Author: Ekmekjian Janet

AMONG THE INTELLECTUALOIDS
Immanuel Kant for Dummies
By James Bowman
American Spectator
Oct 30 2006
The most fundamental of all the liberal principles handed down to us
from the Enlightenment and the very cornerstone of our civilization
is the “categorical imperative” of Immanuel Kant: namely, that one
cannot act on that maxim which one cannot will to be universal. In
other words, if it’s OK for me to do it, it has to be OK for everybody
to do it. If it’s not OK for everybody to do it, then it’s not OK
for me to do it either. This principle is so deeply ingrained in us,
along with the contempt we feel for what we call ” hypocrisy” when
people violate it, that we take it for granted. I was having dinner the
other night with a learned and cultured man, an internationally famed
historian of somewhat conservative tendencies, when the conversation
turned to the North Korean nuclear test. “What I just can’t get past,”
this man said, “is that we are saying it’s OK for us to have nuclear
weapons, but it’s not OK for the North Koreans or the Iranians.”
Glen Suarez of London writes in a similar vein to the Times: “How can
we condemn North Korea for seeking to acquire nuclear weapons when we
possess them and say that we wish to upgrade them? How can Tony Blair
condemn the North Korean regime for ‘disregarding the concerns of
neighbours and the wider international community’ when he and George
Bush did the same when invading Iraq?” Neither of these men mention
Kant, but of course it was the Kantian principle they were appealing
to as an absolute bar against efforts by leaders in America or Britain
to prevent potential terrorist states or backers of terrorists from
acquiring nuclear weapons or doing other things which might pose a
threat to their countries.
A moment’s thought will show us that the Kantian principle cannot
apply in international relations, at least not unless we are prepared
to adopt a thoroughgoing pacifist and (I would say) suicidal policy
by disarming and disbanding our armed forces and refusing to fight
against those who wish us harm. So long as we admit that a nation has
the right to defend itself, we must also admit that it is necessary
to adopt a different standard for ourselves and for our enemies. It
is OK and probably unavoidable for us to bomb them, for example, while
it is very definitely not OK for them to bomb us. Leave aside for the
moment the question of whether or not it can be right to bomb them, if
we are to fight them at all and so preserve ourselves, our people and
property and our way of life, we must be prepared to do things to them
that we should not hesitate to deplore if and when they did them to us.
The Kantian principle really has its origins in the revolutionary
Christian notion that it is wrong for us to consider ourselves ahead
of other people. We should put our duty to others first — or at least
treat them no worse than we treat ourselves. Under the old Christian
dispensation, it was recognized that this kind of saintliness had to
be reserved for, well, saints, and those who chose to live lives that
were not of this world. They belonged, to use the Augustinian imagery,
to the City of God rather than the City of Man.
But the Enlightenment began with the idea that that kind of saintliness
ought not to be reserved for a special few but ought to be expected
of, even required of, everybody. That’s hard enough to live up
to in our personal lives. To live up to it in matters of war and
peace and international relations is impossibly utopian — unless,
of course, you’re a pacifist and are prepared to give up the right
of self-defense.
****
The Nobel Prize for literature given this year to the Turkish novelist
Orhan Pamuk caused some of his fellow Turks great annoyance.
“The prize was not given to Pamuk for being a writer, nor to his
works,” said the conservative Kemal Kerincsiz who advocated prosecuting
Pamuk “for directly insulting the Turkish nation” over the wish to
acknowledge genocide practiced by the Turks against the Armenians
in 1915. When Pamuk was prosecuted (he got off on a technicality),
he denied that he had insulted Turkey. “But what if it is wrong?” he
said. “Right or wrong, do people not have the right to express their
ideas peacefully.” Ah! But in an honor culture of the sort that still
holds sway in Turkey and other historically Islamic nations, the insult
is not dependent on right or wrong. This is a question subordinate to
that of honor or dishonor, and the charge itself, irrespective of its
truth or falsity, brings dishonor on the nation. In such a culture,
it remains true as it once was in ours, that if a bad act is not made
public to the shame of the doer, then it didn’t really happen.
I wonder, too, if Mr. Pamuk’s profession makes him vulnerable to this
kind of misunderstanding. The novelist almost by his very existence
must privilege the individual psyche over the demands of the group
when they come into conflict. A novel without psychological reality
— as opposed to the honor culture’s demand for conformity with which
that reality is bound to come into conflict — is not really a novel at
all. Novels and novelists naturally belongs to our Western, post-honor
world, which is why there are so few novelists in the Islamic one
and why those there are, like Mr. Pamuk or the late Naguib Mahfouz
are so often in trouble and even risk their lives merely to continue
doing what we take it for granted novelists should do — that is,
in Mr. Pamuk’s own phrase “to express their ideas peacefully.” It
sounds reasonable to us, but not to those whose world-view is formed
by honor in this basic, even primitive form.
James Bowman is a resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy
Center, media essayist for the New Criterion, and The American
Spectator’s movie critic. He is the author of the new book, Honor:
A History (Encounter Books).
art_id=10555

