The Armenian Weekly On-Line
80 Bigelow Avenue
Watertown MA 02472 USA
(617) 926-3974
[email protected]
menianweekly.com
* * *
Armenian Weekly On-Line; Volume 73, Number 26-27; June 30-July 7, 2007
News:
1. Stolen Genocide Monument Replaced
2. Hrant Dink School Opens in Paris
Commentary:
3. Stop the Poisoning!
Will Teghut’s Forest Be the Next Victim of Mining?
By Moorad Mooradian and Jeff Masarjian
4. The Political-Strategic Resettlement of Karabakh’s Security Zone
By Michael G. Mensoian
5. Letters to the Editor: ‘Kef’ Controversy
Literature:
6. Forty Years in Hollywood Hell
New Book Explains How the ‘Musa Dagh’ Movie Odyssey Went from High Espionage
to Low Brow
By Andy Turpin
7. Poetry
——————————————- ————————————–
1. Stolen Genocide Monument Replaced
A new memorial to the Armenian Genocide victims was inaugurated in the
French town of Chaville on June 24. Mayor of Chaville Jean Levain,
Ambassador of Armenia in France Edward Nalbandian, and several French
political figures, including Secretary of State for Civil Service Andre
Santini, attended the ceremony.
On October 13, 2006, two days after the adoption of the French bill
penalizing the Armenian genocide denial, two vandals stole the 300-kg.
bronze monument. The monument had cost 50,000 euros and was donated as a
gift to Chaville by the Armenian community in 2002.
——————————————– ————————————————– —-
2. Hrant Dink School Opens in Paris
In an article by Khajag Mgrditchian titled "A Piece of Sassoun … In Paris"
about Turkish and Kurdish-speaking Sassountsis in Paris (May 26, 2007; page
3), the Weekly reported that "a building currently being renovated will open
as the "Hrant Dink" school in the Arnaudville suburb of Paris.
On June 25, we were informed that the renovations at the school have almost
ended and that on June 30, the official opening ceremony will be held. The
ceremony will be attended by Rakel Dink, the widow of Hrant Dink.
——————————————– ————————————————– —-
3. Stop the Poisoning!
Will Teghut’s Forest Be the Next Victim of Mining?
By Moorad Mooradian and Jeff Masarjian
Armenia is located at the convergence of three major bio-geographic regions,
and has within it seven of the world’s nine climate zones. Although it
consists of only 29,000 square kilometers, amounting to 0.05 percent of the
land mass of the northern hemisphere, it is home to 40 percent of all
landscape types found there.
As a result, Armenia has enormous biological diversity, including 8,800
plant species, half of which are at risk of extinction; 13 species and 360
varieties of wheat, which was first cultivated there 10,000 years ago; 260
species of trees and bushes; 17,500 invertebrate and 500 vertebrate species
of animals, of which 346 species are birds (of the 500 vertebrate species,
300 are rare or declining, and 18 are at risk of extinction); and one-third
of the 156 reptile species found in the former Soviet Union.
Today, Armenia’s forest cover is at its lowest point in history, estimated
by some to be at less than eight percent of its territory. The loss of
forests is caused by poverty and unemployment, a lack of alternate fuel
sources, legal and illegal cutting and export of wood, and improper
management. Forests perform important environmental and socioeconomic
functions, and when they disappear, long-term consequences result, such as
erosion, flooding, landslides, climate extremes, loss of water supply,
reduction of topsoil fertility, loss of plant and animal biodiversity, and
severe air pollution. The harsh reality is that all of Armenia’s forests may
be gone in as little as 20 years at the current rate of deforestation,
leading to irreversible environmental damage.
In the small agrarian village of Teghut in northern Armenia, the Armenian
Copper Program, a foreign-owned company, is seeking final approval from the
government to begin clear cutting over 1,500 acres of forest (an area the
size of 1,125 football fields) in preparation for an enormous open pit strip
mining operation in search of copper and molybdenum ore. The ore will be
separated from the soil by adding various toxic chemical compounds to it.
The resulting sludge is planned to be dumped in a nearby pristine gorge in
Shnogh village. The toxins and heavy metals will leach into the ground and
nearby river, creating a permanent death zone in the area and threaten the
water quality for people downstream.
We all understand the need for economic development in Armenia, where nearly
half the population lives below the poverty line. But should economic growth
be pursued regardless of the cost and damage that will be inflicted on the
land and the health of the people? If final approval is given to proceed
with this mine, eventually the jobs it created will be gone when the ore is
depleted. The profits will be exported, and left behind will be a poisoned
landscape unsuitable for agricultural production, the permanent loss of
innumerable habitats that support unique plants and animals, and a dumpsite
that will be a blight on the environment and long term threat to the health
of future generations.
