US State Dept. Briefing: Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
Federal News Service
September 16, 2005 Friday
STATE DEPARTMENT REGULAR BRIEFING
BRIEFER: ADAM ERELI, DEPUTY SPOKESMAN
LOCATION: STATE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING ROOM, WASHINGTON, D.C.
MR. ERELI: Okay. Let me begin with a couple of announcements. First
of all, the United States continues to be deeply grateful for the
generous outpouring of assistance from the international community
in response to the disaster of Hurricane Katrina. As of today,
we’ve received offers of cash, food and technical assistance from
126 countries and 16 international organizations. That assistance
is being distributed on the ground by the dedicated employees of the
State Department and USAID.
To date, USAID has received 40 foreign flights of commodities. They
have transported — or helped transport 86 truckloads of foreign
donated commodities out of the Little Rock Air Force Base totaling
5 million pounds to Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas and Texas.
And the airlift — the NATO airlift of supplies continues. As you know,
it began on September 12th, and it is flying at the rate of one cargo
plane every other day from September 15th through September 23rd.
Finally, I would note that we are assisting representatives of foreign
governments to have access to their consular facilities in New Orleans
and to provide assistance to their foreign nationals in the area,
both in terms of Louisiana where the — and Mississippi where the
disaster hit, as well as, in areas where their nationals have been
evacuated to. And this includes a visit yesterday by representatives
of eight countries to their Consulates General in New Orleans to
retrieve papers and to sort of assess the damage there.
So just an update on our response and our appreciation to — for the
generosity of foreign countries who have helped us and continue to
help us respond to this terrible disaster.
Any questions on that? All right.
Q (Off mike).
MR. ERELI: Yeah?
Q What’s the amount now that has been received by the United States
government?
MR. ERELI: The total amount?
Q Yes.
MR. ERELI: I don’t have that figure for you.
I wanted to let you know that our Ambassador to Afghanistan, Mr. Ron
Newman, will brief the press on the elections in Afghanistan by digital
video conference from Kabul here at the State Department on Monday,
September 19th at 10:00. So those interested should contact our press
office about the details on that. We look forward to that.
And finally, just a little bit of blowing our own horn, I would note
that a team of researchers at Brown University did a survey of 1,600
state and federal websites and determined that the White House and
the State Department had the best — were the one — first and second
best websites of the bunch, so congratulations to those in the White
House and State Department who have put together a great product.
Hope you find it useful.
With that, I will take your questions.
Q Adam, just to follow up on that; best how?
MR. ERELI: They evaluated the websites for quality issues affecting
user experience and a range of factors ranging from audio/video
features to disability access and privacy policy. And the state.gov
website in particular was noted for offering users, quote, “a wide
range of options and services in a refreshingly organized format that
is easy to navigate.”
Yes, ma’am?
Q Another subject. House International Relations Committee yesterday
adopted three resolutions regarding the Armenian genocide issue, and
some people in Turkey suggest the U.S. administration didn’t do much
to prevent this outcome, other than a letter by the assistant secretary
of State — (inaudible) — the chairman of the International Relations
Committee. The resolutions are on the way to House floor. What is your
position? And are you going to try to prevent them to be adopted by
the House floor?
MR. ERELI: Let’s be clear. The United States policy on this issue
hasn’t changed. The president made clear what the administration’s
policy is in a statement on April 24th, where he said that the United
States mourns the forced exile and annihilation of approximately 1.5
million Armenians in the closing years of the Ottoman Empire as one
of the great tragedies of human history. The United States actively
encourages scholarly, civil society and diplomatic discussion of the
forced exile and killings of 1915 in order to help all parties come
to terms with these horrific events.
The administration did not support the vote to pass House Resolution
195 and 316, and we, I think, continue to make our position clear
on this. So I wouldn’t — as far as the State Department and the
administration goes, our position remains what it has always been,
and that is that this is not a matter that should be politicized,
this is a matter that needs to be discussed seriously and honestly
and in the spirit of analysis by those involved, or those with a
direct connection to it.
Q Some of the congressmen in the committee have changed their positions
on this issue, citing the Turkish Parliament’s March 1st decision
before the Iraqi war.
For example, Congressman Tom Lantos —
MR. ERELI: I’m sorry, I just don’t want to — I don’t want to —
I’m not going to comment on positions that congressmen take or don’t
take. I’ll leave it to them to speak to their positions, speak to
their views. I can speak for the State Department. I think I’ve given
you our view. I think that view has been communicated to members of
Congress. They are in no doubt about it. And — and that’s pretty
much what I have to say on the subject.
Yes?
Q Syria has strongly rejected the escalation and accusation against
Syria concerning its borders with Iraq. And the Syrian ambassador said
yesterday that it’s an established fact that Syria has done everything
possible within its means to secure her side of the borders. And he
said that we invite Syria — he, as a representative of President
Assad, he said he repeated or — again, he said, we invite the United
States government and Iraqi authorities to immediately engage with
Syria towards finding a solution to the situation in Iraq.
Now, this seems to be pretty genuine and practical enough to replace
rhetoric or statements made against Syria by some people. Is the United
States going to take up Syria’s renewed offer for joint cooperation
on Iraqi borders by the United States and the Iraqi authorities?
MR. ERELI: Look, there’s no — innocent people are getting blown up
in Iraq not because of rhetoric and not because of a lack of desire
for engagement. Innocent people are getting blown up in Iraq because
Syria is allowing its territory to be used by terrorists bent on
sowing murder and mayhem in Iraq. And they’re not going to succeed.
The international community is not going to let this continue to
happen. Why? Because Syria more and more is being recognized as a
destabilizing element in the region. It’s not just about Iraq; it’s
about Iraq, it’s about Lebanon, it’s about the Palestinian Authority,
because there’s a connection between Syria and terrorism and murder
and mayhem in each of these three different areas.
In Lebanon, Syria continues to — continues to, I think, have a
residual presence that doesn’t contribute to the well-being and
welfare of the Lebanese people or the sovereignty of Lebanon.
