EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OF OPPOSITIONIST JAMANAK-YEREVAN SENTENCED TO FOUR YEARS IN JAIL
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Sept 9 2006
Aram Babajanyan, editor-in-chief of an opposition newspaper Jamanak
Yerevan, was sentenced to four years in jail on a decision passed by
Yerevan City Court, APA reports.
The court found him guilty in evasion of military service. Public
Prosecutor Janna Kotikyan claimed the editor-in-chief had faked
documents to evade military service. But, the court considered this
charge groundless and found Aram Babajanyan guilty for draft evasion,
but not forgery. His lawyers will soon appeal against the decision.
Armenian media rate the arrest of Aram Babajanyan as persecution of
freedom of expression in the country.

TURKEY TORN OVER AUTHOR’S TRIAL
Calgary Sun, Canada
Sept 10 2006
Pregnant novelist faces trial of ‘insulting’ nation for writing
on genocide
ISTANBUL, Turkey — Elif Shafak, one of Turkey’s leading authors,
is about to have a baby — and go on trial.
The reason for this strange conjunction of joy and foreboding is
her new novel, The Bastard of Istanbul, which has exposed her to a
charge of “insulting Turkishness” because it touches on one of the
most disputed episodes of her country’s history — the massacres of
Armenians during the final years of the Ottoman Empire.
A University of Arizona literature professor, the 35-year-old Shafak
divides her time between Tucson and Istanbul. She sought a postponement
of her trial, set for Sept. 21, until after her first child is born,
but was refused.
She could get three years in prison, though similar trials of other
Turkish writers have usually folded on technicalities and no one has
gone to jail.
“I think my case is very bizarre because, for the first time, they
are trying fictional characters,” said Shafak.
The case has broad ramifications, highlighting a rising wave of Turkish
nationalism and the whole question of whether Turkey, a Western ally
and NATO member, should be admitted to the liberal, democratic European
Union — something the Bush administration supports.
Turks who long for EU membership worry trials of writers are setting
back their cause. But nationalists such as Kemal Kerincsiz, one of
the lawyers suing Shafak, say Turkey shouldn’t have to forsake bedrock
convictions — for instance, that there was never any Armenian genocide
— just to please Europe
The Bastard of Istanbul deals with taboos — domestic violence and
incestuous rape — that are rarely discussed in this conservative,
predominantly Muslim country.
But it is what her Armenian-American characters say that has landed
Shafak in court.
Shafak’s book has sold 60,000 copies, a best seller by Turkish
standards, and will appear in English next year.

WON’T THE REPUBLICAN PARTY REGRET?
Lragir.am
11 Sept 06
The Republican Party will not regret having accepted Serge Sargsyan and
his company to the political party, said Tigran Torosyan, the speaker
of the National Assembly, reports the news agency ARKA September
11. “The Republican Party has not made such a decision so far that
it regretted later. I think this time it will not regret either,”
said Tigran Torosyan. He said that the membership has two aspects
for the political party: a new opportunity and a new challenge. “So
far the political party has succeeded in overcoming this,” added the
speaker of the National Assembly.

U.N. ADOPTS GLOBAL COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY
PanARMENIAN.Net
11.09.2006 13:33 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan welcomed the
adoption of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy by the General
Assembly. “I commend Member States for developing and agreeing to a
comprehensive strategic framework to counter terrorism. In doing so,
they have resolved to take concrete actions to address the conditions
conducive to the spread of terrorism, prevent and combat terrorism in
all its forms, and strengthen the individual and collective capacity
of States and the United Nations to do so — all while ensuring
the protection of human rights. I congratulate the President of the
General Assembly and his two co-chairs — Ambassador Vanu Gopala Menon
of Singapore and Ambassador Juan AntonioYañez-Barnuevo of Spain —
for leading the membership to this historic achievement.
The upcoming fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks of 11
September 2001, serves as one of many solemn reminders of the
gruesome and unjustifiable consequences of terrorism all over the
world. I urge all Member States to honor the victims of terrorism
everywhere, by taking swift action to implement all aspects of
the strategy. May today’s agreement demonstrate the international
community’s unwavering determination to defeat terrorism,” he said,
reported U.N. communication unit.
–Boundary_(ID_Bfuy6sTCpaYYchPDXAAh7A)–
From: Baghdasarian

KARABAKH: PACE HIGHLIGHTS PEACEFUL RESOLUTION ONLY
PanARMENIAN.Net
11.09.2006 13:57 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “It’s inadmissible for members of the Council
of Europe, which undertook peaceful co-existence as a basis,
to experience a conflict like the Nagorno Karabakh one,” President
of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Rene van der
Linder said. He voiced hope that the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan
with the assistance of the Council of Europe and other international
organizations will proceed with the dialogue and achieve a final
peaceful resolution. “Our aim is to render the essential assistance
in order to prevent any opposition between two members of the CoE,”
he said.
“Even if provided by law and political defense expediency, a CoE
member must not unleash war. War is ruled out. We give priority to
a decision that is achieved by peaceful means only, via dialogue and
negotiations. If either of the sides launches war, it will bring to
serious discussions in the PACE and the membership of the state in
the Council of Europe will be questioned,” the PACE President said,
reported Trend new agency.

