Author: Kajoyan Gevork

NATIONAL SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ASCENDS ‘MYSTERIOUS MOUNTAIN’
— Mark J. Estren

The Washington Post
October 3, 2005 Monday
Final Edition

There was a pleasant tang of unfamiliarity at this weekend’s National
Symphony Orchestra performances. Symphony No. 2 (aka “Mysterious
Mountain”) by Alan Hovhaness, written in 1955, is the first “mountain”
symphony by this underplayed American composer of Armenian-Scottish
descent. Mountains fascinated Hovhaness: Among his 66 other symphonies
are “Three Journeys to a Holy Mountain,” “To the Green Mountains,”
“Mount St. Helens,” “Cold Mountain” and “Hymn to Glacier Peak.”

Conductor Leonard Slatkin paced the somewhat meandering “Mysterious
Mountain” well. Hovhaness’s characteristic “spirit murmur” technique,
in which individual sections of the orchestra continuously repeat
melodic fragments, came through with a new age feel. The second
movement’s double fugue was a highlight, played with great clarity
in the strings and nicely punctuated by the brass.

Norwegian cellist Truls Mork made his NSO debut in Edward Elgar’s
Cello Concerto in E Minor. Written in 1919, it was Elgar’s last major
orchestral work, though he lived another 15 years. There is no pomp
and circumstance in this spare post-World War I concerto, which may
explain its rather infrequent performance. Mork, a large man who
cradles his 1723 Domenico Montagnana instrument with ease, played
with reserved beauty and loveliness, if not always full-bodied tone.

The performance was more judicious than eloquent at times, but the
finale was excellent, with the sense of mourning and resignation
before the brief coda that was especially heartfelt.

Antonin Dvorak’s bright-hued Symphony No. 6 in D got a full-bodied,
rhythmically vital reading, with fine wind playing and even better
brass. This is a large work that sprawls a bit, though Slatkin’s
decision to reduce its scale by omitting the first-movement repeat
did not help. This symphony can wander away from an inattentive
conductor. Slatkin kept it mostly under control, though the Adagio
drifted and was a bit too intense. The Scherzo was delightfully
ebullient despite some piccolo wobbles. The finale, whose opening
is strongly reminiscent of Brahms’s Symphony No. 2 (written three
years earlier and also in D major), was a joyful noise indeed — a
rousing conclusion to a concert of works heard less frequently than
they deserve.

LATVIAN PRESIDENT EMBARKS ON CAUCASUS TOUR

RIA Novosti, Russia
Oct 3 2005

RIGA, October 3 (RIA Novosti, Yury Guralnik) – Latvian President Vaira
Vike-Freiberga arrived in Azerbaijan Monday for the beginning of her
six-day tour of the Caucasus, a presidential spokesman said.

Vike-Freiberga’s agenda in Azerbaijan includes a meeting with
President Ilham Aliev, a tour of the Sangachal oil terminal, and the
presentation of a book on Latvian art. She is also planning to sign
several agreements during the visit.

On October 5, Vike-Freiberga will travel to Georgia for meetings
with President Mikheil Saakashvili, Prime Minister Zurab Noghaideli,
and Speaker of Parliament Nino Burdjanadze. She is also scheduled to
address an international forum, The Road to the EU.

On October 7, the Latvian president will visit Armenia to meet with
President Robert Kocharyan and Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan. Her
itinerary includes a tour of a cognac distillery and a ceremonial
tree planting at the Armenian Genocide Institute-Museum in Yerevan.

Commentary: Turkey’s EU accession not likely
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
UPI Editor-at-large

World Peace Herald, DC
Oct 3 2005

WASHINGTON — It will be an exercise in diplomatic futility and
hypocrisy, choreographed to remain on stage, kabuki-like, for 10 years,
with a cast of hundreds of diplomats and Eurocrats (EU’s civil servants
who micromanage everything from the size of condoms to the curvature
of bananas).

Turkey, with 5 percent of its land mass and 10 percent of its people
on the European side of the Bosporus and 95 percent of the country
and 90 percent of its population in Asia Minor, wants to become a
full-fledged member of the European Union. This would give EU a common
border with Syria, Iraq, Iran, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, a
notion that has already given Europeans an acute attack of Turkophobia.

