Orthoepy Manual "Right and Wrong" Published

ORTHOEPY MANUAL "RIGHT AND WRONG" PUBLISHED

YEREVAN, JANUARY 31, NOYAN TAPAN. Yerjanik Gevorgian’s and Lavrenti
Mirzoyan’s orthoepy manual "Right and Wrong" has been published. The
authors’ goal is to help a reader oriente himself/herself in oral and
written speech, learn why and what is deniable in pronunciation of
words. The manual presents distortions of modern Armenian orthoepy,
the causes of their emergence, as well as mistakes connected with
articulation of various sounds. Besides, the list of words used with
most widely-spread orthoepic mistakes is placed in the book. The list
contains more than 1000 words, including personal and geographic names
most frequently used in Armenian.

Analyst Says Legitimacy Key to Economic Independence

Panorama.am

19:56 30/01/2007

ANALYST SAYS LEGITIMACY KEY TO ECONOMIC INDEPENDENCE

`Armenia is on a very difficult road to independence,’ Richard
Kirakosyan, an American-Armenian analyst said.

In his words, Armenia must implement projects that will secure
economic independence from the European Union, USA or Russia. Asked
about the ways to economic independence, Kirakosyan said, `Armenia
needs deeper democracy and the key to that is legitimacy.’

Kirakosyan believes the level of democracy and corruption are internal
problems that endanger the national security of Armenia. `The May
elections are very important and the leaderships must clearly
understand that the standards are very high’.

Source: Panorama.am

Hrant Margarian: Lebanese Armenians Continue Positive Neutrality

IN HRANT MARGARIAN’S WORDS, LEBANESE ARMENIANS CONTINUE KEEPING
TRADITIONAL POSITION OF POSITIVE NEUTRALITY

YEREVAN, JANUARY 30, NOYAN TAPAN. The Lebanese Armenians did not take
part in the collisions taken place recently in that country. ARF
Bureau representative Hrant Margarian stated about it at the January
29 press conference. In his words, being a minority at the Lebanese
Parliament, the Armenian deputies’ group continues keeping in that
country the traditional position of positive neutrality.

Touching upon the fact of presence of the Armenian Tricoloured at the
demonstrations and marches being held in Lebanese, Hrant Margarian
mentioned that the local Armenian population waves the Armenian flag
even during the football games, irrespective of the fact, teams of
what country take part in the given game.

As for straining of the situation in Lebanon, H.Margarian expressed
his anxiety concerning the Armenian community’s fate in that
country. To recap, few people died recently in Beirut as a result of
collisions of the opposing and pro-ruling forces.

PM: Army Is One Of Greatest Achievements Of Our Independence

ANDRANIK MARGARIAN: "ARMENIAN ARMY IS ONE OF GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS OF
OUR INDEPENDENCE"

YEREVAN, JANUARY 29, NOYAN TAPAN. "The Armenian Army born with the
independence of Armenia is one of the greatest achievements of our
independence," is said in RA Prime Minister Andranik Margarian’s
address on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of formation of the
Armenian Army. In the Prime Minister’s words, the national army passed
a long way of formation during a short period of time and it is today
not only the hopeful guarantee of defence and security of Armenia and
Artsakh, of the independent statehood, but also has its deserving
participation in international peace-keeping processes, gathering
necessary experience to confront challenges of the modern word.
"Continuing efforts for our country’s future development, creation of
competitive economy, for strengthening the statehood, we clearly
understand that it is also one of important preconditions for army
building, reforms being implemented in the Armed Forces, improvement of
an efficient and powerful army," is mentioned in the RA Prime
Minister’s address. It is mentioned in RA National Assembly Speaker
Tigran Torosian’s congratulation message on the occasion of the 15th
anniversary of the RA National Army that it would seem unimaginable 15
years ago that the martial detachmeans defending Artsakh would increase
in the best, most efficient national army of the region during such a
short period of time. In the NA Speaker’s words, it is an indisputable
fact today which was fixed owing to our people’s heroic steadfastness,
thousand of Armenians’ devotion, entirely service to the Fatherland.
"The delight and pride of having an army overcome with honour all the
ordeals of war and peace is another occasion for paying the tribute of
our deep respect and gratitude to the memory of Armenian sons
selflessly passed the heroic way for improvement of the National Army,
the guarantee of freedom, securiy and integrity of our Fatherland, our
people’s peaceful life," is said in T.Torosian’s address.