NKR SPEAKER MET WITH DELEGATIONS OF SOUTH OSETIA AND TRANSDNYESTR
Azat Artsakh, Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
09 Sept 2006
On September 4 NKR Speaker Ashot Ghulian met with the delegation of
the Republic of South Osetia, Deputy Foreign Minister Alan Pliyev
and Deputy Minister of Defense and Emergencies Ibrahim Gassiyev. The
delegation visiting NKR on the 15th anniversary of NKR thanked
for hospitality and emphasized that relations between the two
republics are becoming more frequent, which enables development of
cooperation. The speaker of the NKR National Assembly Ashot Ghulian
expressed willingness to extend cooperation between Stepanakert and
Tskhinvali, namely on the level of parliaments. Besides, the future
visits were outlined. Vahram Atanessian, chair of the Committee of
Foreign Relations and Arpat Avanessian, chair of the Social Committee
were present. On September 5 Ashot Ghulian met with the delegation
of the Moldavian Republic of Transdnyestr, Ljubomir Ribyak, chair
of the Committee of External Relations and Sergey Simonenko, deputy
head of the Department of External Relations of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. The speaker of the National Assembly thanked the
guests for arriving from Tiraspol to take part in the celebration,
and emphasized that such visits greatly foster relations between
the two countries. During the talk relations between the two states,
namely parliamentary ties were discussed.
Yuri Hairapetyan, chair of the State and Legal Committee and Semion
Afiyan, senior official of the NKR foreign ministry were present at
the meeting.
Press Secretary Of The NKR Speaker

FINALLY A BOOK ABOUT … AN ARCHITECT’S CULT
Maclean’s, Canada
September 11, 2006 / September 18, 2006
Frank Lloyd Wright was more than an influential architect: with his
third wife he headed an exclusive community of live-in apprentices that
behaved not unlike a cult. The Fellowship recounts how the imperious
Wright, aided by his aggressive wife and a weird Greek-Armenian mystic,
created some of his greatest buildings such as Fallingbrook and the
Guggenheim, while manipulating the romantic and even sexual lives of
his live-in apprentices.

