Category: Main Issues

  • State can’t let Armenian victims’ heirs sue

    State can’t let Armenian victims’ heirs sue

    Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

    Thursday, August 20, 2009


    (08-20) 14:25 PDT SAN FRANCISCOA California law allowing heirs of victims of the Armenian genocide to sue in state courts for unpaid insurance benefits is unconstitutional because it conflicts with U.S. foreign policy, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.



    The law contradicts past presidents’ opposition to describing Turkey’s slaughter of as many as 1.5 million Armenians as a genocide, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said in a 2-1 ruling.

    The same panel struck down another California law Wednesday allowing owners of art stolen by the Nazis to sue for recovery of their possessions until the end of 2010.

    The court ruled that both laws intruded into the federal government’s exclusive authority over foreign affairs. State and federal courts have also have invalidated California laws that would have allowed suits over Holocaust-era insurance benefits and slave labor during World War II.

    “The federal government has made a conscious decision not to apply the politically charged label of ‘genocide’ to the deaths of these Armenians during World War I,” said Judge David Thompson, who wrote the majority opinions in both Wednesday’s and Thursday’s rulings. “Whether or not California agrees with this decision, it may not contradict it.”

    The case decided Thursday was brought by a Southern California man of Armenian descent whose class-action suit accused insurance companies of failing to pay benefits on their policies.

    His lawyer said he would ask the full appeals court for a rehearing.

    The attorney, Brian Kabateck, said there was no conflict between the state law and federal policy. About 40 states have passed resolutions recognizing the Armenian genocide, with no public objections by the U.S. or Turkish governments, he said.

    Neil Soltman, lawyer for one of the insurance companies in the case, said the ruling was consistent with past decisions overturning “efforts by California to adopt legislation which interferes with one or another aspect of the national government’s foreign policy.”

    The law, passed in 2000, refers to mass killings, death marches and other abuses of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923 as the Armenian genocide, a description that most historians also accept. The measure allows victims’ descendants to sue insurers doing business in California for unpaid benefits until the end of 2010.

    The court said national policy on the issue was defined by Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, who opposed congressional resolutions that described the killings as a genocide. The presidents’ warnings that any such measure would damage U.S. relations with Turkey persuaded House leaders to drop the resolutions without a floor vote three times, the court said.

    President Obama said during his campaign that the nation deserves “a leader who speaks truthfully about the Armenian genocide.” But he refrained from using the term during a trip to Turkey in April. His administration has not taken a position in the court case.

    E-mail Bob Egelko at [email protected].

    http://contribute.sfgate.com/ver1.0/Content/images/no-user-image.gif

    Yeghern

    8/20/2009 4:53:29 PM
    Since when are States forbidden to deal with genocide issues?Lets close down museums and change school curriculums for fear of offending the Turkish ambassador who wrote to the US Federal Judges telling them to stay out of genocide!Devastating decision for US justice..
    Recommend:    (1) (3)[Report Abuse] Permalink Permalink

    http://contribute.sfgate.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/13/9/fd0d8852-1c26-4818-b929-16061c33d685.Small.jpg

    purkel

    8/20/2009 4:33:48 PM
    The USA should not overlook any evidence of ethnic cleansing or genocide. Shame on Clinton and Bush.
    Recommend:    (3) (3)[Report Abuse] Permalink Permalink

    http://contribute.sfgate.com/ver1.0/Content/images/no-user-image.gif

    username withheld

    8/20/2009 4:01:09 PM
    This comment violated SFGate’s Terms and Conditions, and has been removed.

    Read more: https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/State-can-t-let-Armenian-victims-heirs-sue-3220858.php#ixzz0OmABenFF

  • Matthew Bryza’s Plans for Artsakh:  Formula for Disaster for Armenians

    Matthew Bryza’s Plans for Artsakh: Formula for Disaster for Armenians

    sassun-21

    By Harut Sassounian

    Publisher, The California Courier

    Matthew Bryza, the U.S. mediator for Artsakh (Karabagh), discussed in great detail for the first time the critical issues dealing with the behind the scene negotiations on resolving that conflict.

    Mr. Bryza is the U.S. Co-Chair of the Minsk Group and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. He delivered a speech on the Artsakh conflict at the International Center for Human Rights in Tsakhkadzor, Armenia, on August 7. Mr. Bryza’s lengthy presentation, followed by an extensive question and answer period (19 pages), was transcribed by NEWS.am Armenian news agency.

