ANKARA: Broadcasting Watchdog Suggests French Film Boycott

Broadcasting Watchdog Suggests French Film Boycott

Zaman Online, Turkey
Oct 19 2006

Friday, October 20, 2006
zaman.com

The Radio and Television Higher Board (RTUK) has recommended that
Turkish national and local television channels and radios boycott
French media.

Turkey’s broadcasting watchdog said in a written statement late
on Wednesday that board members had unanimously agreed that Turkish
television and radio stations should avoid airing French-made programs
until France drops the Armenian genocide bill.

On Oct. 12, the French National Assembly passed a highly controversial
bill that makes it a crime to deny that the mass killings of Armenians
during World War I were genocide.

French films, TV shows and music account for about 10 percent of the
content on Turkish radio and television, according to figures provided
by the broadcasting watchdog.

The Turkish Consumers Union, Turkey’s main consumer group, last
week decided to publicize one French company or brand every week and
encourage Turks to boycott it.

French oil company Total has been boycotted and a boycott of L’Oreal
will begin as of next Monday

Armenia: Politics without Women

Institute for War & Peace Reporting, UK
Oct 19 2006

Armenia: Politics without Women
Armenian women seek deeper involvement in public and political life.

By Lena Badeyan in Yerevan for IWPR (20/10/06)

Armenia has fewer women in parliament than any other country in
Europe. Currently there are only seven females in the 131-seat national
assembly, accounting for five percent of its members.

Outside parliament, just 15 of the 926 local government heads at
village and town level are women.

Now moves are afoot to reverse this situation. A new grouping of
organizations called Women Leaders announced last month that they
had submitted a set of proposed amendments to the electoral code to
parliament which would mean a quota of 25 per cent of seats in the
legislature would be set aside for women. Twenty-two parties and
around 40 public associations are supporting the initiative.

This is not the first effort to boost female representation. During
the 2003 parliamentary poll, women were given a five per cent share
of the party lists used in the proportional representation system.

However, most were placed near the bottom of the lists, leaving them
virtually no chance of getting elected.

"That decision brought no qualitative changes to the parliament,
as it was not specific," said Hermine Naghdalian of the Republican
Party. "It did not specify where female candidates would be placed
on the lists – and our men were quick to exploit that."

Only half of the parties now in parliament have women on their lists.

Three of the four belong to the ruling coalition – the Republican
Party, Dashnaktsutiun and the United Labor Party. The fourth, Orinats
Yerkir (Party of Law), recently left the governing coalition.

"It’s essential that the Armenian government assess the situation
properly and take the appropriate action to increase female involvement
in the decision-making process," Dubravka Simonovic of the United
Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women,
commented to the ArmInfo news agency.

"For anything to change in the way parliament works, women’s
representation there should be at least 30 percent."

It is uncertain whether the new initiative will get through, as it is
not supported by parliament’s largest faction, the Republican Party,
or by another large group, People’s Deputy. The votes of the two
combined would be sufficient to vote down the motion.

Some argue that setting a quota is the wrong approach. "I think the
process should be a gradual one," Arshak Sadoyan of the opposition
Justice faction told IWPR. "You can’t change from the Asian gender
system to a modern European one at a stroke."

"Specific quotas should not be prescribed by law – it’s an internal
matter," argued Gurgen Arsenian, leader of the United Labor Party
faction, while pledging that his party list would contain women in it.

Shogher Matevosian, editor-in-chief of the opposition newspaper
Chorord Ishkhanutiun (Fourth Power), said the idea was misconceived,
arguing that loyalty to the government, not gender, was the crucial
factor in Armenian politics.

"When it comes to the fight for the presidency or any other high
position, what happens is what usually happens with the opposition:
if a woman is on the opposition’s side, she won’t get in, if she
sides with the authorities, she will," she told IWPR.

Hermine Naghdalian of the Republican Party said that women were passive
in political life in large part because of the general atmosphere of
disillusionment in Armenia. "In many cases, women do not believe that
they can help change anything, or that their struggle and wishes can
produce results," she said.

