Minister of Culture Ghassan Salameh: “Reading has become
more essential than ever in an age shaped by digital communications and artificial intelligence”
Haigazian University held its Book Day on Thursday, October 29, 2026, under the auspices of the Ministry of Culture, in a celebration of books, scholarly publishing, and the rich literary and intellectual heritage
of Lebanon and its Lebanese-Armenian community.
The event highlighted the University’s longstanding contribution to academic scholarship and cultural preservation, bringing together its publishing legacy, historical publications, rare books, and archival materials
that bear witness to the evolution of literary and intellectual life in Lebanon.
The official opening featured a welcoming address by Rev. Dr. Paul Haidostian, President of Haigazian University, followed by remarks by H.E. Dr. Ghassan Salameh, Minister of Culture. Their addresses underscored
the significance of books and publishing in preserving collective memory, advancing knowledge, and sustaining cultural heritage.
Haidostian reflected on the significance of books as vessels of memory, expressions of identity, and bridges connecting generations and cultures. Drawing on the symbolism of October as a season of
harvest in Lebanon and many other parts of the world, he noted that a university’s harvest is reflected in what it speaks, teaches, writes, researches, and publishes. He also highlighted October’s particular significance for Armenians, who, since the creation
of the Armenian alphabet in the fifth century, have celebrated their cultural heritage through writing, translation, and publishing.
Marking the University’s 71 years in this part of Beirut, known for its cultural, artistic, and educational institutions, Haidostian reaffirmed the centrality of the written word to the University’s
academic mission and cultural identity. He emphasized the importance of preserving linguistic and historical heritage, expressing hope that Book Day would mark another step in the University’s enduring commitment to the Word, the Book, knowledge, and cultural
heritage, one of Lebanon’s greatest strengths, deeply rooted in the history of its people and continuing to enrich its present and future.
In his address, Minister of Culture Ghassan Salameh dismissed claims that the book is dying, stressing that reading has become more essential than ever in an age shaped by digital communications and
artificial intelligence.
Salameh highlighted three key purposes of reading: learning, enjoyment, and, increasingly, healing the mental distraction caused by the constant flow of digital content. He noted that mobile reading
is often fragmented and shaped by algorithms, encouraging rapid shifts between topics and platforms while exposing users to harmful content, including hate speech and vulgarity.
Citing studies linking these habits to declining attention spans among adults and children, Salameh emphasized the importance of sustained reading in cultivating focus, patience, and deeper understanding.
He concluded that reading is now vital not only for acquiring knowledge and enjoying literature, but also for countering distraction and helping younger generations regain their ability to concentrate.
The opening ceremony was followed by the inauguration of an exhibition at the Matossian Art Gallery, featuring publications issued by Haigazian University Press and volumes of the Haigazian Armenological Review.
The exhibition also showcased rare books, historical publications, early Lebanese-Armenian newspapers and periodicals, printing clichés, and other archival materials from the University’s collection, offering a glimpse into the history and development of Armenian
and Lebanese-Armenian publishing. A particularly prominent feature of the exhibition was a selection of Armenian manuscripts by Rev. Dr. Armenag Haigazian (1870–1919), the University’s namesake, an esteemed educator and scholar who became a victim of the Armenian
Genocide.
A highlight of the day was the unveiling of “The New Book (aged) 2025”, a sculpture by artist Hady Sy, consigned by Banque BEMO for a two-year display at
the University, as part of the “Virtual Pantheon” initiative, honoring the legacy of late MP. Dr. Antranig Manouguian. In his speech, CEO and General Manager of Banque BEMO, Dr. Riad B. Obeji highly valued the added value of the sculpture giving an
artistic dimension to the celebration and reflecting the enduring significance of the book as a medium of knowledge, creativity, and intellectual engagement. In his heartfelt words, the artist Hadi Sy expressed his gratitude and pride for his work being displayed
at Haigazian University.