ILHAM ALIYEV: AZERBAIJAN NO TO MAKE CONCESSIONS WITH RESPECT TO ITS TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY
ArmInfo News Agency, Armenia
Oct 30 2006
The negotiation process for the Karabakh conflict settlement passes
now in a so-called Prague format which may enable its peaceful
resolution, the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, said in an
interview to the some Mass Media, accredited in Russia, the “Trend”
Azeri Agency reports.
According to I. Aliyev, it is difficult to say in advance about
the future of the negotiation process as the negotiations have been
lasting for 10 years with no result. The reason for this, according
to Aliyev, is a “”non-constructive position of Armenia which violates
the international legal norms”. “The position of Azerbaijan rests
upon the international norms and principles, recognized by the world
community. The territorial integrity of Azerbaijan is not a subject
of negotiations. Armenia has to release the Azerbaijan’s territories
without delay and unconditionally which is prescribed by four
resolutions of the UN Security Council. This is the basic principle
Azerbaijan follows unconditionally, while the position of Armenia
is based upon its wishes, expectations and dreams. It thinks that
only a foreign support gives it a ground to think about separation
from the Azerbaijan’s structure and joining of Karabakh lands to
Armenia, which it occupied as a result of temporary advantage during
operations. This will not happen. Therefore, the Armenian authorities
have to understand that Azerbaijan will not make any concessions with
respect to its territorial integrity”, I. Aliyev said.
According to him, Azerbaijan has already suggested all it may go to
make. There is a positive world practice with respect to autonomies.
Availability of the issue of national minorities does not mean
withdrawal from the structure of one state and creation of another
state. “It is difficult to say in advance what will happen in case
of futility of negotiations. At least, if this round of negotiations
ends without any results, Azerbaijan will revise its strategy and
tactics without fail”, I. Aliyev said.

OSCE ATTACHES IMPORTANCE TO POSSIBILITY OF IMPLEMENTATION OF LONG-TERM OBSERVATION MISSION IN RA
Noyan Tapan
Oct 26 2006
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 26, NOYAN TAPAN. The OSCE attaches great importance to
holding the 2007 and 2008 state elections corresponding to democratic
standards and to sending invitations for implementation of the
long-term observation mission. Francesco Bascone, the Ambassador
of Italy to the OSCE said about it at the October 25 meeting with
RA NA Speaker Tigran Torosian. At the meeting at which OSCE Yerevan
Office head, Ambassador Vladimir Pryakhin and Ambassador of Italy to
Armenia Marco Clemente were present, it was spoken about discussions
of the Electoral Code and the coming state elections. As Noyan Tapan
was informed by the RA NA Public Relations Department, at Francesco
Bascone’s request, the NA Speaker presented in details the process of
discussions on the EC draft amendments and terms of adoption. It was
mentioned that it is envisaged to adopt the EC in December, during
the last four-day sittings of the autumn session. Touching upon the
issue of invitations addressed to international organizations for
implementation of the observation mission during the coming elections,
NA Speaker Tigran Torosian explained that it is possible to send
invitations only after appointing the elections day and assured that
Armenia is the first one interested in holding elections corresponding
to democratic standards and in participation of as many observers
in those elections as it is possible. OSCE Yerevan Office head,
Ambassador Vladimir Pryakhin assured that in the opinion of the
Venice Commission and OSCE experts, there is no need of experts’
conclusion for the EC draft, and the draft may be adopted as soon
as it is ready. F.Bascone expressed satisfaction with the process of
the EC reforms and wished success in the process of holding elections.