SOS Teghut is a coalition of 26 environmental organizations in Armenia that
is working together to inform the Armenian public and concerned citizens
around the globe of the ecological disaster that is looming in Teghut. We
are asking the Armenian government to further analyze the costs and benefits
of approving this mine and to consider instead other forms of more
sustainable economic development possibilities for the region.
More information and photos about Teghut can be found on the ATP website
Anyone interested in supporting the effort to preserve
the landscape there and advocate for more sustainable development can
participate in SOS Teghut’s Action Alert by sending an electronic letter to
the President and other government officials from the web site as well.
We must consider the legacy our ancestors left to us on this precious land,
and do no less for the generations of Armenians to come.
Moorad Mooradian is executive committee member of ATP. Jeff Masarjian is ATP
executive director.
—————————————- ————————————————–
4. The Political-Strategic Resettlement of Karabakh’s Security Zone
By Michael G. Mensoian
One visit to the Nagorno Karabakh Republic is sufficient to inspire the
visitor with the progress that has been made in rebuilding the country.
Three years of intense fighting had laid waste to much of the region’s
housing stock and infrastructure. In addition, thousands of Armenian
refugees from Azerbaijan and displaced people within Karabakh had to be
provided for. This Herculean task was carried on despite the blockade
imposed by Azerbaijan and supported by its ally Turkey that affected Armenia
as well.
The unilateral decision by Moscow to wrest Nargono-Karabakh from Armenia and
give it to Azerbaijan was made in 1921. Giving Karabakh status as an
autonomous region within an Islamic Azerbaijan did little to protect the
rights of the Christian Armenian population. It was not long, 1923 to be
exact, that the anti-Armenian Turkic government severed the Shahoumian
district from northern Karabakh with its Armenian majority and placed it
within the adjoining Azeri dominated Goranboy administrative district.
>From 1923 to 1989, when Azerbaijan administered the region, the government
implemented an insidious policy that allowed Karabakh to languish
economically. Little was done to develop even the most basic economic and
physical infrastructure of the region. The Armenian population was
continually subjected to discriminatory policies whose sole purpose was to
force them to abandoned their lands and leave Karabakh.
During this period from 1923 to 1989, the Armenian population of Karabakh
decreased from 149,600 to 145,500. However, the apparently small decrease of
4,100 is misleading. The present 2004 rate of natural increase for Karabakh
is .54 per cent – an extremely low rate of natural increase which is based
on 14.4 births per thousand minus 9.0 deaths per thousand. If we assume the
same rate of natural increase for the 66 year period that Karabakh was under
Azerbaijan’s control, the Armenian population of Karabakh should have been
approximately 214,000 rather than the 145,500 reported for 1989. It must be
assumed that there was an out-migration of approximately 68,500 people
during that 66 year period, suggesting that the Azerbaijan policy to
depopulate Karabakh of its Armenian inhabitants was succeeding. During the
same period, the percentage of Armenians in Karabakh decreased from 95
percent to approximately 77 percent while the Azeri segment of the
population increased from 7,700 to 37,300.
Had the Karabakh Armenians not exercised their right to self-determination
and remained within Azerbaijan when it also declared its independence from
the rapidly disintegrating Soviet Union, their situation would have become
intolerable. For anyone to believe that the Karabakh Armenians would have
been allowed to prosper; that their cultural integrity could be maintained
or that a meaningful relationship with their compatriots in Armenia would
have been allowed need only to look at conditions in Turkey. The
anti-democratic, anti-Armenian governments in Ankara and Baku are mirror
images of each other.
It was against this background that the Karabakh Armenians responded and
were ultimately forced to defend their homes and lands when their 1991
declaration of an independent Karabakh Republic was challenged by
Azerbaijan. The response from Baku was immediate; revocation of Karabakh’s
autonomous status. The ensuing war for the defense of Karabakh went through
several cease fires and eventually culminated in an uneasy truce brokered by
Russia in 1994 that remains in place today. The Karabakh Defense Force had
not only defeated a larger and superior equipped Azerbaijani military, but
gained control of a vital "security zone" primarily to the west and south of
Karabakh. The occupation of the western third of the Agdam District
eliminated an Azeri salient into the mid-section of Karabakh and placed the
important transportation hub of Agdam controlling the principal road from
Stepanakert to Mardakert within the NKR.