The literary program continued at the Helen Barsumian Grimsley Fountain in the Mugar Garden with a reading by author Suha Naimy from
The Pitted Face: Memoirs of a Vagrant Soul, adapted from and inspired by the original work of Mikhail Naimy, one of the prominent figures of modern Arabic literature. The reading offered an opportunity
to revisit Naimy’s literary legacy through a contemporary interpretation of his work.
The day concluded with an Armenian-language roundtable discussion entitled “The Historical Journey and Printing Process of Lebanese-Armenian Books.” The discussion brought together author Baruyr Aghbashian, publishers
Vicken Hanessian and Hagop Havatian, and editor Garo Hovhannessian. Moderated by Dr. Antranig Dakessian, Director of the Armenian Diaspora Research Center at Haigazian University, the roundtable examined the historical trajectory of Lebanese-Armenian publishing,
the processes and practices of book production, and the role of publishers, editors, and authors in safeguarding and transmitting this distinctive literary heritage across generations.
Book Day 2026 also offered an occasion to reflect on the scope and continuity of Haigazian University’s scholarly publishing endeavors. Through Haigazian University Press, the University has published around 50
books in Armenian, English, and Arabic, addressing a broad range of subjects, including Armenian and Lebanese-Armenian history, identity, culture, religion, education, literature, and the social sciences. Established in 1970, the
Haigazian Armenological Review has published its 46th volume in 2026, thus serving as a longstanding scholarly platform dedicated to Armenian Studies and the advancement of Armenian studies.
Through this initiative, Haigazian University reaffirmed its commitment to scholarship, the preservation of historical memory, and the promotion of cultural dialogue. By bringing together scholarly publications,
historical collections, literary _expression_, and critical discussion, Book Day 2026 highlighted the enduring role of books in shaping intellectual life, sustaining cultural identity, and transmitting knowledge across generations within Lebanon’s multilingual
and multicultural society.
—
Science21:00, 27 October 2026
Read the article in: العربيةՀայերենРусский
Photo: Max Alexander/STARMUS
Artificial intelligence is advancing at a pace that is transforming the world – and raising a question that once belonged to science fiction: what happens when machines become smarter than humans?
A British-Canadian computer scientist and cognitive psychologist, Geoffrey Hinton was awarded the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics, jointly with John Hopfield, for foundational discoveries and inventions that enabled machine learning using artificial neural networks. One of the pioneers of modern artificial intelligence, Hinton spent decades helping machines learn in ways that once seemed impossible. His groundbreaking work on artificial neural networks helped lay the foundations for many of the AI systems now reshaping our world. Often called the “Godfather of AI,” Hinton has also become one of the technology’s most prominent voices of caution, warning about its potential risks.
In 2023, Hinton left Google to speak more openly about the dangers of the technology he had helped develop. His concerns go beyond the possibility of machines replacing human workers. He has warned that increasingly intelligent AI systems could become difficult to control, while their misuse could bring new threats ranging from sophisticated cyberattacks to biological weapons.
Yet Hinton does not believe humanity should abandon AI. He believes AI could bring enormous benefits to humanity, but only if its development is accompanied by serious efforts to manage the risks.
In an exclusive interview with Armenpress at the STARMUS VIII festival in Spain’s Canary Islands, Hinton discusses the greatest threats posed by AI, whether governments can regulate a technology advancing at extraordinary speed, the responsibilities of the scientists developing it, and what may determine whether AI becomes one of humanity’s greatest achievements or one of its greatest mistakes.
Armenpress: I know this is probably the question you’re asked most often, but I’d still like to ask it. As someone widely regarded as the “Godfather of AI,” what do you see as the greatest risks artificial intelligence poses to humanity?
Geoffrey Hinton: There are many different risks. The shorter-term risks are mainly to do with the people misusing AI. It’s getting to be very good at cyber-attacks. Probably the two most immediate risks are people will use it for very sophisticated cyber-attacks. And once AI is better than people, and it will be better than people quite soon at doing cyber-attacks, the only way to defend is to use another AI. And the problem with a cyber-attack is the attacker only needs to be successful once, and the defender needs to beat the attacker every time. So that’s very worrying, and we’re likely to see very bad things over the next few years.
