cases, even fanatically so.

I don't take people like that seriously. Some people think if you tell the truth, you're playing into the enemy's hands. But we need the truth first.

This project was the first one of its kind, so attacks were to be expected. But that's not important. What we really need is for people to think about it. I'm sure at the next couple of films, the discussions will change fundamentally.

The film is not propaganda; it is not shot for international audience, but only for the Armenians and Azerbaijanis.

The cease-fire that has lasted for fourteen years is like an impassable border between Armenia and Azerbaijan that has moved our societies away from each other, and over the years we have not had a proper picture of each other. But without a proper picture, it's hard to talk about armistice and peaceful co-existence.

Our next step will be to show the films in both Aygepar and Alibayli and make a small film about the villagers' perception of the films.

An interview with Ayaz Salaev, the director of the Azerbaijani film

Mr. Salaev, how have the films been received in Azerbaijan?

The films have not been widely shown yet and I do not know if they ever will be. After the very few screenings I came to the following conclusion: the hurrah-patriots criticize the film for the nostalgia for friendship in the beginning of the (Azerbaijani) film, a few pacifists criticize it for what the subjects say in the second part (Armenians are dushman ); a not-very-deep spectator criticized the fact that the villagers make mutually exclusive statements; a more intelligent spectator was merely surprised.

From all this I came to the conclusion that any truth is beyond the tendentious and theoretical perceptions of life. As I see it, all conflicts, as well as xenophobia and nationalism, originate from the fact that people build their perception of life by reasoning not from life but from their own tendentious-propagandistic imaginings about life.

In films like ours the majority of the spectators only want to see what they want to on the screen-they don't want to see the truth.

Regarding the Armenian movie, views were more or less like this: the Armenian authors apparently did not include aggressive statements by the Armenian villagers to show to the entire world that Armenians are pacifists.

What do Azerbaijani people think of the idea of dialogue?

I can't speak on behalf of the entire nation-that is a complicated conception. But I think that in Azerbaijani society there is an opinion that dialogue is now more profitable for Armenians than for Azeris: they (Armenians) allegedly achieved what they wanted to, and now for complete happiness they need stability in the region (I'm just repeating what other people say.

Would you say that the views of the Alibayli villagers on Armenians represent the views of Azerbaijanis as a whole?

I think so. In any case, I hope the film helps answer that question. In this context, I'd like to mention one common analysis (an excerpt from an article I wrote): 'As is well known, the idea of a people has recently undergone essential changes. The number of people engaged in production has decreased and the number in service, trade, and money turnover sector has increased. From a cultural-historical perspective, only the first group can be called a people . Engaged in everyday physical labor, they are involved in superficial relations and better preserve the foundation of the national-historical organism. For that reason, the opinion of these people is then most important and decisive. If you like, the truth speaks from the mouths of these people'.

To be extremely objective and exclude the author's text was your mutual decision. Nevertheless have there been any "dangerous moments" during the shooting which you preferred not to include in the film?

To me, the presence of narration in documentaries most often is a sign of the director's weakness. I believe it should be used only in exceptional cases.

With all sincerity I can say that everything related to the issue was included in the film. When we started shooting, the only thing I didn't want to include was what would be outside of the ethical norms, say, foul language. But thank God no one cursed. I did not include only what seemed to worry our characters the most but had nothing to do with the topic - their complaints about material and every day difficulties.