BOOKS: MARCH OF HORRORS: TRUTH IS THE FIRST WEAPON AGAINST GENOCIDE
by Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Weekly Standard
The Weekly Standard
September 11, 2006 Monday
Terrible Fate
Ethnic Cleansing in the Making
of Modern Europe
by Benjamin Lieberman
Ivan R. Dee, 416 pp., $27.50
Ethnic cleansing has changed the face of Europe. In 1913 Salonika was
a multicultural city with more Jews and Muslims than Greek Orthodox
Christians. By the middle of the 20th century it was a Greek city with
virtually no Jews or Muslims. Until the beginning of the 20th century,
Macedonia had been home to both Bulgarians and Greeks. In 1916 Greeks
fled. At the beginning of the 20th century the western sectors of the
Russian empire were heavily populated by Jews, who had lived there
for centuries. Within a few decades virtually no Jews lived in these
areas, or in many other parts of Europe.
The Polish port city of Gdansk was once a German city. Little, if any,
of the German presence is felt there today. Izmir used to be home to
a substantial Greek population. It no longer is. In eastern Turkey
there are scores of towns and villages once populated by millions
of Armenians. The Turks expelled them in acts of unprecedented
intensity. In what was the Austro- Hungarian Empire an exceptionally
diverse mix of peoples once lived. Little of that diversity is still
evident.
These changes were the result not of natural population movements but
of brutal actions, now termed ethnic cleansing. This is the subject
of Benjamin Lieberman’s compelling book.
What motivates neighbor to brutally turn on neighbor? It may be
conflicting languages, religions, or national identities. Some
attackers consider it a chance for personal gain: Never underestimate
the lure of looting, or deriving perverse pleasure from driving
neighbors from their homes. There is yet another factor: history,
or more properly put, the rendition of history to which one portion
of the population has been exposed. While these stories of betrayal
and injustice may be true, others are greatly exaggerated or false.
As Lieberman demonstrates, ethnic cleansing feeds upon itself. As
the century progressed it became an increasingly familiar response to
political situations. People knew it, and considered it a legitimate
means of solving their perceived problems.
While the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust are probably the best
known of the century’s atrocities, neither is a template for ethnic
cleansing, which has generally been used by weak governments to
deflect attention from genuine problems. In contrast, the Holocaust,
the Armenian genocide, and, for that matter, Stalin’s treatment of
a host of minorities, were conducted by authoritarian regimes at the
height of their power.
The Holocaust is certainly not a template because, generally, ethnic
cleansing’s objective is the removal of a segment of the population
through deportations, population transfers, and forced migration. The
perpetrators know that the result of these actions could be death,
even on a massive scale. However, their objective is not murder. In
contrast, Nazi Germany chased down every Jew it could find in order
to murder them. They did so even when the men and materiel used for
the killing could have been better deployed elsewhere.
The new Jewish Museum in Rome contains a letter written on a crumpled
piece of paper by a Jew as he was being deported from the Italian
capital. It is dated May 20, 1944. Rome was liberated on June 4th. As
the Allied forces were on Rome’s doorstep, the Germans, rather than
throw all available resources to repelling the enemy, were deporting
Jews to Auschwitz. The letter writer never returned.
How might ethnic cleansing be repaired and prevented in the future?
Unless refugees are returned in short order to their homes, the chances
for resettlement are very poor. If they do return, there must be local
reconciliation projects, economic development, legal proceedings,
and effective guarantees of security. Those who have committed these
acts must be apprehended and tried in the appropriate legal setting.
Lieberman believes that historians from both sides of the conflict
must work together to create an accurate historical record. It may
well be research by historians–Turkish historians in particular–that
will compel Turkey to end its genocide denial. As Turkish historians
explore what their country did, it will become increasingly difficult
for the government to continue to hide behind historical fictions. But
it is not sufficient, Lieberman notes, for the historians to conduct
research. The broader public will have to accept its findings. Once
that happens, the policymakers will have no choice but to follow in
their wake.
Germany’s postwar entry into the “family of nations” was hastened by
its strategic geographic importance in the Cold War. However, that
reentry would not have been as swift or complete had Germany not openly
acknowledged and made amends for the unspeakable horrors committed by
both the Nazi leaders and millions of Germans during World War II. Its
willingness to face its past was certainly not complete. Perpetrators
were given light sentences or never prosecuted. Slave laborers found
it difficult to receive compensation. Nazi-era judges continued in
their posts. Medical doctors who participated in gassing experiments
went on to distinguished careers in Germany.
These failings notwithstanding, Germany did not shrink from
acknowledging the deeds it had committed and making some restitution
for them. This certainly facilitated the healing process.
This is a painful book to read. Many people will recoil from the
repeated tales of looting, physical persecution, and death. That
would be a mistake. The only hope for an end to this terrible march
of horrors is for people–particularly Europeans–to understand and
acknowledge it. As Lieberman notes in his conclusion, “arriving at
a new understanding of history” will not resolve all problems, but
it will increase the chances that different groups will be able to
live in peace together.
Deborah E. Lipstadt, professor of Holocaust Studies at Emory, is
the author, most recently, of History on Trial: My Day in Court with
David Irving.