ANKARA: In the name of love

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Jan 29 2007

In the name of love

by CEM OZDEMIR

Everybody — journalists, party leaders, the president of the
republic, the chief of general staff — found harsh words to condemn
the murder of Hrant Dink. But don’t they see that there is a link
between what they are writing, saying and preaching in their daily
professional lives and what happened to Hrant? How can one condemn
his murder and still argue for the absurd Article 301, which brought
him to court multiple times for nothing but his opinion?
How can one continue to argue that the border to Armenia should
remain closed? Some are against opening the border because of the
Armenian occupation of Azeri territory. But that’s all the more
reason to take the initiative and establish good relations with your
neighbors, thereby becoming the good broker in the process to
negotiate a fair and just solution.
Those who continue to oppose the recent legislation on foundations
don’t understand that treating Armenians and other Christians as
second-class citizens was exactly what Hrant was fighting against.
How can one still be against Christians becoming officers, generals
and members of parliament?
How can one still continue to declare as an enemy everybody who has
another opinion than the official one on the events of 1915?
Just before Hrant was murdered, Sylvester Stallone became the new
enemy. What did he do wrong? He supported the views of the majority
of historians and experts in the world and described the events of
1915 as genocide. Even if one doesn’t agree with him, has anyone
bothered to read the script of the movie he is planning? How many
people have actually read Franz Werfel’s book about the 40 days of
Musa Dag? Or does the fact that Werfel and Stallone don’t share the
official views of the state automatically make them enemies? And if
so, is it treason if I watch Stallone’s new film, "Rocky Balboa"?
Recent commentaries on TV and in the papers that say this film too is
now bad, even though it has nothing to do with his announced movie
about Werfel’s book, are incredibly shortsighted.
In case it matters: I am still a fan of Stallone and his movies (OK,
except for the Rambo series) and I look forward to seeing "Rocky
Balboa," just as I was looking forward to it only a couple of weeks
ago. The difference now, of course, is that since last Friday, I
don’t feel much like going to the movies?.
There is enough sadness in Hrant’s death. But it increases my pain
even more to watch people talk about him and his heritage who never
understood Hrant while he was alive. For all the talk about Hrant’s
legacy let’s not overlook Agos, his Turkish-Armenian newspaper, which
should persevere. Hrant’s death should not be used to make arguments
in favor of or against Turkey’s accession to the European Union.
Obviously, Turkey’s EU prospects were for Hrant — and remain for
other people of different origins in Turkey — a chance to improve
their rights. Nor should the death be employed in the debate
surrounding the events of 1915. Hrant did not insist on recognizing
the genocide as a precondition for a dialogue as some people in the
diaspora do. But remember his words when he said that the Armenians
know what happened to them.
One man come in the name of love
One man come and go
One man come he to justify
One man to overthrow
One man caught on a barbed wire fence
One man he resist
One man washed on an empty beach
One man betrayed with a kiss
U2 sang this song for Martin Luther King, Jr. I would like to
dedicate it to my brother Hrant Dink.
Do they who betrayed him with a kiss know what they did?
Turkey produced both Hrant Dink and the 17-year-old boy who killed
him. And let’s not forget the thousands of people who marched in
solidarity and chanted, "We are all Hrant Dink! We are all
Armenians!"
This is Turkey, and its future depends on whether it produces more
Hrant Dinks — who live in the name of love — or more 17-year-old
boys who kill in the name of hate.

