Author: Kajoyan Gevork

World Boxing Champion Misha Aloyan seeks to change name

October 22, 2011 – 12:46 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – Misha Aloyan, Baku-hosted AIBA World Boxing
Championships’ gold winner, will apply to registry to change his name
to Mikhail.The 23-year-old Armenia-born Yezidi said it’s traditional
among his people to give diminutive names to children (Misha
diminutive to Mikhail).

The boxer confessed to having gained much experience over the last
years, intending to use all he leant to gain gold at 2012 London
Olympics, sport-express.ru reported.

FORMATION DES ARCHEOLOGUES EN ARMENIE
Stephane

armenews.com
samedi 22 octobre 2011

Le memorandum recemment signe entre le Ministère de la Culture
d’Armenie et l’Institut National des Valeurs Culturelles de Tokyo vise
a faire des recherches sur les echantillons de metal disponibles au
musee d’histoire d’Armenie et ainsi qu’a ameliorer leur conservation.

La ministre adjointe de la culture Arev Samuelyan a declare que le
processus devait etre effectue en 4 etapes et durera jusqu’en 2014.

Elle a dit les echantillons de metal seront etudies et puis ensuite
expose.

Selon elle, une des questions du programme est la creation d’un
reseau de cooperation international. ” Suite a cette cooperation
Armeno-japonaise les archeologues de la region, les restaurateurs
et d’autres specialistes de la sphère seront formes. Des echanges
d’experience seront organises suite auxquels en 2014 pour la première
fois dans la region un centre technologiquement au niveau pour la
recherche et la conservation d’echantillons de metal archeologiques
fonctionnera ” a dit la ministre adjointe.

DILIJAN VILLE DE TOURISME
Stephane

armenews.com
samedi 22 octobre 2011

Dilijan espère devenir une ville touristique. En 2009 et 2010 le
flux des touristes dans la ville armenienne ont augmente a declare
le maire de Dilijan Armen Santrosyan lors d’une conversation avec
des journalistes et a note qu’il s’attendait a une forte hausse
cette annee.

Selon lui, les armeniens, en particulier les residants de la capitale
aussi bien que quelques armeniens de la Diaspora, prefèrent venir
a Dilijan.

” Je pense que notre ville possède le climat le plus favorable en
Armenie. En plus, du point du vue du relief elle n’est pas petite
” a-t-il dit. En notant qu’actuellement plus de 30 maisons sont
disponibles poue une location. Les prix fluctuent de 3000 drams
jusqu’a 180 000 drams par jour.

Plus de 15000 a 17000 touristes visitent annuellement Dilijan.

ARMENIA TO APPEAR BEFORE WORLD WITH NEW POSTER

news.am
Oct 21 2011
Armenia

YEREVAN. – Armenia will now present itself before the word with a
new brand, Deputy Minister of Economy Ara Petrosyan stated during a
press conference on Friday.

This brand is the poster (see photo) that was declared winner at
the Vettor Giusti tourism poster exhibition-contest held during 19th
Session of the World Tourism Organization (WTO).

The poster was the winner of People’s Choice Award category.

According to Petrosyan, the poster will be used during a variety
of tourism events and in advertisements on Armenia. In addition,
as winner in the aforesaid category, the picture will be posted on
WTO’s official website, for two years.

ARMENIA HOSTING IRAN~RS EXCLUSIVE TRADE EXHIBITION

Islamic Republic News Agency
Oct 21 2011

Moscow, Oct 21, IRNA – Islamic Republic of Iran opened an exclusive
exhibition of its industrial and commercial products the Armenian
capital of Yerevan on Thursday.

Several Iranian and Armenian officials attended the inaugural ceremony
of the exhibition.

Armenian Energy Minister Armen Mosesian said that holding such
exhibitions plays an important role in enhancement of bilateral
economic ties.

“The officials of both countries are determined to expand their
bilateral ties in different fields,” he said while referring to a
40 percent increase in the volume of trade transactions between Iran
and Armenia.