YEREVAN QUESTIONS RUSSIAN VERDICT ON PLANE CRASH
By Karine Kalantarian
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Oct 25 2006
Armenia’s aviation authorities have expressed serious reservations
about Russian investigators’ preliminary conclusion that last May’s
crash of an Armenian airliner in southern Russia, which killed all
113 people aboard, was caused by pilot error.
Citing their findings , Russia’s Transport Minister Igor Levitin said
in July that the crew of the Armenian Airbus A-320 lost control of the
plane as they made a second attempt to land at the Black Sea city of
Sochi. This conclusion was endorsed by the Moscow-based Interstate
Aviation Committee (ICA) of the Commonwealth of Independent States
which also investigated the deadliest air disaster in Armenia’s
history.
The Armenian government’s Civil Aviation Department essentially
accepted this verdict at the time. At the same time, its director
Artyom Movsisian said that although the “human factor” apparently
played a role in the crash, Yerevan believes that there are still
some key unanswered questions about its causes.
It emerged on Wednesday that Movsisian’s department has presented the
ICA with a six-page document that questions some of the conclusions
drawn by the Russian investigators. In particular, the Armenian side
complained that the Russians failed to take note of Sochi airport’s
alleged failure to “detect dangerous weather conditions” that are
thought to have prevented the plane belonging to the national airline
Armavia from landing safely on first attempt.
Armavia’s owner Mikhail Baghdasarian insists that the A-320 would
have avoided the crash had it not received a last-minute order to
veer away from the airport’s runway and make a second approach.
Baghdasarov, who is a Russian citizen of Armenian descent, has rejected
the ICA verdict and demanded an “independent inquiry.”
The Civil Aviation Department also took issue with the investigators’
implicit claims that Armavia had failed to properly train its pilots
and assess their professional level. It further urged them to drop
from their preliminary conclusions an assertion that moments before
the crash the A-320 crew found themselves in a “tense psycho-emotional
situation” due to unspecified “imperative demands to land at Sochi.”
According to rumors cited by the Armenian press, those demands were
made by some wealthy and influential passengers of the doomed flight.
There have also been allegations that a gunfight may have broken out
between crime figures that were allegedly among the victims of the
crash. The Armenian government and Armavia have dismissed the claims.
Aviation Department spokeswoman Gayane Davtian could not say when the
ICA will release its final verdict or whether Yerevan will succeed
in influencing its content. “They may publish their final findings
at any moment,” she told RFE/RL.

VICE-PRESIDENT OF OSCE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY VISITS AZERBAIJAN TODAY
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Oct 25 2006
Oleg Bilorus, OSCE Parliamentary Assembly vise-president and Ukraine
representative to the organization visits Azerbaijan today, Bahar
Muradova, the head of Azerbaijani delegation to OCSE PA told the APA.
She said that Bilorus plans to meet with Azerbaijani delegation member
and the parliament speaker Ogtay Asadov, National Academy of Science
president Mahmud Kerimov and Foreign minister Elmar Mammadyarov. He
will also visit refugee settlements, sightseeing of Baku and one of
the oil mines.
Bahar Muradova also said that the sides will discuss the cooperation
of Azerbaijan and Ukraine within OSCE PA and GUAM.
“Oleg Bilorus’ position as OSCE Parliamentary Assembly official can
influence some problems. We want to win his support in the settlement
of Nagorno Garabagh conflict,” she said.

NEW DETAILS OF CRASH OF ARMENIAN PLANE
Lragir.am, Armenia
Oct 25 2006
The news agency Regnum published an anonymous report on the crash
of the plane of Armavia Airlines on May 3 near Sochi. The anonymous
author, who introduced himself as the relative of one of the victims,
writes that a group of passengers flying in business class, i.e. they
were close to the cockpit, were leaving for Sochi for an “important
meeting”. The group had already had several drinks. Learning that the
crew decided to return to Yerevan because of the bad weather, they got
one of the pilots out of the cockpit and taking him hostage, demanded
to land in Sochi. The author writes that the panic that occurred on
board resulted in uncoordinated actions of the crew and the dispatcher.

ARMENIA RANKS 101ST IN THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH LIST
Public Radio, Armenia
Oct 20 2006
According to the “Reporters without Borders” international
organization, this year Armenia ranks 101st in the freedom of
speech list. The document, issued today by the headquarters of the
organization in Paris, includes 168 states and covers the period from
September 2005 to September 2006.
The list is concluded by Turkmenistan, Eritrea and North Korea.
Finland, Ireland, Island and Netherlands share the first four places.
France, which is considered a country of free speech, digressed from
the 30h to the 35th position.
As compared to the previous year, Russia digressed from the 138th to
147th position.
Among other CIS countries Azerbaijan ranks 141st, Belarus – 151st,
Uzbekistan – 158th and Turkmenistan – 167th.