Gagik Beglarian, head of administration of Yerevan’s central district,
illustrates a common sense among male politicians that it is shameful
to lose an election to a woman.

"It will be a disgrace to me if I lose to a woman," Beglarian said
after he had learned that a woman – a member of the Popular Opposition
Party Ruzan Khachatrian – would be facing him in the local government
elections last year.

Khachatrian lost and Beglarian scored a convincing victory in the
poll. Khachatrian has never recognized the results, saying that her
opponent used underhand methods to rig the vote – a style of operation
which she says distinguishes male from female politicians.

During the election campaign, Beglarian presented bunches of flowers
to his opponent instead of engaging in arguments with her.

"Why does a man’s ambition for public office not surprise anyone,
whereas the same claims by a woman come as a surprise?" asked
Khachatrian. "Why is no one surprised if a woman wants to be a doctor,
but astonished if she wants to become a politician? It is an ordinary
profession, an ordinary job. If you have the skill, why should it
become the target of ridicule?"

"Give us clean democratic elections, and if women don’t get elected,
only then can you say women are uncompetitive," said Nora Hakobian,
chairperson of the Women’s Republican Council. "If women show willing
and men try to help them, the situation in the country will improve."

Turkish Parliament Condemns France

Turkish Parliament Condemns France

Paris Link, France
Oct 20 2006

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:13:00
Gareth Cartman

The attempted passing of a law penalising the negation of the Armenian
genocide between 1915 and 1917 has resulted in a furious reaction
from the Turkish parliament. They backed a declaration condemning
the Assemblee Nationale and a media boycott will ensue.

A furious Turkish parliament has issued a declaration condemning the
Assemblee Nationale for having attempted to pass the law that would
criminalise anyone who denied the Armenian genocide took place. The
law, which was voted through parliament by a handful of Socialists –
most MPs abstained – has caused a rift in French-Turkish relations
that could result in the loss of potential money-spinning contracts.

Jacques Chirac attempted to heal the divide earlier in the week by
apologising to Prime Minister Erdogan, but the parliament has insisted
that some form of sanction should be applied to France until the law
is taken fully off the agenda.

Mystifyingly, Yashar Yakish, Turkey’s former foreign minister suggested
that Turkey deport 70,000 Armenians from Turkey as punishment for
France’s attempted passing of the negation law. He claimed that
Armenia should pay the price for France’s behaviour.

Approximately 500,000 Armenians live in France.

However, more immediate measure are being suggested in the media. The
Turkish television watchdog this week recommended that French
television programs and films should not be broadcast in Turkey.

French broadcasting accounts for about ten percent of television
output, while French films are relatively popular.

One of Turkey’s leading consumer groups urged customers to boycott
one French product per week, stating that it would publicise which
product is being boycotted each week.

Turkey denies that it committed genocide against the Armenians
between 1915 and 1917. According to Turkey, there were deaths, but
nowhere near the figure stated by historians – and the use of the word
genocide is exaggerated. They claim that as Armenians were evacuated,
then continued to fight – and that losses were equal on both sides.

France has claimed that acknowledgement of genocide is a pre-requisite
for Turkey’s entry into the EU, which is looking less likely by the
day after the Parliament’s attempt to force through this law coupled
with Turkey’s riposte.

The law, however, will not see the light of day. The Senate is
expected to defeat it, and if the law does make it through the Senate,
President Jacques Chirac is already known not to be favourable,
and will immediately annul it.

BAKU: Armenian Armed Forces began military trainings in Aghdere regi

Armenian Armed Forces began military trainings in occupied Aghdere region

Today, Azerbaijan
Oct 20 2006

20 October 2006 [14:22] – Today.Az

Armenian Armed Forces began military trainings in occupied Aghdere
region beginning from 09.00 today, the peasants of frontline villages
of Terter told.

The villagers said they feel the shake caused by the explosion of
heavy artillery bullets.

As APA reports, Armenians have been in large-scale military trainings
in occupied regions for three days.

During the military maneuvers cannon-ball fired in the direction
of Terter fell on the neutral area in the contact line of
Azerbaijani-Armenian Forces.

