Barber shop visits are normally tame affairs, but today involved a rather heavy conversation with my hair cutter of choice in Mile End.

The 67-year-old Greek Cypriot, who is normally very quiet, today opened a conversation by asking if I had seen the news last week that France had condemned Turkey’s genocide against the Greeks.

A massacre of Armenians by the Turks.

Turkey denies the allegations, claiming deaths occurred in the course of war.

My limited understanding of this subject is the Armenians were literally slaughtered and many Greeks were also persecuted.

My barber was far more explicit. He recounted stories told to him by his father and grandfather about Greeks being thrown overboard at sea and left to drown, babies having their throats cut, bodies being washed ashore and so on.

Charming conversation.

Wikipedia states there was a violent campaign by the Ottoman Empire against the Greek population of the Empire during World War I and its aftermath (1914–1923).

“The campaign, also known as the Pontic genocide, included massacres, forced deportations involving death marches, summary expulsions, arbitrary executions, and destruction of Christian Orthodox cultural, historical and religious monuments.”

This appears to be fact. I can’t see any academic disagreement about this having occurred.

It may have been in the context of a crumbling empire defending its territory, but that’s no excuse for genocide.

The Greeks and Armenians may have retaliated and instigated attacks, but that is no excuse for arbitrary state-sanctioned murder.

I just think Turkey should acknowledge that atrocities occurred (before the modern country was created) and move on.

• Here is an interesting article, which explains more.

Activists of the Ukrainian women's movement FEMEN stage a performance in front of the Christ the Saviour Cathedral in Moscow, on December 9, 2011, to protest against alleged mass fraud in the Russian December 4 parliamentary polls.

According to Wikipedia, in Kiev there are about 300 active participants in the movement, which comprises some 20 topless activists and 300 fully clothed members.

Most of their early protests were in Ukraine, but they have since appeared in Russia, The Vatican, Paris and now in Switzerland.

Ukrainian feminists protest against sexism in the media.

FEMEN justifies its provocative methods, stating: “This is the only way to be heard in this country. If we staged simple protests with banners, then our claims would not have been noticed”.

The organisation plans to become the biggest and the most influential feminist movement in Europe, a goal I suspect they will rapidly achieve.

This web page features a selection of powerful images (warning, may offend).

Issues that have prompted protest include:

• French former IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s attitude towards women;
• Sex tourism and the trafficking of women in Ukraine;
• The death penalty given to Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, a mother of two children who was sentenced to death by stoning in Iran on charges of adultery;
• Saudi Arabia’s ban on women driving cars;
• Animal welfare conditions at the Kiev zoo;
• Prostitution during a European soccer tournament.

I’m not one to support protest for the sake of it. In fact, I find the Occupy campaign somewhat strange and pointless, but FEMEN seems to have a point.

A scene from the FEMEN protest at Davos.

They have also brought to my attention the fact Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world that shamefully doesn’t allow women to drive.

FEMEN clearly now has a more global agenda and it will be interesting to see if the movement attracts members and support outside Ukraine.

The potential downsides include that copycats will be less ideologically pure; the media and public will become indifferent about “shocking” demonstrations that are no longer shocking; and someone could get hurt if things turn ugly.

The issue that brought this group to my attention was media coverage of their current protest at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The Mail Online reports: “With temperatures around freezing in the snow-filled town, they took off their tops and tried to climb a fence before being detained”.

While I don’t condone public nudity, I concede some admiration for what these young women are trying to achieve.

Kim Jong-un is surely one of the fattest dictators to ever lead a famine-stricken impoverished nation.

North Korea's new supreme leader Kim Jong Un during a memorial service for his late father Kim Jong Il in Pyongyang.

Kim Jong Il obviously saw something he liked in his third son, presumably the ruthlessness needed to maintain power and authority.

I wonder though if appearance and image are issues that need concern a modern dictator?

The media is tightly controlled in North Korea, but the people will occasionally catch glimpses of their supreme leader.