Iran’s exclusive exhibition will continue in Yerevan until next Sunday.

A total of 42 companies from nine Iranian provinces have displayed
their products in the exhibition.

WHO WILL REPLACE AZERBAIJAN’S PRESIDENT?

news.am
Oct 21 2011
Armenia

BAKU. – Domestic political situation in Azerbaijan is getting tenser
in connection with the country’s presidential elections to be held in
2013, and the next candidate’s issue is actively discussed, Azadliq
newspaper of Azerbaijan writes, presenting new details on the meeting
which the Nakhijevan clan recently held in Gabala.

The clan’s key representatives examined the matter of replacing
current president Ilham Aliyev and choosing a convenient candidate.

“If [Ilham Aliyev’s wife] Mehriban Aliyeva becomes president, this
would have disastrous consequences for the Nakhijevan clan,” the
newspaper writes. That is why the Nakhijevan “troika” is looking for an
alternative to Ilham Aliyev, and the most likely candidate from among
them seems Kamaladdin Heydarov, the Minister of Emergency Situations.

“So, it will also become clear soon as to how Ilham Aliyev will
deal with these problems. And when that happens, the Minister of
Emergency Situations could find himself in a difficult situation,”
Azadliq concludes.

HUMOUR WITH A TRADEMARK FRENCH TWIST

AZG DAILY
22-10-2011

By Jan Epstein, The Australian Jewish News

FEW contemporary writers and directors of comedies for the screen
can outrank Francis Veber, the grand master of French comedy, in
his ability to make audiences roar with laughter yet empathise with
buffoons and brutes as he exemplifies the human condition.

Early in his comedy writing, Veber invented a clownish “fall guy”
character, whom he gave the moniker Francois Pignon. Pierre Richard
played Pignon in the three early films which launched Veber’s success
globally: Le Chevre (1981), Les Comperes (1983) and Les Fugitifs
(1986).

Daniel Auteuil played Pignon in The Closet and Moroccan-born Jewish
actor Gad Elmaleh in The Valet. But no matter who plays the bungling
Pignon, the purpose of the character is clear: to play the Chaplin-like
“little man” in stark contrast to a macho bully (played by Gerard
Depardieu in the early films with Pierre Richard). Thrown together
by forces beyond their control, the two must find a way to coexist,
and in the process grow protective and even fond of each other.

Veber believes this coupling of opposites, cruelty with humour, is the
“foundation of comedy” and sees German-born director Ernst Lubitsch’s
To Be or Not To Be, made in 1942 and set during the Nazi occupation
of Poland, as a powerful example of how these opposites work.

“The more tragic it is, the better for laughs,” explains Veber, who
was in Australia this month giving master classes at the Melbourne
International Film Festival.

Veber was born in the western suburbs of Paris in 1937 to a Jewish
father (Pierre-Gilles Veber, who scripted the eight-episode serial
adaptation of Fanfan La Tulipe in 1925) and an Armenian-Russian mother
(also a writer). Only the fact of his being baptised at birth saved
his family from the fate that awaited many Parisian Jews during the
war, as shown so chillingly in the recent French film The Round Up.

“I have two lamentations in my blood,” Veber explains as we meet
over coffee. “The Armenian genocide (by the Turks in 1915) and the
Jewish genocide. What else could I do but turn to comedy? I remember
my father hiding in the back of our Paris apartment throughout the war.

If he was picked up, my mother could have been sent to a concentration
camp. It was a nightmare; it’s impossible not to be affected by it.”

His great-uncle Tristan Bernard, the brother of his maternal
grandmother, was a French Jewish humorist who had a Paris Theatre
and a street named after him.

In World War II, Bernard was rounded up at the Velodrome with thousands
of other Jews and sent to Drancy (the primary internment camp in
the Paris region) where he would have been deported if not for the
intervention of powerful literary friends, among them Jean Cocteau.

