1980_11 Hye Sharzhoom Newspaper November 1980

              Page 2
Hye Sharzhoom
November, 1980
OPINIONS
Gourgen Yanikian: Prisoner of hate
By Mark Malkasian
Understandably, not all the victims of the Armenian Genocide were buried
anonymously in the soil of the Armenian homeland.
Many of the "victims" survived,condemned to a new life in the Diaspora. One such
victim resides in a prison cell in Chino, California. He is Courgen Yanikian-clearly,
a man unable to overcome the Genocide.
In 1973, Yanikian assassinated two Turkish envoys in Santa Barbara. Today at
age 84 he is the subject of an intense "Free Yanikian" campaign-a shadow of a hero
among a people tragically deprived of both heroes and hope.
Upon closer scrutiny, of course, Yanikian's act was not heroic. Simply rendered,
he killed two innocent men in an attempt through self-sacrifice to bring the unpunished genocide of 1915 to public attention. He sought no heroism. Courage not
ever spoke of. He himself sacrificed only the few remaining years of a scarred and
disfigured life, exchanged for a mute statement in violence.
The hatred and rage that possessed Yanikian, however, can easily be explained.
He did not unleash the venomous emnity that consumed his life. Rather, his life
was ensnared and then inextricably bound by a genocide he had no part in. And for
Yanikian the crime did not end with the murder of two million Armenians. He and
his fellow surviving victims were haunted by world indifference, Turkish deceit
and Western duplicity. In the case of Yanikian, the initial pain travelled an inevitable cycle-from sorrow to frustration, from frustration to exasperation, from exasperation, finally, to an old man's fury.
Likewise, the shadowy mystique that now surrounds Yanikian can also be explained. He will be remembered as a man of action, an Old Testament prophet of
vengeance collecting timeless debts from sons and grandsons and great-grandsons.
In the larger arena, the world has yet to judge the character of the 20th century's
Yanikians-the killers for a political cause. Murder and murderers continue to grip
mankind, straddling a constantly shifting border between fascination and revulsion.
The life and death drama played out in Santa Barbara in 1973 is even rather romantic, an affirmation of individualism in an impersonal, collective society. Yanikian
took two lives-two lives that cannot be replaced by nuclear-age technology or big
brother bureaucracy or any other component of the modern state. The vision, of
course, abruptly loses its romantic quality when one is forced to confront the benumbed widows and fatherless children. Fortunately or unfortunately, however,
few of us ever know the corpses as real people.
In fact, for many, political killings represent not an ailment but a cure, a boiling
water-and-ammonia cleansing of a contaminated planet. The 20th century, of
course, provides a fitting ideological backdrop for such an approach. Marx proclaimed entire social classes "diseased" in brave,swift strokes of the pen. In practice, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot oversaw a new and brutal order, purging society
of designated "parasites" as one applies pesticide to a field of vegetables.
The 20th century has also been burdened by national dead wood, entire "diseased"
peoples--Jews, Crimean Tartars, Ibos, Gypsies,Cambodians and, of course, Armenians-all methodically severed from the body of the state.
Clearly, the modern age demands final solutions. Within this context, human
destruction on an individual level-absolute, uncompromising and instant-suits the
political climate.
Consequently, the killers for a cause often defended as only expediting the political life cycle with a well-placed bullet. Murder becomes regeneration and death,
life. Thus, Yanikian lent his people an aura of political relevance, ushering in a new
era of Armenian political terrorism by claiming the first of Turkey's 16 victims. His
fame was assured by a cadre of armchair assassins drawn to the brazen simplicity
of Yanikian's act. Now, his legacy of violence belongs to the younger generation,
the vicarious victims and struggling martyrs of international Armenian terrorism.
Nevertheless, Yanikian remains unique. Confined to his bleak prison cell, he affords an enlightened case study of a man forever trapped within the stifling hatreds
and darkened perceptions of the Genocide. As a victim in 1915, he was exclusively
an Armenian, a member of a nation marked for death. The Turks did not ask his
occupation, his political convictions, his educational background, his literary interests, his feelings toward the Turks. He was only an Armenian, nothing more was
needed.
Some 58 years later, an old embittered Armenian saw only two Turks before his
pistol. Like the murderers of his own family, Yanikian condemned two men to
death merely because of their service to the Turkish government, a private genocide
cast in the shadow of an inescapable past.