Armenian and Russian MFAs Hold Recurrent Consultations in Yerevan
PanARMENIAN.Net
21.10.2006 13:35 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ October 19 recurrent consultations between Armenian
and Russian MFAs were held in Yerevan, reports the Press Office of
the Armenian MFA.
Director of the Fourth Department of CIS of the Russian MFA Andrey
Kelin lead the Russian delegation.
During these matters of Year of Armenia in Russia, bilateral
cooperation in ensuring stability and security in South Caucasus
were discussed. The same day Kelin met with Armenian Deputy FM
Gegham Gharibjanyan. During the meeting matters of mutual interest
were discussed.

Michael Gulezian to play at Windsor Hall in Cumberland Nov. 3
Keyser Mineral Daily News Tribune, WV
Oct 21 2006
Published: Saturday, October 21, 2006 12:40 AM CDT
Michael Gulezian is one of the consummate guitarists of our times.
His first ever, live concert release, Concert at St. Olaf College,
displays Michael’s love of his craft, the intensity of a singular
artist dedicated to music, and the beauty and love of an
extraordinary musician.
Michael’s guitar work displays a blend of several musical influences.
The virtuosity, power, and haunting spirituality reflected in his
compositions reminds one of Leo Kotke and the late great Michael
Hedges.
In conversations with Michael, you can hear the absolute dedication
to his craft; the intensity of an extremely focused individual, and
the natural beauty and awe reflected in his music.
Michael identifies early influences as his Armenian parents;
Mississippi Delta blues artists such as John Hurt and Robert Johnson;
and current influences such as Keith Jarrett; John McLaughlin; and
Sun Ra.
His epiphanic moment was upon discovering the music of John Fahey,
who Michael identifies as the godfather of American solo acoustic
guitar.
Michael’s music reflects a blend of creative self-expression,
haunting melodic composition and identification with the natural and
spiritual world.
Each of Michael’s albums has increased the heights of contemporary
acoustic guitar. From Distant Memories and Dreams (1992) named Runner
up of the year (New Age) by CD Review Magazine; Dare of an Angel
reached new heights of acoustic fingerplay; a tribute to the late
Michael Hedges Language of the Flame (2003) reflects his
understanding and expression of the yearning of the human spirit.
Jazziz describes his music as ” unbelievable…incredible”.
Music Express calls Michael “…among the great acoustic guitar
innovators of the 20th century.”
But Michael really doesn’t need to prove himself anymore to anyone.
What one can recommend is that you listen to his music… and be
transformed.
Michael Gulezian will be performing at Windsor Hall in downtown
Cumberland, Maryland on Friday, November 3rd. Showtime is 8pm; doors
open at 7pm.
Tickets are available at Kauffman Music, 39 Baltimore Street,
Cumberland or by calling (301) 724-6800 to reserve.

French Armenian genocide bill makes no sense-US
Fri 20 Oct 2006 14:45:50 BST
Reuters, UK
Oct 20 2006
BRUSSELS, Oct 20 (Reuters) – A French parliamentary bill that would
make it a crime to deny that Armenians suffered genocide at the
hands of Ottoman Turks in World War One makes no sense, a senior U.S.
official said on Friday.
Daniel Fried, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs,
said he backed French President Jacques Chirac’s opposition to the
bill, which has infuriated Turkey even though it may never become law.
“I certainly share the view that this legislation criminalising
discussion doesn’t seem to make any sense,” Fried told a news briefing
in Brussels.
He said the United States and President George W. Bush had spoken out
repeatedly about the mass killings of Armenians during World War One
and did not want to minimise or deny them.
However, he added: “We as a government have never termed these events
genocide. We don’t use that word.”
Fried said the United States would like to see Turks and Armenians
address the issue honestly and some Turks were already urging their
government to do so.
“It doesn’t strike me as clear that resolutions like this in the
French parliament are going to encourage this process.”
Turkey denies claims that Armenians suffered genocide, arguing that
large numbers of both Christian Armenians and Muslim Turks died in
a partisan conflict that raged as the Ottoman Empire collapsed.
Given opposition from Chirac and the French Senate, the bill is
unlikely to become law but it has infuriated Turkey, where consumer
groups have called for a boycott of French-made goods.
France, which faces presidential elections next year, is home to
Europe’s largest Armenian diaspora.