URL:

http://www.today.az/news/politics/31662.html

BAKU: Turkey ex-State Minister: "France activity in OSCE MG impedes

Today, Azerbaijan
Oct 20 2006

Turkey ex-State Minister: "France activity in OSCE MG impedes
settlement of Nagorno Karabakh conflict"

20 October 2006 [14:27] – Today.Az

"I disrespect my country and myself by keeping an order of enemy
country," stated Kamran Inan, one of the professional politicians of
Turkey and former state minister.

He told APA Turkey bureau that reason of taking such a step is France’s
policy against Turkey. The politician drew the attention to France
president’s last visit to Armenia.

"Jacques Chirac visited Armenia a month ago. He did mention the
invasion of Azerbaijan’s territory and one million Azerbaijanis
refugees, but sent severe messages against Turkey. He referred
to Agri dagh as Armenia territory, asked us to recognize false
Armenian genocide and said many times that "Do not forget, this is
genocide against us" while visiting Armenian monument. It means that
if something happens to Turks and Muslims, the West will not take
interest in this. But they worry when something happens to those
of the same culture and religion with them the West show immediate
reaction to this. France made it the part of its policy to fight
against Turkey. It recognized false Armenian genocide in 2001 and then
adopted a law which will punish those who deny false Armenian genocide
by EU 45 000 and a year in jail. France denies EU human rights and
Copenhagen criteria by this decision. It is a political war against
Turkey. That is why I cannot keep the order given by former France
president Mitterrand. I returned it to France embassy in Turkey. But
the government did not show severe reaction," Kamran Inan said.

The politician also touched upon France accession to OSCE. He said
that he cast doubt on France’s objectiveness in the settlement of
Nagorno Karabakh conflict. "France’s activity in Minsk Group impedes
the settlement of Nagorno Karabakh conflict. It remained indifferent
in Bosnians genocide in 1992-95 when Miloshovich promised western
leaders to remove Turks and Muslims from Europe. The west remained
indifferent in 14-year-ago Khojali genocide too. They should be
ashamed of their double-standard policy," he said.

URL:

http://www.today.az/news/politics/31663.html

BAKU: Turkey former state minister: France activity in OSCE MG imped

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Oct 20 2006

Turkey former state minister: France activity in OSCE MG impedes
settlement of Nagorno Garabagh conflict

[ 20 Oct. 2006 14:01 ]

"I disrespect my country and myself by keeping an order of enemy
country," Kamran Inan, one of the professional politicians of Turkey
and former state minister told APA Turkey bureau.

He said that reason of taking such a step is France’s policy against
Turkey. The politician drew the attention to France president’s last
visit to Armenia.

"Jacques Chirac visited Armenia a month ago. He did mention the
invasion of Azerbaijan’s territory and one million Azerbaijanis
refugees, but sent severe messages against Turkey. He referred
to Agri dagh as Armenia territory, asked us to recognize false
Armenian genocide and said many times that "Do not forget, this is
genocide against us" while visiting Armenian monument. It means that
if something happens to Turks and Muslims, the West will not take
interest in this. But they worry when something happens to those
of the same culture and religion with them the West show immediate
reaction to this. France made it the part of its policy to fight
against Turkey. It recognized false Armenian genocide in 2001 and then
adopted a law which will punish those who deny false Armenian genocide
by EU 45 000 and a year in jail. France denies EU human rights and
Copenhagen criteria by this decision. It is a political war against
Turkey. That is why I cannot keep the order given by former France
president Mitterrand. I returned it to France embassy in Turkey. But
the government did not show severe reaction," Kamran Inan said.

The politician also touched upon France accession to OSCE. He said
that he cast doubt on France’s objectiveness in the settlement of
Nagorno Garabagh conflict.

