Robert Fisk’s “The Great War For Civilization”: A Thousand Pages OfR

ROBERT FISK’S “THE GREAT WAR FOR CIVILIZATION”: A THOUSAND PAGES OF RAGE
By Robert Bryce

New Socialist Group, Canada
March 13 2006

It’s 1,000 pages of rage. One thousand and thirty eight pages, to be
exact. And Robert Fisk, one of the best, most courageous Westerners
who writes about the ongoing military conflicts in the Middle East,
justifies that rage on every page of his magnum opus, The Great War
for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East.

Fisk, a reporter for the British newspaper, The Independent,
has covered the Middle East for nearly three decades. And he has
brought formidable skills to that assignment. Fluent in Arabic,
and incredibly dedicated to his job, Fisk repeatedly returns to the
very front lines of the war zones, telling the stories of individual
soldiers and their terrors.

Fisk’s willingness to repeatedly visit war zones proves his personal
bravery. He takes readers with him to the battlefields of the Iran-Iraq
War, the First Iraq War, and the Second Iraq War. And his unflinching
descriptions of what he sees are not to be read by the squeamish. In
one visit to a hospital in Baghdad, he writes “I’ll leave out the
description of the flies that have been clustering round the wounds
in the Kindi emergency rooms, of the blood caked on the sheets and
the dirty pillow cases, the streaks of blood on the floor, the blood
still dripping from the wounds of those I talked to.

All were civilians. All wanted to know why they had to suffer.” There
are dozens of other horrifying passages in this book ­descriptions
of bodies blown apart by bomb blasts, of severed heads. There are
vivid descriptions of the torture procedures used by the Iranians,
the Iraqis, the Israelis and others. And by page 1,000 or so when
Fisk catalogs some of Saddam Hussein’s favorite methods of torture,
it becomes too much to tolerate. But there’s a reason for Fisk’s
gruesome recitations: they are graphic (perhaps pornographic) pictures
of warfare and despotism.

Blood and guts aside, Fisk is a graceful, passionate writer. And it’s
the passion that makes this book sing. Fisk plays no favorites. He is
disgusted by the duplicity and mendacity of Western leaders and Arab
leaders alike. His passion is for the ordinary people that he meets.

And he introduces us to many: the survivors of the Armenian genocide,
the Iraqi victims of American bombing attacks, the Palestinian victims
of Israeli missile attacks, the Iranian soldiers who were hit by Saddam
Hussein’s poison gas assaults, the young Algerian who was subjected
to savage torture by Algerian policemen. (Again, vivid descriptions
of the torture methods that are not for the squeamish).

He also provides insights into the views of Osama bin Laden, who Fisk
has interviewed twice.

Fisk’s book is particularly interesting for American readers ­like
this reviewer who seldom see news coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict that tells of the conflict from the Palestinian side. In 1982,
Fisk was among the first reporters to visit the Sabra and Shatila
refugee camps in Lebanon after several thousand Palestinians were
slaughtered by the Christian Phalangists allied with the Israelis. Fisk
repeatedly points out how the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza
has fomented the ongoing conflicts in the region. “There was one
outstanding, virtually unchanging phenomenon which ensured that the
Middle East balance of power remained unchanged: America’s unwavering,
largely uncritical, often involuntary support of Israel. Israel’s
‘security’ or supposed lack thereof became the yardstick for all
negotiations, all military threats and all wars.”

Fisk reserves special disdain for reporters from the western media
outlets and particularly for the New York Times, the paper that led
the American media’s cheerleading in the months before the launch of
the Second Iraq War in 2003. Fisk says that the Times was a “virtual
mouthpiece for scores of anonymous U.S. ‘officials'” all of whom
supported the war. And he shows how newspapers in Britain and the
U.S. trumpeted every bit of fabricated news about Saddam Hussein’s
alleged weapons of mass destruction while ignoring the data coming
from independent analysts which suggested that Iraq did not, in fact,
have any.

Fisk recounts the latest chapters of the West’s ongoing militarization
of the region. “In 1998 and 1999 alone, Gulf Arab military spending
came to $92 billion. Since 1997, the Emirates alone had signed
contracts worth more than $11 billion, adding 112 aircraft to their
arsenal” He tells of meeting arms designer Mikhail Kalashnikov at
an Abu Dhabi arms bazaar in 2001. The man who created the AK-47,
the weapon that has become a symbol of warfare around the world,
was “a small, squat man with grey coiffed hair and quite a few gold
teeth.” And Fisk allows Kalashnikov to tell his version of history,
that he is not to blame for the violence done by the rifle that bears
his name, instead, “I think the policies of these countries are to
blame, not the weapons designers. Man is born to protect his family”

Fisk seems to have been at every important event affecting the Middle
East over the past three decades. He has seen the Israeli invasion of
southern Lebanon, the Iran-Iraq war, the defeat of the Soviet army in
Afghanistan, the Algerian civil war and Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. He
was at the United Nations in February of 2003 to hear Secretary of
State Colin Powell presented his dubious evidence against Iraq. And
of course, Fisk was in Baghdad a few weeks later when the U.S. began
what he calls “this frivolous, demented conflict.”

