Author: Zaminian Bedik

Windsor Star (Ontario)
June 24, 2004 Thursday Final Edition

Shooting star: Karsh immortalized local Ford workers

by Grace Macaluso

Shirley Crapper vividly remembers the day her husband unknowingly
entered the realm of the famous. It was 1951, and 26-year-old Goward
Crapper had just returned home from his job on the assembly line at
Ford’s No. 4 plant. “Somebody took my picture at work,” he said. The
couple didn’t give the news much thought until finding out years
later that “someone” was world-renowned photographer Yousuf Karsh.

“We were excited,” recalls Shirley. “My husband is a VIP. His picture
and Winston Churchill’s picture are in the same book by Karsh.”

Goward Crapper died in 1987, but he along with other working-class
heroes have been immortalized in a collection of black and white
photographs that will be exhibited from Saturday to Aug. 29 at the
Art Gallery of Windsor.

“Anything Karsh touched turned into gold, and for one of Canada’s
most famous artists to be connected to Windsor is significant,” says
Cassandra Getty, collections manager at the AGW. “He put a face on an
aspect of Windsor that has made Windsor — the auto industry.”

The show coincides with the 100th anniversary of Ford of Canada,
which had commissioned the photographer better known for his photos
of popes and world leaders to take pictures of its employees in
Windsor.

Karsh delivered 31 finished prints to Ford, which featured some of
the photos in its annual report — published at the start of a
postwar decade that would be shaped by the rise of North American
industry and affluence. The photos reflect Karsh’s career as a
portrait photographer, which is gaining renewed attention, says
Getty. In his earlier career, Karsh practised pictorial photography
— a style prevalent in the late 1800s that was defined by the use of
“moody, dramatic and soft focus technique,” says Getty.

In portrait photography, there’s less manipulation. “It’s still
dramatic, but more assertive,” says Getty. “Everyone can see and
recognize Karsh’s style; it’s the epitome of portrait photography.
We’re going further and looking at his career and how it fit into the
greater culture and how culture affected him.”

The commission by Ford was the second for Karsh, whose photographs of
steelworkers in Canada and the United States are also part of the
collection in the AGW exhibit. “Instead of making leaders and
celebrities heroes, he made ordinary workers heroes,” says Getty.

The art gallery as well as Ford have been trying to locate some of
the original workers for the upcoming show, but with limited success
since many have died, says Getty. However, they did manage to track
down Bob Oloman, who enjoyed a 37-year career at Ford’s Oakville
operations before retiring in 1987.

Oloman was a 19-year-old trainee at the Ford trade school on
Riverside Drive when he and a small group of other students were
summoned to pose for Karsh

The photo shoot, “didn’t take very long,’ he recalls. “We were asked
to stand by a narrow window in a corner of the building.”

But Oloman, who plans to attend the official opening on Friday, says
the experience of being in a Karsh photo is a major source of pride.
“I feel very privileged, in small a small way, to be part of this
historical icon and Ford’s industrial history, which has been
preserved in a unique way.”

Shirley Crapper also is attending the opening in honour of both Karsh
and her husband, whose portrait is included in the photographer’s
last book, Heroes of Light and Shadow, published in 2000. Entitled
Rear Window, the picture frames Crapper’s handsome face and arms
through the rear window of a car as he looks directly into the
camera.

One critic said the photograph “evokes the erotic smouldering of a
James Dean.”

“This has been quite the experience,” says Shirley. “Gow’s picture
has hung in the National Art Gallery in Ottawa. He never knew just
how famous he became.”

YOUSUF KARSH AT A GLANCE

– Yousuf Karsh (1908-2002)

– Portrait photographer

– Grew up during the Armenian massacres

– Brought to Canada in 1924 by his uncle

– Brief schooling in Sherbrooke, Que.

– Apprenticed with portrait photographer John Garo of Boston

– Opened his studio in Ottawa in 1932

– A portrait of Winston Churchill in 1941 brought him international
prominence

– Work is in the permanent collections of the Museum of Modern Art,
the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, the Art Institute of
Chicago, The National Portrait Gallery in London, and the National
Gallery of Canada

BOOKS INCLUDE:

– Faces of Destiny; portraits by Karsh (1946)

– Canada: as seen by the camera of Yousuf Karsh and described in
words by John Fisher (1960)

– In Search of Greatness; reflections of Yousuf Karsh (1962)

– Karsh Portfolio (1967)

– Karsh Portraits (1976)

– Karsh Canadians (1978)

– Karsh: a Fifty-year Retrospective (1983)

– Karsh: American Legends (1992)

– Karsh: Heroes of Light and Shadow (2000)

— George Eastman House,

KARSH STUDIED MAN’S RELATIONSHIP WITH MACHINES

Yousuf Karsh and his wife, Solange, spent several days surveying,
interviewing and photographing workers at the Ford of Canada
operations.