EU membership negotiations, which were scheduled to start this week,
are programmed to last 10 years. By then, Turkey’s population will have
increased from 71 million to 82 million, making a Muslim country the
largest in the 25-nation European Union. That’s why it’s not going to
happen. But the European players, eyes blazing with insincerity, have
to convince the spectators that if the negotiations are successful,
and Turkey agrees to all European demands, preconditions, codicils,
and 80,000 pages of EU law, membership, strongly endorsed by the U.S.,
will be forthcoming.

Turks are beginning to question the utility of what now strikes
them as a charade whose pantomime hints have already been correctly
interpreted. These voices now say Turkey should distance itself from
a Europe that doesn’t wish to go beyond “privileged partnership”
status. Most European leaders understand that rejection could tip
Turkey, now governed by an Islamic party, into the camp of radical
Islam. But one European opinion survey after another says Turkey does
not belong in EU.

French and Dutch voters rejected the proposed new European constitution
last spring because the move was widely interpreted as facilitating
Turkey’s membership application.

A fear that transcends all others in Europe these days is called
“Eurabia.” The nightmare this conjures up is of militant Islam
overshadowing a Judeo-Christian Europe. The Ottoman Empire and before
that the sword of Islam carved out a nice chunk of Europe through
the Iberian Peninsula into southern France.

The Muslims of 1,000 years ago put the Europeans to shame. It took
Europeans several centuries to match their architecture and their
gardens. They also outclassed Europeans in astronomy, medicine,
engineering, geography and mathematics (algebra is an Arabic term).

Cordova, their capital in Spain, was Europe’s richest city, replete
with magnificent palaces and mosques.

The age of Islamic military conquest lasted until 1669, when the
Ottoman Empire made its last acquisition by conquering Crete from
the Venetians. Fourteen years later, it was curtains for the Ottomans
in Europe. They failed to take Vienna and retreated in disarray. On
the southwestern end of Europe, Islam’s armies collapsed almost 200
years earlier when they lost Granada, the last Islamic city in Spain,
in 1492, the year Columbus arrived in America.

Islam’s big mistake was to ban the printing press, which was
banned by Ottoman decree in 1485. It would have been a sacrilege,
flat earth clerics decided, to use the Arabic language in mechanical
equipment. That was the geopolitical ball game. When Napoleon arrived
in Egypt in 1798, Cairo had no printing presses. By then the European
intelligentsia had been embarked on self-improvement through books
for almost two centuries.

Today, there are approximately 20 million Muslims, including 3.8
million Turks, living in Europe, a number that is projected to double
by 2020. Poor immigrants, most of them illegal, continue to flow into
EU countries from the Middle East, including Turkey, North Africa
and sub-Sahara Africa.

New arrivals fade into the masses of mostly unemployed Muslims that
huddle in the poorer neighborhoods of Europe’s major cities. For the
most part, they are not integrated. Even second- and third-generation
European-born Muslims, now holders of EU passports, and free to travel
to the U.S. without visas, resist assimilation.

Their hero is neither European nor American, but Saudi. Pro-Osama
bin Laden literature can be found at kiosks all over Europe and on
thousands of websites.

In Europe, would-be jihadis continue to volunteer to fight
in Iraq. They use the Internet to learn how to make bombs from
store-bought chemicals. They also learn the names of mosques in Syria
and Jordan that can hide a jihadi making his way into Iraq, and then
to learn the different locations in Iraq where jihadis should report
for training and combat assignments. An unknown number have already
returned from Iraq with newly acquired terrorist skills, the ability
to form sleeper cells, and encourage others to sign up for “holy war
against the infidels.”

The Dutch intelligence service — AIVD — says radical Islam in the
Netherlands now encompasses a multitude of movements, organizations
and groups that embrace the fundamentalist line, 20 of them hard-line
Islamist. In London, authorities believe as many as 3,000 veterans
of al-Qaida training camps over the years were born or based in
Britain. And in France, a study of 1,160 recent French converts to
Islam found that 23 percent of them identified themselves as Salafists,
another way of spelling Wahhabi.