    While Mr. Bryza has regularly met with members of the media during his frequent visits to Armenia and Azerbaijan, often recanting in Yerevan what he reportedly said in Baku, he has never before disclosed the details of the settlement being negotiated between the presidents of the two conflicting countries and the three Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group, composed of France, Russia, and the United States.

    The Armenian public certainly appreciates Mr. Bryza’s willingness to discuss the terms of a future agreement on the Artsakh conflict. Nevertheless, one wonders why was Mr. Bryza in such a talkative mood? Was he preparing the Armenian public for the painful compromises that are to be made or was he trying to impress his Washington superiors with his negotiating skills, as he is being considered for an ambassadorial post in Baku?

    Mr. Bryza began his remarks by stating that the negotiations for the settlement of the Artsakh conflict are based on the three fundamental principles of the Helsinki Final Act: Self-determination, territorial integrity, and non-use of force.

    Claiming that the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan “right now are on the verge of a breakthrough,” an assertion he has made many times before, Mr. Bryza proceeded to disclose a highly controversial roadmap of the agreement currently under consideration. Mr. Bryza stated that Artsakh would preserve its current status for an “interim period.” Armenians would then turn over to Azerbaijan most of the “seven territories” surrounding Artsakh. After the Azeri refugees who left Artsakh during the war return to their homes, a referendum would be held to determine the final status of Artsakh.

    During the question and answer period, Mr. Bryza stated that the Minsk Group Co-Chairs were disappointed that during their July 17 meeting in Moscow, Presidents Sargsyan and Aliyev did not come to an agreement “on several of the final elements of the basic principles,” despite the fact that, during their January meeting in Zurich, they had “agreed on the basic concepts.” He said he expected an agreement in September “on the last few elements of the basic principles that remain not yet agreed.”

    When asked if Azerbaijan was making any compromises, Mr. Bryza pointed out Baku’s increasingly accommodating position on the Lachin Corridor which links Artsakh to Armenia, its concern for the security of Artsakh Armenians and their need to run their own affairs. Mr. Bryza further claimed that “Azerbaijan had to give up quite a bit from a position where it was in the beginning when it said it will never talk about self-determination. And, of course, to bring Azerbaijan to that point, Armenia had to give something up as well…. So, both sides are making compromises.”

    Mr. Bryza defended the non-recognition of Artsakh by the United States, by pointing out that the government of Armenia has not recognized it either. He said that the reason Armenia does not recognize Artsakh’s independence is that “it knows that if it does that, the chances to negotiate a peaceful settlement finish.”

    In response to a complaint from the audience that Artsakh was left out of the negotiations, Mr. Bryza blamed its absence on the Kocharian government. “Until 1998, Karabakh Armenians were formally part of the negotiations, when it was the former government of Armenia who decided to change that situation. It was not the Co-Chairs who made the decision — that was the government of Armenia,” he said. Mr. Bryza did not mention the fact that Azerbaijan had rejected Artsakh’s inclusion in the talks.

    Responding to another question, Mr. Bryza made the surprising disclosure that the international peacekeeping troops to be stationed in or around Artsakh would not be armed, simply because they would not be able to compel the two sides not to fight, if they are intent on going to war against each other. He stated that “the Co-Chairs have to be smart and skillful enough to put at place a settlement in which the international peacekeepers will be primarily observers.”

    Mr. Bryza candidly told his Armenian audience not to trust the international peacekeepers to secure the peace in Artsakh. He also stated that a “legally binding” referendum to determine the status of Artsakh would be held in several years, after the original Azerbaijani inhabitants, who before the war constituted 20% of the territory’s population, would return to Artsakh.

    Mr. Bryza concluded by urging Armenians to accept “a compromise settlement now,” warning that “a decade ago, Armenia was in a much stronger negotiation position!”

    The terms of the possible settlement, as outlined by Mr. Bryza, is a disaster waiting to happen to Armenians. They are supposed to first turn over to Azerbaijan practically all of the territories surrounding Artsakh. Then the former Azeri inhabitants of Artsakh are to return, after which a referendum would be held on the status of Artsakh, under the watchful eyes of UNARMED international peacekeepers. If Azerbaijan, at a future date, uses its massive petrodollars to acquire sophisticated weaponry and invade Artsakh, particularly after Armenians have given up the buffer zones they are currently holding, the population of Artsakh risks being completely destroyed.