And the other immediate threat is making biological viruses. They can already design new viruses. People have shown they can design new viruses to attack bacteria. They’re already capable of designing new viruses to attack people, multicellular organisms. And that’s extremely worrying, because it makes it much easier for some terrorist group to design multiple viruses.
Another use is in lethal autonomous weapons, battle robots, which is already beginning to happen. And all the big countries that produce arms are working on that.
Another bad use in the short term is creating fake videos to corrupt elections.
And then there’s sort of accidental harms where the AI companies, to make all their investment back, need to replace a lot of jobs with AI workers. And that will cause a lot of unemployment. And two things will happen at the same time. You’ll get a lot of unemployment, so unemployed people will need to be supported. And the government will lose its tax base because they won’t be paying taxes. And as Bill Gates has pointed out recently, the only solution for that is to tax AI. But the tech bros who are creating AI are very much against taxation, especially of them. And so there’s going to be a big problem, which is going to cause social chaos. So unemployed people, and the government not having the money to support them.
Then, separately from all that, there’s the existential threat of AIs getting smarter than people and taking over, having intentions of their own, and just taking over from people, making us irrelevant. We’re just kind of serfs who run the power plants.
Armenpress: And is it possible for AI to outsmart us?
Geoffrey Hinton: Absolutely. It already can in many things. So it’s clear AI already knows much more than you do, right? It can answer any question pretty well.
It’s already much smarter than almost all mathematicians at mathematics, and it’s getting smarter all the time. So yeah, it’s definitely going to get smarter than people. Almost all the experts think we’ll get superintelligence. What superintelligence means is being smarter than people at almost any intellectual task. And most people think it’ll get there within 10 years, most of the experts don’t.
So we’re going to get superintelligence. It’s going to be much smarter than us, and we have to figure out how to design it so we can share the planet with it. Because at present, we’re still building it. Although what’s happening now is, most new developments in AI are produced by AI. Most of the code for a new AI is written by AI, not by people. And so we’re getting what’s called recursive self-improvement, where the AI is making the AI better. And that’s very scary, because that can go very fast.
Armenpress: Recently, there have been cases in which AI agents gained unauthorized access to government systems. Some governments are now considering laws and regulations to address these risks. Do you think these regulations can help?
Geoffrey Hinton: Well, obviously there need to be regulatory things. If I want to make a new drug, I can’t just make a drug and release it on the market. In America, I have to satisfy the FDA that the drug is safe or does more good than harm. And I have to do the work to prove that to them. And certainly the AI company should be like that. They should have to prove that, statistically, that this new chatbot is safe. It’s not going to say racist things. It’s not going to tell people how to make bombs. It’s not going to go off and create agents that attack other companies.
There should at least be something like the FDA that you can’t release a chatbot until you convince them it’s safe. So at present, there’s many more regulations controlling a sandwich. If I make a sandwich, I have to satisfy all sorts of regulations. If I make an AI that could potentially wipe out humanity, I don’t have to satisfy any regulations. That’s crazy. And the idea that the companies can regulate themselves is just we know, for example, if you take energy companies and say, “You shouldn’t be polluting, but we’ll let you regulate yourself.” Or if you take tobacco companies and say, “Well, you should warn people that it could cause cancer, but we’ll let you design the labels that do the warning.” everybody knows that’s crazy. The only reason we don’t have these regulations on AI is because very rich people control the American politicians.
Armenpress: What responsibilities should scientists working on AI have?
Geoffrey Hinton: Well, I think as one of the scientists who helped develop it, I feel I’ve got a responsibility to warn people how dangerous it is. You can’t sort of develop it and then just walk away with the money and have a good time. I think you need to warn people that, look, this stuff is really dangerous. And unless we do something to control those dangers, that might be the end of humanity. I think we’re probably going to survive, but only if we do something to control the dangers.
Armenpress: Like in sci-fi books that we see the world after robots and things like that.