“He survived, but many of my relatives were lost this way (through
deportation). Even for my family it was a disaster, although we were
personally safe,” says Veber.

For Veber, humour is a defence against despair. He tells me the
joke about two Jews who are brought into a square to be executed
by a firing squad. As they are blindfolded, one of the Jews says
to the other that he would love a cigarette, and his friend says:
‘Don’t look for trouble!’

“I love this joke – don’t look for trouble,” he says. “Jewish humour
is so philosophical and profound. It’s a reflex – so Jewish – to
laugh about very serious things.”

This is the space where Veber’s foolish, seemingly ineffectual,
but ultimately triumphant alter ego Pignon comes from. He identifies
strongly too with the ageing gay characters in La Cage aux Folles and
the sequel, for which he wrote the screenplay from Jean Poiret’s play.

But this impulse, and the great creativity it unleashes, comes not
only from Veber’s Jewish-Armenian background, but also from something
in his own make-up.

“I have what psychiatrists call mild depression,” says Veber. “This
can give me a hard time. You say to yourself in the morning: what do
I want to do today? You get up, wash yourself, and then set to work.

It’s hard. I have to work in solitude. People want to laugh, and I
have to make that comedy work.”

What makes Veber’s comedy work so well is his drive for perfectionism,
coupled with his gift for economical use of action and words. His films
are short but energetic, studded with larger-than-life performances
and hilarious, escalating situations. It was these qualities, and
the success of his three films with Richard and Depardieu, that led
to the invitation by Jewish-American movie mogul Jeffrey Katzenberg
in 1985 to make movies in America.

Veber and his wife of 42 years, Francoise, have been living in
Los Angeles for 25 years. There he writes in splendid isolation –
each script for stage or screen taking a year to complete – before
returning to France to shoot them.

“Everything is easy in America; the house, getting parking spaces.

When you are working, you can go to your swimming pool and swim,”
he says.

According to Veber, only two of the eight American remakes of his films
have been successful. Three Fugitives (1989), written and directed by
Veber and starring Nick Nolte, was a hit. Not so Dinner for Schmucks
(2010), directed by Jay Roach (Meet the Fockers, Austen Powers:
The Spy Who Shagged Me), which Veber is at pains to disown.

Dinner for Schmucks was based on The Dinner Game (1998), which began
life as a stage play and established Veber’s name in Australia.

“That film had nothing to do with me,” says Veber. “I was only the
scriptwriter of the original film. It’s the producer who owns the
rights. I said to them (Roach and his company), ‘Do what you want’,
and they did what they wanted, and it was terrible. French cuisine
turned into ketchup!”

Similarly unsuccessful was the great Billy Wilder’s Buddy Buddy (1981)
starring Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau. The script was written by
Wilder, based on Edouard Molinaro’s L’emmerdeur, which Veber had
adapted from his play Le Contrat.

Veber made his own version of L’emmerdeur (A Pain in the Ass) in 2008.

And what does he think of Wilder’s version? “It was Wilder’s last
film – I think it killed him!”

THREE PRINCIPLES, SIX GUIDELINES AND “STATUS-QUO” IN THE KARABAKH CONFLICT SETTELEMENT
Mikhail Aghajanyan

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict expert
20.10.2011

The process of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement is going
through one of the most intensive stages. It is more correct to speak
about the intensification than about stirring up, because stirring
up implies the disposition of all the parties to the conflict
to rapprochement, while intensification is based first of all on
amplification of the external impulses. The stances of the parties,
which are well-known and do not need presentation, has not changed.

The external powers, carrying out mediation attempts, doubled their
efforts and it is mostly prominent in Russia’s efforts.

The “dry residue” of the meeting in Kazan is that Armenia once more
demonstrated constructive stand and was ready to sign the document
which was often called a “road map” of the settlement. But it is not
happening for one simple reason: Azerbaijan is fully occupied by the
imitation of readiness to set this “road map”, one of the provisions
of which clearly states “the definition of the future legal status
of Nagorno-Karabakh through the will expression of its population
which will have legally biding force”.