The most powerful passage in this book comes on page 378, where Fisk
dismantles the rhetoric being used by the Bush Administration and
other politicians to justify the massive militarization of Iraq and
other regions of the Middle East. Fisk strips naked Bush’s vaunted
“global war on terrorism” by showing how Bush and others are debasing
the language. It’s a passage so powerful that I dearly wish I’d
written it myself. It deserves full quotation:

“Terrorism” is a word that has become a plague on our vocabulary,
the excuse and reason and moral permit for state-sponsored violence
our violence which is now used on the innocent of the Middle East ever
more outrageously and promiscuously. Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism.

It has become a full stop, a punctuation mark, a phrase, a speech,
a sermon, a be-all and end-all of everything that we must hate in
order to ignore injustice and occupation and murder on a mass scale.

Terror, terror, terror, terror. It is a sonata, a symphony, an
orchestra tuned to every television and radio station and news
agency report, the soap-opera of the Devil, served up on prime-time
or distilled in wearingly dull and mendacious form by the right-wing
“commentators” of the American east coast or the Jerusalem Post or
the intellectuals of Europe. Strike against Terror. Victory over
Terror. War on Terror. Everlasting War on Terror. Rarely in history
have soldiers and journalists and presidents and kings aligned
themselves in such thoughtless unquestioning ranks. In August 1914,
the soldiers thought they would be home by Christmas. Today we are
fighting for ever. The war is eternal.

This is not a perfect book. I wished for better attribution and more
footnotes. Fisk helpfully place his footnotes on the page in which
the notes appears, rather than hiding them in the back of the book.

But there are too few footnotes and too few attributions of sources
and quotations. Second, and most obvious, this book is too long.

Better editing could have cut the book by a third and still made it
work. That said, Fisk’s ability to sustain his rage for 1,030 pages
is remarkable and laudable. And for the dedicated readers who finally
reach page 861, they will find Fisk’s personal credo. There he quotes
the Pakistani national poet Allam Mohammed Iqbal, who wrote “Of God’s
command, the inner meaning do you know? To live in constant anger is
a life indeed.”

Fisk’s a man of constant anger. And he directs it toward the
miscreants who have used their violence on the Middle East “ever more
outrageously and promiscuously.” And yet, amidst Fisk’s rage and
righteous indignation lies an unspoken, secular prayer for peace,
a prayer that the violence that has haunted the entire region for
decades might one day be stopped. It’s a long prayer 1,038 pages but
it deserves to be read by everyone interested in knowing the modern
history of the Middle East.

Robert Bryce is the author of Cronies: Oil, the Bushes, and
the Rise of Texas, America’s Superstate. He may be reached at
[email protected].

–Boundary_(ID_2Y7Dgjv MjMMVJuAye4jX1g)–

Fresno: Dokoozlian, former Bulldog player and teacher, dies at 77

Fresno Bee (California)
October 14, 2005, Friday FINAL EDITION

Dokoozlian, former Bulldog player and teacher, dies at 77

Bryant-Jon Anteola The Fresno Bee

Nick Dokoozlian, who played for the Fresno State football team from
1949 to 1951 and later was a member of the Bulldog Foundation, died
Monday of heart disease in Fresno. He was 77.

A three-year starter at fullback and kicker, Mr. Dokoozlian earned
all-conference, Little All-Coast and honorable All-America honors in
his final year. He also was named to the All-Armenian-American team
in 1951.

After football, Mr. Dokoozlian became a viticulturist and worked at
Fresno State for 20 years as an instructor and vineyard manager.

He stayed involved in Fresno State sports while serving on the
Bulldog Foundation board of directors, a fundraising group for Fresno
State athletics.

“The university was really the fabric of his life,” said Mr.
Dokoozlian’s son, Nick Dokoozlian Jr. “He loved football, and he
loved working in the vineyard.

“He had this favorite story he always told how he scored a tying
touchdown with no time remaining, then kicked in the extra point to
win the game.”

Mr. Dokoozlian, who graduated from Dinuba High in 1946, also played
at Reedley College for two seasons and was inducted into the Reedley
College Hall of Fame last year.

During his first year at Reedley College, Mr. Dokoozlian lettered in
football, basketball, baseball and track. He concentrated on football
during his second season and earned a scholarship to UCLA.

But before Mr. Dokoozlian could play at UCLA, he returned home from
Southern California after his father suffered a heart attack. Mr.
Dokoozlian then decided to attend Fresno State.

Smaller schools such as Fresno State at the time granted
junior-college transfers three years of playing eligibility.

“He was one of the hardest guys ever to bring down,” said Paul
Mitchell, a longtime coach, teacher and stadium announcer at Reedley
High who practiced against Mr. Dokoozlian in the late 1940s. “He
either ran over you or was dragging you for several yards.”

Mr. Dokoozlian is survived by Bernadine Dokoozlian, his wife of 491/2
years, and sons Nick Jr. and Jeffrey.

Funeral service is at 10 a.m. Monday at Holy Trinity Armenian Church.
Contact the Yost & Webb Funeral Home for more information at (559)
237-4147.

Armenians Should Squeeze Concessions Out Of Turkey During EUNegotiat

ARMENIANS SHOULD SQUEEZE CONCESSIONS OUT OF TURKEY DURING EU NEGOTIATIONS
By Harut Sassounian; Publisher, The California Courier

AZG Armenian Daily #185
14/10/2005

Turkey-EU

Turkey finally embarked on a journey that it had been anxiously
awaiting for more than 40 years. The long and arduous negotiations
for Turkey’s membership in the European Union officially started last
week and are expected to last 10 or more years.