JOLLY GOOD FELLOWS: THE GURDJIEFF SECT, SEXUAL POLITICS AND OTHER REVELATIONS FROM TALIESIN’S GLORY YEARS
By Ron McCrea The Capital Times
The Capital Times (Madison, Wisconsin)
September 8, 2006 Friday
ALL EDITION
Just when you think the last word has been written about the life and
times of architect Frank Lloyd Wright, a book like “The Fellowship”
appears.
This new blockbuster cannot be good news for the senior fellows and new
arrivals now struggling to rebuild the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation
and its school of architecture.
But it could help tourism.
Cultural sociologist Roger Friedland and historian-architect Harold
Zellman have packed plenty of sex and surprises into 603 pages, while
pretty much avoiding the cheap, tell-all hatchet job and settling
of scores.
This book has a lot of news.
Some of it is steamy — the chapter titled “The Sex Clubs” only begins
to describe the sexual intrigues of the community that one woman said
“made Peyton Place look like Utah.”
Olgivanna Lloyd Wright, Wright’s last wife, micromanaged the romances
and couplings of the fellowship, begun in 1932, in part to keep
everyone on the reservation.
She made some gay men marry straight women. She sent some couples
with children away and tried to pay others to have abortions. She
encouraged what came to be called the “merry wives of Taliesin”
to sleep with unattached straight men. “I had them all,” bragged one.
Olgivanna was not a stranger herself to gay love affairs, having had
one with literary editor Jane Heap, one of Armenian mystic Georgi
Gurdjieff’s “women of the rope,” a group of lesbian disciples. At
Taliesin, with not enough women to go around, Olgivanna encouraged
the young men to try gay sex, on one occasion lining up apprentices,
pairing them up, and sending them out into the Arizona desert to
experiment.
The important role of gay men in sustaining and advancing the fortunes
of Taliesin and Frank Lloyd Wright — it was Edgar Kaufman Jr. who
paved the way for Fallingwater, for example, and Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer
who established the priceless archives — is one of the major pieces
of news in “The Fellowship.” The authors give Madison’s own Jack
Holzhueter credit for helping to develop this section.
But if Wright was not homophobic, he could be racist (exploding when
he learned that Paul Robeson had been permitted to visit Taliesin)
and anti-Semitic (once suggesting that Taliesin might become known as
“Talestine”).
He also could be violent to women and neglectful of children; the
Wrights’ own daughter, Iovanna, was still unschooled and illiterate
at age 9.
But he was a great artist, and, as they say, you wouldn’t want to
live next door to Beethoven either.
The Capital Times figures prominently as a source in “The Fellowship,”
since its founder, William T. Evjue, gave the Wright community a
weekly column and also a weekly radio broadcast on WIBA, which the
paper owned.
But some news in “The Fellowship” didn’t make The Cap Times, like
the fact that four of the fellows were serving time in federal prison
for draft resistance.
And the column did not tell how Gurdjieff and his Institute for the
Harmonious Development of Man insinuated itself into Taliesin and
came to compete with its architectural mission.
Gurdjieff’s agent was Olgivanna, who underwent “voluntary suffering”
as part of her discipleship with him in Soviet Georgia. Gurdjieff’s
toughest test of her character: a demand that she send her 5-year-old
daughter Svetlana away. It broke her heart, but she complied.
Svetlana came to America.
Olgivanna idolized both Gurdjieff and Wright, considering them (and
later herself) bohdisattvas, advanced souls sent to improve the human
race. She drew many of the Taliesin fellows to Gurdjieff’s cause.
Wright’s architecture and “the work” of Gurdjieff, with its sacred
dances and movements, clashed publicly in 1953, when the Gurdjieffians
scheduled a show at Chicago’s Goodman Theater at the same time that
other Wright apprentices were feverishly preparing a major show of
Wright’s work at New York’s Museum of Modern Art.
Olgivanna demanded that two dancer-architects come back from New York
for practice in Chicago and tried to snag an accompanist-architect
as well. The dancers went, but the accompanist refused.
Wright admired Gurdjieff and even allowed Iovanna to study with him
in Paris. But he drew a line. “You are not going to turn this into
a Gurdjieff Institute,” he told Olgivanna. “Not while I am alive.”
Wright died on April 9, 1959, just short of his 92nd birthday.
The authors note that when her daughter Svetlana died in an auto
accident, Olgivanna was immobilized for months, but “After Frank’s
death, she hit the ground running.”
That’s “The Fellowship.” Read all about it.
FIRST SHOWING
What: Ron McCrea will host the first local showing of the new,
60-minute BBC documentary, “Frank Lloyd Wright: Murder, Myth and
Modernism.”
When and where: Thursday, Sept. 28, 7 p.m., Monona Terrace auditorium,
as part of the Frank Lloyd Wright Lecture Series. Free and open to
the public.
NOTES: E-mail: [email protected]
GRAPHIC: “The Fellowship” describes the entanglements of Armenian
mystic Georgi Gurdjieff (above) with the Taliesin architects. CARMIE
S. THOMPSON/THE CAPITAL TIMES Frank Lloyd Wright celebrates his 87th
birthday (he maintained it was his 85th) at Taliesin on June 9, 1954,
with (from left) daughter Iovanna Lloyd Wright, Katherine Lewis, Mrs.
Kenn Lockhart, Edgar Kaufman Jr. and Olgivanna Lloyd Wright.