Snow-Storm Forecast on January 31 in Armenian Mountainous Regions

SNOW-STORM FORECAST ON JANUARY 31 IN ARMENIAN MOUNTAINOUS REGIONS AND
MOUNTAIN PASSES

YEREVAN, JANUARY 29, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. Due to penetration
of cold atmosphere front to Armenia from the west, snow is forecast in
Armenia until January 31, which on January 30 will be not heavy and on
January 31 heavy. As NT was informed from Gagik Surenian, chief
specialist of Haypethydromet Department’s Meteorological Forecasts
Unit, mainly no precipitations are forecast of February 1-3. On January
29, air temperature fell by 15-20 degrees in Tavush and Syunik regions,
in other regions it fell by 5-8 degrees and in Ararat valley it rose by
4-6 degrees. From January 30 to February 1, air temperature will fall
by another 4-6 degrees and on February 2 will rise by 3-5 degrees. It
was mentioned that the wind will intensify reaching 25-30m/s in some
regions of Armenia, in particular, in Shirak, Lori and Tavush on
January 31. Snow-storm is forecast in mountainous regions and mountain
passes the same day and roads will be covered with ice. Air temperature
will be close to the norm in February and precipitations will exceed
the norm. Average air temperature will be -1 in February.

Midnight at the Oasis

New York Times, NY
Jan 27 2007

Midnight at the Oasis

By MAX RODENBECK
Published: January 28, 2007

POWER, FAITH, AND FANTASY
America in the Middle East, 1776 to the Present.
By Michael B. Oren.
Illustrated. 778 pp. W. W. Norton & Company. $35.

Around the time of the War of Independence, America’s main contact
with the Middle East consisted in trading Caribbean rum for Turkish
opium. It’s hard not to wish, reading the epic story of this 230-year
relationship, now usefully condensed into a single well-researched
volume, that things could have remained as simple as the swapping of
your recreational poison for mine.

But things never were quite so simple. Even then the potential for
friction loomed as large as the possibility of mutual gain. Before
the end of the Napoleonic wars, Christian sailors risked capture and
enslavement by Muslim pirates from the Barbary ports of Algiers,
Tunis and Tripoli. Governments could either front protection money,
cough up ransom or threaten force.

America tried all three approaches, and its erratic policy echoes
with sad familiarity in the 21st century. We find the same wrangling
in Washington between those who counsel appeasement (the cheaper,
saner option) and those who demand armed action (the more glorious);
bickering among Western capitals over whether to act singly or in
concert (Thomas Jefferson tried to corral a coalition, but Congress
balked); and daring strikes carried out with near-fatal clumsiness
(an attempt to blockade Tripoli led to the capture, in 1803, of the
U.S.S. Philadelphia and its 308-man crew, and a subsequent,
heroically farcical attempt to free them by effecting regime change).

Michael B. Oren, an American-born Israeli scholar and the author of a
well-received study of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, recounts such
exploits with admirable detachment. `Power, Faith, and Fantasy’ is
hugely ambitious, drawing on hundreds of original sources to create a
finely balanced overview of this enormously complex subject. Out of
understandable necessity, the later chapters, dealing with more
recent times and America’s role as a superpower, preoccupied with a
multilayered and often contradictory agenda in the Middle East, grow
sketchier and less conclusive.

Yet it is a diverting tale over all, full of forgotten twists and
memorable characters. Who remembers now, for instance, that the
Statue of Liberty was initially conceived by her French sculptor as
an Egyptian peasant girl, intended to adorn the entrance to the Suez
Canal? Or that the first Zionists to settle in Palestine were in fact
American Protestants, who planted successive, ill-fated colonies
aimed at `restoring’ the Holy Land to Jews, so that their subsequent
conversion to Christianity would speed the Second Coming? Or that
Civil War veterans officered Egyptian campaigns in Sudan and
Abyssinia? Or that before landing in North Africa during World War
II, the United States Army dropped leaflets advertising the arrival
of `Holy Warriors … to fight the great jihad of freedom’?

Some of these episodes may sound trivial or obscure, but Oren
cleverly weaves them into the overarching themes of his title.
Consider America’s missionary effort. The printing of native-language
Bibles, and the founding of schools, clinics and three universities,
in Cairo, Beirut and Istanbul, that remain among the best in the
region, failed to win more than a trickle of converts. Yet a hundred
years of American mission work produced some unexpected change.