"France’s activity in Minsk Group impedes the settlement of Nagorno
Garabagh conflict. It remained indifferent in Bosnians genocide in
1992-95 when Miloshovich promised western leaders to remove Turks
and Muslims from Europe. The west remained indifferent in 14-year-ago
Khojali genocide too. They should be ashamed of their double-standard
policy," he said. /APA/

ANKARA: Comment: Mind your own business, France

Comment-Mind your own business, France
By Suat KINIKLIOGLU

ABHaber
EU-Turkey News Network
Oct 20 2006

Turkey is in an uproar. Turks are reacting bitterly to the
tactlessness of the French National Assembly in passing a bill that
would criminalize "denial" of the Armenian "genocide."

Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy of France is right: The vote
is seen as an unfriendly gesture by a vast majority of the Turkish
people. We are dismayed by the ease with which French lawmakers seem
willing to jeopardize relations between France and Turkey dating from
the 16th century.

What puzzles us even more is that of all countries, France – seen by
us as the symbol of civil liberties and free speech – would become
hostage to a small, if influential, lobby that exploits every electoral
opportunity to advance its narrow agenda.

Lawmakers are not historians and their attempt to establish facts about
an extremely sensitive and complicated historic event is misguided
at best. Further, the proposed bill represents a blow to freedom
of expression at a time when European Union member states regularly
lecture Ankara on legislation they view as curtailing free speech.

Both on grounds of substance and process, the National Assembly’s
action is deeply offensive and counterproductive. That is why the EU
enlargement commissioner, Olli Rehn, and 16 prominent French historians
opposed the bill.

Many Turks interpret the National Assembly’s action as not just an
attempt to appease an active lobby, but also as a populist appeal to
the majority of the French public opposed to Turkish membership in
the European Union.

In the run-up to what promises to be a very competitive presidential
race next spring, both the French left and right seem ill disposed
toward a predominantly Muslim country interested in EU membership.

Bound legally by the EU Council’s decision to start accession
negotiations with Turkey, French lawmakers may hope to provoke an
already unsettled Turkey to quit the negotiations by touching a
sensitive nerve. Whether such irresponsible behavior hinders efforts
to heal the wounds of World War I and the tragedy of Ottoman Armenians
seems to be lost on them.

Ironically, this ill-considered action comes at a time when Turkey’s
domestic debate on the Armenian issue is more open than at any time
in the past. Turks on both sides of the issue are intensely discussing
what happened in 1915-1916 and whether it can be defined as genocide.

Last year, in an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan suggested that Turkey and Armenia set up a joint commission of
historians to determine whether the events of 1915-1916 constituted
genocide. The offer was rejected by Armenia. Turkey also organized
its first international conference on the Armenian issue with Armenian
historians last year. Furthermore, Turkey’s determination to join the
EU provides ongoing impetus for this healthy process of reconciliation
to continue.

Turkish-Armenian reconciliation cannot be facilitated by laws passed
in foreign parliaments. Such moves only help those who thrive on the
continuation of the impasse between Turks and Armenians.

As tempting as gesture politics may be for French politicians, any
genuine effort at reconciliation must be based on the recognition
that both Armenians and Turks suffered immensely during the fateful
years of World War I. To move forward, the focus must be broadened
to include common losses and experiences during this period, rather
than limited to the question of whether the events of 1915-1916 can
be qualified as genocide. Context is critical.

Having Turkey as a member in the EU is both in Europe’s and Armenia’s
interest. Provoking Turkey on a sensitive issue only serves to further
alienate a country whose destiny will have a major impact on the
greater Europe of which Armenia is also part.

As the British Armenian historian Ara Sarafian eloquently noted,
the ultimate irony is that France, which has not faced up to its own
genocidal past, dares to pass legislation on Turkey’s past.

Thankfully our lawmakers are unlikely to follow that path. After all,
we want to remain true to the ideals of Rousseau, Voltaire and the
French encyclopedists who inspired us and the European Enlightenment.

Suat KINIKLIOGLU is director of the Ankara office of the German
Marshall Fund of the United States.

ANKARA: L’Oreal next Target of Turkish Boycott

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 20 2006

L’Oreal next Target of Turkish Boycott
By Cihan News Agency
Friday, October 20, 2006
zaman.com

Having called for a boycott against French oil company Total last week,
the Turkish Consumers Union has declared that next target is L’Oreal,
the world’s largest cosmetics group, in protest at the adoption of
the Armenian "genocide" bill in the French parliament.