Presently the NKR Defense Force controls 85 percent of Karabakh. The
Shahoumian district, separated from Karabakh in 1923, and parts of the
Mardakert and Martuni districts still remain under Azerbaijani occupation.
In addition, the Karabakh Defense Force controls a security zone comprising
about 6,100 square kilometers. This includes the districts of Kelbadjar (the
eastern part of which lies within Karabakh), Lachin, Jebrail, Gubadly,
Zangelan and parts of Fizuli and Agdam.
The importance of this security zone was stressed in a recent interview
provided by where President Ghukassian is reported to
have said that the issue of territories adjacent to NKR is out of the
question. "We do not have occupied territories and we do not have [the]
Armenian army there" [as the Azerbaijan government claims]. "The Defense
Army of NKR liberated the security zone.[and] the same army defends those
territories." That is a significant statement. It implies that no part of
the liberated territories is subject to negotiation.
Whether or not Karabakh becomes an independent state or an integral part of
Armenia, the long term outlook would be precarious and possibly untenable
without the absolute control of this security zone. Karabakh would become
either an exclave if it joined Armenia or an isolated state if it remained
independent. It should be understood that control of this security zone
requires that Armenian families occupy the land and that these settlements
become inextricably linked to the NKR.
The preoccupation with the issue of Karabakh’s recognition as an independent
state overlooks this fact. Without Armenian settlements within the security
zone, there is little likelihood that these areas would ever be considered
part of a future de jure recognition of the NKR. Military control alone will
not be sufficient. Therefore, the importance attached to the proposed
settlements in the security zone becomes obvious. It was reported by a
REGNUM correspondent stationed in Stepanakert that Prime Minister Anushavan
Danielyan had said that Karabakh needs to have at least 300,000 people.
Assuming that to be a legitimate figure, it would necessitate doubling the
current population.
However, with that figure in mind, a report by Serge Amirkhanian, head of
the NKR government agency dealing with migration and refugee settlement is
troubling. Given the present budgetary restraints, the three million dollars
available annually will only allow for the settlement of from 130 to 150
families each year. The original plan unveiled in 2001 was to resettle
35,000 refugees in ten years at an estimated cost of 110 million dollars.
Even at this rate, to increase the population by 150,000 to reach the
300,000 figure that Danielyan cited, would take some four decades; far too
long and absolutely inadequate. Given existing political realities, a
conservative estimate as to the time available to reach a doubling of the
population is, at most, 20 years. This includes developing the economic,
socio-cultural and physical infrastructure necessary to support this
resettlement. To its credit, the government has shown its ability to provide
much of the needed infrastructure, especially with respect to the settlement
projects in the strategic Kashtagh (Lachin) region.
Prorated over a 20 year period, the plan would require the settlement of
7,500 individuals annually or approximately 1900 (4 member family) to 2500
(3 member family) families. This is both manageable logistically as well as
fiscally. For military, economic and sociopsychological reasons the NKR
government should consider establishing grids 20 kilometers squared. These
grids would be located based on strategic considerations, agricultural
requirements and to facilitate providing the necessary infrastructure. Each
year two 400 square kilometer grids would be laid out containing four to
five settlements each ranging in size from approximately 750 to 940
individuals. This settlement pattern would facilitate economic development,
schooling, social interaction, cooperative enterprises as well as serving
the strategic requirements of the NKR. Over the twenty year period the goal
would be to create 40 interconnected grids within the security zone which
would contain a total of from 160 to 200 settlements.
Failure to effectively settle and incorporate the security zone with
Karabakh would, for all practical purposes, leave the region as an enclave
within Azerbaijan even with its connection through the Lachin Corridor. This
six kilometer corridor would be vulnerable to any future Azeri attack,
especially by air. Severing the road would effectively cripple land
communication with Armenia. Unfortunately, the topography prevents the road
from ever becoming a high speed route from Armenia to Stepanakert; a serious
detriment both militarily and economically. The loss of the Kelbadjar region
would prevent the future construction of a vital second road connecting
Armenia with northern Karabakh. This is a high priority requirement. Main
highways with their feeder roads are vital for defensive purposes as well as
for economically viable resettlement projects within the security zone.
The liberated districts of Fizuli, Jebraill, Qubadli and Zangilan districts
protect Karabakh’s southern flank which would extend to the banks of the
Arax River. Additionally, it would expand the east to west width of a buffer
zone between Azerbaijan and its exclave of Nakhchivan. In normal times, the
principal route from Azerbaijan to its exclave passed through the Megri
Corridor in southern Armenia.