Besides intensification of the process of settlement, its
confidentiality, which distances this topical process from public, is
emphasized. Nevertheless, taking into consideration the closed nature
of the process and paucity of information about the actual settlement
of the conflict, some theses which spread light on some aspects of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement can be brought forward.

Status, security and territories The international status of
Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent state will be founded on the
legally biding force of the will expression of the population
of Nagorno-Karabakh and will be the best guarantee of its
security. Nagorno-Karabakh has already de-facto been formed within its
factual borders, the international recognition and documentary setting
of which are possible after the resolution of the issue of the borders
between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan. Those are the issues, for the
resolution of which, Azerbaijan is not ready, because the resolution
of the later is not possible without involvement of the representatives
of Nagorno-Karabakh, meanwhile Baku opposes to the their involvement.

Azerbaijan is simulating vigorous activity, which comes down to
unacceptability of the current status-quo in the conflict zone, but
in reality it does everything for the current status-quo to remain
unchanged. Nagorno-Karabakh on practice has everything what has been
mentioned above – secure borders, territory of historical Artsakh,
which are under the jurisdiction of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.

They only need international recognition of the current de-facto
status of Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent state. In this aspect
the stance of the Armenian parties concerning one of the guidelines of
the settlement is in granting Nagorno-Karabakh intermediate status and
it seems rather well-considered and fully founded on today’s realities.

The intermediate status for Karabakh “means status-quo plus”, i.e. all
we have today, plus international recognition of that status” (thesis
from the statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia E.

Nalbandyan at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in
London on July 13, 2011).

Azerbaijan is simulating the process of settlement due to very simple
reason. In Baku they realize that getting back to the 1988 status and
borders is not possible. The only chance for them is new aggression
against Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijani thesis that Nagorno-Karabakh
has never been an independent state is nostalgia for 1988 with a claim
for the second attempt of military revanche for the final resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue according to the scenario tested in 1990.

By the way, this thesis of the Azerbaijani leadership indirectly shows
that Baku is ready to consider the issue of reunion of Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh which found solution in the joint resolution of the
Supreme Soviet of the Arm. SSR and National Soviet of Nagorno-Karabakh
of December 1, 1989. In Baku they believe that this will qualitatively
facilitate resolution of such issues as status, security and
territories from the position advantageous for Azerbaijan and it will
present the conflict in quite different light, i.e. in the light of
conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan with bringing Nagorno-Karabakh
down to the level of object and not a subject of agreements.

The nostalgia syndrome of 1989 can be seen in the stance of the
Azerbaijani leadership on all the levels. Unlike two other parties
to the conflict and assessment of external actors, Azerbaijan has
got nowhere for the recent 20 years in their desire of “instituting
direct vertical sovereign control over that territory and people living
there. Azerbaijan took a step to the middle of the bridge saying it
was ready to show some flexibility, meaning various models of autonomy
for the population in Karabakh region within Azerbaijan Republic, i.e.

to flexibility within the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. We
are ready for that and we took a step to the middle of the bridge”
(from interview of Araz Azimov, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs,
personal envoy of the president of Azerbaijan on Nagorno-Karabakh
settlement to “Ekho Moskvi” radio station, 19 July, 20111). The things
called in Baku “flexibility” and “readiness for the compromise”
more remind dictating terms with the elements of despotic caprice
(“setting control over people living there”) and allegoric clownery
(“taking step to the middle of the bridge”).

Repeated referendum Agreement to holding repeated referendum for
setting the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh is the biggest concession
of the Armenian party on this stage of the process of settlement.