Bulent Deniz, chairman of the Turkish Consumers Union, announced
on Thursday that they would put all the products of French cosmetic
giant L’Oreal on the boycott list next week.

L’Oreal products, including Biotherm, Cacharel, Garnier, Giorgio
Armani, Inneov, Kerastase, Lancôme, Matrix, Maybelline, Ralph Lauren,
and Vichy will be on the boycott list, Deniz said.

Turkey’s main consumer group last week decided to publicize one French
company or brand every week and encourage Turks to boycott it.

L’Oreal has been in the Turkish market since 1989 and has increased
its sales throughout the country 45 percent in the last five years.

Last a boycott began for Total, a French gas station, with a reported
30 percent drop in sales.

Apart from French oil group Total, which has 500 gas stations across
Turkey, other French companies such as Carrefour, Renault, Axa and
Lafarge could also be facing consumer boycotts in the coming weeks.

–Boundary_(ID_G2X1KYB02NLWpeG8mUmINw)–

A refracted world view

A refracted world view

Mail & Guardian Online, South Africa
Oct 20 2006

Aida Edemariam profiles Orhan Pamuk and the writings that won him
this year’s Nobel Prize for Literature

>From a very young age," begins Orhan Pamuk’s memoir of his lifelong
home, Istanbul, "I suspected there was more to my world than I could
see: somewhere in the streets of Istanbul, in a house resembling ours,
there lived another Orhan so much like me he could pass for my twin,
even my double."

When his parents’ frequent quarrels overwhelmed him, he would play what
he called the "disappearing game": sitting at his mother’s dressing
table, he would adjust her three-way mirror until Orhans reflected
Orhans reflected Orhans, ad infinitum. He notes that it was a game he
would later play in his novels, which is true enough; they are full of
refracted selves and voices and bit parts for a narrator called Orhan.

This is also, however, a useful way to think about Pamuk the writer and
his place in the world. He is published in more than 40 languages, and
has had to slowly get used to the fact that "my books are being read
with completely different reactions in different countries". In Turkey
he is both a literary difficult author, and a teller of absorbing
whodunnits; a European-influenced stylist and an assiduous miner of
Turkish history.

Pamuk is the author of five novels, one of which, My Name Is Red,
won the International Impac Award; another Istanbul was shortlisted
for the Samuel Johnson prize and in the history category of the
British Book Awards. So he is a major writer in the United Kingdom,
but this is nothing compared with how big he is in Turkey. Thanks
to The New Life, which, at the time of its publication in 1994, was
the fastest-selling novel in Turkish history, and the bestselling My
Name Is Red, he has been a celebrated figure at home for some time;
he was really catapulted to infamy, however, when he remarked to a
Swiss interviewer in February last year that "a million Armenians
and 30 000 Kurds were killed in this country and I’m the only one
who dares talk about it".

Turkish newspapers launched hate campaigns against Pamuk, some
columnists even suggesting he should be "silenced". His books and
posters of him were burned at rallies and he received death threats,
after which, for a while, he went into hiding abroad.

Eventually he returned to face trial and a possible three years’
imprisonment. In January this year the court decided there was no case
to answer. It has been said this was only because of the international
condemnation the trial provoked, yet though Pamuk now insists the
case would have been dismissed regardless, it would be foolish to
ignore the fault lines it exposed.

Snow, which he began writing two years before 9/11, is set in Kars
in north-eastern Turkey and tackles the urgent issues of secularism
and religion in a country that has been torn between the two for most
of the past century. It is full of intimations of trouble. "Can the
West endure any democracy achieved by enemies who in no way resemble
them?" asks one character; another comments that "the world has lost
patience with repressive regimes".

Pamuk begins Snow with the famous Stendhal quote: "Politics in a
literary work are a pistol-shot in the middle of a concert, a crude
affair though one impossible to ignore. We are about to speak of
very ugly matters." The irony is that the rest of his fiction is
also political, if far more obliquely so; it has set up, within its
characters, opposing ideological poles, then patiently probed what
Pamuk calls "the confusion in between".