There can be no question that the NKR and Armenia face formidable problems
in their relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey. Easy as it may be to
compromise, such concessions would irreparably damage the psyche of the
Armenian nation and undo the work of the past 100 years. Presently, time
appears to be an ally of the NKR. There can be no guarantee as to its
duration. The resettlement of Karabakh and especially the security zone is a
political and strategic necessity. The period of 20 years was given as a
likely time frame based solely on empirical evidence. The principal nations
of Western Europe, Russia, the United States, China and Japan that
collectively influence the destiny of the world are presently preoccupied
with more pressing matters such as global warming and environmental
degradation, terrorism, on-going genocides, global economic imbalances and
the Middle East quagmire to name but a few. The Karabakh-Azerbaijan conflict
has not yet reached center stage. Until then, the NKR assisted by the
Diaspora must continue to prepare for either eventuality: military
intervention by Azerbaijan or the time when the NKR and Armenia can ably
present their case of a fait accompli for de jure recognition by the world
community.
————————————– ————————————————– ——————
5. Letters to the Editor
Dear Sir,
Dr. Levon A. Saryan’s letter printed in your issue of June 16 is
what we would call in school "an exercise in excess of zeal."
Before mailing his letter, my dear friend Levon should have
consulted his mother, Mrs. Armine Sarian, a graduate of the Jemaran in
Beirut and one of the few remaining pupils of Levon Shant and Nigol
Aghbalian.
She would have pointed out to him that "kef" is a perfectly
valid Armenian word (never mind its Arabic, not Turkish, origin), which is
also used in a dozen or so more languages. The word is also to be found in
every Armenian dictionary, especially Malkassian’s four-volume opus (see
photo), which gives a whole column to it.
Going a little beyond the word in question, it is useful to
remember that our language has only about a dozen purely Armenian roots, all
the rest come from Persia, Arabic, Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, Kurds and God
knows where else! By the way, did any of our readers know that khanoot is an
Arabic word very much in use today? (I had heard and read it in Morocco a
few years ago!)
Before I close, I cannot resist telling about Mr. Aghbalian,
reminding us in class that: "The shabig (shirt) you are wearing is Persian,
the vardig (underpants) you are wearing is Persian." and so on and so forth
for about 20 or 30 words. Pity I did not write it all down at the time.
In conclusion: "Kef" is an Armenian word and I hope you will all go and
enjoy yourselves at the "Hye Kef Time" in Cape Cod, and have a lot of "kef"
without any pangs of conscience.
Sincerely,
Levon Palian
——————————————- ————————————————– ———-
6. Forty Years in Hollywood Hell
New Book Explains How the ‘Musa Dagh’ Movie Odyssey Went from High Espionage
to Low Brow
By Andy Turpin
WATERTOWN, Mass. (A.W.)-Edward Minasian’s new book "Musa Dagh" should be
required reading for every high school history student studying the Interwar
period.
It tells the ultimately anticlimactic story of the making of the film
version of Franz Werfel’s "The Forty Days of Musa Dagh" over the course of
roughly 50 years.
It may be the only history of media that elicits active suspense throughout,
making it an engaging, important and quick read for the summer reading
scholar.
A majority of Armenians and a sizeable amount of the general
public are aware of the book’s importance in the pantheon of genocide
literature, as well as there existing what is considered to be a B-movie
version of the book.
Few realize, however, the amount of time, money, diplomacy and ardor that
went into suppressing the making of the film.
Minasian’s meticulous research and scholarship proves that truth is often
stranger than fiction, and that the truth around the making of "Musa Dagh"
rivals in noir pulp scope the reach of any modern Indiana Jones movie
involving Nazi spies, Turkish agents, backdoor politics and seedy moguls.
"Musa Dagh" personifies the moral relativism and idealism of America’s
"Greatest Generation" in a time of crisis.
It questions the proper course of action for film artists, as most in the
1930s were highly patriotic Americans of recent immigrant stock -had they
made the greatest redemptive anti-fascist piece in history-weighing that it
would have cost real political allies in the wartime fight to curb Nazi
world domination.
In contrast, if the film had been made as planned to rival the likes of
"Gone With the Wind," it may have contributed in public outreach, preventing
the Holocaust from happening.
Amid these overarching questions of conscience, Minasian paints a vivid
background of important players in the story, including touching sketches of
Werfel. How he comes to both write the book in a frenzy of "Lost Generation"
humanism and later escape Hitler’s Europe with his wife under secret escort
from the OSS (and the anti-Nazi support of the YMCA) stands as a real-life
episode from the reels of "Casablanca."