In an interview at the time with the Windsor Daily Star, Karsh
explained how he viewed his assignment, particularly man’s
relationship with machines:

“This is not a study of the Great Machine. This series is a portrait
of the working man — the Ford worker. They are not part of the Great
Machine. They give the Great Machine life. The man is important, the
operation is secondary. The operation and the machine give my subject
the atmosphere — it is the background.”

The Ford plant itself seemed to overwhelm Karsh. “The production line
moves on, as endless as time. Karsh stands off to the side, his
assistants carrying his equipment. He is in deep thought, his index
finger to his lip. He studies. He shakes his head, then mutters with
astonishment, “It is so complicated … There are a lot of stories in
this plant.”

— The Windsor Daily Star, Feb. 13, 1951

GRAPHIC: Photo: Brent Foster, Star photo; LOOKING BACK: Shirley
Crapper holds a photo of her husband, Goward, called Rear Window
taken by Yousuf Karsh in 1951 at the Windsor Ford plant. ; Photo: ON
THE JOB: Emric (Jimmy) Saska, set-up man, Plant No. 2, Valve
Department No. 39, in 1951 photo by Yousuf Karsh taken at the Ford
Motor Company of Canada plant in Windsor.; Photo: WORKING: William N.
Hagen, Plant No. 2, Camshaft Department, Ford Motor Company of
Canada, photographed by Yousuf Karsh in 1951.; Photo: DASHBOARD: Rene
Gabriau, Frank Hebert and Ross Ryan, photographed by Yousuf Karsh at
Ford Motor Company of Canada in 1951.; Photo: Windsor Star, File;
FAMOUS PHOTOGRAPHER: Yousuf Karsh poses at the Ford plant in 1951
while shooting his portraits of workers.

Kazakh lower house approves CIS antiterror document

Interfax-Kazakhstan news agency, Almaty
23 Jun 04

ASTANA

The Majlis (the lower house) of the Kazakh parliament approved at a
plenary sitting today the ratification of the protocol approving the
provision on the procedure for organizing and holding joint antiterror
exercises in CIS member states.

The document was sent to the parliament’s Senate (the upper chamber)
for further consideration.

Presenting a relevant draft law to the Majlis deputies, the first
deputy chairman of the Kazakh National Security Committee, Vladimir
Bozhko, noted that Kazakhstan would ratify the document “without
reservation”, although four of the 10 CIS states that signed the
document earlier had ratified the document with reservations.

The provision on the procedure for organizing and holding joint
antiterror exercises in the CIS member states was signed in Chisinau
by Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan and Ukraine on 7 October 2002.

The provision “provides for joint efforts from the sides to thwart
terrorist activities, as well as to secure the release of hostages, to
render explosive devices harmless and to wipe out terrorist groups and
so on”, the Majlis’s committee for international affairs, defence and
security stated in conclusion at the plenary sitting.

The document also provides for the joint training of special
antiterror formations during exercises.

In accordance with the provision, the antiterror centre, which was set
up under a decision from the CIS heads of state in 2000, will
coordinate the issue of organizing and holding antiterror exercises.

In order to control directly the special antiterror formations during
joint exercises the interested side will set up a supervising body to
define the procedure for holding the exercises, including the use of
forces and special means.

The document also mentions that interference with the holding of joint
exercises is allowed only by instruction from the head of the
interested state.

Clinton on the record, from Oslo to Camp David
By Matthew E. Berger

Jewish Telegraphic Agency
June 23 2004

WASHINGTON, June 22 (JTA) — Bill Clinton covers a range of issues
in his 957-page autobiography, “My Life.” Following are excerpts.
• On a brush with anti-Semitism in New York:

“I lived in a southern town with two synagogues and a fair number
of anti-Semites who referred to Jews as ‘Christ-killers,’ but I was
surprised to find anti-Semitism alive and well in New York. I guess
I should have been reassured to know the South didn’t have a corner
on racism or anti-Semitism, but I wasn’t.”