With pathetic irony, Yanikian consumated his hatred of the Turks by adopting
the fragmented view of humanity and genocidal nature of his oppressors. Indeed, he
may have found something human, something even likable, within the two assassinated envoys, but he was no longer concerned with men and humanity. His was a
simple world-Armenians and Turks, friends and foes, us and them. The truth
could not be clearer.
And now we are asked to share in an old man's horror-filled blindness. "Yanikian
the martyr! Yanikian the Armenian warrior!" they announce, applauding violence's
greasepaint facade.
In reality, however, the Yanikian case and the Armenian Ca<se are not intertwined.
Yes, Turkish intervention into the parole hearings is abominafott and, yes, an ailing,
84-year-old man deserves our understanding (perhaps he «.lso deserves release).
But, finally, no, Yanikian has offered nothing to the Armenian cauJB, Particularly
in the United States, public clamor for the parole of a convicted murderer might
only muddle the Armenian demand for justice.
Yanikian may have intended his act for the world, but, predictably, a world that
overlooked two million corpses has no interest in two more. Yanikian sacrificed his
own life, and the lives of his two Turkish stereotypes, in futility. We as Armenians
can only contemplate the insatiable anger that became this man's involuntary
destiny. His struggle is also our struggle.
Ultimately, though, the martyrdom he sought will never be his. Yanikian remains
the "victim," forever driven by the Turkish whip. Yes, he warrants compassion
and tears, but praise and admiration, never.
Pategian award winners:
A closer look
By Bill Erysian
To what extent must we work to instill in some of today's Armenian youth an
awareness of the rich culture they are a part of? They may either directly or indirectly reap the rewards of their forefathers, yet an interest to broaden this heritage
seems lacking at times.
Consider the 14 Armenian students at California State University, Fresno who
Yeceived: the Charles K. Pategian and Pansy Pategian Zlokovich scholarship
for the 1980-1981 academic year.
We applaud the Pategian foundation for its continued generous support to worthy
Armenian students. In fact, this year each student received $500—the highest
amount awarded since its inception in 1972.
According to the scholarship criteria, the student must possess a 3.0 grade point
average, the student must maintain full-time status and, most importantly, the
student must "show an interest on behalf of Armenian culture." The last criterion
was set by the Pategian fund.
Yet only four students out of the 14 awardees are now enrolled in any sort of
Armenian Studies course and only a handful are active in the Armenian Students'
Organization.
We find this distressing. What better way can a student demonstrate an interest
in Armenian culture than by enrolling in an Armenian class or participating in-
one of the most active Armenian student organizations in the nation.
Obviously, the crucial issue at stake here is "To what extent" must the student
show an interest in Armenian culture? The intent of this stipulation is good, but
we find it ambiguous. It's too difficult to gauge a student's interest in Armenian
culture by simply having him elaborate in an application. Additional concrete
evidence should be required. It should also be noted here that CSUF Professor
of Armenian Studies Dr. Dickran Kouymjian was never even contacted during
screening of the applications.
Several other ethnic scholarships at CSUF, including another Armenian grant,
require the recipient to enroll in at least one course pertaining to his ethnic background. This may appear as an unfortunate criterion, but it does allow (or nudge)
the student to demonstrate to the scholarship donor his interest in Armenian
culture. Although Armenian students should not have to be forced to take Armenian
Studies classes, it does jar the conscience a bit.
To argue that students have had a lack of exposure to Armenian Studies courses
is unacceptable. The opportunities do exist.
Professor Kouymjian has repeatedly stressed that he favors the requirement
that each Pategian award recipient must enroll in "at least one Armenian Studies
course."
With the Pategian fund awarding several thousand dollars each year to such
worthy students, it appears time for sorne of those students to realize the obligation
they have to themselves and to their scholarship donors.
The fate of Max Klindjian
and the Armenian Question
By Bryan'Bedrosian
On Feb. 6, 1980, in the Swiss capital of Berne, an attempt was made on the life
of Dogan Turkmen, the Turkish ambassador to Switzerland. Due to the alertness
of Turkmen's chauffeur, the ambassador escaped virtually unharmed.
A few davs after theattempt, a certain Hrair "Max" Klindjian was arrested by
the French police in Marseilles, where he operates a tobacco and gift shop with his
brother. Klindjian was apparently charged with masterminding the assassination
attempt, yet police could only produce the following circumstantial evidence:
Klindjian was in the Swiss capital prior to the assassination attempt, he had rented
a car said to have been used during the attempt and he had been affiliated with an
Armenian vouth organization called the Nor Seround (New Generation), which has
ties with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. Klindjian has consistently denied
all participation in the attempt. com. on page 6