Azeri envoy to India to focus on improving economic ties
ANS TV, Baku
7 Nov 04
[Presenter] Azerbaijan’s newly-appointed ambassador to India, Tamerlan
Qarayev, is expected to submit his credentials to the Indian president
today. Mr Qarayev said before his departure to India that he had
already resolved financial problems pertaining to the opening of the
embassy.
[Correspondent over video of scenes in India] Azerbaijan should
reconsider its relations with India. The reason is that bilateral
economic and commercial relations are at a very low
level. Azerbaijan’s newly-appointed ambassador to India, Tamerlan
Qarayev, says that it is possible to hope for relatively increased
cooperation after the opening of the embassy in that country.
[Tamerlan Qarayev speaking at a news conference] Our economic
relations are still not at the satisfactory level, and one of the main
tasks the [Azerbaijani] president has set us and the embassy is to
expand and deepen economic relations. As for relations, after the
embassy opens and starts operating there, we will try to maintain good
relations.
[Correspondent] Mr Qarayev also said that he had already been to India
once and had conducted consultations about the premises of the
embassy.
[Qarayev] After that, I returned and resolved some financial issues
here. I am now leaving and from now on, there are certain ideas to
rent an office and a residence in the future. Two of my employees have
already started working there. The remaining employees will go there
at the beginning of the next year.
[Correspondent] Unfortunately, Armenia opened its embassy in India
before Azerbaijan: it has had an embassy there for five years now. But
Qarayev thinks that the Azerbaijani lobby will become stronger with
the opening of the embassy there and work will be carried out at least
to make up lost ground.
[Passage omitted: repeating the same ideas]
Ayaz Mirzayev and Emil Babaxanov for ANS.

OBSERVERS CALL ON TO MOBILIZE DIPLOMATIC RESOURCES FOR NEUTRALIZATION
OF AZERBAIJAN’S INITIATIVES IN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
YEREVAN, November 5 (Noyan Tapan). The November 5 seminar organized
by the Center for Development and Public Dialogue was dedicated to
discussion of the situation formed in CE in the issue of peace
settlement of Karabakh conflict. Arayik Margarian, Head of the CE
Department of RA Foreign Ministry, briefly represented the history of
discussion of Karabakh issue in CE. He touched upon the report made by
Terry Davis, former PACE reporter on Nagorno Karabakh issue.
Margarian declared that this report once more affirmed the anxiety of
the Armenian side about the fact that high-ranking officials or
organizations who aren’t aware of all the necessary details regarding
the issue aren’t able to make an objective document. As for David
Atkinson, the new PACE reporter, the Foreign Ministry representative
declared that Atkinson was among the few PACE deputies who displayed
interest to Karabakh settlement from the very start. Arayik Margarian
also mentioned that the Armenian side has always strived for making
the discussions on Karabakh issue in CE only of information character
in order that no structure competing with OSCE should be established
within the framework of CE. What, according to him, can’t be said
about Azerbaijan, which has always strived for establishment of
another format besides OSCE for Karabakh peace settlement. According
to Khachik Galstian, expert of the Media Model research center,
experience shows that the more structures are involved into discussion
of this or that problem the less effective the results of the
decisions are. He called on for mobilization of all diplomatic
resources of Armenia for neutralization of Azerbaijan’s initiatives in
international organizations.

Manila Times, Philippines
Nov 8 2004
DOUBLETAKE
Upholding the child’s dignity

By Eric F. Mallonga

TWO years ago, at the UN General Assembly Special Session on
Children, His Serene Highness, Prince Albert of Monaco formally
proposed the recognition of the most serious crimes against children
as crimes against humanity. The proposal had its roots in the
recommendation to the World Association Children’s Friends, or
Association Mondiale des Amis de L’ Enfance (Amade), by its
Philippine chapter. HRH The Princess of Hanover fully supported the
move so that highly organized criminal syndicates exploiting children
for commercial sex, slavery, bonded labor, organ harvesting, military
conscription, armed conflict and targeting children for military
objectives could be held criminally accountable before international
tribunals. With qualification of crimes against humanity, even
monarchs, presidents, and prime ministers cannot invoke sovereign
immunity from accountability for involvement in such abominable
crimes.
At the Makati Shangri-La Hotel colloquium held under joint
sponsorship of Amade-Philippines, Virlanie Foundation, and
Development Academy of the Philippines, UP Law Professor Harry Roque,
a Master of Laws cum laude, specialist in International Humanitarian
Law from the University of London, expounded on the necessity for a
progressive evolution of world humanitarian law. As stressed by
Roque, international crimes of genocide, war crimes, crimes against
aggression and crimes against humanity evolved because of the need to
proscribe conduct that denies dignity to human beings owing to their
basic humanity. Genocide, torture and slavery are international
crimes because they contravene basic standards by which human beings
should be treated under laws of humanity. The Amade proposal to
qualify the most heinous crimes against children as crimes against
humanity is consistent with the universal pattern that seeks to
uphold the dignity of human beings under all conditions, whether in
times of war or peace.