Geoffrey Hinton: Yeah. And people used to say it’s just science fiction. But after the Hugging Face attack, people realized it’s not just science fiction. We’re like we’re in the first part of a science fiction movie.
And we need to get the right ending.
Armenpress: Can AI’s potential benefits outweigh its potential to cause harm?
Geoffrey Hinton: Unlike nuclear weapons, AI has a lot of benefits in healthcare, in education, in making industries more efficient, in getting rid of boring jobs. It’ll greatly increase productivity in all industries. Not immediately. It’ll take a few years. We don’t want to get rid of it, but we won’t benefit from that if we don’t deal with the risks. So we have two futures. We have one future in which we develop AI without taking enough care about the risks, and it wipes us out. And another future in which we develop it, and we put a lot of work into coping with the risks, and then we have a great future, and AI will be a very positive thing.
Armenpress: You are often called the “Godfather of AI,” yet today artificial intelligence is increasingly seen as a threat, with concerns about job losses and its potential risks. How do you feel about this title at a time when so many people are worried about the technology you helped shape?
Geoffrey Hinton: Well, as long as I know that I’m encouraging people to figure out how to stop social chaos when AI starts taking people’s jobs, and how to stop AI taking over, then I’m okay. But a lot of the people still developing AI just want to make lots of money by developing it very fast and not worrying about the risks. And I think that’s very bad.
Armenpress: And the last question. What do you consider the biggest scientific achievement of the 21st century?
Geoffrey Hinton: Chatbots.
The Armenpress coverage of the STARMUS festival is supported by Team Telecom Armenia.
Read the article in: العربيةՀայերենРусский
Published by Armenpress, original at
—
Science21:00, 30 October 2026
Read the article in: ՀայերենРусский
Somewhere in the vast expanse of the observable universe, a planet may be orbiting a star 30 light-years away from Earth, with conditions that could, in some respects, resemble those on our own planet. On the scale of the Milky Way, that is practically in our cosmic neighborhood. Yet, with the technology currently available to humanity, such a journey would take an extraordinarily long time, potentially hundreds of thousands or even millions of years.
This example illustrates the paradox at the heart of humanity’s quest to find other Earth-like planets: the universe may be full of worlds that seem to offer what we need, yet they could remain forever beyond our reach.
Swiss astrophysicist Michel Mayor, who shared the 2019 Nobel Prize in Physics with Didier Queloz for the discovery of an exoplanet orbiting a Sun-like star, believes humanity must come to terms with this reality.
He made these remarks at STARMUS VIII, held on the Spanish islands of Tenerife and La Palma. Co-founded by Armenian astrophysicist Garik Israelian and British astrophysicist and legendary Queen guitarist Brian May, the festival once again brought together leading scientists from around the world to discuss science.
“Humanity Will Not Migrate to an Earth Twin” was the title of Mayor’s keynote address at the festival. He warned his audience against looking to other planets for an escape from the problems humanity itself has created on Earth.
“We do not have a planet B. We have to take care of Earth.”
Mayor also addressed two important questions: whether large-scale settlements could be established on Mars and how common Earth-like planets are in our galaxy. Although astronomical discoveries in recent years have radically transformed our understanding of planetary systems, he stressed that finding a potentially habitable planet does not mean humanity will ever be able to reach it.
Why Mars is no second Earth
In recent years, the idea of moving millions of people to Mars, promoted by several wealthy entrepreneurs, has become a subject of widespread debate. But how realistic are such ambitions? Mayor urged his audience to consider the actual conditions on the Red Planet.
Mars has an atmospheric pressure roughly one hundredth that of Earth. Its atmosphere consists primarily of carbon dioxide, argon and other gases, with virtually no oxygen suitable for human respiration. Its average surface temperature is around minus 60 degrees Celsius. Extreme cold, powerful winds and cosmic radiation pose additional challenges, while Martian soil is unsuitable for conventional agriculture without substantial treatment.
Establishing a permanent human presence there would therefore require pressurized habitats, protective domes or underground facilities capable of shielding people from radiation, extreme cold and other environmental hazards.