• Clinton discusses getting Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and
Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat to attend the September
1993 White House signing of the Declaration of Principles behind the
Oslo peace accord:

“I badly wanted Rabin and Arafat to attend and urged them to do
so; if they didn’t, no one in the region would believe they were
fully committed to implementing the principles, and, if they did,
a billion people across the globe would see them on television and
they would leave the White House even more committed to peace than
when they arrived.”

Arafat, however, wanted to wear a revolver:

“I balked and sent word that he couldn’t bring the gun. He was here to
make peace; the pistol would send the wrong message, and he certainly
would be safe without it.”

Clinton strove to get Arafat and Rabin to shake hands. Rabin was
reluctant:

“I told Yitzhak that if he was really committed to peace, he’d have
to shake Arafat’s hand to prove it.”

Before long, Clinton writes, “Rabin and Arafat would develop a
remarkable working relationship, a tribute to Arafat’s regard for
Rabin and the Israeli leader’s uncanny ability to understand how
Arafat’s mind worked.”

• Clinton learns of Rabin’s assassination:

“By the time he was killed, I had come to love him as I had rarely
loved another man. In the back of my mind, I suppose I always knew
he had put his life at risk, but I couldn’t imagine him gone, and I
didn’t know what I would or could do in the Middle East without him.”

Clinton discusses his decision to say “Shalom, chaver” — Hebrew for
“Goodbye, friend” — at Rabin’s funeral. The phrase since has become
famous in Israel:

“I had a number of Jewish staff members who spoke Hebrew and knew how
I felt about Rabin; I am still grateful that they gave me the phrase.
Shimon Peres later told me that chaver means more than mere friendship;
it evokes the comradeship of soul mates in common cause. Soon,
‘Shalom, chaver’ began to appear on billboards and bumper stickers
all across Israel.”

• Clinton recalls his historic December 1998 speech to the Palestinian
National Council in Gaza:

“Just before I got up to speak, almost all the delegates raised their
hands in support of removing the provision calling for the destruction
of Israel from their charter. It was the moment that made the whole
trip worthwhile. You could almost hear the sighs of relief in Israel;
perhaps Israelis and Palestinians actually could share the land and
the future after all.”

• On the Camp David summit in July 2000:

“It was frustrating and profoundly sad. There was little difference
between the two sides on how the affairs of Jerusalem would actually
be handled; it was all about who got to claim sovereignty.”

Efforts continued to reach a peace agreement that fall, as Clinton’s
term drew rapidly to a close:

“It was assumed that Palestine would get the Muslim and Christian
quarters, with Israel getting the other two. Arafat argued that
he should have a few blocks of the Armenian quarter because of the
Christian churches there. I couldn’t believe he was talking to me
about this.”

“At times Arafat seemed confused, not wholly in command of the facts.
I had felt for some time that he might not be at the top of his game
any longer, after all the years of spending the night in different
places to dodge assassins’ bullets, all the countless hours on
airplanes, all the endless hours of tension-filled talks. Perhaps he
simply couldn’t make the final jump from revolutionary to statesman.”

“Arafat never said no; he just couldn’t bring himself to say yes.
Pride goeth before the fall.”

Just before Clinton left office, he spoke with Arafat on the phone:

Arafat “thanked me for all my efforts and told me what a great man I
was. ‘Mr. Chairman, I replied, ‘I am not a great man. I am a failure,
and you have made me one.’ I warned Arafat that he was single-handedly
electing Sharon and that he would reap the whirlwind.”

“Nearly a year after I left office, Arafat said he was ready to
negotiate on the basis of the parameters I had presented. Apparently,
Arafat had thought the time to decide, five minutes to midnight,
had finally come. His watch had been broken a long time.”

• On Israel-Syria peace talks:

“Before he was killed, Yitzhak Rabin had given me a commitment
to withdraw from the Golan to the June 4, 1967 borders as long as
Israel’s concerns were satisfied. The commitment was given on the
condition that I keep it ‘in my pocket’ until it could be formally
presented to Syria in the context of a complete solution.”

At peace talks in Shepherdstown, W.Va. in January 2000, Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Barak took a go-slow strategy:

“Barak had not been in politics long, and I thought he had gotten
some very bad advice.”

• On his decision not to pardon Jonathan Pollard, a Navy intelligence
analyst and American Jew convicted of spying for Israel:

“For all the sympathy Pollard generated in Israel, he was a hard
case to push in America; he had sold our country’s secrets for money,
not conviction, and for years had not shown any remorse.”

Plus, CIA Director George Tenet objected to Pollard’s release,
threatening to resign if he were pardoned:

“I didn’t want to do it, and Tenet’s comments closed the door.”