>>From his penthouse window in his Istanbul home — where he grew
up — he can see Hagia Sophia, the Sea of Marmara, the Bosphorus,
the Golden Horn, the Topkapi palace, the suspension bridge that links
Europe and Asia — "all the essentials", as he puts it.

He hasn’t much time for my theory about how his still living here is
unusual in these days of mass migration — that is a myth, he feels,
perpetrated by a highly visible, mobile minority. "The rest of the
world lives in the same street, the same building. The father builds
a house, then the child lives there. So I don’t want to talk about
my experience as a unique thing." On the other hand, he concedes that
still living in this place does perhaps give him "a strong centre in
my spirit. The world, for me, has obvious beginnings."

Pamuk grew up in a rich Ottoman family that was, through profligacy
and mismanagement, progressively becoming less so. The young Orhan
was meant to become something useful, preferably an engineer or
an architect. He chose painting initially, then writing, despite
his father’s exhortations that he should enjoy himself more. When
is he happiest now? "If you leave aside sensual pleasures, sexual
pleasures, good food, good sleep, and so on, then the happiest thing
is that I have written two and a half to three good pages. I am almost
assured that they are, but I need confirmation. My girlfriend comes,
we are happy, I read to her, she says, ‘This is wonderful’ — that’s
it! That’s the greatest happiness."

Although when he was in his 20s he read the Marxist pamphlets
favoured by his friends, Pamuk simply found Woolf or Faulkner more
interesting. He has been criticised for being too Western a writer,
though, he points out, "A bit of experimentalism is always ‘betraying
the nation’ in my part of the world."

Pamuk’s fiction plays with voice and subject — for him, this is a
way of exploring what it means to be Turkish. So The White Castle
(1995), in which a 17th-century Italian scholar is captured by
Ottoman pirates and sold to a Turk eager to learn about the West,
"is a sort of intense personal conflict … Of course, it was also a
story of doubles. That was the first book that had some international
success. Then, when I was doing interviews, thinking about the book
in an international context, I realised that doubles are Turkey’s
subject: 95% of Turks carry two spirits in themselves. International
observers think there are the good guys — seculars, democrats,
liberals — and the bad guys — nationalists, political Islamists,
conservatives, pro-statists. No. In the average Turk, these two
tendencies live together all the time. Every person is fighting
within himself or herself, in a way. Or maybe, very naively, carrying
self-contradictory ideas."

My Name Is Red (2003), the sprawling intellectual whodunnit that
made his name outside Turkey, dramatises the tussle between Islamic
manuscript illuminators and artists seduced by the Western concepts
of style, originality and representation.

"It’s a metaphor for a very common Middle-Eastern fantasy," says Pamuk,
"that of taking sophisticated, attractive inventions, techniques,
[or] objects from the West, without paying the spiritual price. To
appropriate an invention, be it artistic or technical, you have to
have at least a part of your spirit embracing it so radically that
you somehow change. That is one of the things that I see in my culture
that makes me very angry."

He is not angry, he says, because of the urge to copy in itself:
"Though that is deplorable, hateful, I have great understanding for the
inevitable desire to imitate. I’m angry because that kind of fantasy
is based on a very simplistic world picture. In the novel I’m writing
now [to be called The Museum of Innocence], there is a dialogue about
poor people. A cruel but observant upper-class person says words to
the effect that, ‘They are so naive that they believe being poor is a
sin and their guilt will be forgotten as soon as they get some money.’