“Do you really dream of going to this surface?” Mayor asked, challenging optimistic visions of large-scale Martian settlement.
In his view, the problem is not simply the difficulty of building habitats or growing food. The broader question is whether humanity should regard another planet as a realistic refuge if, for one reason or another, Earth becomes uninhabitable.
A galaxy full of planets
The prospects of discovering other planets are far more promising than the possibility of one day moving to them.
The Milky Way is approximately 100,000 light-years across and contains hundreds of billions of stars. For much of the history of astronomy, humanity was unaware of the existence of planetary systems beyond our Solar System. However, particularly over the past decades, as our understanding of star formation has deepened, it has become increasingly clear that planet formation is a natural consequence of this process.
Observations of young stars have subsequently provided compelling evidence that they are often surrounded by disks of gas and dust from which planets can form. Instruments at the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) allow astronomers to study these disks in unprecedented detail.
Today, the question is no longer whether other planetary systems exist. Scientists are now trying to determine how common Earth-like planets are in the universe and how many of them might have conditions favorable to life.
For a planet to be considered potentially habitable, it must orbit its star at a distance that, provided other necessary conditions are present, allows liquid water to exist on its surface. If a planet is too close to its star, it may be too hot; if it is too far away, it may be too cold. This range of distances is known as the habitable zone. However, simply being located within this zone does not mean that a planet is inhabited or even possesses all the conditions necessary for life.
How scientists find distant worlds
Because planets are generally much fainter than the stars they orbit, astronomers have developed indirect methods to detect them.
Mayor explains that one of these is known as the Doppler or radial velocity method. It makes it possible to measure the slight movements of a star caused by the gravitational influence of a planet orbiting it. By observing changes in the star’s velocity, scientists can infer the presence of a planet and estimate its mass.
Another method, known as the transit technique, detects the slight dimming of a star when a planet passes between the star and the observer. The amount of light blocked can reveal the planet’s size, while repeated transits can help determine its orbital period.
NASA’s Kepler space telescope demonstrated the effectiveness of this method. By monitoring more than 100,000 stars in a fixed region of the sky, it detected periodic dips in their brightness, indicating the presence of orbiting planets. Among its discoveries were planetary systems in which several planets orbit the same star.
The scientist notes that the two methods complement each other: transit observations provide information about a planet’s size, while radial velocity measurements help determine its mass. By combining these measurements, researchers can estimate a planet’s density and gain insight into its likely composition.
Mayor also emphasizes the importance of studying planetary atmospheres as a promising direction for future research. When a planet passes in front of its star, a small portion of the starlight travels through the planet’s atmosphere. Analyzing changes in the light spectrum can reveal information about the atmosphere’s chemical composition.
Such observations can help scientists determine whether distant planets have atmospheric conditions compatible with life.
Finding an Earth twin is not the same as reaching it
Despite the growing number of exoplanet discoveries, Mayor cautions against confusing theoretical astronomical possibilities with practical feasibility.
Even a planet that appears promising for life could be so distant that reaching it would be impossible for humanity. To illustrate the scale of this challenge, he asks his audience to imagine an Earth-like planet located 30 light-years away.
Compared with the Milky Way’s vast expanse of 100,000 light-years, this distance may seem relatively small. Yet it is approximately one billion times the distance between Earth and the Moon.
At the speeds achieved by spacecraft used in the Apollo missions, reaching such a planet would take millions of years.
Mayor explains that increasing a spacecraft’s speed would require enormous amounts of energy. The challenge is not simply to travel twice as fast, but to achieve velocities far beyond the capabilities of today’s human spaceflight technology.
He argues that even if scientists discover a nearby planet with conditions favorable to life, that would not make it a realistic destination for humanity.
In Mayor’s view, this is a fundamental limitation that must be taken into account in any discussion about the future of space exploration. The universe may contain countless worlds, but their existence does not guarantee that humans will be able to travel between them.
There is no Planet B
The search for exoplanets has radically expanded our understanding of humanity’s place in the universe. Scientists now know that planetary systems are widespread, while increasingly sophisticated instruments allow them to study worlds that may resemble Earth in certain respects.