Clinton had to persuade Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who
had demanded Pollard’s release in exchange for Israeli concessions at
the 1998 Wye River Plantation talks with the Palestinians, to agree
to the deal even without Pollard:

“I told Netanyahu that I would review the case seriously and try to
work through it with Tenet and the national security team, but that
Netanyahu was better off with a security agreement that he could
count on than he would have been with the release of Pollard.”

OIC Urges Middle East Quartet To Implement Peace Roadmap

CihanNews
6/16/2004

ISTANBUL (CIHAN) – The Organization of Islamic Conferences called
on the Middle East quartet to pressure the Israeli government to end
violence against the Palestinians.

The joint declaration of the 31st Foreign Ministers Summit of the
OIC said that world`s second largest organization will aid the
Palestinian people and help them to attain their free rights and to
help Palestinians form an independent state.

The Middle East quartet consists of the UN, the USA, Russia, and the
EU. The OIC calls for the group to stop Israel from implementing
violence, enforce the roadmap for Middle East peace and give
international aid to the Palestinian people.

In relation to Iraq, the OIC reaffirmed its support for the newly
founded Iraqi government by voicing support for steps aimed at ending
the occupation of Iraq and transferring sovereignty to the Iraqi
people. The joint communiqué said that the programs and activities
of the transitional Iraqi government should be clear and basic.

The OIC also welcomed the 1546th numbered resolution of the UN
Security Council.

The joint declaration of the OIC Foreign Minister Summit said that
it will continue to monitor progress between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
“The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan should be resolved on
basis of protecting the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.”

The declaration also condemned terrorist activities across world.

Armenian foreign minister and US Secretary of State discuss Karabakh in USA

Noyan Tapan news agency
15 Jun 04

Yerevan, 15 June: Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan who is
in USA on two-day working visit, met US Secretary of State Colin
Powell on 14 June. The heads of the Armenian and the USA foreign
political administrations discussed a number issues concerning the
prospects of development of bilateral relations, recent processes
in the region, the Armenian-Turkish relations and settlement of
the conflict in Nagornyy Karabakh. In particular, they also touched
upon the problem concerning about Armenia’s participation in the US
“Millennium Challenge” programme, the importance of this programme for
the development of economy and democracy in Armenia was also outlined.

The same day Vardan Oskanyan met the US president’s national security
adviser, Condoleezza Rice and her deputy Stephen Hadley. The issues
concerning, in particular, regional security, the forthcoming NATO
summit in Istanbul and settlement of confrontation in Nagornyy Karabakh
were discussed.

The Armenian foreign minister made a speech the same day, at the
Centre For Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and touched
upon foreign political problems of Armenia and issues of ensuring
the regional security.

The press service of the Armenian Foreign Ministry told Noyan Tapan
news agency that the meetings with American congressmen and senators
and also representatives of American Armenians’ organizations and
the American press have also been scheduled.

Azeri pressure group condemns media campaign against rights activist

Turan news agency, Baku
12 Jun 04

Baku, 12 June: The federation of Azerbaijani human rights organizations
has condemned the Azerbaijani authorities for continuing the policy of
persecution against rights champions. The “authorities-controlled”
media and NGOs have recently launched a campaign against the
Azerbaijani coordinator of the international working group for
releasing POWs and hostages and for tracing missing persons, Avaz
Hasanov. The reason for the campaign was his trip to Nagornyy Karabakh.

Hasanov is being threatened and false reports are being circulated
about his Armenian captivity and recruitment by the Armenians. The
pro-government media is quoting Hasanov’s telephone conversations
with his colleagues. They are telephoning him at home and threatening
him. On 10 June a group of young people burst into Hasanov’s office
and threatened him with murder both verbally and in writing.

This smear campaign has been arranged and is being performed by those
who earlier organized attacks on other rights champions – E. [Eldar]
Zeynalov, Z. [Zaliha] Tahirova and L. [Leyla] Yunus. The statement
said that the campaign was launched under orders from “certain circles
in the Azerbaijani government”.

The aim of the campaign is to paralyse human rights activities and
bring them under the monopoly of “patriotic” organizations. All this
is happening while the country’s official circles are continuing to
speak to the Armenians and participate in joint projects and events.

The federation of Azerbaijani human rights organizations condemns
the campaign against Avaz Hasanov and calls on political parties, the
media, NGOs and state officials not to be involved in “the propaganda
show by the irresponsible circles”, the statement said.