In Gaza and the West Bank, they continue to have association with
terrorist elements that are bent on sabotaging the peace process and
undermining the peaceful aspirations of the Palestinian people for
an independent state. And they are certainly out of step with the
rest of the world on that.
And in Iraq, Syria continues to — and it’s not just us saying this;
it’s the Iraqis saying this, it’s the international community saying
this — they — there continue to be clear, I think, and indisputable
connections between Syria and Syrian territory and activities in Syria,
under the authority — activities in Syria that the Syrian government
can do something about that are directly connected to the insurgency
in Iraq.
So the question is not is the U.S. and Iraq willing to engage with
Syria. This is something that we have been raising with Syria for
years. Secretary Powell did it. Deputy Secretary Armitage did it.
Assistant Secretary Burns did it. Secretary Rice has been very clear
about it. Deputy — Assistant Secretary Welch has been very clear
about it. Deputy Secretary Zoellick in his trips to Iraq has been
very clear about it. There’s no absence of engagement.
What there’s an absence of is a willingness on the part of the Syrian
government to take actions that is within its capacity to take to
prevent Syrian territory from being used by insurgents and those
that insurgents have recruited from across the region and across the
world to go into Iraq to kill innocent Iraqis and to prevent Iraq
from being a democratic, stable and sovereign state.
Now one has to ask the question: What’s holding — what’s preventing
the Syrian government from doing that? I mean, does Syria not care
that young guys from Yemen or Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan or Iran come
into Damascus airport with a one-way ticket and no job and no place
to stay and then find their way into Syria — into Iraq, where they
strap bombs to themselves and blow themselves up and kill children in
front of — in a market, women and children from a market? I mean,
why does Syria continue to let that happen if — unless there’s a
deliberate decision to do it?
There certainly seems to be a — an unwillingness to take actions to
stop it. And that’s not because we haven’t engaged with them, and it’s
not because there’s some sort of stopping at rhetoric on our part and
not going into concrete action. It’s because the Syrian government,
from one reason or another, has decided that they don’t want to do it.
And our point is — and the point of the Iraqis is — hey, you guys
better make a choice, because the choice you make, whether it’s to
do something or not to do something, has consequences, and serious
consequences.
Q But they seem like they — I appreciate your stating all these
things, but Syria also, on their side — they’re saying the authorities
have took may diplomats and international observers to the borders,
Syrian and Iraqi borders. They showed them how many hundreds of
monitoring posts have been opened.
MR. ERELI: Well, I don’t know what — listen, I don’t know what dog
and pony show the Syrian authorities organized on their borders. But
the fact of the matter is, there are insurgents — the Iraqis have
evidence of this, I think the MNFI has evidence of it — that there
are insurgents who end up in Iraq that — and blow themselves up
and kill people, and that they couldn’t have done it without —
without Syria and Syrian territory playing a critical and necessary
intermediary role.
Q Would you please tell the Arab audience why is the United States
so reluctant in cooperating with Syria —
MR. ERELI: It’s not a question of cooperation —
Q — to monitoring —
MR. ERELI: It’s not a question of cooperation with Syria on the
border. It’s a question of Syria exercising — and Syrian security
forces and Syrian political authority making a decision to act
responsibly and control what goes on in their country. They haven’t
done that.
Q May I ask one more?
MR. ERELI: Yes.
Q The United States has asked Mexico to monitor its borders so the
Mexicans wouldn’t cross the borders. Why are you asking Syria to
monitor the borders on the two sides —
MR. ERELI: I’d say — first of all, look, it’s not just the border
that we’re talking about. You’ll note I’m being very clear; it’s
about Syrian territory as a whole. I talked about Damascus Airport —
I didn’t talk about the border with Iraq — that’s a problem. Another
problem, and if not a bigger problem, is Syrian territory. That’s
number one.
And number two — and this will bring this discussion to an end because
I think I’ve made the points I need to make — I just reject any kind
of comparison between Syria and Iraq and the United States and Mexico.
Next subject.
Q What about from other countries, like Turkey, Iran or Jordan?
MR. ERELI: I think that the — based on what we’ve seen, based on what
the Iraqis have seen, that there is a critical and disproportionate
role that Syria has and that — related to Syria and the insurgency
that needs to be addressed with urgency.
Yeah?
Q Can I change to North Korea?
MR. ERELI: Sure.
Q There’s reports coming out of Beijing now that the sticking point
of the light-water reactor is putting the talks at a stalemate. Are
you still confident that progress will be made?
MR. ERELI: Rather than — rather than provide value judgments, I’ll
give you the facts.
The facts are that we had discussions today with all the parties.
These included a trilateral lunch with the South Koreans and the
Japanese, as well as separate meetings with the Chinese and the North
Koreans. There was also a heads of delegation meeting today, and at
that heads of delegation meeting, the Chinese host presented a new,
fifth draft on a joint statement of principles. They asked all the
delegations to consult with their capitals and return tomorrow with
a response to the fifth draft.
For our part, we are studying the draft, we are — we are talking to
Assistant Secretary Hill and his party, and we are considering our
response and we’ll be back at it tomorrow.
Q Follow-up. Can you give us an idea of what that fifth draft says?
How is —
MR. ERELI: No.
Q — it different from the fourth draft?
MR. ERELI: I don’t really want to comment on it.
Q Does it have anything to do with the water nuclear reactor?
MR. ERELI: Again, I’m not in a position to talk about the draft
itself. I think what we’re all working for is a denuclearization of
the Korean peninsula and a firm commitment to act to achieve that
goal. And hopefully, we can all agree on a common text.
Q Would the United States be willing to accept the principle of a
peaceful Korean water reactor in order to break the stalemate of —
MR. ERELI: I’m not going to get into that. I think you know what our
position is on that. We’ve been very clear about it.
Yeah?