Werfel’s personal motto? "My political credo is to search for humanity
everywhere and to avoid barbarism."
In chapters essential to but separate from the film’s history, Werfel
defines how he came to dedicate his life first to publicizing the valor of
the Armenians and later to Christianity and staunch anti-fascism when he
said: "I saw why the mighty nations that had once ruled over and oppressed
you-Babylon,Rome, Byzantium-were dead and gone, but you were still alive. It
was because you were a nation of book lovers, children of the spirit."
Riveting is the who’s who of stars and directors who wanted to be associated
with the film. Names like Frank Capra, Elia Kazan, Stanely Kubrick, Sophia
Loren, Carlo Ponti, Dino Di Laurentis, Omar Shariff, Audrey Hepburn and
Clark Gable.
Yet, the project was always shelved due to intervention from the Turkish and
U.S. governments on the grounds that it would burn political ties-first
during WWII and later during the Cold War.
Just before the war, despite Britain’s fame for pieces like Lawrence Olivier’s
"Henry V" to support war morale, Winston Churchill personally involved
himself in the prevention of "Musa Dagh."
Minasian writes, "The future World War II prime minister ‘was very worried
because he felt it was important to have the Turks as allies when war came."
The British representative, Lord Tyrell, conceded: "Were these normal times,
no one on the British Board of Censors would ban a film of "The Forty Days
of Musa Dagh," but in consideration of the world situation in 1939, the
times are different."
In tandem with the proverb, "No good deed goes unpunished," Minasian asks if
it is more just to call for unity or an even greater time to call a spade a
spade, when actions are assured to cause controversy.
A dogged hero who emerges from the story in support of the Armenians is
legendary producer and Jewish-American Irving Thalberg.
Minasian writes that "When Mayer refused to carry the "Musa Dagh" fight to
the State Department or appeal the Hays Office ruling on Sinclair Lewis’ "It
Can’t Happen Here," Thalberg snapped, ‘We’ve lost our guts, and when that
happens to a studio, you can kiss it goodbye.’"
Later chapters introduce the personality and story of John Kurkjian, the
Armenian-American immigrant who beat the odds of politics and poverty to
forge his dream of owning the rights to "Musa Dagh" and attempting to roll
snowballs through hell in getting it made on film.
Kurkjian’s story is one of idealism and self-sacrifice-perhaps one of
Hollywood’s last unknown tales of quixotic woe. Kurkjian spent his life’s
hard-earned fortune to further what is universally regarded as a great piece
of the Armenian artistic legacy, yet found no Armenian backer to his
efforts. In a last ditch effort to compensate his investments and place
"Musa Dagh" in a more flexible legal domain for future filmmakers, Kurkjian
made the 1982 film version on a financial pittance that today would have a
slightly higher budget than "The Blair Witch Project" did.
Sylvester Stallone has shown vested interest in making a big-budget movie
version of "Musa Dagh," as was originally intended. Stallone and his backers
should be supported in their endeavor.
What resonates most with Minasian’s "Musa Dagh" is the hypocrisy of the
American government, the genuine American-immigrant solidarity that was
shown Armenians by the Jewish, Italian and Greek film community, and the
Achilles heal that what began as an epic of persecution by those outside the
Armenian community has thus far been noted as a story of internal
self-sabotage and disunity.
—————————————- ————————————————– ———-
7. Poetry
THORNBUSH
I approached
A rose in an alien garden
To stroke and smell
Its radiant essence
As I came close
To touch the velvet
Of its petals
It pierced my hand
With its thorn.
Forlorn,
I came to you
My heart on my sleeve,
Seeking solace and
Perhaps a smile.
And my heart was stabbed
By your icy scorn.
By Tatul Sonentz
June 26, 2007
***
NOCTURNAL LONGING
It is night. I miss you so,
Your subtle silence, searing charm,
So alluring and so calm
Like no other in this world.
It is night. I miss you so,
It seems all lights have gone out
Lest I go forth and find you –
Or perhaps, to reach you in stealth.
It is night, I miss you so,
Your serene eyes, flaming hair,
To behold unseen, and mute,
With no words, no dispute.
It is night, I miss you so,
A single touch, all lights will bloom,
And the next one can make the sun
Come out and rise above the gloom.
Yet, it is night, and I miss you so.
By Varand
Translated by Tatul Sonentz
***
(c) 2007 Armenian Weekly On-Line. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.ar
www.armeniatree.org.
www.panarmenian.net