    From the Armenian point of view, the only acceptable solution to the Artsakh conflict would be to either maintain the status quo or to agree to a package deal that would require Azerbaijan’s recognition of Artsakh’s independence and the establishment of a demilitarized zone on the Azeri side of the border, before giving up a single inch of land or allowing the return of a single Azeri refugee!

  • Unanimous Ruling:  Krikorian Probably Made False Statements – Hearing on Sept. 3

    Unanimous Ruling: Krikorian Probably Made False Statements – Hearing on Sept. 3

    State hears Schmidt genocide case

    By Jon Craig • [email protected] • August 13, 2009

    COLUMBUS – U.S. Rep. Jean Schmidt’s Armenian-American opponent probably made false statements during the 2008 campaign about contributions she received from Turkish political action committees, a unanimous three-member panel of the Ohio Elections Commission ruled today.

    David Krikorian, an independent candidate now running as a Democrat, also claimed the Republican congresswoman denied the mass killings of Armenians during World War I constituted genocide. Schmidt’s attorney withdrew an elections complaint about that claim, as well as complaints about three other statements.

    The three-person panel Thursday found probable cause that Krikorian made false statements. Next, fhe full seven-member elections commission will hear evidence Sept. 3 to decide whether the statements were false. If they are, it could result in a written reprimand, a fine or, in rare cases, prosecution.

    Donald C. Brey, Schmidt’s Columbus attorney, argued, “It would be illegal, it would be a crime, for her to take money from a foreign government. . . It’s a false statement.”

    Brey denied Krikorian’s claim that Schmidt’s campaign received $30,000 in “blood money” from Turkish PACs and Turkish people.

    “We actually wanted them to find probable cause,” Krikorian said afterward, complaining he’s been unable to get Schmidt to discuss the Turkish contributions during the campaign. “Jean Schmidt brought these frivolous charges against me. She’s afraid of facing me in an election. She’s not used to people speaking the truth.”

    Christopher P. Finney, Krikorian’s Cincinnati attorney, told the election panel that the Turkish government has poured campaign money into the U.S. government so it does not recognize the Armenian genocide of the early 1900s. “We’re actually disappointed we won’t have a hearing on her being a genocide denier,” Finney said.

    The debate spilled out into the commission lobby after the hearing: Krikorian attempted to argue facts of the case with Brey. “You can’t bring charges and drop them,” Krikorian said.

    “Actually you can,” Brey replied, saying an honorable man, if he tells a lie, would ultimately apologize.

    “I don’t understand why he doesn’t say he misspoke,” Brey told the Enquirer.

    Eventually, Finney got pulled into the verbal fray: “I’m the one who convicted her of making a false statement,” Finney said of an earlier campaign complaint against Schmidt. The Ohio Elections Commission doesn’t convict people, Brey countered. Both attorneys dared the other to file new grievances.

    From: 

    __._,_.___

  • ARMENIA: PUTIN VISIT TO TURKEY SPARKS HOPES AND FEARS IN YEREVAN

    ARMENIA: PUTIN VISIT TO TURKEY SPARKS HOPES AND FEARS IN YEREVAN

    NOTE: Below is Armenian view of Putin’s visit to Turkey. Aram Safarian, a member of the Prosperous Armenia Party, part of Armenia’s government coalition declared that Armenia and Russia are strategic partners. Last year Russian planes used Armenian air fields to attack Georgia, a friend of NATO. Armenia continues to occupy 20% of Azerbaijan territory. Azerbaijan is a U.S. ally

    Bunch of American legislators are circulating letters in congress on behalf of Armenia, an admitted Russian strategic ally against Turkey, a staunch ally of U.S. and member of NATO.

    What is wrong with this picture?

    Eurasia Insight:

    ARMENIA: PUTIN VISIT TO TURKEY SPARKS HOPES AND FEARS IN YEREVAN

    Haroutiun Khachatrian: 8/11/09

    Haroutiun Khachatrian is an editor at Noyan Tapan news service in Yerevan, and a specialist in economic reporting. His reports also appear on EurasiaNet.

    Armenians watched Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s August 6-7 visit to Turkey with a mixture of hope and suspicion. While many in Yerevan see potential benefits arising out of closer Turkish-Russian ties, worries persist among Armenian leaders and experts that Turkey’s importance in the eyes of the Kremlin may come to outweigh that of Armenia.