Armenians are of two minds over the benefits of Turkey joining
the EU. Some of them are of the opinion that Armenia is better
off if its old nemesis is kept under check by EU’s strict code of
conduct. Armenians in this camp believe that a “civilized Turkey”
is more apt to recognize the Armenian Genocide, lift its blockade of
Armenia, and conduct peaceful relations with its neighbors.

Other Armenians believe that Turkey is simply going through the
motions of transforming itself, without having any honest intentions
of doing so.

Besides, these Armenians believe that there are no guarantees that
“an enlightened Turkey” would be more inclined to recognize the
Genocide. Turkey could well become an EU member, and like Britain,
still refuse to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Even worse,
should Turkey not change its denialist policy after joining the EU,
Armenians would be deprived of whatever clout they may have had
in creating obstacles for its EU membership. Furthermore, Turkey
would have by then the largest population among the EU countries,
and thus be entitled to have the largest number of votes in various
EU councils. Turkey could thus block pro-Armenian initiatives and
help pass pro-Turkish and pro-Azeri resolutions in the EU.

Therefore, the time to get any possible concessions out of Turkey is
now, before it joins the EU.

Whether or not Turkey eventually becomes an EU member in 10 or 15
years from now is very difficult to determine in advance. To begin
with, no one really knows with any degree of certainty the domestic
and foreign developments that would shape Turkey’s decisions and as
well as the attitudes of Europeans about Turkey years from now. Here
are some of the factors that could influence the outcome of Turkey’s
EU membership negotiations:

1) The social, economic and political conditions within Turkey that
would impact its government’s desire to make the extensive changes
required by the EU negotiations framework;

2) The stability of neighboring Iraq and the repercussions on
Turkey arising from Iraqi and Turkish Kurds pursuing their national
aspirations;

3) The social, economic and political conditions within various EU
member states, particularly the attitude of their citizens towards the
influx of more foreign workers at a time when they may be suffering
from high unemployment and social unrest;

4) The state of negotiations on the settlement of the Cyprus problem;

5) The clout of the US government in terms of its ability and
willingness to influence the EU on Turkey’s membership;

6) Whether or not more terrorist acts are committed by radical Islamist
groups, particularly in Western Europe;

7) The results of the referendums that are to be held in several
European countries on whether to allow Turkey to join the EU; and

8) The status of Armenian-Turkish relations that are partly linked
to the outcome of the negotiations on the Karabakh conflict.

While Turkey will most probably have to lift its blockade of Armenia,
since “the EU-Turkey negotiation framework” document requires that it
unequivocally commit to “good neighborly relations,” the recognition of
the Armenian Genocide by Turkey is not certain at all. Aside from the
repeated non-binding resolutions adopted by the European Parliament
demanding Turkey’ s recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the EU
itself has not made such acknowledgment a part of its requirements
for membership.

It would be naïve, if Armenians believe that they could block
Turkey’s EU membership because of its non-recognition of the
Armenian Genocide. If several years from now, Turkey successfully
fulfills all EU requirements and settles the conflict in Cyprus, its
EU membership would be just about guaranteed. Armenians should not
expect European countries to rise to their defense, at the expense
of their own self-interests. The Europeans would care about Armenian
issues only when they happen to coincide with or serve their own
national interests.

To be able to squeeze the maximum concessions out of Turkey, Armenia
and the Diaspora would need to make common cause with the majority of
Europeans who are strongly opposed to Turkey’s EU membership. Turkish
officials must realize that unless they sit down at the negotiating
table with Armenians and try to accommodate some of their grievances,
Armenians would work tirelessly for the next 10 or more years to
ensure that Turkey’s membership is delayed indefinitely. It is not in
Armenians’ interest to block Turkey’s EU membership, but to drag it
out as long as possible. The longer the negotiations take, the more
concessions can be squeezed out of Turkey. This is the logic behind
the positions of Cyprus and Greece. Despite the fact that they could
have vetoed the start of Turkey’s EU talks, Cyprus and Greece allowed
the talks to go forward with the aim of extracting concessions from
Turkey during the negotiating process. Had they used their veto last
week, they would have deprived themselves of the opportunity to get
any concessions from Turkey.

The interest of Armenians requires that, on the EU issue, Turkey remain
a bridesmaid, as long as it refuses to pay the dowry to become a bride!

–Boundary_(ID_AtGDPK30A5oGa3ASpByHbA)–

Armenina-Russian Intergovernmental Commission On Cooperation Is TheM

ARKA News Agency, Armenia
Oct 13 2005

ARMENIAN-RUSSIAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMISSION ON COOPERATION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RELATIONS MECHANISM BETWEEN TWO COUNTRIES

YEREVAN, October 13. /ARKA/. The Armenian-Russian intergovernmental
commission on cooperation is the most important relations mechanism
between two countries, the RA President Robert Kocharyan stated
during the meeting with the Russian Co-Chair of the Armenian-Russian
intergovernmental commission on economic and scientific-technical
cooperation Igor Levitin, according to the RA PREsident’s Press
Service. According to the press release, programs on cooperation were
discussed in the course of the meting, and the issues of development
of energy and transport communications were paid special attention.