Q On Greece, Mr. Ereli. In your consular information sheet,
the recent one about Greece, you are stating once again, quote,
“Greece’s open borders with Western European neighbors allow the
possibility of terrorist groups entering/exiting the country with
anonymity,” unquote, and generally is presenting Greece as an area
under terrorist threat on a permanent basis. I am wondering why,
since Greece is not an open orchard.
MR. ERELI: Is not a what?
Q Orchard. Farm.
MR. ERELI: Orchard?
Q Yes.
MR. ERELI: Well, I would just note that there’s nothing new in that
statement; that our previous assessments haven’t changed. And I
wouldn’t read anything positive or negative.
It’s simply a statement of what our assessment of the situation is,
and it is consistent with what we’ve said in the past.
Q (Inaudible) — about this issue. Why you don’t mention the
positive things, like that the members of November 17 Terrorist
Organization have been arrested and they’re in prison; Greece had
the most successful Olympic Games from the security point of view,
without any minor incident.
MR. ERELI: I think that that kind of information is in other public
documents, so it’s not something that we don’t acknowledge.
Q And the last one. And since this consular sheet was drafted by your
former ambassador to Greece, Tom Miller, who is working now under a new
capacity as a philanthropist, as the president of an NGO in London,
PLAN — P-L-A-N, and his era is over, why, then, the Department of
State still circulated, as you mentioned, the same, unfair document?
MR. ERELI: Well, I’m sorry. We update these consular information
sheets as necessary, as circumstances change. It’s not related to
a particular individual; rather, it’s an ongoing process of review
and updating as circumstances require. I would look at it in that
perspective, and not tie it to one person or another.
Q So you don’t — you don’t have any — you don’t notice any change
in the recent months —
MR. ERELI: When there’s enough material to justify change, we’ll
change it.
Q So far, there is not any change?
MR. ERELI: No. You’ll have to look on the website and see the last
time it was updated, but —
Yeah?
Q Adam, tonight “Nightline” is going to air a program — specifically
an interview with Hugo Chavez. Of course, the whole controversy with
CBC and Pat Robertson enters into this.
What’s the administration policy, as well as —
MR. ERELI: On what?
Q On Venezuela currently. And also, have you spoken to the OAS
regarding his behavior and his leftward leaning towards Hugo?
MR. ERELI: Nothing new to report on that. I mean, I think you know
what our position on Venezuela is. It’s a country that — it’s
a country that — that we’d like to see cooperate in productive
ways that benefit the hemisphere. Unfortunately, there are a number
issues where they just aren’t doing that, and our policy is to try
to promote cooperation where we can; where we can’t and where they’re
not cooperating or they’re not acting in ways that are — that serve
the interests of the United States, their neighbors in the hemisphere,
then to work to try to redress that.
Assistant Secretary Burns, I think, spoke to the drug issue
yesterday. We’ve spoken to the issue of regional security cooperation
and others. So I think that’s a fair statement of our policy. But you
know, unfortunately, I think a lot of it’s — a lot of discussion is
characterized by outlandish rhetoric as opposed to a sincere desire
to engage on the issues of substance.
Q Do you see this program tonight as a — (off mike) —
MR. ERELI: I haven’t seen — it’s hard to comment on a program that
hasn’t taken place.
Q Right.
MR. ERELI: And I will just state what our policy is and not what is
bandied about on the airwaves.
Yeah?
Q I’m sorry. Can you just come back to North Korea for one second?
MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm. (Affirmative.)
Q Some satellite photos — images have come out that were taken about
five days ago, suggesting that there’s some activity going on at
the Yongbyon facility in North Korea. Is the State Department aware
of those photos? And do you have any concerns that North Korea is
continuing with their program while the six-party talks are going on?
MR. ERELI: Well, we’ve seen — obviously we’re aware of the reports.
I don’t have comment, really, for you on matters related to
intelligence.
Obviously North Korea’s continuing nuclear program is a concern.
We’re worried about it. There are four other parties at the six-party
talks that are worried about it, which is why, I think, we’ve been
working really hard for a really long time to see if we can’t put an
end to it.
Last — yes, sir?
Q At the U.N. session in New York, of course, the Iranians are there.
And aside from the EU-3, were there other countries concerned with
what is occurring with Iran and their development of nuclear power?
MR. ERELI: Well, again, I think we’ve — if you look at what Assistant
Secretary Burns said — I’m sorry — Undersecretary Burns, Nicholas
Burns, said yesterday in his briefing to the press, as well as his
briefing to the press the day before, I think we’ve been saying
consistently for the last several days that we’re hearing the same
thing from everybody we talk to: that Iran’s program is of concern,
that nobody wants to see Iran get a nuclear weapon, that everybody
thinks that Iran needs to resume negotiations with the EU-3, re-
suspend their — re-engage in — re-suspend their ban on enrichment
or their enrichment activity or their activity related to enrichment,
and that there’s, I think, a common view that this is the result that
we all want to achieve.
So there is, I think, based on our discussions, a commonly held view
on that. And frankly, our diplomacy is geared to achieving that end.
The EU-3 have — are engaging with Iran to try to produce it. We’re
supporting them.
Q Do you see a strain in U.S.-Russian relations —
MR. ERELI: I do not.
Q — because of this issue?
MR. ERELI: I do not.
Let’s go to the lady here.
Q Thank you. Secretary Rice did an interview with the New York Post
and said for those who spread atomic weapons, there’s a potential
freeze on their assets.
MR. ERELI: Yeah.
Q Well, I’m just wondering, given the situation at the six- party talks
and also the recent Iranian president’s remarks about sharing nuclear
technology with other countries, would that comment be directed to
a certain country, or it —
MR. ERELI: Well, it’s directed to any country engaged in proliferation
of WMD. And it’s specifically referring to an executive order that
President Bush signed on June 28th that allows the United States to
block or freeze assets of proliferators of weapons of mass destruction
as well as their supporters and prohibit U.S. persons from engaging
in transactions with them. So this is – — you know, it’s a statement
of fact, it’s a statement of U.S. policy that this is our response
to those who seek to proliferate. And I would look at it that way.