It was, in part, the missionary doctors’ reputation for altruism that
persuaded the Saudi king to offer his oil patch not to British, but
to American prospectors. And while the proto-Zionist restorationist
movement faded to the fringes of Protestant preaching – at least,
until its revival by some modern evangelicals – a sentimental
attachment to the ancient Hebrews infused the religious upbringing of
Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson, the two presidents who did most to
cement American ties with Israel.

Such underlying trends have seldom been so well explored, but Oren
occasionally overstates their importance. Truman’s own words reveal
that `faith’ was perhaps a secondary motive behind his crucial
decision to back the creation of Israel. `I have to answer to
hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism,’
Oren quotes Truman as explaining. `I do not have hundreds of
thousands of Arabs in my constituents.’

Important context is missing from some of the book’s pages. Oren
artfully touches on Middle Eastern influence on American popular
culture, from the hootchy-kootchy dance to Camel cigarettes, but
tends to dissociate this from the wider Western tradition of
Orientalism. There is much gory detail about the Armenian genocide,
but scant mention of the fact that Ottoman Turkey faced repeated
invasion by a Russia whose czars, disastrously for the Ottomans’
Armenian subjects, claimed leadership of all Orthodox Christians. At
several junctures, Oren paints Europe as stubbornly resistant to
American policy, without adequately substantiating the charge or
explaining European motives. We hear nothing of how America’s
fateful, post-World War I decision to restrict immigration helped
push desperate Jewish refugees toward Palestine.

While correctly noting the peculiar mix of cultural disdain and
romantic fascination that has marked American attitudes to Muslim
Middle Easterners, Oren curiously declines to distance himself from
some unflattering views. We hear, for instance, of an 18th-century
diplomat whose `experience had taught him that in the Middle East
power alone was respected,’ as if this were a quality unique to the
region. And a hint of distaste sometimes infuses his language. The
landmass of the Middle East curves `scimitar-like through Arabia.’
Elsewhere, Oren speaks blithely of `nameless Middle Eastern thugs’
and `the ubiquity of Arab terror.’ Such shopworn phrases tend to
compound, rather than dispel, preconceived notions of the Middle East
as a kind of unfathomable Badland.

Commendably, in a work of such scope, there are very few errors of
fact or omission. Yet, as a reserve major in the Israeli Army, Oren
ought to know that Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon was not provoked
by the P.L.O. `regularly striking’ at Galilee. Yasir Arafat’s group
was certainly an elemental threat to the Jewish state, but had
actually been observing a long, American-brokered cease-fire before
Ariel Sharon’s drive to Beirut. It is also odd that the author hardly
touches upon the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, or on the issue
of United States financial and military aid to Israel, factors
undeniably crucial to any understanding of America’s involvement with
today’s Middle East.

Oren mostly avoids the temptation to seek historical parallels to
modern events. The occasions when he succumbs reveal the peril for
historians of this habit. Toward the book’s conclusion, for instance,
he avers that `by protecting themselves from Middle Eastern threats
while simultaneously trying to assist native people, U.S. forces in
Iraq were, in effect, revisiting the earliest American involvement in
the region.’ Surely, as we now know, the threat to America posed by
Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was more fantastical than real, until, that is,
American forces hit the ground there.

Such subtle reinforcement of America’s self-image as an innocent
among Middle Eastern sharks mars an otherwise exemplary work. This is
a pity, since, as Oren amply illustrates, it is America’s failure to
be clear and honest about its own motives, as much as its serial
failure to interpret the Middle East, that has so often befuddled
relations with the region.

Max Rodenbeck is the Middle East correspondent for The Economist.

In Conflict Resolution People Matter More Than Territories, Lord R-J

IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION PEOPLE MATTER MORE THAN TERRITORIES, LORD
RUSSELL-JOHNSTON

Strasburg, January 26. ArmInfo. The principle of territorial integrity
is directly linked to the question of acceptance of such by the people
residing in this territory. It is definite that people matter much more
rather than territories. It is matters much how the population of the
territories are treated, Lord Russell-Johnston, Chair of the PACE
Interim Commission on Nagorno-Karabakh, told ArmInfo correspondent.