The political and legal retrospective review of the issue of referendum
in Nagorno-Karabakh demonstrates the sequence of operations of the
Armenian parties and it is connected with defining the will of the
people of Nagorno-Karabakh. In the aspect of political and legal
actions, the actions of Azerbaijan which “won its independence by
deaths of shahids” by means of physical annihilation of the Armenians
in January 1990 and in 1991 it took part in the all-USSR referendum
on preserving the USSR (March 17, 1991) and overwhelming majority
(93.3%) voted for preserving the USSR (87.3% voted for the USSR in
Nakhijevan ASSR). The population of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh did
not take part in that referendum. By the way it is interesting to
mention that according to Russian researchers Transdniestria, which
formally did not separate from Chisinau, as well as Abkhazia and South
Ossetia participated in the referendum and made it demonstrative”2.

Three principles and six guidelines The Armenian parties, most
probably in concord with each other, took an absolutely right stance
on what should be considered principles and guidelines (elements)
of settlement. Only three well-known principles of international law
can be considered as principles in regard to the Karabakh settlement
– non-use of force and threat of force, the right of people to
self-determination, territorial integrity of the states.

The items of the well-known statements by the presidents of the US,
Russia and France (of July 10, 2009 and July 26, 2010) which were
mentioned in Deauville statement on May 26, 2011 are the guidelines
of the settlement (by the way in the last statement those guidelines
are called “elements”). Such an interpretation allows annihilating
Azerbaijani insinuations that if Nagorno-Karabakh is not taking part in
the elaboration and adoption of the “basic principles” of settlement,
it is not a party to the conflict, party at the negotiations and
generally this is Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict between Armenia
and Azerbaijan. In reality, Nagorno-Karabakh is considering only
three aforementioned principles of international law as principles
of settlement. As for the rest, including the guidelines of the
settlement, the signing of which even in this form, by the way,
Azerbaijan avoided in Kazan, Nagorno-Karabakh has its own vision.

The document, which includes “basic principles” of settlement, which
are the subject of negotiation between two of three parties to the
conflict, is characterized as political and it does not have any legal
liabilities for the Armenia and Azerbaijan, which may approve it in
perspective. According to the distinct definition of the Minister
of the Foreign Affairs of Russia Sergei Lavrov “The parties are
working on the assumption that after the basic principles, anyway,
legal document, i.e. peace agreement, should be prepared. Of course
this will demand more attention to details. Nevertheless, the basic
principles as a political document would have a great importance,
as they would demonstrate in political aspect determination for
obtaining the settlement”3.

However, this does not reduce the value of the checked stance of the
Armenian parties which put clear accents in terminology concerning
three principles and six guidelines sounded in the statements
of the presidents of the US, Russia and France. Besides, focusing
attention rather on political than on legally abiding essence of the
“basic principles” is appropriate, particularly, in the light of
the statement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia in which
reads: “the project of the basic principles is a political and not
legal document which begins with words: “presidents of Armenia and
Azerbaijan decided to begin work over the Peace Agreement”. Then
only the guidelines which we being reconciled now and which will be
included in the peace agreement follow”4.

Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan may decide to begin the work over
the peace agreement but that work makes no sense without participation
of the official representative of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Restoring full-format negotiations It is implied that after the
adoption of the “basic principles” of the settlement on the initial
stage work over the peace agreement on Karabakh conflict settlement,
the chosen representatives of Nagorno-Karabakh will be involved in
the negotiations. Azerbaijan torpedoes this too, making statements
that in this case it is necessary to involve the representatives of
the Azerbaijani community of Nagorno-Karabakh.