    Officially, there was no indication that the issue of Armenian-Turkish relations was discussed in any form during Putin’s trip to Ankara. The visit led to Turkey’s agreement to environmental impact studies relating to the Russian-backed South Stream gas pipeline project, as well as the signing of accords on Russian construction of a nuclear power plant, the country’s first.

    So far, the Armenian government has adopted a neutral tone on the visit. But after more than a year of attempts at normalizing relations with Turkey and reopening the Armenian-Turkish border, the visit nevertheless stirred mixed feelings in Yerevan. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    “Of course, it is not a pleasant thing to see your strategic partner [Russia] building ambitious programs with countries with which Armenia has problems,” the online magazine new.am quoted MP Aram Safarian, a member of the Prosperous Armenia Party, part of Armenia’s government coalition, as saying.

    Yet in the energy sphere, Armenian and Russian interests can easily coincide with those of Turkey, noted Alexander Iskandarian, director of the Yerevan-based Caucasus Institute. “Russia is a major shareholder in the Armenian energy system and is interested in the possibility of exporting Armenian electricity to Turkey. This indicates that Turkish-Russian contacts are beneficial to Armenia,” he said.

    Electricity exports to Turkey were expected to start in April-May 2009, but so far have not begun. There has been no official explanation for the delay, but, presumably, diplomatic obstacles are to blame.

    One opposition member, though, believes that Russia’s involvement in Turkey may upset the existing balance of power in the South Caucasus, with uncertain results for Armenia.

    “Russia has already somewhat shattered the balance in the region by intensifying its contacts with Turkey and, especially, with Azerbaijan,” said political analyst Styopa Safarian, a MP affiliated with the Heritage Party and member of parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee. Moscow recently signed an agreement with Baku on gas sales to the Russian republic of Dagestan and named a price for gas purchases from the second phase of the country’s ambitious Shah Deniz project. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    Other experts are more optimistic, believing that the Kremlin will push officials in Ankara to reopen Turkey’s border with Armenia. Such a development would ease Armenia’s ability to export goods. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. “Russia, in fact, is interested in opening the Turkish-Armenian border, as after the August 2008 war, it lost Georgia as a route to Armenia, its military and economic partner,” observed Iskandarian.

    Whether that interest is sufficiently strong to have prompted Putin to try and decouple the reopening of the border from the Karabakh peace process remains unknown, however. Ankara has insisted that Armenia meet a set of conditions on the conflict before it will reopen its border with Armenia. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    In late July, President Serzh Sargsyan stated that he would not visit Turkey in October unless the border is open or is close to opening by that time. [For details, see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    Turkey maintains that it is sincere about wanting to see the border with Armenia reopen, although no noticeable progress has been made on this score recently. “Turkey has prospects in the Caucasus both in terms of Turkey-Armenia and Armenia-Azerbaijan relations,” Turkish Foreign Minister Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said on August 9, the APA news agency reported. “That’s why Turkey is resolute to normalize the relations with Armenia and our contacts on this theme continue.”

    Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is an editor and freelance writer based in Yerevan.