ESTONIA SUPPORTS TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF THE STATES

Azer Tag, Azerbaijan State Info agency
June 14 2004

In the interview to correspondent of AzerTAj about the purposes of
visit the Estonian minister has told: “I am one of candidates on post
of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, therefore, it was
necessary to meet delegation of Azerbaijan in this structure and my
colleague Elmar Mammadyarov. The basic purpose of my visit consists in
that having met with them, to have exchange of opinions on development
of our bilateral relations, and also on the question representing
for me special value. I should note, that after the admission into
the European Union and the NATO, Estonia aspires to development of
relations with the countries of Southern Caucasus. It is necessary to
recognize, that the relations between our countries cannot be named
wide, therefore, we should do serious work in this area. Estonia is
interested in it, next week our governmental delegation will arrive
in Baku. Besides, next week the ministers of the European Union will
discuss a question of expansion of structure to the Caucasian region
and principles of good neighborhood. My country supports position of
the European Union in the said question. To tell the truth, in region
there are a number of problems, including the Armenia-Azerbaijan,
Nagorny Karabakh conflict. All problems following from this conflict
will not be solved yet the question constantly should be on the
agenda of all international organizations, including the Council
of Europe. It is necessary for us to prosecute seriously these
subjects. The concrete position of Estonia in the said question is:
Estonia supports respect of territorial integrity of all states and
protection of principle of inviolability of borders.

Kyrgyzstan: International Forum On Dialogue Of Cultures In Eurasia Ends
By Antoine Blua

Radio Free Europe, Czech Republic
June 11 2004

A two-day high-level international conference to promote dialogue in
Eurasia ended on 11 June in Kyrgyzstan with the adoption of a draft
document on future European-Asian cultural relations. Participants
underscored the need to accept the diverse cultural values of the
region’s various populations — and to work together to resolve any
security issues that might arise from future culture clashes.

Prague 11 June 2004 (RFE/RL) — A two-day forum on enhancing
international stability and intercultural dialogue concluded today
in the Kyrgyz resort town of Cholpon-Ata.

The forum — titled Eurasia in the 21st Century: Dialogue of Cultures
or Conflict of Civilizations? — was held under the aegis of the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

The international gathering ended with the adoption of a draft document
stating that Central Asia has the prerequisites needed to become a
model for the development of dialogue on European and Asian cultures
and civilizations.

The document says that the region is suited to such a role because
it is situated in the heart of Eurasia, has many languages, and is
multiethnic and multireligious.

Participants included the Kyrgyz and Tajik presidents as well as
high-ranking officials and scholars from around Eurasia, including
Russia, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Iran,
Kazakhstan, Turkey, and Pakistan.

At the opening ceremony, UNESCO Director-General Koichiro Matsuura
noted that globalization — and the sometimes aggressive reaction to
it — is the reality of the world today. But Matsuura said he remains
optimistic.”My conclusion from the lessons of history is that people
learn little from it.” — Tajik President Imomali Rakhmonov

“Conflict between civilizations is not our collective destiny,”
Matsuura said. “After all, we live in an era of globalization,
integration and mutual exchange. Also, there is new ignorance
being generated by increased globalization. [But] we are capable of
addressing that.”

Kyrgyz President Askar Akaev, who initiated the gathering, also denied
the threat of a “clash of civilizations,” and expressed hope the
forum would pave the way for improved dialogue and practical action.

“It is very important under present conditions to preserve
the diversity of cultures and encourage the harmonious
multi-civilizationism [coexistence of civilizations] as an essential
condition for stability in the world,” Akaev said.

Tajik President Imomali Rakhmonov noted that globalization may be
having a negative effect on Eurasia’s national cultures. He warned
that only dialogue based on the principle of equality between European
and Asian countries can prevent this.

At the same time, Rakhmonov urged the countries of Central Asia to
pursue greater ties between themselves in order to prevent conflicts.

“My conclusion from the lessons of history is that people learn little
from [it],” Rakhmonov said. “This is one of the reasons why sad events
sometimes repeat.”

Azerbaijan’s Deputy Prime Minister Elchin Efendiev, referring to the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which has led to the occupation of Azeri
territory by Armenian troops, described what he called the “tragic”
consequences of military occupation on a native culture.

“The occupation of a territory has, among other things, humanitarian
consequences that are tragic for the preservation of the cultural
heritage and the development of culture,” Efendiev said.

Not all examples were so bleak. Seyyed Makhdoom Raheen, Afghanistan’s
minister of culture and information, said his country’s reconstruction
process is a good example of cooperation between cultures.