Yet an enormous gap remains between discovering a potentially habitable planet and establishing a human settlement there.
“If Earth begins to become uninhabitable, humanity will have no possibility of emigrating to another exoplanet,” Mayor says.
He notes that the search for other planets continues to be of great scientific value, offering opportunities to understand how planets form, how their atmospheres evolve and whether life could exist elsewhere in the universe. However, Mayor makes clear that this research cannot replace our responsibility to protect the only home we have: Earth.
“We have to take care of Earth. There is no Planet B”.
The Armenpress coverage of the STARMUS festival is supported by Team Telecom Armenia.
Published by Armenpress, original at
—
Caucasian Knot
Oct 29, 2026
An Armenian native has been sentenced to a long term in the Russian Federation for comments on social media.
The Second Eastern District Military Court sentenced Armenian native Gevorg Grigoryan to nine and a half years in a penal colony, whose comments on social media were deemed by the prosecution as calls for terrorism and extremism.
Grigoryan, who lived in the Trans-Baikal Territory and held citizenship of Russia and Armenia, was tried on charges of spreading fakes about the Russian army, rehabilitating Nazism, as well as calls for terrorism and extremism.
Grigoryan was detained and placed under house arrest in June 2025, with the criminal case initiated due to anti-Russian comments on Armenian resources. In them, he wrote that “Hitler should have destroyed them all” or that “after Ukraine, Russian troops will enter Armenia,” reports Mediazona*.
According to an acquaintance, Grigoryan wrote these comments because he was “upset that Moscow did not help his homeland in the war for Karabakh.” Later, Grigoryan agreed with the charges and “repented of his words,” the publication notes.
The Investigative Committee for the Trans-Baikal Territory stated on August 20, 2025, in a release about the detention of a local resident that he was accused of rehabilitating Nazism, inciting hatred, committed using the internet with justification or propaganda of violence.
“According to the investigation, since September 2023, the accused systematically posted public comments in one of the messengers containing offensive formulations that humiliate the dignity of a group of persons based on nationality, openly supported the ideology of Nazism, used Nazi slogans, and also spread messages whose content was aimed at inciting hatred and enmity on national grounds,” the agency’s message states.
Initially, Grigoryan was charged only with rehabilitating Nazism and inciting hatred, and he was to be tried in the Central District Court of Chita, but over time new articles appeared in the case, and in August 2026, the case was transferred to the district military court.
As a result, the Second Eastern District Military Court sentenced Grigoryan to nine and a half years of imprisonment. According to the criminal case card on the court’s website, his case on criminal articles was submitted to the court on August 5, and the verdict was read out on October 20 by Judge Zyryanov.
In December 2025, Gevorg Grigoryan’s data was entered into the register of terrorists and extremists of Rosfinmonitoring. The young man was born in Yerevan in 2003, and he turned 23 in June.
We have updated the applications on Android and IOS! We would appreciate feedback, ideas for development both in Google Play/App Store and on the pages of the Caucasian Knot in social networks. Without installing a VPN, you can read us on Telegram (in Dagestan, Chechnya, and Ingushetia – with a VPN). Through a VPN, you can continue to read “Caucasian Knot” on the website as usual, and on social networks Facebook**, Instagram**, “VKontakte”, “Odnoklassniki” and X. You can watch videos of the “Caucasian Knot” on YouTube.
* included in the Russian register of foreign agents.
** the activities of the Meta company (which owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp) are banned in Russia.
Translated automatically via OpenAI from class=”gmail_default”> Источник: Кавказский Узел
—
Caucasian Knot
Oct 31, 2026
The editor of the encyclopedia “Armenians of the Black Sea Region” publicly apologized to the residents of Abkhazia.
Editor Christopher Mkhtaryan recorded a video message in which he publicly apologized for the information in the first volume of the encyclopedia “Armenians of the Black Sea Region,” which caused outrage among the residents of Abkhazia.