But simple recognition of these crimes within the international
sphere may remain a principle that eludes enforceability. The UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child may have radically provided for
the recognition of children’s rights but it remains an unenforceable
document because there is no recognized international tribunal
through which the rights of children can be adjudicated and sanctions
can be imposed upon the violators. Thus, the logical progression to
strengthen existing recognition of rights to protection of
defenseless children is the punishment of crimes through
international tribunals. However, the recognition of international
tribunals is a fairly recent initiative.
According to Roque, the League of Nations, at the end of the First
World War, tried to convene an international tribunal to try grave
breaches of the laws and customs of warfare. Nations were aghast over
the use of weapons of mass destruction, which did not distinguish
between civilian and military targets as well as the deaths of more
than one million innocent Armenian civilians, mostly children, at the
hands of invading Turks. This original initiative did not succeed
because of a legal objection interposed by the United States.
Pursuant to their concept of legality, war crimes could only be
prosecuted if there is a domestic penal law defining war crimes.
Consequently, America also argued that such prosecutions could only
be held before domestic judicial tribunals. The same problem arose at
the end of the Second World War. Despite existence of nonderogable
treaties protecting civilians and prohibiting warfare that produce
superfluous injuries or unnecessary sufferings, 10 million civilians,
mostly Jews, died in Europe, and another seven million died
elsewhere, including Asia.
The Philippine Supreme Court, despite the objections of the
Americans, ruled in Yamashita v. Styler that since nonderogable
treaties have been proven grossly insufficient to implement norms of
International Humanitarian Law, the individual should, and could, now
be made criminally accountable for his criminal acts under customary
norms of public international law. The latter was sufficient legal
basis for prohibiting grave breaches thereof. General Yamashita, the
feared Tiger of Asia, was thus convicted for war crimes, including
instances committed in the province of Batangas where the Japanese
Imperial Army specifically targeted children. The Japanese Kempeitai
were known for their atrocious behavior, specifically for hurling
infants into the air and sticking their bayonets into the descending
bodies of the babies.
America, however, has remained recalcitrant. It rejects the Rome
Statute on the International Criminal Court. It refuses to recognize
that crimes against children are crimes against humanity. It rejects
the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It denounces any
submission to the United Nations on vital decisions that aspire only
to establish world peace and prosperity.
With such stance, innocent children in Iraq and Afghanistan will be
murdered with impunity, as thousands of innocent children were
similarly massacred by American troops at Pampanga, Samar, Bud Daho
and Bud Bagsak. With such recalcitrance, children born crippled at
former American military bases in Angeles and Olongapo cities will
continue to suffer and die, with impunity. Sadly, children will
remain collateral damage – without any real recourse for vindication of
their rights – in America’s `moral’ war.

Zaman Online, Turkey
Nov 7 2004
Yerevan Mellows about Genocide Claim
It is reported that this year the Armenian government has not
included an article about the so-called genocide in the 2005 budget
draft that has been sent to Parliament.
According to the Armenian Arminfo news agency, the decision to
improve relations with Turkey, Georgia and Iran was included in the
draft of foreign policy priorities of the government. While the news
has not been officially confirmed, Ankara evaluated Armenia’s
omission of the so-called genocide article from the budget draft as a
positive step.
Diplomatic sources said that although this omission was important, it
would not be enough to normalize relations between the two countries.
There remain articles in Armenia’s constitution, which are against
Turkey’s territorial integrity. In the draft sent to the Parliament,
there were some expressions such as providing for the security of the
country, maintaining stability and democracy and providing a peaceful
and fair solution for the Nagharno Karabagh problem.
The Azerbaijani daily Express reported that Turkish and Armenian
diplomats would meet in Istanbul next week to discuss the
establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries and
also how Yerevan’s policy about the so-called genocide would be
handled, but there was no official confirmation of the meeting.
Ankara indicates that Armenia should first take some steps to solve
the Karabagh problem.
In Armenia’s former budget drafts, there was an apparent policy about
the recognition of the so-called genocide by Turkey by other
countries. Commentators claim that the article about the ‘security of
the country’ was related with the genocide claims and that Yerevan
cannot give up its claims about genocide in the short term. In the
11th article of the Declaration of Armenian Independence it states,
‘Armenia will support activities to provide the international
recognition of genocide in Ottoman Turkey and West Armenia (East
Anatolia).’

Tacy Ltd., Israel
Nov 7 2004
ARMENIA CUT DIAMOND OUTPUT FALLS 25%
Armenia produced US$160 million worth of cut diamonds in the first
nine months of 2004, marking a decrease of some 25 percent as
compared to the same period of 2003, according to a spokesman for the
Trade and Economic Development Ministry of Armenia.
Sales of cut diamonds fell to US$157 million, while exports fell to
US$156 million.
The decreases are attributed to a drop in supplies of Russian rough
diamonds. Armenia imported just 100,000 carats of rough diamonds from
Russia in the nine months under an intergovernmental agreement that
provides a quota of 400,000 carats for 2004.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Harvard Independent, MA
Nov 7 2004
Interview with Brian Viglione of The Dresden Dolls
An intimate look at punk.
By Justine Nagurney

With their eponymous debut album garnering national attention, and a
recent US tour hot on the heels of a European one, one might have
assumed that Amanda Palmer (piano, vocals) and Brian Viglione (drums)
of The Dresden Dolls had finally outgrown Boston. Then they go and
win “Best Local Act,” “Best Live Act,” and “Best Female Vocalist” in
the Phoenix’s Best Music Poll. To convince you, we even tracked down
the affable and articulate Viglione en route to South Carolina to
explain his cross-dressing, the real meaning of “punk cabaret,” and
why the duduk is “righteous.” Enjoy.