“Afghanistan has suffered for several years under the shadow of
terrorism and the Taliban rule, which resembled a nightmare in our
national life,” Raheen said. “Now the country, with the thoughts of its
people and the assistance of the international community, is moving
ahead towards its moral and material reconstruction. According to
President [Hamid] Karzai, Afghanistan is a good example for cooperation
of civilizations.”

Violence in Afghanistan and Iraq was a strong theme throughout the
gathering. Iranian Vice President for Legal and Parliamentary Affairs
Mohammad Ali Abtahi criticized the use of Islam by terrorists as a
justification for their actions. He, too, pressed for better dialogue
as the first step toward resolving international conflicts, but with
a condition.

“No doubt a real dialogue is possible only when we see that the other
part is also seeking the truth and the ideal and their words are part
of this truth and this ideal,” Abtahi said.

Russian First Deputy Foreign Minister Eleonora Mitrofanova stated that
attempts to bring in Western models of civilization have failed in
Iraq. She said she believes it is impossible to use force to propagate
Western-style democracy in a non-Western civilization.

GYUMRI-KARS: HISTORICAL CULTURAL TOURISM SYMPOSIUM

ArmenPress
June 9 2004

YEREVAN, JUNE 9, ARMENPRESS: The Yerevan office of Academy for
Education Development (AED) in cooperation with several organizations
and interested individual and with the financial support of USAID
has initiated a project, called “Gyumri-Kars: Historical Cultural
Tourism Symposium”. The Symposium is supposed to be held on June 15-18-
the first two days in Gyumri and the last two in Turkish Kars, lying
across the border.

Local government officials, experts on preservation of historical
cultural monuments, specialists in architecture and tourism and
businessmen form Armenia and Turkey were invited to participate and
discuss the present challenges of preservation of historical and
natural objects and development of tourism.

During the symposium the participants are expected to observe the
current state of historical and natural monuments in Kars and Shirak.
They will confer necessary steps to be taken to prevent the monuments
from further destruction. The participants will also discuss prospects
for developing tourism.

A strategy on developing tourism and preservation of historical
monuments in Gyumri and Kars is expected to be developed . The
strategy will be submitted to the interest of state bodies, donor
and international organizations, other interested parties.

According to Academy of Education Development Yerevan office,
preparatory works are almost complete. All the details are conferred
and agreed upon with the Turkish side. However, according to our
sources, there is a concern among Turkish participants that the
symposium will fail. They recall Ankara where the respective bodies
have not authorized the visit to Gyumri.

In case of such development, this will be not the first case when
bilateral initiations fail because of ‘lack of willingness’ from
Ankara at the last moment.

[Congressional Record: June 2, 2004 (Extensions)]
[Page E993-E994]
>>From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr02jn04-73]

STATEMENT OF ERIC ROSENTHAL, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITIES (USCID) AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
MENTAL DISABILITY RIGHTS INTERNATIONAL, ON “INTERNATIONAL DISABILITY
RIGHTS: THE PROPOSED UN CONVENTION”

______

HON. TOM LANTOS

of california

in the house of representatives

Wednesday, June 2, 2004

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on March 30th, the Congressional Human
Rights Caucus held a groundbreaking Members’ Briefing entitled,
“International Disability Rights: The Proposed UN Convention.” This
discussion of the global situation of people with disabilities was
intended to help establish disability rights issues as an integral part
of the general human rights discourse. The briefing brought together
the human rights community and the disability rights community, and it
raised awareness in Congress of the need to protect disability rights
under international law to the same extent as other human rights
through a binding UN convention on the rights of people with
disabilities.
Our expert witnesses included Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Mark P. Lagon; the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Ecuador
to the United Nations, Ambassador Luis Gallegos; the United Nations
Director of the Division for Social Policy and Development in the
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Johan Scholvinck; the
distinguished former Attorney General of the United States, former
Under-Secretary General of the United Nations and former Governor of
Pennsylvania, the Honorable Dick Thornburgh; the President of the
National Organization on Disability (NOD), Alan A. Reich; Kathy
Martinez, a member of the National Council on Disabilities (NCD); and a
representative of the United States International Council on
Disabilities (USCID) and Executive Director of Mental Disability Rights
International, Eric Rosenthal.
As I had announced earlier, I intend to place the important
statements of our witnesses in the Congressional Record, so that all of
my colleagues may profit from their expertise, and I ask that the
statement of Eric Rosenthal be placed at this point in the
Congressional Record.