EU countries are tightening their immigration laws in response to
popular demand to retard the growth of their Muslim populations. So
talking turkey about Turkey in this environment can only produce
a turkey.

COMMUNITY HEAD BY 35%

A1+
| 12:31:19 | 03-10-2005 | Politics |

David Petrosyan has been re-elected head of the Nor Norq community. 28
748 citizens have voted for him. The other candidate Vardan Parsamyan
has received 3 650 votes.

34 163 electors, that is – 35% of the total number of electors have
participated in the community head elections in the Nor Norq community
on October 2. 1 607 ballots have been announced invalid; there have
also been 100 errors.

Let us remind you that the re-elected community head is the son
of the NA Standing Committee on State and Legal Affairs President
Rafik Petrosyan.

Pan Armenian News

EU-BAKU DIFFERENCES SHOULD NOT HAMPER ARMENIA’S PROMOTION

29.09.2005 07:52

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Today Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian met with
EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus Heikki Talvitie, who
arrived in Armenia on a working visit, reported the Armenian MFA Press
Service. In the course of the meeting 4 directions were generally discussed:
EU-Armenia relations, Karabakh settlement process, Armenia-Turkey relations
and constitutional reforms in Armenia. The parties confirmed their
reaffirmed their determination to undertake steps to work out Armenian Plan
of Actions within the European Neighborhood Policy. It was specifically
noted that differences Azerbaijan and EU have within the framework of the
program should not hamper promotion of Armenia. Oskanian and Talvitie
exchanged opinions over the current stage and prospects of settlement of the
NK conflict. The parties discussed the current state and prospects of the
Armenian-Turkish relations, as well as the talks over Turkey’s accession to
the EU. V. Oskanian and H. Talvitie indicated the importance of
constitutional reforms in Armenia, considering these a good opportunity for
development of democracy.

RA FM AND EU SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE DISCUSS CURRENT STATE AND PROSPECTS OF ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS

Noyan Tapan News Agency
Sept 29 2005

YEREVAN, SEPTEMBER 29, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. On September 29,
Ambassador Heikki Talvitie, EU Special Representative to the South
Caucasus, was received by RA Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian.

As Noyan Tapan was informed by RA Foreign Ministry’s Press
and Information Department, the discussion mainly proceeded by 4
directions: EU-Armenia relations, Nagorno Karabakh settlement process,
Armenia-Turkey relations and constitutional reforms.

Touching upon working out of Armenian Action Plan within the
framework of the European Neighborhood policy, the sides confirmed
their readiness to take steps in this direction. In particular, it was
mentioned that within the framework of the program EU’s disagreements
with Azerbaijan mustn’t be an obstacle for Armenia’s progress.

V.Oskanian and H.Talvitie exchanged thoughts about the current state
and prospects of Nagorno Karabakh settlement.

Then RA Foreign Minister and EU Special Representative touched upon
the current state and prospects of Armenian-Turkish relations at the
bilateral level, as well as in the light of Turkey’s membership to EU.

The interlocutors attached importance to the constitutional amendments
in Armenia estimating them as a good opportunity for development of
democracy in Armenia.

Des intellectuels turcs refusent le discours officiel sur l’histoire des
Arméniens ottomans

CAUCAZ.COM
Article paru dans l’édition du 21/09/2005

Par Célia CHAUFFOUR à Paris

Initialement prévue en mai 2005 à l’initiative des universités Bogaziçi,
Bilgi et Sabanci, puis annulée, la conférence sur les Arméniens ottomans
avait alors provoqué un affolement général. Le comité organisateur a
pourtant tenu tête. La conférence se tiendra à Istanbul les 23-25
septembre prochains. Les enjeux sont à la hauteur du tohu-bohu qui
entoure l’événement : cette poignée d’intellectuels turcs
arrivera-t-elle à ses fins – faire entendre une autre voix que celle
d’Ankara sur un dossier aussi épineux que l’histoire des Arméniens
ottomans ?