"So all these fragile feelings of imitation, of not having, of being
angry with your own country, with the West, with everything — I think
that the whole non-Western world is living these damning personal
dilemmas. To understand nationalism and anti-Western sentiment in the
rest of the world, you have to go to these shadowy places, rather
than to the latest political developments, which are actually just
end products." — © Guardian Newspapers 2006

–Boundary_(ID_wldGTjyi04A1P7J54FZxIg)–

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Giving the People credit

Giving the People credit
By Brian Self

Cyprus Observer, Cyprus
Oct 20 2006

20.10.2006

In a replay of what happened in June an allergy struck this week,
coinciding as then with a tangible shift in the seasons. At summer’s
start I hadn’t noticed the arrival of the cicadas but the first October
storm was unavoidable; the scent of wet tree bark, and at night cloud
banks over the Karpaz torn apart by lightning – a demented stage
setting for the arrival of Mozart’s ‘Queen of the Night’. That day
dusk came on with a deepening yellow light belonging to the deserts in
central Asia, where dust and the vast emptiness are palpable qualities
of an otherworldliness. Together with the alarmingly frequent power
cuts in Lapta; the small ants still coming out with sugar from the
dispenser, the scene might easily have tipped into autumnal melancholy,
but no, I recognised the symptoms of over exposure to news from certain
places in the world, in this case brought on by a Guardian article:
Aura of fear and death stalks Iraq.

The antidote – good news – was nowhere to be found, and what appeared
to be cause for optimism was rapidly taken away. British army Chief
Sir Richard Dannatt’s ‘blistering’ denunciation of Tony Blair’s foreign
policy and his call for withdrawing British troops out of Iraq ‘soon’
was welcomed by the Stop the War Coalition and large numbers of the
British public. But on the morning of Friday the 13th as the Guardian
wrote of "a political bombshell" and an outspoken intervention
"unprecedented in modern times" Sir Richard was talking on the BBC
downplaying and revising his remarks, stating that they were not
"substantially new or newsworthy." The encouragement felt by anti-war
campaigners was further dissipated when Tony Blair, who "was bound
to be infuriated by the interview" responded by saying he agreed with
"every word" the General said. The original interview with the Daily
Mail contained more outspoken views than the next day’s headlines
suggested; several times Dannatt wandered away from military matters
by saying that planning for the post-war phase in Iraq was "poor," and
that a moral and spiritual vacuum in Britain might help the "Islamist
threat" make "undue progress." Blair’s position is too weak to sack
a general whose understanding of the British public’s mood is far
better than his own. The pity is that valid issues were raised whose
urgency was immediately drowned in Whitehall and cross-party bickering
reminiscent of the Blair-Brown leadership squabbles. A conservative,
Christian General questioning his own Prime Minister’s faith based
certainties is an oddity deserving more serious attention.

Time on their side As news from Baghdad resembled aspects of a
Hollywood scripted horror film another British General in Afghanistan,
Lt. General David Richards was giving an interview to the New York
Times and also revising some of his more recent remarks to the
press. He was using the opportunity to vent his indignation over a
Guardian column by Simon Jenkins who wrote that he was baffled by
Richard’s naivete about the Taliban. "I am not naïve; he’s naïve,"
the General complained, insisting that the surge by the Taliban across
southern Afghanistan was not a popular uprising. Jenkins was generous
with some of his ‘facts’, but there was one salient point not commented
upon by Richards. The International Security Assistance Force he
commands numbers 31,000 troops; when the Russians left in 1989, their
defeated and humiliated divisions had 110,000 soldiers spread across
the entire country. "People do not want a return to the Taliban,"
said Richards, "but we need time to allow that aspiration to win."

The Taliban have time on their side but Richards does not have very
much left. Generals in Iraq and Afghanistan echo their political
masters in Washington and London in saying they cannot afford to fail,
but they are failing; the facts are there for all to see.

Poles growing further apart By Wednesday morning there was no escaping
from sanctions against North Korea, American Congressional cover-ups
and the latest estimate of Iraqi civilian casualties. Writing about
the meaning of 655,000 deaths the editor of the Lancet Richard Horton
ended on an idealistic note. "We need a new set of principles to govern
our diplomacy and military strategy – principles that are based on the
idea of human security and not national security, health and wellbeing
and not economic self-interest and territorial ambition. The best
hope we can have from our terrible misadventure in Iraq is that a
new political and social movement will grow to overturn the politics
of humiliation. We are one human family. Let’s act like it." Well,
the world acts otherwise, but this was the stuff I wanted to hear;
to become permanently jaundiced by an unending stream of reports of
killing, cruelty and the incompetence of those governing us is as
damaging to the spirit as misplaced optimism. And there were other
idealistic notes as well, in unexpected places. The growing carnage in
Iraq and Afghanistan and heightened tension with Iran has connected
parallels with a schism between Islam and the West which seems to be
deepening. Protests at the Pope’s remarks, at Jack Straw’s comments
on the wearing of veils, Turkey’s reaction to the French government’s
handling of the Armenian genocide issue are only the most publicised
incidents among many pointing to an increasing polarisation.