Q Concerning the wall of separation on the Palestinian land, I read
your statement yesterday concerning the U.S. policy that objects to
acquisition of Palestinian lands in order to build that wall. You
stated that the United States would not agree to a wall that would be
built on Palestinian land. The United States is vouching to implement
international laws, and the International Court has reinstated its
objection to the building of the wall. On Arab TV screens we have
seen in the last few days mothers crying because they are trying to
get their daughters to elementary schools, but they have to wait
several hours before they can cross that wall that is separating
families and kids from their schools. Could you please tell me what
is the United States trying to do to influence the implementation of
this international law now that concerns the wall and that considers
the wall illegal?
MR. ERELI: The United States has made clear its position that Israel
has the right to defend itself, Israel has the right to take action to
secure its border in response to attacks and infiltrations by those
who commit suicide attacks against its citizens. So we’re not taking
issue with that.
We do make the point to Israel that as they take these measures,
including the wall, that they need to be mindful of a couple of things;
one, that the route of the wall doesn’t take land that is the subject
of negotiation and prejudge those negotiations, and number two, that
the humanitarian impact of their measures be taken into account. And
it’s precisely because the lives of Palestinian civilians and men,
women and children are disrupted in many cases that we make this point
and that we urge the Israelis to consider and take into account and
be responsive to the needs of the Palestinians to move and to live
like normal people in the territory that they occupy.
And so I think we’ve — we’re working hard to strike a balance there
between legitimate defense needs and looking to a future where you’ve
got to negotiate a solution and negotiate a settlement on land under
occupation, and you’ve got — you don’t make innocent people pay for
the crimes of terrorists.
Q Are you doing — I mean, are you — is that on the agenda of the
United States authorities meeting with the Israelis?
MR. ERELI: It’s something that we engage with the Israelis fairly
consistently on, yeah.
Thank you.
Q Thank you.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

MOCK BATTLES MAKE FOR FAST FRIENDSHIP
by Oleg Korupai, Alexander Tikhonov
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
September 16, 2005, Friday
SOURCE: Krasnaya Zvezda, September 13, 2005, pp. 1, 3
TACTICAL EXERCISE OF THE UNITED RUSSIAN-ARMENIAN ARMY GROUP IS
NEARING ITS END
Tactical exercise of the United Russian-Armenian Army Group will be
completed today. The exercise is being run at the Training Center named
after Marshal of the Soviet Union, Ivan Bagramjan, in Armavir, Armenia.
Threat of the Northern invasion gauged as real, the South takes
measures to prevent an aggression against Armenia. Readiness status
of the troops is upgraded. Establishment of Groups NN 1 and 2 of the
United Russian-Armenian Army Group is completed in accordance with the
tactical plans. With the invasion under way, the groups are supposed to
defend vital objects from enemy air raids and attacks and to contain
and destroy the enemy afterwards. Group One sends reinforcements to
the area of the Training Center in order to boost the defense in the
Yerevan direction.
This is the scenario of the Russian-Armenian tactical exercise that
will be completed today. This is the tenth joint exercise run by units
of the friendly armies. The first exercise of the series was run here,
in Armavir, in summer 1995.
As a rule, exercises are run by different units of Groups NN 1 and 2.
Group One includes units of the 102nd Military Base of the Russian
Army Group in the Caucasus in Gyumri, motorized infantry and artillery
regiments of the Armenian national army. Colonel Andrei Kholzakov,
commander of the Russian military base, commands the Group. Group Two
includes units of the 5th Army Corps of the Armed Forces of Armenia and
the motorized infantry regiment of the 102nd Military Base commanded
by Lieutenant Colonel Andrei Chernichenko.
Corps Commander Major General Valery Grigorjan commands the group.
Lieutenant General Mikhail Grigorjan commands the united group. Major
General Alexander Zinoviev, Commander of the Combat Control Team for
the Russian Troops in Armenia, is the Russian second-in-command of
the United Russian-Armenian Army Group.
The exercise in question mostly involved units of Group 1. It was
run in three stages.
Stage One included a drill of the United Group Command, Stage Two
a command exercise of Group One, and Stage Three (joint tactical
regimental exercise) involved motorized infantry regiment under Colonel
Menyakin (the 102nd Military Base) and the 545th Motorized Infantry
Regiment of the 5th Army Corps of the Armenian national army. Units
and formations of the Russian and Armenian armies fortified motorized
infantry battalions of the United Russian-Armenian Army Group involved
in this phase of the exercise.
Units directly controlled by the United Group Command drilled
cooperation (the matter concerns the 15th and 121st AF bases of
the Armed Forces of Armenia and the AF base of the 102nd Russian
Military Base).
United Army Group Commander Grigorjan says that interaction and
cooperation between units of the Russian and Armenian armies are
superb, enabling the group command to confidently tackle all and any
tasks. Grigorjan made a special emphasize on the defensive scenario
of the exercise that answered the purpose of repelling an aggression
against any participant. One of the purposes of the exercise concerned
prevention of acts of sabotage by enemy special forces operating behind
the lines of the United Russian-Armenian Army Group (specifically,
prevention of destruction of a nuclear power plant).
Russia and Armenia established diplomatic relations in 1992. Since
then, our countries have signed over 160 treaties and accords including
the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance (August
29, 1997) and documents on Russian military presence in Armenia (Treaty
on the Legal Status of Russian Armed Forces on the Territory of the
Republic of Armenia dated August 21, 1992, Treaty on the Russian
Military Base on the Territory of the Republic of Armenia dated March
16, 1996). All these documents state that security of the two states,
collective security in the Commonwealth, and stability in the region
are the main purposes of the Russian-Armenian military cooperation.
The Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Republic of
Armenia on Joint Planning, Deployment of Troops (Forces) for the
Purposes of Mutual Security was signed in Sochi, Russia, on August
27, 2000. The National Assembly of Armenia ratified it in February
2001. The document legalizes establishment on the territory of
Armenia of the Joint Russian-Armenian Army Group comprising units
and formations of the Russian and Armenian national armies. The
Joint Russian-Armenian Army Group includes units and formations
given the task of defense under the joint command in the period of
deterioration of the military-political situation in the region and
a threat of aggression against Russia or Armenia from a foreign state
or a coalition.