C’est l’histoire d’une conférence annulée, puis reprogrammée. Intitulée
“Les Arméniens ottomans au moment de la chute de l’Empire :
responsabilité scientifique et démocratie”, elle s’est attirée, au
printemps 2005, les foudres des cercles politiques turcs au pouvoir
comme dans l’opposition, ainsi qu’un flot de critiques acerbes, jusqu’à
être accablée de “trahison” et de “poignarder la nation dans le dos” par
le ministère de la justice turc.

Face aux défenseurs de la thèse officielle turque sur les massacres
arméniens de 1915, cette levée de plumes et de micros d’intellectuels
turcs jusque là réduits au silence a suffisamment effrayé la classe
politique turque pour être soumise à pression et menacée.

Au pied du mur, le comité organisateur avait alors suspendu ces
démarches. La conférence semblait vouée à ne rester qu’une initiative
indépendante et privée, privée d’un pignon sur rue et interdite d’accès
au débat public.

Pourtant le groupe d’universitaires turcs persévère. Une opinitreté qui
porte ses fruits dès l’été 2005, puisque le comité organisateur annonce
que la conférence ouvrira bel et bien ses portes des 23 au 25 septembre
2005, à Istanbul, devant même jusqu’à accueillir, pour le discours
d’ouverture, le ministre turc des Affaires étrangères, Abdullah Gül.

Ouvrir une 3e voie

A l’origine de l’initiative, des universitaires turcs décidés à ouvrir
une 3e voie dans le débat sur le destin des Arméniens ottomans : entre
une puissante société arménienne en diaspora revendiquant la
reconnaissance du génocide arménien de 1915 et un Etat turc foncièrement
hermétique aux discours divergents des lignes directrices émanant des
organes de l’Etat ou des arcanes du pouvoir, ne serait-il pas
préférable, dans un premier temps, de faire la lumière sur la véracité
de faits historiques dont la population turque ignore jusqu’à
l’existence même ?

Sociologue et historienne turque à l’université Ann Arbor du Michigan,
Fatma Müge Göçek suit de près la tenue de la conférence. Intellectuelle
engagée, décidée à développer une narration critique post-nationale,
elle est aussi à l’origine du « Workshop for Armenian-Turkish
Scholarship », rare initiative rassemblant universitaires et
intellectuels turcs et arméniens pour faire avancer le travail de
mémoire collectif, en particulier sur 1915.

« Aujourd’hui, certains universitaires turcs comme Taner Akcam et Fikret
Adanir osent aborder le débat en employant ouvertement une sémantique
que redoutent plus que tout les cercles officiels turcs : substituer le
lexique du `’massacre” par celui du `’génocide” », explique la
sociologue. « Ma propre lecture m’amène à penser que la réceptivité de
la société turque baisse considérablement dès que le terme `’génocide”
est prononcé, de sorte que toute communication recourant à cette
sémantique est systématiquement rejetée ».

Fatma Müge Göçek incrimine un nationalisme profondément ancré, mais
aussi une ignorance répandue et popularisée du passé et de ses faits
historiques. « Un facteur que je connais bien pour l’avoir moi-même vécu
en Turquie. Bien que j’aie probablement reçu la meilleure éducation que
la Turquie pouvait alors offrir, je n’ai strictement rien appris sur les
événements de 1915, ni même sur les raisons pour lesquelles d’autres
événements que ceux que le discours officiel mettait en lumière
pouvaient avoir eu lieu », lance-t-elle.

« Si on ignore le passé en général, et 1915 en particulier, au-delà de
ce que l’histoire officielle donne à voir, et que l’on est confronté à
l’hypothèse d’admettre la responsabilité d’un crime contre l’humanité,
la première réaction sera de nier et de s’opposer à ce nouveau discours,
sous n’importe quel prétexte. Et je pense que c’est ce qui se produit
aujourd’hui en Turquie. La société turque pressent que 1915 ne s’est pas
déroulé comme les livres d’histoire ont pu le prétendre. Elle doit en
apprendre davantage sans véritablement savoir à quoi s’attendre.
Peut-être faut-il, pour que les Turcs admettent la vérité sur 1915,
qu’ils apprennent dans un premier temps, par eux-mêmes, des faits
historiques véridiques. »