With regard to re-launching the Abkhaz part of the Georgian railway,
it was noted that the state of the railway and factors necessary
for the reconstruction of the railway are being studied as well as
possibilities of trilateral participation (Russia -Georgia -Armenia)
in the construction work. According to Kocharyan, the re-launching of
the railway will provide new opportunities for cooperation. The sides
touched upon the issue of re-launching of the Armenian enterprises
passed to Russia in the framework of Property for Debt Program.

According to Levitin, the Russian side is also interested in the
quickest re-launching of the enterprises, and a special work group
is formed for this purpose.

ANKARA: Point Of No Return?

POINT OF NO RETURN?

Turkish Daily News
Oct 13 2005

TDN editorial by Yusuf KANLI

Turkey’s chief negotiator in the European Union accession process,
State Minister Ali Babacan, proudly declared on Wednesday that Turkey
has reached a point of no return in its bid for EU membership.

At a time when a leading writer and newspaper editor could face
charges — even sentenced — for “insulting the Turkish identity” by
expressing opinions that might not be shared by the majority people
in this country, it is of course difficult to say that Turkey has
reached a point of no return in its well over 200-year effort to
integrate with the West.

I could not finish any of the novels by Orhan Pamuk. I tried hard,
but I just couldn’t. Perhaps I do not have the minimal intellect
required to understand what he was trying to say, but still, if many
people in this country and abroad love reading his works, I feel
proud that we have a writer of his calibre.

As someone who possibly believes “there is no good or bad advertising,”
he might even have intentionally mentioned in that controversial
newspaper interview that although many Kurds and Armenians had
been killed in this country nobody was talking about it, except
himself. I might not understand his prose, at least thus far, but I am
confident that he knew what reactions his words would stir up in this
country. If he was testing the limits of freedom of expression here,
I must confess it was a clever ploy and he successfully demonstrated
that we have not yet reached the “point of no return” in that sphere.

Pamuk will appear in court on Dec. 16, and we shall see whether
he will face a similar sentence to that meted out to Hrant Dink —
the Armenian-Turkish editor of the bi-lingual Agos weekly newspaper
published in Istanbul — on Oct. 7 only four days after the official
start of the accession talks process on the grounds that he insulted
Turks and “Turkishness.”

Of course, as we keep stressing at every opportunity, legislating
reform is one thing, but implementing that reform is something
else altogether. If the ruling party has sufficient parliamentary
strength, it can even change the Constitution in a very short period
of time. However, when it comes to the implementation of those reforms
and the human factor enters onto the scene, no country can wave a
magic wand to transform the mindset of its people overnight.

Time is needed, and intense efforts are required to achieve the mindset
revolution required to bring into force the required legislation.

The basis of democracy is an awareness that there may be truths other
than your own. Democracy is not just confined to a number of seats in
Parliament. Unless an awareness that governments elected to office
with a majority are primarily entitled to safeguard the minority
views cannot be nurtured, then that regime cannot be a democracy,
but an elected dictatorship.

But simply by witnessing some bad examples, however, we should not give
up. The EU perspective of this country — even if it may not take us
to membership of the bloc one day — is a must in order to sustain
reforms for a better governed, more democratic and more prosperous
Turkey. When all 35 chapters of the accession talk’s process are
completed successfully, we fully agree with Babacan that we will have
a much different Turkey than the one we have today.

The Pamuk and Dink cases will all be forgotten as nasty developments
that happened during the transformation period of Turkey while a new
era of understanding, brotherhood, nationhood and citizenship emerged.

On Wednesday, an Ankara prosecutor further boosted our belief in
the “reform absorption capacity” of this country and nation when
he decided to reject an official demand by the governor’s office in
Ankara to ban gay and lesbian associations.

Yes, unlike many Muslim countries, homosexuality has never been
illegal or criminalized in Turkey, but there is no legislation to
protect gay men and lesbians from discrimination or hostility.

The decision of the prosecutor that the American Psychiatric
Association did not rate homosexuality as a disorder and the words
“gay” and “lesbian” were widely used in daily life and scientific
research, was therefore a landmark move for individual and civil
liberties here.

Have we reached the “point of no return,” as Babacan proudly declared
on Wednesday? I am afraid not. A lot has been done but we still have
a long way to go before we can make such a bold statement.

Confidence Measures, Referendum Needed To Solve Karabakh Dispute:Thi

CONFIDENCE MEASURES, REFERENDUM NEEDED TO SOLVE KARABAKH DISPUTE: THINKTANK

Agence France Presse — English
October 11, 2005 Tuesday 4:23 PM GMT

An influential Western thinktank proposed a package of
confidence-building measures on Tuesday it said should lead to
a referendum on the status of the disputed Caucasus territory of
Nagorno-Karabakh.

The International Crisis Group (ICG) said there remained a risk of a
resumption of large-scale conflict 11 years after a 1994 ceasefire
ended a war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territory that
claimed some 25,000 lives.

“So far, despite progress in the negotiations, the resumption of war
remains as likely as peace,” the Brussels-based group’s European Vice
President, Alain Deletroz, said in a statement introducing a 40-page
report on the dispute.

The measures it proposed include a withdrawal of Armenia-backed
Nagorno-Karabakh troops from districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh
and the renunciation by Azerbaijan of the possibility of using force
to take control of the territory.