I: How has it been interacting with fans across the nation? Are you
seen as a novelty act or do people know your music?
BV: We get the same overwhelmingly positive and heartfelt response
wherever we go. Like last night, there were kids who were crying at
the show, hugging us. We dole out more hugs than Mr. Rogers. It is
pretty ridiculous at times, and pretty beautiful… and we are
traveling with a fantastic band from Boston, Count Zero, who we love
dearly…
I: I think that what makes your live show one of the best I have seen
in recent years is the element of theater, and I was wondering how
you saw that fitting into your music.
BV: It’s definitely an integral part of who we are as people. And the
music is really a vehicle to be able to express all those different
sides of us…Acting is something that has been with both of us since
we were little. We both love theatrics and getting dressed up in
costumes and makeup and playing with images. We were extremely
fortunate to have found in each other the ability to play around and
manipulate these looks and roles and to find that sort of central
duality that we are involved with….We used to just get up and play
in our street clothes and let the passion and energy speak for
itself. We’ve found that the passion and energy can still hold their
own without our being seen as pretentious in having a look. It’s only
an enhancement and not a crutch.
I: No, it seems completely organic. That’s what is so powerful.
BV: Yeah, absolutely. It’s great to see people turned on by that. We
are lucky that the climate right now is very conducive to playing
with image. Bands like Slipknot, Britney Spears, whatever, are all
very much into that kind of play. So for us, we’ve always seen this
look as a neutral, traditional kind of look. We perform wearing suits
and striped stockings, which we see as a timeless, classic
look….People ask us, “How do you feel about kids coming to the
shows dressed up as the two of you?” Well, if that is a starting
point, then so be it. But we hope that it carries on beyond the
Robert Smith phenomenon of everyone coming in white face and big hair
and the same kind of makeup. We hope that kids really take this and
run with it to their own punk shows, their own creative outlets. It’s
more of an idea and a spirit than a look that needs to be copied.
I: Your music is characterized as “punk cabaret.” Do you think having
this terminology that people aren’t necessarily familiar with has
helped you?
BV: Absolutely. We saw that as an empowering move, to label our own
music before the press did…. We said, it’s definitely punk in the
spirit and energy of it, as well as the rebelliousness of saying that
this is absolutely our own thing that sprung from pure energy and
ambition. There is no conforming to any preconception…A really fun
aspect of the show is that people come and say, “Okay, I see a girl
on piano and this guy drummer in a suit and I know what this is going
to be,” and then, by the end of the show, these people say, “God, I
had no fucking idea.” The cabaret aspect is there in the very
intimate atmosphere, the intimate connection with the audience, and
the very vulnerable open lyrics. We hope for the audience to have the
same sort of release that we are afforded ourselves as performers.
That’s very much what cabaret was: to hold up this mirror for people
to take a look at their own lives, you know, through parody or satire
or drama or comedy or whatever, and that is something that we
definitely hope to provide for our audience as well. Joni Mitchell
said she felt that in recent times there have been a severe lack of
role models for young performers to try and emulate or glean ideas
from for direction and I sort of agree. I definitely have found
myself looking back for inspiration to these jazz drummers from the
1940s and 1950s, and performers like Billie Holliday, Louie
Armstrong. We definitely have a lot of inspiration from that kind of
dedication to art and the delivery of the performance.
I: Is there a role for politics in your art?
BV: Hopefully it’s again that we can challenge people to think for
themselves…. I think that is the greatest thing that an artist can
offer the public: the chance to challenge your preconceptions and
perspective…
I: [rambling question about creative energy, influences, and
lynchpins]
BV: I have been listening to a lot of weird world music, a lot of
jazz stuff recently.
I: Like what?
BV: Well there is this amazing group of gypsy musicians who put out a
CD called “Taras de haïdouks.” and another one called “Armenian
Lullabies” which is beautiful stuff, all sort of traditional
lullabies from Armenia with the duduk. It’s totally
righteous….Another great woman called Iva Bittova who’s got a
record called “Bile Inferno.” And so that stuff, mood-wise, has
absolutely influenced the stuff I play…And Amanda keeps me in touch
with the newer stuff, like The Decemberists…we have a lot of
different stuff.
I: I know you guys are working on a new album. Do you see it as going
in more of a rock kind of direction?
BV: There is always a natural sort of mix of moods. The last record
had “Coin-Operated Boy” and “Miss Me,” and this record may have
“Amsterdam” and “Pierre.” There is a lot of driving material on this
record…. Sean Slade is a great Boston rock producer and has worked
with bands like Dinosaur Jr and the Pixies and Radiohead and Hole, so
he has a real handle on what we are trying to do and I think we are
going to really try and harness the energy from the live show….It
is going to be very stripped-down, only drums and piano and just
really to keep straight on record what we do live.
I: I’ll look forward to hearing the new stuff on Saturday.
BV: We have some surprises planned. It should be cool.

Turkish Press
Nov 7 2004
News Analysis by Ugur Akinci, Ph.D.