FOR MANY LEBANESE,; WAR IS NEW REALITY: BUT WILL THEY STAY?
by Katherine Zoepf
New York Observer
September 11, 2006
AMMAN, JORDAN–By now, United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan
is winding down his latest Middle East trip, a grueling 11-day tour
that has had him hop-scotching from Beirut to Tel Aviv to Tehran
to Damascus to Ankara. The trip was organized in order to shore
up regional support for a Security Council resolution that ended
the month-long conflict between Israel and the Lebanese militia,
Hezbollah, and to discuss Lebanon’s reconstruction. So far, the most
concrete result of all this diplomacy appears to be a plan, still not
yet firm, to lift Israel’s naval blockade on Lebanon later this week.
But even if Mr. Annan succeeds and the Israeli blockade is lifted,
it will still come too late for Jack Yacoubian, a Lebanese Armenian
goldsmith that I met in Amman yesterday. Mr. Yacoubian, who is in
his early 30’s, has spent his entire life in Bourj Hammoud, Beirut’s
Armenian enclave. He recently lost his job with a large Lebanese
jewelry company because the Israeli blockade has made it impossible for
his employers to ship their products to overseas customers, mainly in
the Persian Gulf countries; about 170 employees were laid off, he said.
“I have lost my work; I have lost everything,” Mr. Yacoubian said.
“Many of us Armenians are jewelers, and our business has been ruined.
Our boss tried to help us; he paid all of us out of his own pocket
for a whole month, even though he couldn’t sell anything. But after
that it was all over. He finally had to let us go.”
When I met him in Amman’s Queen Alia International Airport early
yesterday morning, Mr. Yacoubian was on his way to seek his fortune
in Bogota, Colombia, where he has friends that he believes may be
able to help him to find a new job. He doubts that he will be coming
back to Beirut any time very soon.
“I will give it two months, three months, in Colombia, and then I
will see what is the situation in Beirut again,” Mr. Yacoubian said.
“But I do not feel very hopeful now. I think that Lebanon has many
difficulties still ahead.”
Whatever promises to aid Lebanon or to support its troops near
the Israeli border that Mr. Annan succeeds in extracting from Arab
leaders this week, rebuilding Lebanon’s economy will take a very long
time. Many highly educated or specially skilled Lebanese like Mr.
Yacoubian, even including some of those who stayed throughout the
war, are now making very painful and personal choices: about whether
to stay in their country, or to seek greater stability and better
opportunities overseas.
Many Lebanese who fled during their country’s long civil war had
returned in recent years, and thanks in large part to their skills,
energies and investments, Beirut had once again become a thriving
Mediterranean capital. But many middle and upper-class Lebanese have
dual passports, and extended families abroad. They have ambitions
for themselves and their families that are not necessarily rooted in
Lebanon, and they have options.
“How many times in your life can you rebuild everything?” a middle-aged
Lebanese woman asked me the other week in Damascus. “Two times,
three times maybe? You rebuild your home, your business two or three
times. And after that maybe you say, that’s enough, and you find a
home someplace else.”
A extraordinarily cosmopolitan people, many Lebanese, particularly the
educated elite, are asking similarly agonized questions these days,
trying to figure out whether the ceasefire will last, trying to decide
whether they can bear to start all over again in the midst of such
a tenuous peace. Loving your country is all very well, they say, but
what good is patriotism in the face of domestic factionalism and the
constant threat of Israeli attack? What sort of crazy devotion would
make an educated, ambitious young person forsake other opportunities
in order to stay in such a place?
In Beirut last week, and among the groups of Lebanese who remain in
Damascus and Amman in recent days, I’ve heard these questions asked
constantly. How the majority will eventually decide to answer them
will have a huge effect on Lebanon’s prospects for a speedy recovery.
Among those Lebanese who have already resolved to stay, there is
naturally some resentment of those who are on the fence. A young
university professor that I met in Beirut last week spoke witheringly
of his privileged students, most of whom had fled to Europe or the
United States with the onset of Israeli air strikes, and some of whom
have said that they don’t plan to return.
“These kids are rich,” the professor told me bitterly. “That means
they have the chance to decide whether or not they are Lebanese.”
For parents, the questions are even more difficult. It is impossible
to spend much time in Lebanon these days without hearing a great deal
about the effects that the war has had on Lebanese children, about the
unusual tearfulness and aggression shown by even normally even-tempered
young children. A Lebanese friend, Patrick, spoke of his decision to
send his 10-year-old daughter to stay with relatives in Europe during
the worst of the fighting, and then his eventual decision to bring her
home again, despite some relatives’ urgings that he educate her abroad.
“These children, this generation, knew nothing of war,” Patrick said.
“When I was a teenager, we used to go out dancing, and we’d hear
explosions. We’d leave the club for a few minutes, pull people out
of the rubble and take them to the hospital, and then go right back
to drink and dance. We didn’t think anything of it. This was normal
life for us.
“I had really thought that for my daughter it would be different,”
Patrick continued. “I felt angry when the fighting began, and I decided
to send her abroad, so that she wouldn’t see this. But I’ve decided
to bring her home. She will start the school year here, whatever
happens. She is Lebanese, and this fighting, these bombings, are her
heritage. She is 10 years old; she is old enough to understand.”