The voluntary return of displaced persons would also be a crucial
element, as would investigations of war crimes, under the plan proposed
by the group.

In endorsing such measures, Armenia and Azerbaijan should also agree
the mechanism for an eventual referendum on the territory’s status,
in which only Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians and Azeris would participate,
the ICG said.

The risk of a return to armed conflict was symbolised, the thinktank
said, by a “line of contact” on which are stationed some 18,500
Nagorno-Karabakh soldiers, half of them estimated to be from Armenia,
and 30,000 to 45,000 Azerbaijani fighters.

“Nothing has been done on the ground to build confidence and trust,
demilitarise and demobilise, or resume trade and communications,”
the report read.

Agreement to hold a later referendum “is the crucial ingredient in
a viable peace process,” it continued.

Despite the failure to achieve a settlement, the ICG said both sides
had shown signs of flexibility in recent years that should eventually
enable a final status referendum.

BAKU: Azeri Soldier Reportedly Killed In Armenian Truce Violation

AZERI SOLDIER REPORTEDLY KILLED IN ARMENIAN TRUCE VIOLATION

Lider TV, Azerbaijan
Oct 10 2005

The Armenian armed forces again violated the cease-fire in Agdam
[District] last night, killing an Azerbaijani soldier, Niyamaddin
Ajdar oglu Mammadov.

The enemy was silenced with retaliatory fire. Our correspondent in
Agdam Teymur Zahidoglu reported that Mammadov had been drafted into
the army from the village of Sor Tahnali in Samkir District by the
district’s enlistment office 13 months ago. May he rest in peace.

Shahin Farhat composes “Iran Symphony”

Mehr News Agency, Iran
Oct 9 2005

Shahin Farhat composes “Iran Symphony”

TEHRAN, Oct. 9 (Mehr News Agency) — Iranian composer Shahin Farhat
recently finished composing a work entitled “Iran Symphony” to prove
his patriotism once again. He had previously created “Iranian Lady
Symphony”, “Damavand Symphony”, and “Persian Gulf Symphony” in this
genre.

Shahin Farhat (photo: Mandegar
“I began writing the symphony last Noruz (Iranian New Year, which
begins on March 21). It abstractly demonstrates bittersweet events
our country has experienced over history,” Farhat told the Iranian
Students News Agency (ISNA) on Saturday.

“With a genuine Iranian theme, the symphony has been written in four
movements taking 40 minutes. The first and second movements have an
exciting and fast rhythm, the third movement is mellow, and the
ending reminds one of triumph and victory,” he explained.

“I have asked Ali Rahbari (Tehran Symphony Orchestra conductor) to
perform the symphony, and he has welcomed the idea,” Farhat said.

According to Farhat, the Iranian Academy of Arts will sponsor the
performance. He had previously said that he might be persuaded to
give it to the Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra because of technical
limitations in Iran for the performance and recording of orchestral
and symphonic works.

Farhat’s Persian Gulf and Damavand symphonies were also to be
performed by Iranian conductor Loris Tjeknavorian and recorded in
Iran, but in the end they were performed and recorded by the Armenian
Philharmonic Orchestra.

Farhat expressed satisfaction with the Armenian orchestra’s
performance of the symphony.

Turkey gags journalist over ‘insult’

The Guardian/Observer, UK
Oct 9 2005

Turkey gags journalist over ‘insult’

Just as the EU opens talks with Turkey over its application to join
the European Union comes a reminder that the freedoms the British
press takes for granted are not always extended to its Turkish
equivalent.

Last Friday, a Turkish court gave an Armenian-Turkish journalist a
six-month suspended prison sentence for ‘insulting Turkish identity’
in an article he wrote.

The issue of freedom of speech has dogged every stage of Turkey’s
efforts to join the European Union. While the EU agreed this week to
start entry talks with Turkey, such court cases are likely to hinder
Ankara’s progress toward full membership.

The Istanbul court found Hrant Dink, the editor-in-chief of the
bilingual Turkish and Armenian weekly Agos newspaper, guilty of
‘insulting and weakening Turkish identity through the media’ in an
article he wrote last year.

‘Whether the sentence was for one day or six years, it doesn’t
matter. The important thing, and what saddens me, is that I was
sentenced. I did not commit this crime,’ Dink told Reuters.

The article he wrote called on the Armenian diaspora to reject the
anger they felt against Turkey. ‘Forget insulting the Turkish
identity, I said to Armenians “let go of your enmity toward Turks”,’
Dink said.

The journalist, who founded the Agos newspaper in 1996, said that he
would appeal against the court’s verdict and take the case to the
European Court of Human Rights if necessary.

‘If I don’t get a result, I will not stay with the people I have
supposedly insulted,’ he said. ‘I will leave the country.’

Venice Biennale: Be Careful What You Wish For

Art in America
September 2005 Issue

Venice Biennale: Be Careful What You Wish For.

By Marcia E. Vetrocq

Despite the unprecedented appointment of two women as visual-arts
directors, the 2005 Biennale is a cautious affair, marked by close
administrative oversight and curatorial temperance. More garden party
than free-for-all, the event just might leave some visitors nostalgic
for the undisciplined–and occasionally spectacular–displays of years
past.