On the other hand, Lord Russell-Johnston refused to make direct
parallels with Nagorno-Karabakh and pointed pout that due to his
present position he should retain maximal objectivity. He said that a
thousand of Serbs died in the war imposed by Slobodan Miloshevich but,
tens of thousands of Armenians died in Karabakh. However, he leaves it
without comment.

Lord Russell-Johnston said that there were two main principles of
territorial integrity after the WW2. These are – territorial integrity
stipulating permanence of the borders, and the non-interference into
the home affairs of a sovereign state. The both principles are
out-dated. He brought examples of interference into the home affairs of
sovereign states, these are Indonesia, Kosovo and Bosnia.

There is a general agreement that being a sovereign, the state does not
acquire a right to oppress the population. If rights of the people are
infringed, then the international community takes over responsibility
to protect the people from the further oppressions. Mentioning the
Kosovo example, Lord Rassell-Johnston pointed out that the
international community could deprive Serbia of right to rule over
Kosovo grounded on ill-treating the Kosovars. 90% of its population are
Albanians, and in case it is returned to Serbia, the situation will go
out of control.

The committee of the European Parliament published a draft resolution
in January 2007. It says that it would be unthinkable to pass Kosovo
under the reign of Belgrade. In other words, the international
community can vary the term of territorial integrity, he pointed out.

Lord Russell-Johnston found it amusing that there is no such a term as
– "international law" but – UN’s agreements. There was an agreement on
territorial integrity of African states. It had an acute problem of
national tribes caused by politics of a European colonist state. The
violation of the principle of territorial integrity caused massacre
there. Lord Russell-Johnston said that truth is that states and people
are against that what is known as "acceptance". He admits, that if
something is done in one place it would become a precedent. The
question is whether this precedent would be applied or not. He added
that the population of South Osetia and Abkhazia strive to separate
from Georgia.

A census was recently held in the Great Britain and showed that 52% of
the respondents are for Scotland’s separation from the UK. However,
Lord Russell-Johnston adds that he is not in favour of such point and
definitely won’t set tanks of to counteract it.

Sixth suspect jailed, top officials removed over journalist’s murder

Agence France Presse — English
January 26, 2007 Friday

Sixth suspect jailed, top officials removed over journalist’s murder

A sixth suspect was jailed and two senior regional officials were
removed from office Friday as Turkish authorities expanded their
investigation into the murder of ethnic Armenian journalist Hrant
Dink.

A court in Istanbul charged university student Erhan Tuncel with
instigating the murder, bringing to six the number of suspects held
over the January 19 killing, the Anatolia news agency reported.

Tuncel, who was close to an ultra-nationalist group, allegedly
agitated young people in the northern city of Trabzon, where the
suspected assailant, 17-year-old Ogun Samast, comes from.

The government meanwhile removed the governor and the police chief of
Trabzon from their positions, an interior ministry spokeswoman told
AFP.

The city, a nationalist stronghold, has come under the spotlight with
a series of violent incidents, including the murder of an Italian
Catholic priest and the near lynching of five leftist activists
mistaken for Kurdish separatists last year.

Critics say the Trabzon authorities failed to investigate seriously
the groups of rogue youths under the sway of local nationalist and
anti-Christian hardliners following the murder of Father Andrea
Santoro, who was gunned down last February by a 16-year-old boy while
praying in his church.

On Wednesday Samast, a jobless secondary school graduate, and four
other suspects were charged in connection with Dink’s murder and
jailed pending trial.

A second suspect who appeared before court on Friday — a teenager
who allegedly sent an e-mail to Samast congratulating him for Dink’s
murder — was released.

The investigation so far has suggested that the suspects, all of them
young people, did not belong to any known underground organisation
but wanted to take action on their own against what they saw as
rising threats to Turkey’s unity.