It is said a lot about the necessity of a speedy restoration of the
full-format talks with the participation the NKR. It is also said a
lot that there are no examples in modern history of the settlement
of similar conflicts when one of the parties does not take part in
the talks on equal terms. Here we will bring an example from the
Israeli-Palestine conflict which is similar to Karabakh conflict in
its complexity. It is known that the current stage of this inveterate
conflict is in stagnation but it might have had simply inevitable
consequences if Israeli party refused conducting negotiations with
the official representatives of Palestine pleading the fact that
there is no such state and Israel would conduct negotiations only with
internationally recognized Arab country. There is no such thing. Quite
the opposite, there have been statements and actions by Israel
underlining direct talks with the representatives of Palestine. E.g.

words of incumbent prime-minister B. Netanyahu that only his “direct
and proceeding contacts” with the head of the Palestine national
administration M. Abbas might bring to the breakthrough on main
disputable issues5.

External efforts Mediatory component is gradually becoming an
irreplaceable element in the whole process of settlement. The activity
of co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, special mediatory mission of
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia has become an integral part
of the process of settlement. According to definition the US, Russia
and France give to the efforts of the Minsk Group – we have one goal
but different interests. Their common goal is not allow sliding down
of the conflict to the stage of military revanche by Azerbaijan. The
difference in interests is of deeper and wider nature, which touches
on an entire layer in approaches of great powers to the issues of
the South Caucasus, Black Sea and Caspian regions. The parties can
always come to terms on one goal and they did it concerning preserving
stability in the zone of Karabakh conflict. As for their interests
they will never come to terms because this is the reality of balance of
the internal powers in the region and the layout of the powers outside.

But close cooperation within the mediatory mechanism of the Minsk
group gives all three external actors additional opportunities when
both their goals and interests differ on other regional issues. So,
it can be supposed that for the US, Russia and France the mechanism
of co-chairmanship within the framework of the Minsk Group has turned
into a convenient diplomatic ground allowing to control situation in
one of the most problematic issues in the South Caucasus as well as
to create preconditions for finding convergence points on problematic
issues in other regions.

1 Full text of the interview:

2 oÅÒCÅÊ ûÅÌEÎ, oËÁÚËÁ Ï ÓÏÈÒÁÎÅÎÎÏÍ oÏÀÚÅ, “cÁÚÅÔÁ.òÕ”,
, 16.03.2011.

3 oÔÅÎÏCÒÁÍÍÁ EÎÔÅÒ×ØÀ ÍEÎEÓÔÒÁ EÎÏÓÔÒÁÎÎÙÈ ÄÅÌ òÏÓÓEE o. ìÁ×ÒÏ×Á
ÁÚÅÒÂÁÊÄOÁÎÓËEÍ oíe, íÏÓË×Á, 27 Á×CÕÓÔÁ 2010 CÏÄÁ, aÅÐÁÒÔÁÍÅÎÔ
EÎÆÏÒÍÁÃEE E ÐÅÞÁÔE íea òÏÓÓEE ().

4 Statement and answers of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia
S.Lavrov to the mass media during the joint press-conference following
the results of the negotiations with the Minister of Foreign Affairs
of Azerbaijan E. Mamadyarov, Moscow, July 18, 2011. Information
and Press Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia
().

5 Netanyahu wants nonstop talks with Palestinians,
,
02.01.2011.

“Globus Energy and Regional Security”, Issue 5, 2011

——————————————————————————–
Another materials of author

*POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF THE NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT
SETTLEMENT ROADMAP AT CURRENT STAGE[18.02.2011] *RUSSIA-TUKREY
RELATIONS IN THE SPOTLIGHT OF THE US AND UN[21.12.2010] *RUSSIA AND
SOME ASPECTS OF CURRENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITUATION IN THE BLACK SEA
REGION [08.07.2010] *”BLACK SEA SYNERGY” INITIATIVE AND THE SOUTHERN
CAUCASUS[25.01.2010] *FROM APPLIED TO CONCEPTUAL: POSSIBLE APPROACH
TO THE FORMATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF INFORMATIONAL SECURITY OF ARMENIA
[21.05.2009]

(c) “Noravank” Foundation

YEREVAN’S ZOO CELEBRATES 70TH ANNIVERSARY AND INTRODUCES A NEW “ANIMAL CARE” CONCEPT

Noyan Tapan
20.10.2011

This project is one of the numerous reforms launched at the zoo
marking its 70th anniversary this year. The improvement program has
been initiated by the new director -president of the Preservation
Fund for Wildlife and Cultural Values Mr. Ruben Khachatryan.