The U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus: Members’ Briefing on the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
It is a great pleasure to be here for this historic
occasion. I would like to thank Representative Lantos, the
Congressional Human Rights Caucus, and the Disability Rights
Caucus for making this possible.
I’m a member of the board of the U.S. International Council
on Disability (USICD) and executive director of Mental
Disability Rights International (MDRI). I have spent more
than ten years in the field doing international human rights
work for people with disabilities–documenting human rights
abuses and training activists. There has been little
recognition of the vast worldwide pattern of human rights
abuses against people with disabilities that exists in the
world today–either by the U.S. government or the United
Nations. Thus, it is a great step forward to bring these
concerns to public attention today. This hearing provides an
invaluable opportunity to discuss what practical next steps
the U.S. Government can take to bring long over-due attention
to the rights of people with disabilities worldwide.
The most important leadership by a U.S. Agency, to date,
has been the work of the U.S. National Council on Disability
(NCD). Over the last few years, NCD has made an invaluable
contribution to advancing discussion and action on
international disability issues by convening International
Watch, a group of experts and leaders in the U.S. disability
community involved in international activities. In addition,
NCD has brought attention to this issue by commissioning two
important reports. In 2002, NCD commissioned Janet Lord of
the Landmine Survivors Network to write a detailed legal and
policy analysis of the need for a new UN disability rights
convention. I recommend that report as essential background
to today’s discussion about the need for a UN convention.

[[Page E994]]