After the satanic heat and Babylonian excess of the last Venice Biennale
preview, the survivors of 2003 sounded downright catechistic when
reciting their common hopes for this year’s edition: greater thematic
coherence, a more restrained roster of artists, shorter entry lines,
fewer on-your-feet screening marathons and–admittedly beyond
bureaucratic determination–less punishing temperatures in which to
tackle a citywide event that has become a test of time management and
physical endurance. Meteorological prayers were answered in full, but,
as if by the malign volition of a devil who corrupts each wish even as
he grants it, the desired clarity and numerical abstemiousness (91
artists in the international group shows compared to 380 in 2003) became
the attributes of an exhibition that is all but purged of risk and
surprise. Well-groomed, responsible and as eager to please as a new
suitor, the 2005 Venice Biennale serves up contemporary art (and some
less-than-contemporary art) that is market wise, celebrity conscious and
chary of offending. That the exhibition comes wrapped in a
self-satisfied mantle of better-late-than-never feminism is cause for
some dismay.

It’s necessary, of course, to distinguish between the presentations in
the national pavilions, which are determined by each participating
country, and the large international group shows, which are curated by
visual-arts directors appointed by the administrative board that
oversees the event. Yet throughout all the sections this year, there
prevails a reassuring air, attributable in part to the sheer familiarity
and even seniority of many of the participants. For example, four of the
national pavilions that claim a hefty share of the limelight are
showcasing high-profile artists age 60 or older, with Prance, Great
Britain, Spain and the U.S. presenting, respectively, works by Annette
Messager, Gilbert & George, Antoni Muntadas and Ed Ruscha that are
unlikely to arouse any controversy. An almost deferential atmosphere
permeates the two international shows as well, thanks to the relatively
high number of well-known (and some deceased) artists, and to the
inclusion of a fair number of works that have already garnered critical
attention.

For this outing, the visual-arts directorship saw its first joint
appointment, that of Maria de Corral and Rosa Martinez, whose
nationality (Spanish) and gender (female) are likewise unprecedented in
the organization’s history. Installed in and outside the mazelike
Italian pavilion in the Giardini, de Corral’s show of 42 artists, “The
Experience of Art,” is dedicated to mapping the terra firma of art
today. The presence of Marlene Dumas, Gabriel Orozco, Rachel Whiteread,
Cildo Meireles, Dan Graham and other landmark figures is reasonable if
not stirring, while the inclusion of Francis Bacon, Philip Guston, Agnes
Martin and Juan Munoz arguably carries the enterprise too far into
retrospection. Martinez’s “Always a Little Further,” a presentation of
works by 49 individuals and teams that is intended to be the more
forward-looking of the two shows, occupies the expansive spaces of the
Arsenale, the past home of “Aperto,” “Utopia Station” and other edgy or
youthful manifestations. Yet Martinez’s roster inexplicably includes
Samuel Beckett and Louise Bourgeois–inspirational, yes,
up-to-the-minute, no–along with Jimmie Durham, Olafur Eliasson, Mona
Hatoum and others who might have easily been at home in de Corral’s
overview of contemporary art’s establishment.

Both group exhibitions include good works, but the overwhelming
impression is of a project of confirmation spiced with a bit of novelty,
rather like the audience-survey-driven programming of summer repertory
theater. Some of the responsibility for this pervasive caution, perhaps
the lion’s share, rests with Davide Croff, the current president of the
Biennale’s board [see “Front Page,” Oct. ’04]. Croft took the
step–previously the prerogative of the visual-arts director–of
articulating the Biennale’s prudent theme, which he then entrusted to de
Corral and Martinez. Moreover, for the first time the board named the
directors of two successive biennali, with Robert Storr’s appointment
for 2007 preempting a second outing by de Corral and Martinez. The board
further determined that Storr would be enlightened by the collected
wisdom of veteran biennial and Documenta curators and other high-profile
art professionals, a group of whom have been invited to Venice for a
summit in December.

One recalls past editions directed by Achille Bonito Oliva, Jean Clair
and Harald Szeemann as expressions of strong and compelling, though
certainly not infallible, curatorial vision. Francesco Bonami’s 2003
extravaganza, engorged and unfocused, seems to have been the last straw,
the Heaven’s Gate of biennali. The potential consequences of the
administration’s clipping the director’s wings and casting a net of
circumspection over all operations were nearly ignored in last summer’s
stir over the superficially radical step of appointing de Corral and
Martinez. But in truth, the designation of a woman or women to direct
the Biennale was so belated, the curators’ resumes are so long and
distinguished, and the outcome, after all, is so mainstream, that this
appointment really has caused no more of a ripple than, say, last year’s
casting of Denzel Washington in the wan remake of The Manchurian
Candidate: the public, as they say, was ready for it.

Grrrrrrl Power and (A Few) Bad Boys

De Corral and Martinez open each section of the international show with
an assertive graphic display: a digitally printed vinyl mural (called a
“wall tattoo” in the catalogue) by Barbara Kruger on the facade of the
Italian pavilion, and enormous posters by the Guerrilla Girls in the
Arsenale. Thus we enter, lashed by the irony of one (“YOU MAKE HISTORY
WHEN YOU DO BUSINESS”; “ADMIT NOTHING. BLAME EVERYONE”) and prodded by
the sarcasm of the others (“Where are the women artists of Venice?
Underneath the men”). Two ceiling-hung pieces by younger women follow
the works of the veteran feminists. Above the entrance foyer of the
Italian pavilion is suspended Monica Bonvicini’s Blind Shot (2004), a
menacing-looking but ultimately pointless jack hammer that cycles on
like a thunderous automatic weapon every two minutes or so. In the
Arsenale is Joana Vasconcelos’s The Bride (2001), an enormous teardrop
of a chandelier that proves, upon inspection, to be made of tampons
(14,000 of them) on a steel armature.