The exercise that is about to be completed will not be the last in
the history of Russian-Armenian relations, according to Armenian
Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisjan. According to Sarkisjan, relations
between Yerevan and Moscow – particularly in the military-political
sphere – have advanced all through existence of a sovereign Armenian
state. Moreover, they are at the height of their potential at this
point.
Nikolai Bordyuzha, General Secretary of the CIS Collective Security
Treaty Organization, is expected to participate in evaluation of the
outcome of the exercise.

KINGS AND LEGENDS OF ANCIENT PERSIA;
by Souren Melikian
The International Herald Tribune
September 17, 2005 Saturday
Persepolis survived in Iranian psyche
LONDON
It was a great idea to devote an exhibition to the first classical
age of one of the three oldest cultures in the world, Iran.
“Forgotten Empire: The World of Ancient Persia,” at the British
Museum, focuses on the Achaemenid period (557-333 B.C.). It should
not be missed, but it is marred by curious flaws.
The Achaemenid Empire came into existence when the first Iranian
emperor documented in history, Kurush (later known to the Romans
as Cyrus), ascended the throne around 557 B.C. For the first time,
all Iranian groups, the Medes in the northwest, the Persians in the
center and south, the Sogdians in the northeast and the Scythians,
right up to the Sir Darya, which flows through present-day Uzbekistan,
were united under one rule.
But the empire soon extended far beyond Iranian territory. Assyria,
which had waged war against the Medians, was included in it. So were
Armenia, which had recently arisen in ancient Urartu (now mostly
in eastern Turkey), Lydia and other territories. By the late sixth
century B.C. the entire Middle East was under Achaemenid control,
up to the Mediterranean shores.
It would take the world-conquering fury of Alexander to break up the
empire in 333 and burn down its jewel, the huge royal palace-shrine
called by the Greeks Persepolis, “the Persian City.”
The mark left by the empire in Iranian culture remained indelible.
The memory of Persepolis continued to resonate through time in
the collective Iranian psyche long after its ancient name had been
forgotten it is called today Takht-e Jamshid, “The Throne of Jamshid,”
after a legendary king.
Iranian poets writing in Islamic times lamented its ruins. Solemn
visits were made to the site by kings who left calligraphic
inscriptions recording their presence down to the late 19th century.
This was not just the result of curiosity. As Sufi mysticism, long
confined to closed circles, spread across Iranian society from the
13th century on, the visits took a mystical turn.
The most extraordinary pilgrimage of all was organized in 1476 when
Sultan Khalil and his troops, accompanied by religious leaders, went to
Persepolis and spent an entire day gazing at the bas-reliefs. The great
Sufi master Jalal ad-Din Davani recounts in a work titled Arz Name
(“The Military Review Book”) the visions experienced by the sultan,
who saw the standing figures coming out of the stone walls and going
back into place.
The ruler’s son Ali, a child prodigy who was a calligrapher, engraved
a poem made up from verses by the 12th-century Sufi poet Nezami. The
visit and the poem made a lasting impression in Iran. In 1606, the
author of a treatise on calligraphy and painting “The Rose Garden of
Art” cited it and reproduced it. The verses can be seen to this day.
I photographed and published them in 1971 in an essay on Islamic
period pilgrimages to Achaemenid sites in the journal Le Monde Iranien
et l’Islam.
The entire Achaemenid age continued to evoke echoes, however imprecise,
in the collective memory of Iran in a way that has no equivalent in
other cultures. Its precise history became lost, but the names of
one ruler, Daraya-vahush (Darius I in Latinized form, 522-486 B.C.),
shortened to Dara, and of his father, Vishtaspa (Hystaspes in Latin),
changed to Goshtasp, are easily recognized in the “Book of Kings”
versified in the 10th century.
In the 15th century, Davani still observed that royal gatherings once
took place at Persepolis on new year’s day.
Mystery surrounds the destination of the huge palatial structure
with walls carved with processions of guards and laymen bringing wine
vessels or driving animals. Debate still rages among scholars as to
the exact nature of the Achaemenid kings’ religious beliefs and the
meaning of many symbols, including the mythical creatures that loom
large at Persepolis, eludes us. Alexander’s troops destroyed the
palace in 330 B.C., and anything that might have shed light on it.
Even reduced to rubble and bereft of their meaning, the remains
profoundly impressed the Iranians. They continued to perceive the
Achaemenid period as a golden age. From its very beginnings, the
Sasanian dynasty, which ruled Iran from 224 to 651, made attempts
at revivalism. At Naqsh-e Rostam, near Persepolis, the Sasanian rock
reliefs are carved under the Achaemenid reliefs. Some of the characters
have a closely resembling smile, barely suggested. The lips are closed,
the eyes stare as if in ecstasy.
The reasons for this admiration are fairly obvious to anyone
strolling through Persepolis. The plaster casts that take up much
of the exhibition space fail to convey the grandeur of the setting,
the mastery of space and the rhythm of the figures. A few sculptural
fragments do not re-create the effect of bas-reliefs as a whole.
The figure of a charioteer who stands holding the reins of the
two horses that pull his vehicle is remarkable. But the fragment
“obtained at Persepolis by Sir Gore Ouseley” in 1811 would look
better if the front part of the two horses, given by him to his son,
had not turned up many decades later at auction. The Miho Museum in
Japan bought them in 1985. Instead of reuniting the two fragments,
the exhibition organizers supplied a plaster cast of the Miho piece,
which does not help much.
Another fragment retains the bust of a camel driver ripped off the
north staircase of the Apadana. This was purchased by the British
Museum in 1894, when the monument was quarried by passing European
travelers.
Not a great deal of Achaemenid sculpture in the round survives. A
small lapis lazuli head of a king dug up at Persepolis in 1946
is on loan from the National Museum in Tehran. It is one of those
rare masterpieces that justify a visit on their own. The smile of
certainty that illuminates the face, as serene as it is mysterious,
is not easily forgotten.