Turkish Fears and Emerging Processes at EU’s Threshold
Ugur Akinci: 11/6/2004
Turkey is about to start full-membership talks with the European
Union (EU). But there is a “minor problem.” To become a part of EU
requires a shift in national identity and a nuanced approach to
sensitive concepts like “minority” and “sovereignty.”
The Turkish establishment interprets these terms by taking the
Lausanne Treaty of 1923 as its sole reference while EU insists on its
current definitions and implementations as reflected in the famous
“Copenhagen Criteria” of 1993, which Turkey has endorsed.
Since Turkey is the one who wants to join the EU, and not the other
way around, Turkey`s insistence on its own definition of such
politically-loaded concepts as “sovereignty” and “minority” is
interpreted by some observers as an attempt (to use an Americanism)
to have one`s cake and eat it too.
But this is a static approach and the dynamic reality is more nuanced
than that.
******** The static picture
According to the static approach, Turkey needs to choose either the
EU`s or its own definitions of “sovereignty” and “minority.”
The differences are glaring indeed.
For Turkey, a “minority group” is one of the specific non-Muslim
minorities defined by the Lausanne Treaty. That is why the Jewish,
Greek-Orthodox and Armenian-Orthodox communities are today recognized
as minorities with distinct rights and privileges protected by the
Turkish Constitution — but the Alawis, Kurds or, let`s say, Women,
are not.
In EU, any group with sufficient numbers, self-identification (and
political clout, one must add) counts as a “minority,” whether they
are defined by any international treaty or not. This does not to mean
that their “rights” are always “granted,” or if granted, “observed”
and “enforced.” Just ask the Turks living in Germany and other EU
countries. However, at least there is no deep-seated collective fear
in EU to recognize a self-identified group as a minority.
Turkey interprets all such attempts to label self-identified groups
as minorities as a sinister move to split Turkey — and for
understandable historic reasons. Certain European powers have spent
well-documented amounts of cash to mobilize religious and ethnic
minorities against the Kemalist movement right after the First World
War, and through the `20s. That`s why the Turks do have a valid
historic reason to get paranoid every time the Europeans start
talking about the “minority rights.” In that sense, the First World
War is still not over for a lot of Turks.
However, if Turkey is to join the EU, then she also has to decide
whether she is joining a group of enemies or friends. She has to
decide which historic memory she is going to emphasize as a main
reference in configuring her relationships in the 21st century.
Desperately trying to join the EU while treating it as a source of
threat to one`s national unity is like stepping on the gas and the
break pedals simultaneously. It is political schizophrenia.
The same is valid for “sovereignty” as well. Joining the EU, by
definition, means relinquishing the exclusive “national right” to
decide on which policies to follow in favor of the collective
policies of the EU. However, I must also add that in matters of
foreign policy, for example, member countries will retain the right
to ratify or veto the EU decisions.
As an EU member, Turkey will not be able to fend off inquiries on
sensitive political issues on the grounds that “foreigners cannot
interfere with our internal affairs” simply because, A) the fellow
family-members will not count as “foreigners” anymore and, B) what
was once an “internal” affair will now be a permissible topic of
discussion for all the twenty five European countries. There is no
way getting around that hard fact.
Just to give an example, Turkey will have to recognize the
“Greek-Cypriot Administration” as the only legitimate Government of
Cyprus, like the rest of the EU.
Another example: Turkey will not be able to spend the monies she
wants on the projects she wants without first getting the approval of
the other 25.
There will be a lot of “interruptions,” frequent “interferences,” and
a very different meaning of “national sovereignty” on the table.
Thus more Turkish “fears and loathing” should be expected in the days
ahead.
******** The dynamic reality
What I have portrayed above is a static picture of irreconcilable and
clashing interests. If that was all to this story, we might have to
reach a “take it or leave it” type of harsh conclusion as far as
Turkey`s EU membership is concerned. But, since the famous “Law of
Unintended Consequences” is at work 24 hours a day, we are witnessing
surprising “third alternative” solutions emerging without tipping the
cart.
The Turkish state is totally committed to EU membership and, at this
point, it will not and cannot change its mind. However, in the main,
the Turkish establishment is equally committed to its traditional
definitions of politically sensitive concepts such as “sovereignty”
and “minority.”
So, I see a new process emerging right before our own eyes:
Turkey is delivering the CONTENT of EU conditions without admitting
the European FORMS that traditionally accompanied such content.
Turkey is delivering the same wine in new bottles, so to speak, to
keep the guests and the host still sitting at the table. I think,
whether it is intentionally implemented that way or not, we are
looking at a very nuanced and creative policy process at work here.
>>> Example 1:
Turkey has not surrendered its national sovereignty in jurisprudence
to anyone. She still has her own independent courts. However, in May
2004, as a part of the Constitutional reform package regarding human
rights, Turkey has admitted the supremacy of international agreements
over domestic courts in matters concerning “human rights and
fundamental freedoms.”
Since October 2003, for example, the European Court of Human Rights
(ECHR) delivered 161 judgments on Turkey. In 132 of these court cases
Turkey was found “in violation” of Turkey`s international treaty
commitments. In 23 cases a “friendly settlement” was reached, and in
2 cases Turkey was not found in violation.