Dink, editor of the bilingual Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos and one of
Turkey’s most prominent ethnic Armenians, was branded a "traitor" by
nationalists for urging open debate on the massacres of Armenians
under the Ottoman Empire — a taboo topic until recently — which he
labeled as genocide.

He was last year given a six-month suspended sentence for insulting
"Turkishness".

One of the key suspects jailed Wednesday, Yasin Hayal, 26, is
believed to have frequently met with Tuncel and allegedly gave Samast
money and a gun to kill Dink.

Hayal served 11 months in jail over a 2004 bomb blast outside a
McDonald’s restaurant in Trabzon.

The interior ministry announced Friday that it was also sending two
senior inspectors to Trabzon to investigate whether the city’s
administrators and security forces were responsible for "any faults
or negligence" in the string of violent incidents there.

The murder of Dink, shot three times from behind outside the Agos
office in downtown Istanbul, has sparked a heated debate over rising
nationalism in Turkey, a candidate for EU membership, and the
government has come under fire for failing to protect free speech.

Despite the controversies, Dink had won respect as a sincere
campaigner for Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and was critical of
Armenian fanaticism.

Some 100,000 protestors marched at his funeral Tuesday in one of the
largest public gatherings in Istanbul in recent years, brandishing
banners that read "We are all Armenians."

The Shadow of Article 301

January 25, 2007
Guardian Unlimited
The Shadow of Article 301
by Lucy Popescu

On January 19 2007 the Turkish-Armenian writer and editor Hrant Dink,
aged 52, was assassinated outside the Istanbul offices of his weekly
newspaper _Agos_ () . He was a prominent advocate
of the Armenian minority in Turkey, who sought to create a dialogue
between Turks and Armenians.

I met Dink last March at a writers’ conference in Istanbul. He struck
me then as a kind, open, quietly courageous man. Although many of us
from the international writers’ organisation PEN were concerned for
his safety, I don’t think any of us suspected that he would pay with
his life for his convictions.

In his last article, published on the day he died, Dink wrote "Yes, I
can feel myself as restless as a dove but I know that in this country
people do not touch and disturb the doves. The doves continue their
lives in the middle of the cities. Yes indeed a bit frightened but at
the same time free."

Dink was charged a number of times under the strict Turkish penal code
for "denigrating Turkey" and "insulting Turkish identity". More
recently, in July 2006, Dink was given a six-month suspended sentence
for "insulting Turkish identity" for an article on the Armenian
diaspora. He has always maintained that his aim was to alleviate the
tensions between Turkey and Armenia. A week later, a new case opened
against Dink. Like the novelist _Orhan Pamuk_
( 0,,1598668,00.html) , he
was due to stand trial under Article 301 of Turkey’s penal code, for
referring to the 1915 massacre of Armenians as "genocide" during an
interview. Dink was awaiting trial for these charges at the time of
his death.

Dink was evidently considered a traitor by Turkish ultra-nationalists.
Just before his assassination, the journalist had apparently
complained of death threats he was receiving from nationalists, and
had appealed to the Turkish authorities for these to be taken
seriously. Tragically they were not.

According to PEN, Article 301 has repeatedly marked writers,
journalists and publishers out as targets for attack, making it even
more urgent that this law is repealed. To be charged under Article 301
is to be branded an enemy of Turkey, to become a figure of hate and a
target for fanatics and extremists. The law is completely contrary to
international standards protecting the right to freedom of expression
and endangers the lives of those charged under it.

On Tuesday, thousands of people marched in a funeral procession for
the murdered journalist in Istanbul, many holding placards and protest
slogans calling for expanded freedom of speech. Today the Armenian
National Committee has organised a vigil outside the Turkish embassy
for anyone who would like to express their support in London.

~ Readers may also like to show their support by emailing the Turkish
government and calling for justice for the murder of Hrant Dink and
for the urgent repeal of Article 301. Send to: [email protected],
Head of Mission, Turkish embassy: His Excellency Mr Akin Alptuna, fao
prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

dow_of_article_301.html

http://www.agos.tr/
http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/books/2007/01/the_sha