It must strike even the dumbest and most ignorant North Korean citizen as unusual that anyone in their country could possibly be fat.

According to Wikipedia, between 900,000 and 3.5 million people have died from starvation or hunger-related illnesses in North Korea since the early 1990s. The crisis was acute between 1994 and 1998.

“Escaped North Koreans report that starvation has returned to the nation. A study by South Korean anthropologists of North Korean children who had defected to China found that 18-year-old males were 5 inches shorter than South Koreans their age. Roughly 45 percent of North Korean children under the age of five are stunted from malnutrition. Most people eat meat only on public holidays.”

European dictators needed more than an iron fist to rule their countries. The likes of Hitler, Mussolini and Franco may have been evil, but they had a certain level of charisma and at least some popular support.

Kim Jong-un may need more than propaganda, brainwashing and brutality to retain power. Fortunately for him, he has military might to shore up his position.

Sadly though, life may get even harsher for the common people of North Korea if their new supreme leader’s apparent indifference and arrogance is any guide.

Peter Roebuck has suggested they may be better off forming national sides based on their countries, eg Jamaica, Barbados, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, etc.

If they can’t get their act together as a confederation that may be the way to go.

There are only four top-rung nations at the moment: Australia, England, South Africa and India.

The second rung comprises Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand and West Indies.

There is a third rung that includes Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Kenya, Scotland and Ireland.

Beneath that are the current Associate nations and developing countries, some of which show considerable promise.

Some articles in the Australian press recently have focused on the game’s potential in China.

That’s great, but don’t forget Kenya needs support, Uganda shows hope to improve, Papua New Guinea has structures in place already and Indonesia also has great potential.

There was an interesting blog article earlier this month on cricket’s prospects in Indonesia.

“Former Surrey left-arm-spinner Keith Medlycott thinks giving Indonesian cricketers exposure to longer forms of cricket and continued coaching would bring huge rewards for the game after leading the Marylebone Cricket Club on a four-game tour of the country last month.”

It’s great the MCC is touring to countries like Indonesia and I hope it’s true the game is developing there beyond expatriates.

If it is true, Australia should be taking the lead and actively encouraging the sport.

There have been suggestions that China is on the brink of major cricket development. I hope that’s right and, if so, it’s worthy of Australian support.

In the meantime, if the game can be assisted in PNG and Indonesia, Australia should play a key role.

It’s only four degrees south of the equator in West Papua, but has several glaciers and is the only region of Indonesia where snow falls.

In Australia we don’t think enough beyond our own country when it comes to the continent.

Geographers consider Papua New Guinea and West Papua as part of our continent, but we know so little about them.

Carstensz Pyramid carries the name of John Carstensz, who was a Dutch seafarer. In 1623 he brought news to Europe about the snowbound mountain right on the equator, but nobody believed him.

West Papua was a Dutch territory until Indonesia took control in 1963. Wikipedia suggests American president John Kennedy talked the Dutch out of resisting the takeover for global political reasons.

It’s been off the international radar since then, unlike East Timor which Indonesia forcibly acquired from Portugal in the 1970s and later gained independence.

I would love to climb Carstensz Pyramid. Maybe I’ll add it to my list of things I’d do if I could.

Just to digress from tropical snowy peaks: … I still think of altitude and all height for that matter in feet. I’ve got no idea how tall I am in centimetres.

I climbed Mount Bogong a few years ago, the highest mountain in Victoria, and although references tell me it’s 1986 meres high, I relate better to the fact it’s 6516 feet.

Another digression, the WordPress spell checker didn’t like “learnt” at the beginning of this post (and again now). I doubt myself when things like that happen.

Google reassured me. According to the Oxford Dictionary, “learned” and “learnt” are:

alternative forms of the past tense and past participle of the verb learn. Learnt is more common in British English, and learned in American English. There are a number of verbs of this type (burn, dream, kneel, lean, leap, spell, spill, spoil etc.). They are all irregular verbs, and this is a part of their irregularity.