  • Revealing Genocide Documents Found in Ottoman Archives

    Revealing Genocide Documents Found in Ottoman Archives

    By Harut Sassounian
    Publisher, The California Courier

    It is a known fact that numerous documents on the Armenian Genocide were either destroyed or hidden away by the Turkish government. Determined researchers, however, can still discover materials in the Ottoman archives that shed light on important events and personalities of that tragic period.
    In recent years, the Turkish government has selectively published some of the more innocuous Ottoman documents, in order to counter criticism that it was concealing incriminating evidence on the Armenian Genocide. Millions of other documents, however, still remain inaccessible to the general public because researchers have to go to Istanbul and request a particular document by its file number, and pay a processing fee. Even if the documents are obtained, few people within and outside Turkey can read and comprehend them, as they are written in Ottoman Turkish and difficult to decipher Arabic script.
    The California Courier was recently able to obtain from the Ottoman archives important documents regarding the tragic fate of prominent ARF (Dashnak) activist E. Agnouni, who was born around 1865 in Meghri, Armenia. He studied at the University of Geneva and was active in Armenian political movements in Georgia, Russia and France. In 1904, while in Paris, Agnouni supported the efforts of the Young Turk Party to overthrow Sultan Abdul Hamid. After returning to Constantinople (Istanbul), he actively participated in the Young Turk revolution of 1908. He then toured the Armenian communities of Europe and the United States. Agnouni was arrested in Istanbul on April 24, 1915 — along with hundreds of prominent Armenians — and subsequently murdered.
    Prior to his arrest, Agnouni had written a heart-wrenching commentary, published in the April 16, 1915 issue of Asbarez, the Armenian language newspaper in Fresno. The article described disturbing scenes of Armenian soldiers fighting each other in the armies of their respective countries — Russia and the Ottoman Empire. In his article, Agnouni urged Armenian-Americans to come to the aid of their suffering compatriots back home.
    Not surprisingly, the Ottoman government had kept track of Agnouni’s every move. This was evidenced by our recent discovery in the Istanbul archives of the Turkish translation of his 1915 article. The translator was an Armenian official named Artin who worked for the Turkish government as a “Censor of Armenian newspapers.”
    Censor Artin added the following revealing note: “This translated article belongs to E. Agnouni. He is a member of the Dashnak Party. His real name is Khachadour Maloumian. He is a citizen of Russia. He came to Istanbul during the war and until recently did not do any work other than carrying out propaganda for his party. During his residence here, he made one or two trips to Europe. He is part of the last group that was deported and exiled.”
    Bishop Krikoris Balakian, who was among those rounded up by the Turkish government on April 24, 1915, narrated the following bone-chilling episode about Agnouni’s arrest in his monumental two-volume memoir titled, “Hay Koghkota,” (Armenian Golgotha). When Turkish police officers came to his house to arrest him, Agnouni asked in a state of shock: “Does Talat know about this?” Agnouni was completely dumb-founded when the officers showed him Talat’s signature on his arrest warrant. He asked: “I just had lunch with Talat — how come he did not say anything to me?”
    Agnouni was stunned by his arrest because he could not believe that Talat would betray him after he had saved his life during the Young Turk revolution of 1908, by hiding him in his own home at the risk of his own life. According to Balakian, when Agnouni finally realized that he was being led to his death, he told his fellow prisoners: “I don’t regret dying, since I knew that death was inevitable. My only regret is that we were deceived by these Turkish villains.” Balakian expressed his deep regret that Armenians who put their trust in Turks realized their mistake too late – only when they were on their way to their deaths!
    Several new documents just obtained from the Ottoman archives reveal for the first time that the King of Spain made repeated efforts to obtain the release of Agnouni, Daniel Varoujan, Siamanto, and other prominent Armenians. It is not known what prompted the Spanish King to involve himself in such a humanitarian endeavor.
    In two letters dated April 24, 1916, and May 10, 1916, Spain’s Amb. Julian del Arroyo wrote to Turkey’s Foreign Minister Halil Bey, advising him that His Majesty King Alfonso XIII was asking Sultan Mehmed V to spare the lives of the above named Armenian prisoners. Regrettably, unbeknown to the Spanish King, these Armenians had been killed long before his praiseworthy intervention.
    Several recently obtained confidential memos between various Turkish officials indicate that Interior Minister Talat finally made up a fake story about the fate of these prominent Armenians. Talat wrote to Foreign Minister Halil Bey on July 25, 1916, asking him to advise the Spanish Ambassador that the Armenians in question, while being led to the Diyarbekir Military Court, had overcome their guards and escaped to Russia! Talat concealed the fact that the Armenian prisoners had been killed months before the Spanish King’s inquiry. This episode demonstrates that Talat was covering up his crimes as he was committing them!
    Reading these newly discovered memos written by Turkish leaders leaves no doubt that the Armenian Genocide was centrally planned and executed. Minister of Interior Talat ordered the deportation and execution of Armenians and demanded detailed reports on their movements and conditions. In some instances, Talat personally wrote letters inquiring about the whereabouts of several prominent Armenians!
    Despite all attempts to purge incriminating documents, ample evidence of Turkish complicity in the Armenian Genocide still remains in the Ottoman archives!
  • horrors of the Armenian genocide

    horrors of the Armenian genocide

    An uncompromising look at the horrors of the Armenian genocide

    01:00 AM EDT on Sunday, August 2, 2009

    By Michael Janusonis <[email protected]>

    Journal Arts Writer

    Paolo and Vittorio Taviani of The Lark Farm.