The foreparts of a lion also carved out of lapis lazuli again gives
in miniature size some idea of the greatness of animal sculpture in
the round that reached an apex in the sixth century B.C. So do three
lions cast in bronze in a larger size to serve as a pedestal.
It would have been desirable to include as an introduction some of the
beakers and cups in gold and silver from the 10th and 9th centuries
B.C. recovered at Marlik or perhaps some copper vessels worked in
repousse from northern and western Iran in the eighth and seventh
centuries B.C. All show examples of low-relief animal sculpture that
would help to understand the blossoming of the Achaemenid age.
One of the greatest and most original aspects of Achaemenid art
is represented by gold, silver or bronze vessels. The exhibition
selection is uneven and disparate. Only one of the so-called rhytons,
or vertical beakers linking up at an angle with the foreparts of
an animal, real or mythical, to serve as a pouring vessel, rates as
a true masterpiece. Said to have surfaced at Erzincan, in Armenia,
now part of Turkey, it was acquired by the British Museum in 1897.
Another British Museum rhyton, reputedly from Mar’ash in Syria,
displays Iranian influence, but is clearly not Iranian.
One wonders why the Louvre bronze rhyton ending with the foreparts of
a gazelle is not in the show. It would look better than the heavy gold
rhyton with the foreparts of a winged lion bought in France by the
shah’s regime shortly before the 1961 Paris exhibition “7,000 Years
of Art in Iran.” It bears a troubling similarity in workmanship to
other gold pieces now recognized as duds. The same comment applies to
a gold bowl from the same source. A beautiful silver bowl reputedly
from Erzincan and another from the so-called “Oxus treasure” do not
make up for the presence of four other shallow bowls that despite their
cuneiform inscriptions again raise questions as the catalogue admits.
The display, cramped and clumsy, does little to improve the mixed
impression with which one leaves an exhibition probably put together
under very difficult conditions. It should have been dazzling, and
it is not.

EU REBUKES TURKEY FOR PROSECUTING AUTHOR
by Marcin Grajewski, REUTERS NEWS AGENCY
The Toronto Star, Ontario
September 19, 2005 Monday
BRUSSELS
Turkey’s “provocative” plan to prosecute novelist Orhan Pamuk shows
that some members of its judiciary are resisting reforms vital to
Ankara’s drive to join the European Union, according to a high-ranking
EU official.
Pamuk faces up to three years in jail for backing allegations that
Armenians suffered genocide at Ottoman Turkish hands 90 years ago –
a highly sensitive issue in Turkey, which is due to start EU membership
talks on Oct. 3.
Turkish prosecutors are also investigating comments by the best-selling
author that some 30,000 Kurds were killed more recently in Turkey in
separatist clashes with security forces.
“I find a recent decision to prosecute writer Orhan Pamuk raises
serious concern,” EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn told the
European Parliament’s foreign affairs committee last week.
“I must say that a decision of the district judge in Istanbul to
bring the court case on Dec. 16 … cannot be just a coincidence,
I think it is a provocation.”
Dec. 16 is the first anniversary of a decision by EU leaders to open
entry talks with Turkey provided that the Muslim country overhauls
its penal code and extends its customs agreement with the EU to new
member states, including Cyprus.
Pamuk’s comments about the Armenians and the Kurds during an newspaper
interview drew an angry reaction from Turkish nationalists and
politicians at the time and the author received death threats.
The public prosecutor in Istanbul’s Sisli district found Pamuk’s
remarks violated Turkey’s revised penal code, which deems denigration
of the “Turkish identity” a crime.
Rehn said he was worried that some Turkish prosecutors interpreted the
code in a way that breaches the European Convention of Human Rights,
undermining Turkey’s quest to join the EU.
“We will have to return to this matter after very careful and precise
legal analysis, I already discussed this matter with (Turkish)
Foreign Minister (Abdullah) Gul,” he said.
“Certain elements within the judiciary … are resistant to the reform
process and court cases are still being opened against individuals
who express criticism in a completely non-violent way.”
Any violation of human rights in Turkey is likely to weaken already
fragile support for the country’s EU membership among the bloc’s
citizens and politicians.
Ankara has long denied that Armenians suffered genocide, or systematic
killing, at Ottoman hands during and after World War I, saying they
were victims of partisan fighting which also claimed the lives of
many Muslim Turks.
Turkey is also very sensitive to portrayals of the Kurdish issue. Its
security forces have been battling separatist guerrillas in the
impoverished southeast since 1984. Fighting has recently flared up
after a period of relative calm.
Pamuk is best known for his historical novels set in Ottoman Turkey,
including My Name is Red and The White Castle.
GRAPHIC: Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk says the killing of Armenians 90
years ago was deliberate.

FOR HEADY THRASH, THE SYSTEM WORKS: DOWN SERVES UP ENLIGHTENED RAGE LIKE NO OTHER METAL MERCHANTS CAN
by Stuart Derdeyn, The Province
The Vancouver Province (British Columbia)
September 18, 2005 Sunday
FINAL C Edition
Let it never be said that System of a Down are just another metal
band. The Armenian/American quartet has sweet nothing in common with
any of those other tattooed, pierced and peeved angst merchants making
music for middle-class Caucasian males.
Not that this isn’t the core audience that the band brings out. It is.
But that this politically and artistically progressive group has
captured that audience still comes as a surprise.
Choruses of “Why do they always send the poor?” from “B.Y.O.B.” —
the band’s opening number at the Pacific Coliseum last night —
just aren’t drawn from the same creative wellspring as “I did it for
the nookie.” There’s something altogether more serious being offered
up by these guys.Which doesn’t mean that the crew is all agit-prop
preaching and no fun.
Far from it.
Daron Malakian has some of the silliest audience banter this side
of a comedian. Who says “Party people put your hands together” at a
rock show?