By reorganization of the park, the personnel of Yerevan Zoo makes an
attempt to turn the zoo into a reserve where animals inhabit in as
spacious areas as possible and people visiting the zoo get a chance
to not simply see an animal locked in a cage, but can watch him in
a more natural environment, study and better understand their vital
importance in the nature. The area is suitable for creating such
conditions, as only 6 ha of the 35-hectare park is currently used. Mr.

Khachatryan believes that foreign expert’s participation in the
project is highly important.

While new plans are being made taken from the world practices
in this sphere, visitors now notice the improvements made at the
zoo. If compared to last year, it is obvious that the space has been
re-arranged and improved; the cages are in a better condition, the
characteristic strong smell has been reduced too, even new garbage
bins have been placed separately for plastic and polyethylene wastes
as well as other kinds of trash.

In order to help children better familiarize themselves with the fauna,
every Friday viewing of documentaries about wildlife is offered at a
designated for that purpose quite comfortable area in the park and
those who are interested can take a bus that offers a free ride to
the zoo from vicinity of Yeritasardakan (Youth) metro station in the
center of Yerevan.

TURKISH ROCK MUSICIAN REVEALS ARMENIAN ORIGINS

Tert.am
21.10.11

Prominent Turkish rock and alternative musician, Yashar Kurt,
recently gave an interview to Hurriyet Daily News who speaking about
the release of his new album, as well as his Armenian origins.

According to the Turkish publication, Kurt became baptized at the
age of 40 after learning that he was actually of Armenian origin.

“I am trying to discover myself. Every individual ought to be free
in this decision and live the way they feel. One ought not to carry
their identity around as if it were his or her fate. I am a proselyte
for both sides, neither side accepts me. The sense of not belonging
sticks to you like your destiny. Is being human not the most important
thing?” Kurt told the paper.

Kurt was interested in his true origins since age 13 but never received
a reply, says the paper. The musician reportedly felt extremely angry
when he learned the truth about his origins after 40 years.

“I lived unaware of my true identity in this land, which was visited
by indescribable pain, but I want peace and dialogue. The peace that
I am describing is a peace where one does not prevail over the other,”
he said, adding that his relatives were unnerved and reacted negatively
when he revealed his true identity.

Kurt’s greatest wish is to stage a screen play about the life of
great Armenian composer Komitas.

“Besides our physical resemblance, Komidas is also a significant
figure for humanity, and for Turkish-Armenian relations,” Kurt said,
adding that everyone who saw him was struck by their likeness.

Kurt also stands as a highly symbolic figure for conscientious
objectors; his dissident song “Korku” (“Fear”), which was released
in the late 1990s on the album “Gondermeler” (Allusions), amounts to
a political march against military service. Kurt was sued and tried
for treason because of the album.

“I was going to be sentenced to 12 years in prison, had I not been
acquitted,” he said, adding that the ban on the album was still
in effect.

“My album is banned. I cannot re-introduce it to the market, but I
can add the songs to my new albums one by one and sing them in my
concerts – it’s truly a contradiction. Because the album was banned
by the Culture Ministry I must file a lawsuit against the state to
lift the ban [and] I was tried at a military court,” Kurt said.

He lived as a fugitive for years to avoid military service, Kurt said,
adding that he finally served 28 days in the military in the early
2000s through draft regulations that allowed him to conduct partially
exempted and paid service.

“Militarism is the fundamental cause behind all the world’s problems.

I cannot lay my hands on a weapon. Bearing arms is not the only way
to serve the country. I can look after the elderly in a nursing home,
or do cleaning work, but I did not want my hands to touch a weapon,
and I still do not want to do so,” he said.