    AP / HENNY RAY ABRAMS

    The 13th Rhode Island International Film Festival officially begins its six-day run Tuesday night with a gala at the Providence Performing Arts Center, followed by a series of short films on the giant screen. But it will actually kick off Monday with a couple of special screenings: a 10 a.m. showing of Monsters Vs. Aliens 3-D at Providence Place Cinemas and a 6:30 p.m. screening at the Columbus Theater of Paolo and Vittorio Taviani’s 2007 historical epic The Lark Farm.

    Despite its bucolic name, The Lark Farm is an uncompromising look at the horrors of the Armenian genocide launched by the Turks in 1915, when World War I was going badly for them. The massacre was carried out amidst fears that the substantial Christian Armenian population, who had always been second-class citizens in the Muslim Ottoman Empire, was going to join the Russians who were fighting the Turks in the war.

    During the genocide, which began in 1915, many Armenian men were arrested and killed. The women and children were deported to a desert region near the Syrian border, though many of them perished during the forced marches. In the end, it is estimated that between 1 million and 1.5 million Armenians died in this holocaust. Unnervingly, their story parallels events that began two decades later in Germany when the Nazis attempted to exterminate the Jews of Europe.

    Trying to tell such a broad-based story is a daunting undertaking, except perhaps as a documentary. But the writing-directing Tavianis, who are in their late 70s and whose output over the decades includes the groundbreaking Padre Padrone and Night of the Shooting Stars, made this history very personal by focusing on one family as it struggled to survive in an increasingly bleak and trying situation.

    The Lark Farm revolves around the lives of the prosperous Avankian family, who live in a fine house in the city and have recently restored the big house at their homestead in the countryside, Lark Farm, to its former ornate grandeur. But the war has broken out, threatening the already wobbly Ottoman Empire, and the Avankians are hearing inklings that things will not go well for the Armenians.

    When the family patriarch dies at the start of the film, he warns with his dying breath to flee, but no one pays heed. His son, Aram (Tcheky Karyo), a wealthy businessman, believes things will pretty much continue as they always have with just a few rough spots. His beatific wife, Armineh (Arsinee Khanjian), puts up a brave front, but is not so convinced. His sister, the headstrong Nunik (Paz Vega), has fallen in love with a Turkish officer (Alessandro Preziosi), who plots to leave the army and flee with her across the border because he has heard rumors that bad things might come. “There’s no hope for us here. I’m a Turk and you’re Armenian,” he tells Nunik.

    It seems like a set-up for what will be a Romeo-Juliet romance, but The Lark Farm soon grows much darker even than that classic tale. Soon the resentment toward the Armenians, who are seen by some Turks as a sort of fifth column of traitors and spies, spirals out of control. Plans are afoot to arrest the Armenian leaders quietly, including Aram. But things quickly get out of hand when a hot-headed officer gets involved and events slip away from the control of the colonel who is in charge of this region. A decent man who has befriended the Armenians, he tries to prevent the killing, but is too late.

    The attack on the Avankians and their neighbors, who have arrived at Lark Farm in hopes of finding refuge from the Turks, is horrific and bloody. It sets the tone for the terrors that will follow, which will see most of the men murdered and the women sent off on a long march toward the desert with little food to sustain them. In desperation, some of them turn to selling sexual favors for a loaf of bread. Others are killed outright or left to die at the side of the road. The Lark Farm becomes a study in human cruelty.

    Cinematically, it’s powerful and yet that power is muted somewhat by the melodramatic way events unfold on screen. The Armenians are pictured as innocents and saints; most Turks as soulless monsters. Some scenes and characters are overplayed. At one point, a Turkish soldier who has arrived at the Avankian manse during their dinner, covetously looks at a tureen that’s filled with soup, spilling its contents on the table and making a grab for the tureen with greed in his eyes. There are many such scenes that lack subtlety.

    Nevertheless, the plight of the Avankians, whose brother in Italy desperately attempts to raise money to get them out of Turkey, is emotionally riveting. It expands to include the tale of a Muslim beggar who tries to help the family, which has always been good to him, hatching an elaborate rescue plan. It goes back to focus on Nunik who finds herself in a camp where she falls in love with another Turkish soldier and is involved in a selfless act to save what’s left of her family. Vega gives a poignant performance as Nunik, who has nowhere left to turn. She puts a face on the struggles of the Armenian people during this dark period.