Contributing to the Biennale’s current of feminist triumphalism–the
title of Pilar Albarracin’s flamenco video, I Will Dance On Your Grave,
may say it best–are the unprecedented numerical strength of women
artists in both shows (less remarked upon is the equally dramatic spike
in the representation of artists from Iberia and Latin America) and the
awarding of three of the Biennale’s four Golden Lions to women artists.
Kruger received the award for lifetime achievement, and Annette
Messager, the first woman to represent France in Venice, was cited for
the outstanding national pavilion. The Golden Lions reserved for the
international show were apportioned between the two sections. Germany’s
Thomas Schutte, in de Corral’s survey, was recognized for his supremely
accomplished ensemble of framed engraved heads and pedestal-borne
metamorphic figures, the latter acquiring supplemental gravitas from the
adjacent hanging of Francis Bacon’s tortured anatomies. Regina Jose
Galindo, a Guatemalan artist from Martinez’s roster, was declared the
best participant under 35 for her viscerally political performance
videos.

As a feminist declaration, however, much of this feels more wishful and
nostalgic than pungent and present. Posters by the Guerrilla Girls, a
20-year-old collective (“fighting discrimination with facts, humor and
fake fur since 1985”) tick off a series of distressing statistics (fewer
than 40 of the roughly 1,240 artworks on view in six major museums of
Venice are by women; only 9 percent of the artists in the 1995 Biennale
were women). But it all seems like so much crabby shop talk when, far
from the spotlight, in the little pavilion of the Republic of Armenia in
Palazzo Zenobio, Diana Hakobian’s three-channel video, Logic of Power
(2005), offers an altogether more sobering and consequential-seeming set
of numbers about deaths resulting from illegal abortions, the depressed
level of women’s wages and the denial of higher education to women in
much of the world. While the Guerrilla Girls have updated their
iconography to include bimbo-of-the-moment Pamela Anderson and the
terror-alert color code system remade into an index of the Bush
administration’s hostility to women, their construction of the gender
problem nevertheless feels dated, and the humor has grown slack.

Is there something in the nature of triumph delayed that makes a bit of
slackness inevitable? Is it possible to match the initial jolt delivered
by Kruger, or by her sister text-messager Jenny Holzer, represented in
the Italian pavilion by a dramatic, Flavinesque corner piece? The punch
line of Vasconcelos’s feminine hygiene fixture seems like a small
“gotcha!” when one thinks of the shocking absorbent armory arrayed by
Judy Chicago in her 1972 Menstruation Bathroom for Womanhouse in L.A.
The videos of Galindo–whom we see shaving her body hair and striding
nude through town, walking through basins of blood and in close-up
footage of her hymenoplasty–strike one as too serf-consciously beholden
to Marina Abramovic, Ana Mendieta and Orlan. Meanwhile, in Runa Islam’s
film Be The First To See What You See As You See It (2004), the
affectless young woman who tentatively coaxes pieces of period china
(tired emblems of women’s domestic entrapment and presumed fragility)
off their platforms to a crash landing is a mere Stepford vandal
compared to the delirious slugger Pipilotti Rist, who demolished the
windows of parked cars with a long-stemmed red flower in an
unforgettable video in the 1997 Biennale. Even Eija-Liisa Ahtila, the
author of tart, tough minidramas probing the psychological and sexual
pressures that bear down on women and families, is represented in the
Italian pavilion by a cloying work, The Hour of Prayer (2005), a
four-screen projection in which a blonde Nordic beauty, grieving over
the death of her fluffy dog Luca, escapes to dusty, crowded Benin, where
the church bell-triggered barking of the lean local mutts becomes a
healing canine ritual.

With the curators showcasing women artists, you can’t resist searching
for constructions of gender in the works of the men they selected. For
example, William Kentridge’s installation in the Italian pavilion’s
elevated gallery is an affecting visualization of two realms of
enchantment–the intimate space of the studio and the vast reaches of
the Milky Way–that pays tribute to the early days of film-making.
Still, the presence in these projections of an elusive nude model/muse
and Kentridge’s imagining of the galaxy as great coiling spermlike
streams invoke the hoary erotic tradition of Courbet, Rodin and Matisse.
More overtly testosterone-fueled is Willie Doherty’s Non-Specific Threat
(2004), a looped game of chicken in which the camera circles an utterly
impassive yet stereotypically tough-looking man. It’s not clear whether
man or camera is the more predatory, since the menacing voiceover–“I
have contaminated you”; “You create me”–could be speaking for either.
Robin Rhode (who may owe something to fellow South African Kentridge for
his halting, low-tech method and incorporation of hand-drawn elements)
is perhaps the most evolved male in de Corral’s show, with his
PBS-friendy videos of children at play. Bruce Nauman remains the baddest
boy on the block with Shit in Your Hat–Head on a Chair, which offers a
thoroughly gratifying lesson in mime abuse. (Did de Corral reach back to
that work from 1990 merely because it’s in the collection of the
Fundacion “la Caixa,” which she directed from 1981 to ’91?)