Some readers might also remember the case of of Ms. Louzidou, a
Greek-Cypriot woman who sued Turkey in ECHR for losing her property
and won a handsome monetary settlement from Ankara.
Thus Turkey has already surrendered the ultimate legal arbitration
authority in human rights cases to EU without creating much fuss at
home about “national sovereignty.”
>>> Example 2:
Another dynamic policy development in which Turkey has proven that
she can indeed “eat her cake and have it too” took place in
broadcasting in “minority languages.”
In June 2004, the Turkish Radio and Television (TRT), the Turkish
state-owned broadcasting company, has quietly started to broadcast
programs in the following non-Turkish languages: Bosnian, Arabic,
Circasian, and in two Kurdish dialects (Kirmanci and Zaza).
Other ethnic groups living in Turkey may conceivably demand similar
non-Turkish broadcasts and these may be followed by similar
non-Turkish broadcasts by private radio and TV stations as well. All
may become a reality in due time.
This has all happened without changing a single letter of the classic
definition of a “minority group” in Turkey. In that regard, the
Lausanne Treaty of 1923 is still the only reference. However, as long
as “minority languages” are freely spoken, printed, and broadcast,
how can EU complain about “violations of cultural rights and
fundamental freedoms”?
I think the Turkish establishment is showing some flexibility and
creativity in meeting the EU requirements without opening the cans of
worms that have been sealed shut since 1923.
If and when Turkey joins the European Parliament it will be one of
the largest voting blocks to determine the common policies of the
Union.
And that`s why some EU observers are as worried about losing their
“sovereignty” as some of their Turkish counterparts.
But static fears are not the end of the road. The dynamic mid-path
solutions developed by Ankara are creative policy alternatives worthy
of emulation.

Union of Vietnamese Student Associations of Southern California, CA
Nov 7 2004
Language Program Faces Possible Cuts
By CHARLES NGUYEN
UCSD Guardian Staff Writer
The UCSD Heritage Language Program is in financial danger because of
university budgetary issues and could be cut midway through the year,
according to Robert Kluender, chair of the linguistics department.
`At this point, we don’t have enough money to get through the year,’
he said. `Every year we have a bit of trouble, but this one is
especially hard.’
The program began in 2001, when a graduate student started an
informal Armenian language class, which quickly gained popularity.
This unplanned beginning precluded any long-term financial planning
for the Heritage Language Program according to Kluender. He also said
university budget cuts pose an additional burden for the program.
The program is geared toward `heritage speakers,’ which Kluender
defined as `those who were exposed to their native language in
childhood but became dominant in English later in life.’
`There seemed to be quite a response initially,’ Kluender said. `In
response to that, we tried to add on more languages to the program.’
The strongest interest in the program comes from students whose
speaking ability doesn’t reach their comprehension level of their
native language, according to Kluender.
It includes Persian, Armenian, Korean, Tagalog and Vietnamese
languages. Arabic had been offered previously, but was not included
this fall.
`The program really serves students that want to know more of their
native language,’ Vietnamese American Youth Alliance Committee chair
Tri Nguyen said. `It builds on the foundation that you already have
of your language.’
Campus administrators said they have responded to demand for the
program, as Dean of Social Sciences Paul Drake granted a special
allocation of $48,000 to the Heritage Language program last summer.
`We thought it was a very innovative, creative and exciting program,’
Drake said. `It could be a great service to the San Diego community.’
Kluender is drafting a grant request to the U.S. Department of
Education for funds for South Asian studies, which would benefit
Heritage Language Programs such as Vietnamese and Tagalog.
While he is grateful for the administration’s aid, Kluender said more
money is needed to keep the young Heritage Language Program afloat.
Various UCSD student organizations have responded to the cause. For
example, the Vietnamese Students Associations at UCSD and San Diego
State and VAYA held a `Saving Language, Saving Diversity’ concert at
a San Diego high school on Oct. 16.
The concert raised approximately $8,171, according to Nguyen, far
short of the $47,000 needed to fund the Vietnamese Heritage Language
Program this year.
The concert featured traditional Vietnamese performances as well as
modern native Vietnamese singers.
`People were really supportive,’ said concert attendee and Thurgood
Marshall College freshman Jaclene Le. `It was a really good effort
and there were a lot of sponsors.’
The groups banded together for the event in order to provide
additional funds to the program, according to a letter sent to
possible sponsors.
`As part of the effort to save the Heritage Language Program at UCSD,
we are organizing a Heritage Concert to raise funds for this
excellent program,’ VAYA stated in the letter. `Due to our limited
budget, we have to look for sponsorships from individuals, businesses
and organizations … who, in return, may benefit from sponsoring
this project.’
The Vietnamese sections of the program are the most popular among
students, with three class sections of approximately 30 students each
during the current quarter, according to Kluender.
The UCSD Pilipino Students Saving Tagalog group has also been
involved in aiding the language program, hosting charity banquets the
past two years for the Tagalog Heritage Language Program, in
conjunction with UCSD Kaibigang Pilipino. The groups plan to sponsor
another similar banquet during winter quarter, according to KP
Academic Director and PSST core member Jimiliz Valiente.
Kluender said that he had reached out to student organizations for
aid.
`Everyone seems very motivated,’ he said. `We need the student
organizations to reach out to the community for support of the
program.’