The same guy incorporating interpretive modern dance routines and clown
antics into his onslaught of molten-lead heavy riffage, that’s who.
Of course, when your bassist has a braided soul patch that hangs down
to his midriff and ultra-neon yellow socks glaring out from under
his capri pants, you’ve no choice but to be physical to get noticed.
Shavo Odajian’s motoring and John Dolmayan’s relentless pounding
aside, it’s the way that Malakian and Frank Zappa-esque lead singer
Serj Tankian play off one another that really generates the power in
sing-along faves “Needles” and “Revenga.”
Both have distinct pipes that, when put together, make for the
harmonies that lock the choruses in anti-pop culture critiques such
as “Violent Pornography” in your head forever. For all its rage and
lightning-fast time signature changes, there’s almost a folk-song
sensibility to System’s songwriting.
With Mesmerize already getting some of the best reviews of the band’s
career, excitement over the soon-to-be-released companion to that
disc can only build after a gig as tight as last night. Connecting
with your audience to build a collective sense of unified purpose is
always at the heart of a killer show. But this is an act that wants
to see the message carried past the mosh pit; to bring enlightenment
to an audience more open to ideas than it gets credit for.
Hopefully to foster a sense of community carried well outside the
arena.

ORHAN PAMUK IS NO TRAITOR: INFORMED SOURCES
National Post (Canada)
September 16, 2005 Friday
National Edition
source The Spectator
The following editorial appeared in Britain’s Spectator magazine on
Sept. 10.
Over the past years, The Spectator has been a staunch defender of
Turkey and its right to join the European Union, negotiations for which
begin on Oct. 3. We have praised its economy, its founder-membership
of Nato and condemned the many Turkophobes within the EU.
A rarity among nations with Muslim majorities, it holds proper
elections and, for the most part, maintains a legal system that most in
the West would regard as fair. It has 70 million industrious citizens
who want to trade on equal terms.
It would be a tragedy, therefore, if Turkish membership of the
EU were to be jeopardized by Turkey’s ugly treatment of its most
prominent novelist, Orhan Pamuk. Last week, Mr. Pamuk was charged
under Article 301/1 of the Turkish penal code, which makes it an
offence to insult the Republic of Turkey, punishable with between
six months and three years imprisonment — increased by a third if
the offence was committed abroad.
Mr. Pamuk’s crime was to make reference, in an interview with Swiss
newspaper Tagesanzeiger in February, to Turkey’s ethnic cleansing
of Armenians between 1915 and 1917 and to its ill-treatment of Kurds
since 1984. “Thirty thousand Kurds and a million Armenians were killed
in these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it,” he said.
It goes without saying that jailing people for raising such issues is
unacceptable in a modern democracy. Orhan Pamuk is no traitor. On the
contrary, he is seen in the literary world as a great ambassador for
his homeland, whose work shows a deep love of his country and who has
been able to straddle the gap between East and West. He simply wishes
to be free to discuss a couple of dark episodes in Turkey’s history.
To give it some credit, the Turkish government does not entirely deny
that a large number of Armenians came to a bad end around 1915. The
prime minister, Tayyip Erdogan, recently announced his desire to
establish a commission of historians to judge whether or not genocide
took place. Yet no democracy should seek to legislate in favour of
one official version of history.
Rather, it should tolerate a free market in ideas, knowing that it is
lively debate which best ensures that the truth eventually seeps out.
Orhan Pamuk’s accusations of the scale of Turkish maltreatment of
Armenians and Kurds are supported by eyewitness accounts.
An American diplomat filed a report at the time speaking of Ottoman
soldiers, aided by Kurdish tribesmen, “sweeping the countryside,
massacring men, women and children and burning their homes. Babies were
shot in their mothers’ arms, small children were horribly mutilated,
women were stripped and beaten.” Pamuk’s accusations are supported,
too, by Halil Berktay, a professor at Sabanci University, who puts
the numbers of dead at between 800,000 and one million.
But even if Pamuk’s charges were nonsense, it would be no excuse for
jailing him. A confident nation has no need to suppress free speech,
knowing that anyone who makes false accusations against their country’s
past for political reasons will rapidly be crushed beneath the weight
of counter-evidence.
Admittedly, Turkey’s problem over Armenia and the Kurds is not limited
to the government: 80% of respondents to a recent opinion poll said
they could do without EU membership if it meant having to admit to
past genocide. But if Turkey wants to join the EU, and become a full
member of the wider club of Western democracies, it simply has to
face up to its past, and to its present democratic failings. Article
301/1 of its penal code must go.

NKR SELF-DETERMINATION THROUGH STRUGGLE
A1+
| 18:59:48 | 19-09-2005 | Politics |
The RA Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has addressed the UN Assembly
General 60th session.
According to the RA Foreign Ministry message, the Minister spoke
about the Millennium Development Goals finding the combat against
poverty and economy development extremely important.
In his speech the Minister also referred to the regional conflicts
and the course of their settlement. He has mentioned that “in case
of regional conflicts preaching of military solutions is not only
unreal but also reflects the absence of democracy, human rights and
the perception of civic society”.
Speaking about the rights of the people of Nagorno Karabakh, he
underlined, “Self-determination is the right of every person. The
people of Nagorno Karabakh have fought and won the right of
self-determination. In order to win it, they have fought the political
and military aggression of a government which was not elected by
them and which tried to suppress them by force. The fight for their
rights was no their choice. Their rights were neither abstract nor
exaggerated. They wanted what most of us have, that is the right to
live in their houses on their lands peacefully. Despite everything,
they reached their aim. From that time on they have shown their
ability of governing and developing democratic institution”.
Finding the realization of Millennium Development Goals, the Minister
noted that we are responsible for the coming generations. “And our
answer to ourselves and to our children must be the united effort,
united measures and united answers on the part of United Nations. The
UN can still be the answer”, said Vardan Oskanyan.

“MESROP MASHTOTS” TO THE EMIR
A1+
| 18:17:33 | 19-09-2005 | Official |
Today Robert Kocharyan has received the delegation of the Arabian
United Emirates Higher Council member, Sharzha Emir, Sheikh Doctor
Sultan ben Mohammad al Kassim.