The Cordoba Initiative was founded in 2002 as a multi-faith
organisation whose objective is ‘to heal the relationship between the
Islamic World and America’. Its founder Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was
interviewed last month by Foreign Policy magazine about the Pope’s
remarks, US foreign policy towards the Muslim world and Iran in
particular. On the subject of possible sanctions against Iran Rauf
said: "Imposing sanctions on Iraq had no impact on Saddam Hussein …

When you employ sanctions, you’re creating an artificial economic
depression. If there are sanctions against Iran, it will strengthen
the Iranians’ resolve." He went on to say: "People basically want
a few simple things in life: a decent meal, the ability to clothe
themselves, and a roof over their heads. And they want their pride.

To do that you have to engage with people on an equal basis." The
contrast between Rauf’s words and those of most European and American
politicians could not be greater.

Surprise!

On Thursday morning the permanent secretary of that most secretive and
discreet body, the Nobel Prize Committee, was asked by the BBC if he
would give a hint as to who would be awarded the Peace prize. "No,
I want to keep my job," he said, only revealing there were 191
nominations and prompted by the interviewer said yes, the winner would
be a surprise. It was in fact a well kept secret. When a journalist,
days before the announcement, handed the Nobel Institute’s head Geir
Lundestad a bookmaker’s list of 60 candidates, he remarked that it
was "a good list." Finland’s former president Martti Ahtisaari who
brokered a peace settlement in Indonesia’s Aceh province – widely
tipped as the favourite – was at the top. Two hours after the BBC
interview the Laureate’s name was announced; neither Muhammed Yunus
nor his Grameen Bank were on the bookmaker’s list.

Journalists at the prize giving ceremony, accustomed to statesmen
or humanitarian agencies as recipients were shocked; no financial
institution or banker had ever won the Peace prize.

Breaking the cycle of poverty In the Citation was the sentence:
"Every single individual on earth has both the potential and the right
to live a decent life." By creating a new kind of bank, giving small
loans to the poorest of the poor without collateral, Yunus, according
to the World Bank’s Bangladesh director has improved the lives of
half of the country’s 140 million population. Destitute widows,
abandoned wives, rickshaw drivers, sweepers, landless labourers and
beggars use loans from $12 to $80 to buy cows, chickens, bamboo for
crafting stools, or incense to sell in stalls. Beggars were encouraged
to take merchandise with them to sell from door to door, ribbons or
biscuits; some have stopped begging. But the true significance of
breaking out of poverty for people who live on less than $1 a day,
is the self-respect and status which comes from having all children of
school age in school, where all family members eat three meals a day,
have a sanitary toilet, a rainproof house, clean drinking water and
the ability to repay $8 a week on their loan.

At present the bank has 6.5 million borrowers, 97% of whom are women,
and the loan repayment rate is almost 99 percent.

Yunus has his detractors and critics. Interest rates are higher
than those charged by commercial banks, but loan agreements have
no provision for legal recovery in the event of default. Some right
wing American organisations view the Grameen Bank as far left and its
empowerment of women as an enemy to procreation and the family. But, as
the Citation speech said, "Microcredit has proved to be an important
liberating force in societies where women in particular have to
struggle against repressive social and economic conditions."

And, said the Nobel Committee, "development from below also serves
to advance democracy and human rights." It also serves to engender
pride, and the simple things of a decent life; something the barrel
of a gun never achieves.

–Boundary_(ID_G52b1VM4PvLZInfwF+l5Rg)- –