Independent on Sunday (London)
November 7, 2004, Sunday
HEADLINE: BOOKS: A NICE CHAP TO DRINK WITH;
BIOGRAPHY; IN SEARCH OF P D OUSPENSKY BY GARY LACHMAN QUEST POUNDS
by JAH WOBBLE Ouspensky: poetic and life-loving TOPHAM PICTUREPOINT
I t is the fate of P D Ouspensky that whenever his name is mentioned,
it is nearly always in relation to G I Gurdjieff, that mysterious
“esoteric master” who turned up in Moscow around 1913, claiming to be
a be a spiritual master. One thing is for sure: Gurdjieff, a powerful
and mesmerising personality, was a master at encouraging and
nurturing myths about himself and his origins. This of course makes
him even more fascinating. According to popular belief, Gurdjieff was
of Greek-Armenian parentage, and grew up in the Caucasus amongst
various cultural and religious traditions. He claimed to have
travelled extensively through remote areas of central Asia, stopping
off at monasteries and the abodes of gurus, gaining great knowledge
of all things esoteric, especially ritualistic dance. Initially
Ouspensky was cynical about Gurdjieff and his ambitions to spread his
knowledge to the West. However, he soon became his main disciple.
George Gurdjieff and Peter Ouspensky embarked upon introducing the
powerful ideas of the former’s “Fourth Way”. Gurdjieff believed that
people were asleep, that they were in a sort of prison, and that they
needed to escape. But of course he explained that is impossible to
achieve that escape on your own. “You need the support of a
organisation.” (It’s funny how they always say that.) Gurdjieff’s
system continues to be practised by groups all over the world.
Predictably the two men fell out some years later. Ouspensky started
his own operation, and wouldn’t even let his students utter the name
of Gurdjieff. Gurdjieff disparagingly said of Ouspensky that he was a
nice person to drink vodka with, but was essentially a weak man, who
lacked the necessary resolve to stick to the master’s plan. Since
then history has resigned Ouspensky to little more than a support
role to Gurdjieff.
This is not the first book to be written about P D Ouspensky. Colin
Wilson’s The Strange Life of P D Ouspensky and William Patrick
Patterson’s Struggle of the Magicians are probably the most notable.
The most striking difference, between these books and Lachman’s, is
the latter’s championing of Ouspensky’s cause. Typically Ouspensky is
portrayed as a bright yet flawed man, who betrayed his master’s
vision, and backed away from gaining true enlightenment. Lachman lays
his cards on the table in the introduction. It transpires that in the
late 1970s Lachman’s world (like many others before him) had been
rocked upon reading In Search of the Miraculous, Ouspensky’s account
of his time with Gurdjieff. Lachman subsequently immersed himself in
other books written by Ouspensky, as well as books written by
Gurdjieff himself. Indeed the author followed the teaching laid out
in those writings for several years. Eventually however, Lachman
moved on to explore other ideas. He was finally spurred into action
upon reading Patterson’s less than complimentary biography of
Ouspensky: “As far as Patterson was concerned, Ouspensky failed to
grasp the importance of Gurdjieff’s mission and when it came to it,
couldn’t abandon his own independence, self-will, and egoism in order
to devote himself entirely to Gurdjieff’s work… But as I read on I
found myself cheering for the wrong team.”
Even before reading Patterson’s biography, the author had found
himself revisiting, for the first time in years, Ouspensky’s
writings. Lo and behold, Lachman found that Ouspensky’s works before
meeting Gurdjieff were the most impressive of all, especially his
only novel, the beautiful and deeply metaphysical The Strange Life of
Ivan Osokin (which is a favourite of mine). I must say that I concur
with the author on this one. In my twenties I read Meetings with
Remarkable Men and other stuff on the “Fourth Way”. However, I wasn’t
that taken with it. I found it to be a jumble of ideas that with the
benefit of late-20th century hindsight (1960s hippie bullshit, dodgy
ashrams etc) didn’t hold water. Whereas Ivan Osokin had a wise and
compassionate feel to it. Above all, it had humour and innocence.
Lachman concludes that Gurdjieff had a negative effect on Ouspensky’s
personality, let alone his writing: “In the presence of the great
master, poetic, life-loving Peter felt somehow childish and immature;
all his philosophy and love of beauty and goodness were made to seem
mere adolescent romanticism. So he changed himself, worked on
himself, until that weakness disappeared and he became hard.” True as
that might be, it would be wrong to simply dismiss Gurdjieff as a
charlatan and control freak. However, it’s nice to see Ouspensky
appear, albeit belatedly, from the shadow of his master.
Indeed, Lachman would like it to be realised that before Ouspensky
met Gurdjieff, writers such as J B Priestley, Aldous Huxley and
Malcolm Lowry held him in high esteem. Ouspensky’s ideas were also
important to the avant-garde movements of the early 20th century, as
well as to going some way towards laying the foundations for early
Russian modernism. Weak, insignificant man? I don’t think so.

Financial Times (London, England)
November 6, 2004 Saturday
Injury time Anti-Semitic taunts from Dutch football crowds highlight
a classic dilemma of democracy. We might not like what someone says,
or who is saying it – but are we prepared to force them to give up
the right to say it?