Kocharyan presented the Emir with the medal “Mesrop Mashtots” for his
contribution to the development of the Armenian-Arabian relations,
as well as for his warm attitude towards the Armenian community
of Sharzha.
The sides discussed issues about enhancing cooperation.

FIRE NEAR THE REPUBLIC SQUARE
A1+
| 18:10:24 | 19-09-2005 | Social |
Today at about 03:00 – 03:30 p.m. there was a fire on the roof of the
fifth house on Nalbandyan street, just in front of the Underground
station “Republic Square”.
At 03:27 the fire brigade had located the fire and at 04:21 it was
put down completely. The reasons of the fire are not yet known, and
the fire fighting department said that further investigation would
find everything out.
The roof of the house has not been damaged much as the fire brigade
arrived at the initial stage of the fire.

SYSTEM OF A DOWN DIG DEEP FOR INSPIRATION: BAND ROCKS AGAINST ADVERSITY
by Heath McCoy, Calgary Herald
The Calgary Herald (Alberta)
September 19, 2005 Monday
Final Edition
Preview
System of a Down performs Sept. 19 at Pengrowth Saddledome. Tickets,
ranging from $39.50 to $55.50, on sale at all TicketMaster outlets.
Phone (403)-777-0000 or order online at ticketmaster.ca
– – –
Black Sabbath were spawned on the gloomy streets of Birmingham. Guns
‘N’ Roses clawed their way up from a Hollywood gutter. Metallica’s
James Hetfield rebelled against a restrictive Christian Science
upbringing.
Most metal bands are raging against something or other.
But a band forged in the fires of genocide? Now there’s a formula
for intensity. It’s that intensity that a million-and-counting fans
tapped into this summer as they flocked to buy System of a Down’s
fourth album, Mezmerize, rocketing the disc to No. 1 on Billboard
charts the week of its May 17 release.
In an interview in advance of the Armenian-American band’s Sept. 19
concert at Pengrowth Saddledome, System of a Down’s bassist Shavo
Odadjian, 31, talked about how the Armenian genocide that occurred
between 1915 and 1923 has shaped the group. In that time an estimated
1.5 million Armenians were expelled from the Ottoman Empire by the
Turkish government in a campaign of murder, deportation and torture.
“When the genocide occurred, our families had nowhere to go,” says
Odadjian. “A bunch of countries helped the Armenians out. We were a
Christian nation and even the Muslims were like ‘Dude, this shouldn’t
be happening,’ and they saved us. They took us into their countries.
That’s why there’s Armenians all over the world today.”
Odadjian was born in Armenia. His bandmates, singer/keyboardist Serj
Tankian and drummer John Dolmayan were born in Lebanon.
Singer/guitarist Daron Malakian was born in Hollywood, but his
grandparents are currently living in Iraq.
“I feel for Daron,” says Odadjian. “Every time he hears something
about Iraq (and its conflict with the United States) he trips out,
because his family members are still there. It drives him nuts. It
really does inspire his songwriting.”
Odadjian, Malakian and Tankian attended an Armenian private school in
Hollywood together, and when they became musicians on the Los Angeles
rock scene in the ’90s, this unique background drew them together. “I
don’t have a family tree,” says Odadjian. “No one knows about my
family’s roots before my grandpa. No one knows his birthdate even.
(In System of a Down) we all share this common bond.”
That consciousness often creeps into the band’s funky, thrash-metal
stew. This has led critics to dub System of a Down the most political
metal band since Rage Against the Machine. Fierce protests against the
Iraq war and portraits of a disgraced Statue of Liberty on Mezmerize
contribute to that notion.
But Odadjian insists System of a Down is not a political band. “We
are a life band,” he says. “We are a social band. We are a band that
raises awareness about issues we confront every day. But we don’t wake
up every morning trying to write songs about how Bush screwed up our
country. . . . It’s just that right now, politics plays such a major
role in all of our lives that we can’t help but speak about it.”
On Mezmerize, Malakian has stepped up as the band’s primary
songwriter. Still, Tankian remains a strong creative force, with
the two balancing each other out perfectly. “Serj will write a song
and it will be all metaphors. I won’t understand it. He won’t even
understand it,” Odadjian says. “While Daron is more straightforward.
. . Serj is more political, but if you sit down and listen to.
Daron, he’s got some crazy views on life.”
Another unique aspect of System of a Down is the way the band
incorporates the music of its native Armenia into its attack.
“Nothing is contrived,” Odadjian stresses. “We never say ‘This part
needs an Armenian beat.’ Actually, we’re big Iron Maiden fans and
they used a lot of Middle Eastern sounds. That’s our main influence.
Mix that up with ABBA, Led Zeppelin and Frank Zappa and you get System
of a Down.”
It’s that sort of adventurous spirit that led the band, along with
producer Rick Rubin, to create Mezmerize. The original concept was
to release a double album. Ultimately, System decided against that,
convinced that today’s MTV-weaned rock fans don’t have the attention
spans to appreciate a double album anymore. “You can’t release (an
album like Pink Floyd’s) The Wall right now,” he says.
To remedy the situation, the band divided the album into two.
Mezmerize was released last May, and the second half, Hypnotize,
is expected to hit stores in November. “Individually, each one is a
piece of art, but together, they complete one another,” he says.
Were it not for the warped, hyper-wacky sensibility that comes through
in much of their music, one could definitely conclude that System of
a Down is a band that takes itself very seriously. It’s been called
on that too.
Odadjian defends System’s stance. “We’re not politicians and we’re
not heroes,” he says. “Serj wrote in one of his lyrics ‘You must
enter a room to destroy it.’
“We’ve entered the corporate room of Sony-BMG and Columbia.
“And for songs like Cigaro and B.Y.O.B to hit the radio or get played
on MTV — no way would that have happened 10 years ago even — we’ve
pretty much destroyed the room.”