Some highly caffeinated guy art can be found over at the Arsenale, too,
with John Bock’s obsessive-expulsive installation (the site of a preview
performance on the durable topos of taming a feral child) incorporating
athletic equipment, projectors and battered teddy bears, and the videos
of Blue Noses, a Moscow-based group whose unapologetically sexist antics
with naked girls, baguette phalluses and a mechanical alligator are
displayed on 12 monitors arranged face-up in a circle of cardboard
boxes. For a sharp behavioral alternative, C-prints, videos and garments
on mannequins capture the gender-bending outrageousness of performance
artist and super-size model Leigh Bowery. During the Biennale, Bowery
can be seen as painted by Lucian Freud in a retrospective at the Museo
Correr.

Fundamentally more tame and far too satisfied with its own leering
naughtiness is Francesco Vezzoli’s Trailer for a Remake of Gore Vidal’s
Caligula (2005), which is playing to packed houses in the Italian
pavilion. A steamy come-on for a fictional remake of the legendary smut
chestnut of 1979, the video features Helen Mirren and Adriana Asti (who
appeared in the original) hamming it up with Courtney Love, Karen Black,
Milla Jovovich, Benicio Del Toro, Barbara Bouchet and Vidal himself.
Notwithstanding long-term support received from the Fondazione Prada
(which organized the concurrent collateral show of Vezzoli’s work on
view at the Fondazione Cini), the artist turned to Donatella Versace for
costumes that are the last word in imperial glare. During the preview
days, only Candice Breitz’s videos, Mother and Father (both 2005), came
close to Vezzoli’s in audience draw, and they, too, feature Hollywood
actors and actresses, though the stars are not co-conspirators but
rather the digital raw material of highly edited sequences that mock the
cliches of family life.

Some Politics, Some Installations, Lots of Video

Compared to biennali past, you have to look hard in the Arsenale to
avoid concluding that the world is in pretty good shape, AIDS has been
cured and stability has been achieved in the world’s trouble spots. The
Guantanamo Initiative of Christoph Buchel and Gianni Motti (the latter
also one of four artists representing Switzerland) requires a small
detour to a shipping container parked outside the building. Launched
last year, the documentation-rich project calls upon the Castro
government–which does not recognize U.S. rights to Guantanamo and has
not cashed checks paid on the lease since 1959–to seize the base, with
its controversial military-run prison, and convert it into a cultural
center. For Palabras/Words (2005), within the Arsenale, the Cuban-born
Diango Hernandez arranges a tangle of wires and fallen electrical poles,
a symbol of failed planning and broken promises, through which we view a
projection of vintage news images and a scroll of the names of former
Communist-bloc nations and their leaders. Fidel Castro is the last
intransigent survivor of the lot.

If the Buchel-Motti initiative is quixotic, Emily Jacir’s Ramallah/New
York (2004-05), which juxtaposes footage of the ordinary activities of
small businesses in both cities, is, sad to say, altogether too
reasonable in its plea for mutual understanding. Meanwhile, Gregor
Schneider’s desire to construct a black cloth-draped, metal cubic
structure that resembles the Ka’ba, the centerpiece of Islam’s holiest
shrine in Mecca, is inexcusably naive. Wounded by the Biennale’s refusal
to back his plan (the administration not surprisingly concluded that the
piece, to be sited in the city’s congested tourist heartland, the Piazza
San Marco, could be offensive to Muslims), Schneider is showing a video
in the Arsenale with an animation of his proposal and an explication of
his soft-headed conviction that East and West can find common ground in
their shared preoccupation with simple formal elements (think Tony
Smith’s Die). Schneider seems rather more sulky than idealistic in the
Biennale catalogue, where his six alotted pages have been printed in
solid black.

Kidlat Tahimik, from the Philippines, and Sergio Vega, a Buenos
Aires-born and Gainesville-based artist, offer their own insights into
cultural difference. A favorite of film buffs, Tahimik’s The Perfumed
Nightmare (1977) follows the disillusionment of a young Filippino taxi
driver who dreams of traveling to the American paradise–Florida–to
become an astronaut. Transferred to video, the work is screened in the
Arsenale above an ad hoc installation that incorporates burned “relics”
from the artist’s fire-ravaged studio and some dubious artifacts–like
the statue of a “wind goddess” who faces a headless Marilyn Monroe
statuette with her skirt lifted by the draft from a subway grating–that
gently mock the equivalences people discern across cultures.

Referencing a different paradise, Vega’s hot-hued ensemble comprises a
number of individual objects, environments and photo-and-text-based
pieces that debunk–though not without affection–the centuries-old myth
of Brazil as a tropical paradise. Despite some discordant notes struck
by shantytown views with irate chickens and dogs, the installation is
wholly seductive, with inviting chairs, spongy floor cushions and bossa
nova grooves from vintage LPs. The environment is surely more relaxing
than the other participatory works by Brazil’s Rivane Neuenschwander,
who invites visitors to type wordless love letters on “modified”
typewriters; by the Centre of Attention, a London-based collective that
allows you to recline on a mortuary bier after you’ve scored your own
funeral with music downloaded from the Internet; and by Mariko Mori, who
has dusted off her brain wave interface pod for those in need of a quick
kip–by appointment only.