By IAN BURUMA
The Dutch nurture their reputation for tolerance and moderation with
loving care. Perhaps that is why some Dutch people, in a rebellious
mood, like to put such a dent in it. And also why, when they do so,
there is such huge dismay. The latest outrage to set the Dutch press
on fire concerns the behaviour of football hooligans in The Hague.
ADO, of The Hague, were playing Ajax, from Amsterdam. Ajax, like
Tottenham Hotspur in London, have the reputation of being “the Jews’
club”. This is not based on anything very real. Jewish football
players are a rarity, at Ajax or anywhere else. But Amsterdam had a
sizeable Jewish population before the war, and many of them supported
Ajax. Hence the reputation. And since hooligans from Rotterdam, The
Hague and Utrecht began taunting the Ajax team a few decades ago with
such slogans as “filthy rotten Jewboys”, or “We’re going Jew
hunting!”, Ajax supporters responded by waving Israeli flags. This,
in turn, prompted the appearance of Palestinian flags in the
anti-Ajax ranks.
The ADO thugs actually did much worse than that. In fact, they did
just about the worst thing possible: they made hissing noises,
mimicking escaping gas, and chanted “Hamas, Hamas, send the Jews to
the gas!” The Hamas slogan, heard on other football terraces as well,
is relatively new, but the hissing is not. About 10 years ago, I had
the misfortune to be in the Feyenoord block when the Rotterdam club
played Ajax. It was like being surrounded by a crowd of foaming
neo-Nazis. The odd thing was, however, that “Jews” had very little to
do with actual Jews. Every time an Ajax player, including blacks from
Surinam, touched the ball, he would be called a “filthy Jew”.
It is probably the same with the flags, or the references to Hamas.
These bear little or no relation to actual countries or their
politics, of which most hooligans will have only the sketchiest
knowledge. I say most, because there are well-organised extremists
who use the stadiums as recruiting grounds. But the thugs know very
well that their chants are bound to cause maximum offence, especially
in Holland, where anything to do with the Holocaust, or Jews, has
been treated over the years with a mixture of sentimental piety and
residual guilt. They have crossed a well-established line: they are
saying the unsayable.
What to do about it? Ajax tried to ban Israeli and Palestinian flags
in the stadium, as though they were the problem. Referees were urged
to stop the games at the first sign of trouble. The football
association held the clubs responsible and threatened to ban the
public from attending games altogether if this behaviour went on – a
curious notion: football games in empty stadiums. A special
government committee, convened to look into the matter, concluded,
rather weirdly, that “racism” and “causing offence” were separate
issues. The first was a matter for the police, the second for the
clubs. One can try to arrest some of the perpetrators, which has been
done with notable success in Britain. Police monitoring and higher
ticket prices also seem to have cleansed the air. But even if you can
drive violent language out of stadiums, it is likely to re-emerge in
other ways, at heavy metal concerts, for example, or on the internet.
The young like to shock. The Dutch prime minister’s talk about
strengthening “norms and values” is hardly going to stop them.
The problem goes beyond the comfort of football spectators. We know
from the past how pushing the extremes of racial prejudice can
undermine the most civilised societies. Calling for the murder of
others, even in jest, or as a provocation, should not be permissible.
But democracy can suffer from too much protection against verbal
offence. Banning the expression of certain views does not get rid of
them. It is an illusion, common to totalitarian states, that thought
can be controlled by policing language.
Where there is freedom of speech, people will be offended. It has
become common in Europe to deal with the problem through legislation
against language or opinions deemed to be inappropriate, or to ban
people who express them from public life. The British home secretary,
David Blunkett, suggested that members of the far-right British
National Party should be excluded from the civil service. An Italian
candidate for the European Commission, Rocco Buttiglione, has been
rejected by members of the European parliament because of his view
that homosexuality is a sin. I have no sympathy for the BNP, and
disagree with Buttiglione, but as long as such people do not call for
violence to impose their views, I see no reason for their exclusion,
even though a man with Buttiglione’s opinions may not be best placed
to deal with justice and freedom.
Some commentators on the Salman Rushdie affair concluded that
toughening blasphemy laws was more important than protecting the
right to free speech. They believed that Muslims had a perfect right
to demand protection from offence, and demanded the same for
Christians and other religious believers. Both France and Germany
have laws against Holocaust denial, which cover more than the
genocide of the Jews. The distinguished Middle Eastern scholar
Bernard Lewis was tried at a French court for claiming that the
Turkish massacres of Armenians after 1915 were not planned by the
Turkish government, and thus could not be called genocide. This
considered opinion was offensive to many Armenians. Lewis lost.
Americans are more protective of the right to free speech than
Europeans. When Frenchman Robert Faurisson got into trouble for
claiming the Holocaust was Jewish propaganda, Noam Chomsky came to
his defence by writing an introduction to his book. He didn’t agree
with Faurisson’s views, but he believed in his right to express them.
In another case, Arieh Neier, acting for the American Civil Liberties
Union, defended the right of American neo-Nazis to march through
Skokie, Illinois, home to many Jews including Holocaust survivors.
The march was offensive, but Neier, Jewish himself, born in Hitler’s
Berlin, believed that the First Amendment, protecting freedom of
expression, was one thing that distinguished his adopted from his
native country.