In 2003, Professor Arlene Kanter and I had the honor of
serving as consultants to NCD as authors of a report, Foreign
Policy and Disability: Legislative Strategies and Civil
Rights Protection to Ensure Inclusion of People with
Disabilities. In this report, released at a U.S. Senate
briefing on September 9th, 2003, NCD cites numerous reports
over the last 10 years identifying the failure of U.S.
foreign assistance programs to respond to the needs of people
with disabilities. Not only have construction projects been
inaccessible to people with disabilities but many programs
have not been accessible to people with physical or mental
disabilities. More broadly, there has not been a concerted
effort to document, challenge, or overcome the vast problem
of human rights abuses to which people with disabilities are
subject worldwide.
NCD has called for the reform of U.S. foreign policy and
foreign assistance to ensure the inclusion of people with
disabilities in U.S. foreign policy, foreign assistance, and
all U.S. government and its activities abroad.
If we stand for the human rights of people with
disabilities, we must stand for it in our own actions as the
U.S. government. We must ensure that U.S. funded assistance
programs don’t discriminate. Indeed, we must ensure that
foreign assistance programs respond to needs and are fully
inclusive of people with disabilities.
We have recently made tremendous progress in Congress. I
would particularly like to acknowledge the work of Senator
Tom Harkin who championed historic new legislation in the
last session of Congress. The new legislation requires any
construction funded by USAID around the world to be
accessible to people with disabilities. It requires all U.S.
programs in Afghanistan and Iraq to be accessible to people
with disabilities, in conformity with USAID’s Policy Paper on
Disability. The most innovative new provision of legislation
makes enforcement of disability rights a precondition for
countries to receive funding under the new Millennium
Challenge Account. By creating financial incentives for
governments to take action on disablity rights, this law
establishes a specialized tool of foreign policy that will
help bring attention and pressure on governments to take
action. In the spirit of the NCD report, it is my hope that
MCA views this as more than a tool to use against
governments. It should be viewed as a mandate to help
governments, and non-governmental disability organizations
around the world, to meet these human rights and disability
rights goals. The NCD report calls on Congress to create a
“Fund for Inclusion,” setting aside funds to support for
the development of non-governmental disability rights
organizations.
Turning now to the question: why a convention? In ten
years, MDRI has documented human rights abuses against people
with mental disabilities in 21 countries on three continents.
I have seen untold human suffering in every country I have
visited. I’ve seen people locked away for their whole lives
in psychiatric hospitals, as well as institutions for people
with developmental or other disabilities. I have seen
children and I’ve seen grown men and women left naked,
covered in their own feces. MDRI recently documented a
situation in Paraguay where two boys were placed in an
institution by family members unable to care for them at home
without any form of governmental support. When the boys were
placed in the institution they probably had some form of
intellectual disability, but they wore clothing, they talked,
they interacted with people around them. For at least four
years, these boys were held naked in isolation with no
clothes, no toilet, no place to sleep other than a mat the
floor of a barren cell. They ate their food off the floor.
According to doctors at the facility, they became psychotic
as a result of the years of isolation and abuse. When we
visited them, they could no longer speak. All they did was
scream, howl, and grunt.
Their lives had been thrown away. The lives of 400 men and
women in that same psychiatric facility have been thrown
away. They live in isolation with little hope of returning to
society. Many are denied basic medical care, much less the
dignity of some privacy or their own clothing. In wealthier
countries, people may be detained in clean institutions with
new clothing. But their isolation from society and their pain
at being denied human contact may be much the same. Does the
international community speak out about these abuses? No. In
almost every country of the world, you can find people
relegated to the bleak, back wards of institutions–or
abandoned on the streets. That same experience has been going
on in many societies throughout the world. And the world has
failed to speak out time and time again.
The U.S. administration has said that the proper way to
deal with this is through domestic legislation, rather than
international human rights legislation. I beg to differ on
this point. As a matter of international law, there is a very
important difference between matters of purely domestic
concern and issues of international human rights. The
international legal framework is built upon the notion of
state sovereignty. Matters of social policy and of
educational policy, are protected by state sovereignty. And a
government may do what it will in that area. But the
international community has come to realize there are certain
principles of government practice that are not just matters
of state sovereignty. When governments deny their citizens
basic human dignity and autonomy, when they subject them to
extremes of suffering, when they segregate them from
society–we call these violations of fundamental human
rights. And when a country sinks so low as to deny the
fundamental rights of its citizen, the world will speak out.
We will hold governments accountable for the most extreme
abuses. That is why we need a convention. It’s not enough to
offer technical assistance on how to improve the law, we must
hold governments accountable for their violations.
Based on my observations as a human rights investigator
over the last ten years–and based on the near void of
activity by established human rights oversight bodies–I
believe that the abuses experienced by people with
disabilities around the world are the greatest international
human rights problem that goes unacknowledged in the world
today.
There are at least 600 million people with disabilities in
the world. How many thousands of people are segregated from
society in closed psychiatric facilities? By the thousands,
children and young adults with disabilities are placed in
orphanages and other institutions. I have met families in
Armenia, Turkey, Russia, and Mexico who were heart-broken
about placing their child in an institution–or who were
afraid that they might have to do so one day if they could no
longer provide care. I have met adults with mental
disabilities living a life of terror that they may be one day
forced into an institution if they cannot keep it together to
fend for themselves. I have met fathers, mothers, brothers,
husbands, wives who wanted to keep a relative at home with
them, but their governments do not provide services that will
allow families to stay together in the community. Heart
breaking as it is, parents are often forced to put their
children in orphanages. These are not orphans. These are
children orphaned by social and medical policy that say
they’re different and shouldn’t have a chance to live as a
part of society at large. Social policies that needlessly
segregate people from society are a form of discrimination.
Legal systems that do not protect against arbitrary detention
permit ongoing violations of human rights.
These are just a few of the abuses that can be addressed by
a disability rights convention. This is why we must commit
ourselves to speaking out. We must make it a priority of our
human rights agenda to end such intolerable abuses against
people with disabilities everywhere.
This Congress has adopted legislation establishing that
human rights will be the core of our foreign policy. We must
ensure that this promise extends to people with disabilities.
When governments strip whole groups of citizens of their
rights because of a disability, when governments put people
away, or when they allow them to die on the streets with no
dignified form of assistance, those are human rights abuses.
Challenging such abuses should becomes the core of our
foreign policy.
In its last session, this Congress made invaluable steps in
the right direction by revising our foreign assistance laws.
Now let us explicitly recognize the concerns of people with
disabilities as part of the pantheon of international human
rights issues. I strongly encourage and appreciate the work
of those members of Congress who have supported resolution
169. I call on all members to do the same.
I would like to leave you with one last thought. Over the
years, I have personally encountered hundreds of children and
adults, old men and old women who have spent most of their
life behind bars. It is amazingly easy to write these people
off as subhuman. As if they are already the walking dead. Yet
I have also seen a glimpse of hope in their eyes. With the
smallest amount of respect for their dignity, people come to
life. The tiniest hint of a possibility that a man or woman
might one day leave the institution can give that person a
reason to go on living. What does it matter that people far
across the waters care about them and their rights? It is a
reason to go on living. Members of Congress, you have a
chance to contribute to their reason for living. You have an
ability to contribute to give them hope. In your careers,
this may be one of the least costly and greatest
opportunities to challenge abuses of hundreds of millions of
people. Please take that action. Please support Resolution
169. And please support the U.N. Disability Rights
Convention.

____________________