Prendre conscience des faits historiques avant d’accepter le terme de
génocide

Mais le recours à la sémantique du génocide ne permettrait-elle pas
d’étioler explicitement la négation du caractère génocidaire des
massacres d’Arméniens de 1915 et mettre un point final à 90 ans de
silence officiel ? « Oui, employer le terme `’génocide” serait
politiquement correct. Mais les soucis pédagogiques et épistémologiques
que je viens de décrire m’empêche d’adopter cette attitude, aussi
respectueuse soit-elle », avise Fatma Göçek. « La société turque doit en
premier lieu avoir la possibilité de débattre, d’échanger, de discuter
sur ce qui s’est réellement passé en 1915 et les raisons des événements
qui ont marqué cette année. Une fois que la société turque aura accès à
l’information historique, et qu’elle aura découvert et compris par
elle-même son histoire, alors il sera possible de recourir à la
sémantique adaptée. »

La sociologue revient sur le sentiment de frustration et d’injustice du
peuple arménien face au refus systématique de l’Etat turc de
reconnaissance du caractère génocidaire de la tragédie de 1915.
Pourquoi, dans les arcanes du pouvoir, craint-on tellement ce débat
devenu tabou ? Fatma Göçek avoue son incompréhension et avance ses
hypothèses. « L’appréhension qui caractérise l’attitude des cercles
politiques face à la tenue de la conférence pourrait prendre ses racines
dans l’étroitesse des liens entre l’épisode ottoman et la république
turque contemporaine. Remettre en cause le mythe fondateur de la Turquie
d’aujourd’hui, l’histoire même qui légitime la politique turque du 21e
siècle, effraye le pouvoir en place. »

Fatma Göçek pousse son raisonnement jusqu’à expliquer la crainte et le
malaise palpable et excessif de la classe politique par « le rejet des
conséquences du manque de responsabilité de l’Etat turc pour les crimes
commis en 1915. Les responsables des crimes perpétrés contre les
Arméniens sont restés en majorité impunis. Certains ont été expulsés
vers Malte par les Anglais, avant d’être libérés, d’autres ont été
protégés par les Forces alliées ou celle du sultan avant de rejoindre la
lutte pour l’indépendance. Ces derniers sont devenus des héros de la
nouvelle république turque. Par conséquent, ces hommes ont non seulement
échappé à la punition pour leurs actes criminels, mais ils ont vu ces
mêmes actes légitimés et valorisés par une forme de nationalisme turc
virulent ».

La conférence promet déjà d’être largement couverte par les médias turcs
et internationaux. Elle pourrait finalement devenir une opération de
relations publiques idéale à quelques jours de l’ouverture, le 3 octobre
prochain, des négociations pour l’adhésion turque à l’Union européenne.

De là à redorer l’image d’une Turquie où le débat démocratique et la
liberté d’expression et d’opinion seraient légitimes et reconnus, celle
d’une Turquie où la voix de l’Etat se serait plus en situation de
monopole ? La question reste ouverte. Et Fatma Göçek se montre prudente.

Quant à savoir si la conférence pourrait également permettre d’embrayer
sur la constitution d’une commission d’historiens indépendants, et
permettre d’envisager un retour au dialogue arméno-turc, seuls les
prochains mois de travail de mémoire collectif nous le diront.

Mais pour sûr, les participants à la conférence des 23 au 25 septembre
prochains auront encore à donner de la voix.

TURKEY URGES ARMENIA TO ORGANIZE A CONFERENCE ON ARMENIAN TERRORISM IN YEREVAN

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Sept 26 2005

ISTANBUL – After the controversial Armenian Conference in Istanbul,
Turkish media and public demand a conference in Yerevan on Armenian
terrorism and on the civilian Turks massacred by the Armenians.

Hurriyet daily’s headline today was “Discuss Yerevan All These”
implying Armenia should be open to discuss Armenian terrorism and
Armenian attacks against the Turkish civilians during the First World
War. Armenian terrorists killed more than 40 Turkish diplomats during
the 1970 and 1980s.

Prof. Cengiz Kutay said “We support strongly the Armenian Conference in
Istanbul though we do not share the speeches made in the Conference. It
is strange that Armenians keep the events so-called happened90 years
ago. However all the Turkish diplomats who were killed by the Armenian
terrorists and the Armenian attacks against the Turkish civilians
are forgotten.”