I read somewhere recently that an academic was calling for an international standard for English spelling. I’ll second that motion.

I’m half Dutch, but the country today is nothing like the one my mother and grandparents left in the 1950s.

I’m not qualified to explain why. I’ve been there and found a bigger cultural gap between the countryside and cities than what exists in other countries.

The politics of allowing cannabis to be legal while making public tobacco smoking illegal just escapes me.

There are many corrupt and despotic regimes in the world today, such as Zimbabwe and North Korea, but China is the biggest.

I don’t envy the Chinese government in holding together such a vast country with so many people and an inequitable distribution of resources. That enormous challenge warrants some leeway in how we respond to internal governance issues.

However, there is no excuse for Chinese expansion into Tibet. The world should send a loud message to China that Tibet is a sovereign nation entitled to self-determination. The influx of Chinese workers is similar to the Soviet influx of Russians to the Baltic states.

Many western countries, including some Australian sports, boycotted the 1980 Moscow Olympics in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

It’s appropriate we should consider Chinese behavior in Tibet in the same context. To participate in the Beijing Olympics will give legitimacy to an evil regime. Reflect on Berlin 1936.

Charles has surpassed the previous record set by Edward VII when he finally succeeded Queen Victoria to the throne in 1901.

That’s a tough gig, enough to make anyone start talking to flowers.

Unlike some others though, I think Charles will make a good King. He’s not afraid to get involved with social issues and he seems to have a genuine sense of compassion.

Critics will point to his failed marriage and quirkiness. I say he’s human, and unlike most other humans, he’s well trained for the role he will inherit.

In brief, a disgruntled diner started firing at the building with a handgun and killed a person.

I’ve been unhappy with restaurants before, but never to the point of violence. My biggest grips are slow service and the steak not being cooked right.

It’s like road rage. I get cross sometimes, but can’t imagine I would ever want to thump someone over a motoring incident.

Why do some people react to adverse situations with violence?

And how can a restaurant chain be called Hooters?

The only more ridiculous name I’ve come across is Wimpies in South Africa.

Ian Smith was a war veteran who led his country of Rhodesia through what many thought were its most turbulent years.

As the architect of UDI (the unilateral declaration of independence) he gave Southern Rhodesia the sovereignty which had been its constitutional right years earlier.

Many people forget that Rhodesia could have had independence or union with South Africa, except for some intransigence and historical quirks which linked it temporarily in the 1950s with modern Zambia and Malawi instead.

I have argued before that the history of both South Africa and Zimbabwe would have been much different if the two nations had been made one when earlier opportunities presented.

I read Smith’s book “The Great Betrayal” with interest and wrote a detailed review on my original blog, which unfortunately I can no longer find.

Written in 1997, the book preceded many of president Robert Mugabe’s worst atrocities against his own people.

Smith gave a concise, logical and analytical account of his policies and philosophies which then, and with hindsight, are hard to refute in light of recent history.

Smith would have delayed one vote one value, but he would have gradually increased giving the franchise to educated blacks who participated in the legal economy.

That wasn’t quick enough for those who were motivated by revolutionary ideology, rather than pragmatism.

Smith’s biography can be read elsewhere. In terms of this article I just wish to record my regret that he wasn’t able to leave a lasting national legacy.

If he had handed power to Nkomo or Mugabe at the first sign of insurgency would Zimbabwe be better off today? I doubt it.

If the western world, especially the United Kingdom, had supported his long-term vision for Rhodesia, would the country be a better place today? I think so.

I know many Zimbabweans and I follow their country’s affairs with interest. Unless they are over 40 they don’t have much recollection of how it used to be.

That’s a shame for the young blacks of today who have been indoctrinated with a certain view of their nation’s history.

Smith’s plan for a meritocracy could have been accelerated, which in my opinion would have delivered the country its best possible outcome.

Ian Smith should be remembered with respect.