I recently came across an interview with the former Belgian foreign
minister, and current European commissioner, Louis Michel. He was
questioned about his most cherished values. Was there anything he was
prepared to die for? Yes, he replied, freedom of speech. Later, he
lashed out at journalists who spoke to politicians of the rightwing
nationalist Vlaams Blok, “as though it were a normal party”. What
about free speech, asked the interviewer. “Yes,” said Michel, “but no
freedom for the enemies of freedom. Racists have no right to that
valuable freedom of speech.”
Michel’s commitment to the freedom of expression clearly does not
come up to the standards of the US constitution. If Belgian
journalists behaved according to his wishes and refused to take the
views of a major political party (33 per cent of the votes in
Antwerp) seriously, it would be difficult to have any debate on such
contentious issues as political asylum or immigration.
A history of persecution often helps to clarify people’s minds. Milos
Forman, the Czech movie director who moved to the US after Soviet
tanks smashed any chance of free expression behind the iron curtain,
made a brilliant film in 1997 about the case of Larry Flynt: The
People vs. Larry Flynt. Flynt is the owner of Hustler magazine, and
not known for his taste. He published a pornographic caricature of
the televangelist Jerry Falwell having sex with his mother. Falwell
took offence and sued. He won in the district court but the US
Supreme Court overturned the verdict on appeal. A pornographer’s
right to free speech was given priority over a public figure’s
emotional distress. Forman said he made his film as “a love letter to
the First Amendment”.
The defence of free expression in the US has not always been so
robust. Think of the trouble Nabokov had in publishing his
masterpiece, Lolita. The traditional enemies of freedom in the US are
usually to be found on the right. But when it comes to gender or
race, liberal-leftists can be just as censorious. Maybe speech bans
are necessary to maintain a civilised society. But where do we draw
the line, and who is to decide?
A good example of the perils of language policing is the case of the
burakumin, or outcasts, in Japan. Officially, the caste system was
abolished in the late 19th century. Unofficially, the descendants of
those whose occupations were considered ritually unclean, such as
butchering, tanning, or executing criminals, are still subject to
discrimination. There are several organisations that wish to protect
their rights. One way is by acting as watchdogs on offensive
language. Derogatory words for the outcasts, such as eta or yotsu,
are as far beyond the pale now as “niggers” in the English-speaking
world. But even the more correct burakumin causes problems. If used
in any way thought to be inappropriate, the mere mention of burakumin
can be criticised. As a result, the Japanese media have stopped
mentioning them at all. When Rising Sun, Michael Crichton’s
inflammatory and offensive novel about Japanese businessmen taking
over America came out in Japan, the only thing the publishers removed
was an inoffensive reference to the outcast problem. When a Japanese
newscaster, in a story about drug-related violence in America, warned
that the streets of New York could turn into a “slaughterhouse”, he
was fiercely attacked for a whole year. The mention of the word
slaughterhouse could conceivably have been construed as a slur on a
traditional outcast occupation. And so a social problem that urgently
needs to be discussed in public is silenced.
“Word hunting” is not limited to the outcast community. Japanese
television producers, newspaper editors and publishers work with long
lists of words to be avoided at all costs. Terms for blind people, or
left-handed people, or deaf people, or any other vulnerable group,
are all scrutinised, a task made more difficult by the fact that
standards of acceptability change. The results can be absurd. A
famous author, named Tsutsui Yasutaka, wrote a science fiction story
about a man arrested by robots because of “irregular brain waves”.
This caused an outcry from the Japanese Epilepsy Association, because
the story could offend people with odd brain wave patterns, including
epileptics.
Japan might be an extreme case. Arthur Koestler once described the
Japanese people as suffering from “social haemophilia”, terrified
that the smallest prick will cause interminable bleeding. But fear of
giving offence does not necessarily translate into greater compassion
for the vulnerable. A physically disabled person, or indeed a black
person, would still be better off living in the ruder, cruder
societies of Britain or the Netherlands than in the linguistically
fastidious Japan. And yet Japan’s social haemophilia should be a
warning to us. To have the freedom to speak freely, we must be
prepared to take the rough with the smooth. Just as crass tabloids
have a legitimate place in a free press, offensive language is
something we must be prepared to live with in a free and open
society. There are limits, of course. Even the First Amendment draws
the line when words are designed to incite violence and disturb the
peace.
Abusive chants in a football stadium might indeed disturb the peace
of other spectators. But then a football stadium is an odd place to
go looking for peace. If the slogans were not only designed to shock
or offend, but to incite violence, the perpetrators should be
arrested. But apart from that there is a case to be made that
football stadiums are a contained venue for ritualised bad behaviour,
which would be more dangerous if it were unchained in daily life.
If you cannot suppress prejudice or the desire to shock, then you
have to find ways in which these urges can be expressed without
people getting hurt. Prejudices can fade away. Now that every
football team in Britain has black players, there are fewer monkey
noises. American baseball teams are a complete mix, which may be one
reason why ethnic taunts are largely absent from US stadiums
I believe all the above to be true, and yet I would never again want
to find myself in the midst of fully grown idiots who find amusement
in mimicking the sounds of mass murder. Anything short of that, I
would put up with as a price for my freedom.
Ian Buruma is professor of human rights, democracy and journalism at
Bard College, New York.