As reported by “Caucasian Knot”, the Armenian community in Abkhazia has previously faced threats and insults. On February 20, 2025, the Investigative Committee of Russia opened a case for inciting hatred and hostility with threats of violence against Armenians, Russians, and Abkhazians living in Abkhazia who hold Russian citizenship. According to the investigation, calls for the persecution of these citizens, including violence against Armenians, were spread on the internet.
On February 17, 2025, a resident of Gagra, Enver Bganba apologized to the Armenian community after an audio recording with threats was circulated regarding the results of the first round of the presidential elections. Bganba claimed that the audio recordings were edited, and in a published video of a meeting with a community representative, he explained that he spoke out of emotion and did not intend to offend the Armenian people.
The editor of the first volume of the encyclopedia “Armenians of the Black Sea Region” Christopher Mkhtaryan recorded a video message apologizing to the residents of Abkhazia. He acknowledged his responsibility for the appearance of information in the publication that he called pseudoscientific and that hurt the national feelings of Abkhazians.
“As the editor, I share my share of responsibility, having shown incompetence and allowing the article to go to print. In this regard, I apologize to the public of Abkhazia and assure that I had no intention to tarnish or offend the national feelings of Abkhazians,” Mkhtaryan stated in the video message, which was published on October 30 by the Telegram channel “News | Emergency Abkhazia.”
The first volume of the encyclopedia was published in 2020. Its author and compiler of the controversial article is candidate of historical sciences Igor Kuznetsov, Mkhtaryan clarified. In the same volume, there is a large article “Abkhazia,” in which, according to Mkhtaryan, the information is presented correctly.
According to the editor, immediately after the release of the first volume, the print run was returned to the printing house, and the article “Abaza” was corrected. The encyclopedia was not intended for sale, and the copies that appeared on marketplaces have no relation to the creators of the publication, he stated.
“The electronic version of the encyclopedia has also been removed from the internet. Only a few copies distributed during the presentation remain, and currently, all remaining volumes have been seized and will be sent for disposal,” Mkhtaryan added.
He expressed regret about what happened.
Abkhaz veterans demanded to hold the authors of the encyclopedia accountable
The article “Abaza” caused outrage among the residents of Abkhazia, as it provided an indecent interpretation of the name of Abkhazians and Abazins, JAMnews explained on October 30. The veterans’ organization “Aruaa” regarded the publication as a provocation and demanded measures against the authors and those involved in the publication of the book, including declaring them persona non grata and initiating criminal cases.
At a meeting of the Council for Veterans Affairs under the President of Abkhazia, representatives of the Armenian community also condemned the publication. Meeting participants considered the statements in the book offensive to the Abkhaz people and distorting historical facts. Following the meeting, the vice president instructed relevant agencies to take measures to prevent the distribution of the publication, reported the newspaper “Republic of Abkhazia” on October 23, citing the press service of the president of the republic.
On October 28, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Abkhazia reported on its website about the inspection of the materials of the encyclopedia. The agency indicated that it is checking the actions of the authors and publishers for signs of crimes under the criminal legislation of the republic.
The article was conceived as part of a series of publications on ethnic stereotypes and national nicknames, explained its author Igor Kuznetsov. “I believed that knowledge is the best weapon against national prejudices,” he wrote in an open letter published on October 22 on the website Russia-Armenia.info.
Kuznetsov acknowledged the publication of the article as erroneous. According to him, in 2023, after criticism, it was decided to withdraw the original version of the article, and the print run was revised, replacing the controversial text. As the author claimed, about ten copies distributed at the presentation remained uncorrected. After the release of the second volume, the project was closed, he added.
The practice of public apologies initiated by Ramzan Kadyrov has spread beyond Chechnya and extended to other regions of Russia. More about this practice can be read in the “Caucasian Knot” reference “The Fashion for Apologies: From Chechnya to the Outskirts”. “Caucasian Knot” also maintains “A Chronicle of Public Apologies in the Caucasus”.
Translated automatically via OpenAI from class=”gmail_default”>
Источник: Кавказский Узел
—
|