More than 520.000 Turkish villagers were massacred by the Armenian
armed groups in order to establish an independent Armenian in the
eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire.

Los Angeles Times
Sept 25 2005

Forum on Armenian massacre defies ban

By Amberin Zaman

ISTANBUL, Turkey – A controversial conference on the mass killings of
ethnic Armenians during the last days of the Ottoman Empire opened
here amid heavy security Saturday in defiance of a court ban.

The forum was hailed by participants and Western observers as a
groundbreaking event where Turkish academics for the first time
publicly could challenge their country’s official version of the
events leading to the Armenian tragedy.

Hundreds of protesters waving Turkish flags pelted the arriving
panelists with eggs and rotten tomatoes, expressing the fury felt by
many Turks over efforts to open their country’s painful past to
debate.

“The aim (of the conference) … is to declare Turkey guilty of
genocide,” said Erkan Onsel, head of the local branch of the small,
left-wing Turkey’s Workers’ Party.

The conference was canceled twice before, most recently on Thursday,
when an Istanbul court ruled in favor of a group of lawyers who
opposed the gathering on procedural grounds.

Turkey’s reformist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, harshly
condemned the ruling, saying it was timed to undermine the country’s
efforts to join the European Union.

Turkey is scheduled to open long-awaited membership talks with the EU
on Oct. 3.

“I want to live in a Turkey where freedoms are enjoyed in their
broadest sense,” Erdogan told reporters Saturday.

His words were echoed by Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, who sent a
letter of support to the conference.

He earlier termed the cancellation a further example of how “Turks
are so good at shooting themselves in the foot.”

Emotions ran high among a packed audience of academics, journalists
and diplomats as panelists deconstructed Turkey’s official
explanation of how the country’s once-thriving Armenian population,
estimated at more than 1 million in the early 20th century, was
reduced to its current level of 80,000.

Armenians say more than 1 million of their people systematically were
killed in a genocide campaign launched by Ottoman forces from 1915 to
1923.

Turkey says several hundred thousand Armenians did die but of
exposure, disease and attacks from brigands as they journeyed south
to Syria after being deported for collaborating with invading Russian
troops.

Most speakers took a cautious tone, saying the purpose of the
conference was not to deliver a verdict on whether the killings
constituted genocide or not.

“We cannot allow debate to be trapped between these two conflicting
points of view. We need to try and understand what happened in 1915,”
said Halil Berktay, a prominent Ottoman historian. He noted
nonetheless that Ottoman officials had declared “an open season to
hunt Armenians” at the start of World War I.

One of the speakers stated outright that the killings constituted
genocide.

“That is my view,” said Fikret Adanir, a Turkish historian.

“What about the Muslims who were killed, why won’t you mention them?”
demanded audience member Mustafa Budak, deputy director of the
state-run Ottoman archive, during a heated question-and-answer
session.

Turkey recently opened the archive to the public, but critics say
incriminating documents have been purged.

Budak denied the claim in an interview and added that “the
conference’s credibility would have been vastly enhanced had other
academics (supporting the official line) been invited to speak as
well.”

A European diplomat observing the panel said its significance went
beyond free debate of the Armenian issue. “It proves that Turkey is
maturing into a Western-style democracy, where all opinions, no
matter how contentious, can be freely expressed.”

A1+

| 20:36:41 | 20-09-2005 | Politics |

ELECTION WITHOUT PROGRESS

«No progress was fixed during the election to the local governing bodies
from the viewpoint of fair and free election. 52000 voters were registered
in Kanaker-Zeytun community, however 53491 came to the polling stations»,
chairman of It’s Your Choice public organization Harutyun Hambartsumyan
sated today during the press conference dedicated to the outcomes of the
election.

The organization members observed the elections in 33 polling stations. In
their words, the great number of faults, grave violations of the electoral
order, cases of illegal voting, abuse of the rights of the empowered persons
arouse concern.

«Just fancy the situation that will be created during the parliamentary
election», he said. To note, It’s Your Choice organization will submit its
report to the Central Election Committee.