Friday, November 30, 2007

Armenia 'Ba2' rating balances low debt burden with modest development - Moody's

11.30.07

MUMBAI (Thomson Financial) - Moody's Investors Service said its stable outlook and 'Ba2' local and foreign currency debt rating on Armenia balances the low debt burden of the government and economy against the country's weak institutional capacity and modest level of economic development.

The ratings agency said Armenia's 'Baa3' foreign currency country ceiling rating for bonds are based on Moody's (nyse: MCO - news - people ) assessment of a low risk of payments moratorium in the event of a government bond default.

While Armenia's debt burden compares well with similarly rated countries, as a relatively poor nation in the process of transitioning to a market-based economy, its institutions are still relatively undeveloped, Moody's said.

Armenia's general government debt burden -- at about 17 pct of GDP and falling -- compares favourably with other 'Ba2'-rated countries. The terms of its debt are also very comfortable relative to its peers, Moody's said.

The country's double-digit growth continues, at one of the fastest rates registered in the world, reflecting the economy's small size, and the government's fiscal and monetary policies are prudent, Moody's said.

However, links between Armenia's political class and the business elite foster entrenched vested interests, while the level of financial intermediation remains low. There are also geopolitical uncertainties linked to the conflict in the Nagorno-Karabach region, Moody's said.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Turkey, Armenia matches to go ahead despite divisions

29 Nov. 2007
By Darren Ennis
This is a positive step falling in line with opening of borders and establishing diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey. Let the best team win.
BRUSSELS, Nov 29 (Reuters) - The World Cup qualifying games due to take place between Turkey and Armenia are expected to go ahead despite bitter political divisions between the two countries, UEFA president Michel Platini said on Thursday.

Concerns were expressed about the two fixtures after both countries -- at odds with each other over Turkey's failure to accept that 1.5 million Armenians suffered genocide at the hands of Ottoman Turks -- were drawn in the same qualifying group for the 2010 World Cup.

"We met with the associations from Armenia and Turkey and there weren't any problems, they said the games would be played the best possible way," Platini told reporters on a visit to Brussels.

Two Euro 2008 qualifiers between Armenia and Azerbaijan were cancelled in June due to a long-running dispute over land. Turkey shut its border with Armenia in 1993 to protest against Armenia's occupation of territory inside Azerbaijan.

"We had a problem last year between Armenia and Azerbaijan because it was worse than non-existing relationships, there was a problem of extreme tensions and so the executive committee took the decision of cancelling the two games," Platini said.
Up to 1.5 million Armenians died in massacres and mass expulsions in 1915. Armenia and the Armenian diaspora abroad -- backed by many Western historians -- say it was genocide and want foreign states to recognise it as such.

Turkey accepts there were widespread killings, but says they did not amount to genocide. A law in Turkey makes calling the deaths a genocide a criminal offence.
"But as far as Turkey and Armenia are concerned, there hasn't been any indication of a potential problem and the cancellation of matches," Platini said.

Both countries were drawn in Group 5 alongside Spain, Belgium, Bosnia and Estonia. (Editing by Miles Evans)

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Azeri Defence Spending Under Fire

Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK
By Rashid Suleimanov in Baku (CRS No. 421 29-Nov-07)

Big increase in defence expenditure allegedly failed to lift soldiers out of poverty.

For the past nine years, Azerbaijan army captain Elchin Safarov has served with the Baku military garrison. He has long dreamed of having a house of his own, but his salary is only enough to rent a flat in a small village north of Baku for himself, his wife and children.

Safarov gets some state family benefits on top of his army pay, as sole breadwinner, he has been unable to get a mortgage to buy a house. When Azerbaijan celebrates Armed Forces Day on July 26 every year, the whole family waits for news that army salaries have gone up.

Azerbaijan’s state budget for 2007, currently under discussion in parliament, envisages defence spending of 1.3 billion US dollars, an increase of 30 per cent on last year. President Ilham Aliev has said he wants to see his country’s defence budget grow to exceed the entire government budget of neighbouring Armenia, with which relations have been coldly hostile since the Karabakh war of the early Nineties.

Parliamentary deputy Siyavush Novruzov, who sits on the assembly’s defence and security commission, told IWPR that some of the new money would go to support the army, some for the security forces, and the rest on defence research.

Novruzov said living conditions for army personnel were improving thanks to greater spending. “The increase in military funding has had an effect on both the food and the clothing of soldiers,” he said.

Yashar Jafarli, who chairs the Reserve and Retired Officers organisation, told IWPR that salaries doubled in the military last year.

However, there is concern that the influx of money has not had a noticeable effect on the welfare of officers and the other ranks, because rising prices have cancelled out increased pay levels.

Captain Safarov confirmed that there was no shortage of food or uniforms in his unit, and said the canteen fed the men better than it did five years ago. But he said officers were still inadequately provided for.

Eighty to ninety per cent of officers have no homes of their own and are obliged to live in rented premises.

Officers receive a benefit payment of 22.60 manats (just over 26 dollars) a month on top of their salaries, but the sum is only enough to buy a sack of flour. This benefit has remained unchanged since 1992. The government is promising to raise the sum to 80 manats in the 2008 budget, and to review it every year to keep pace with inflation.

Jafarli said that most new defence spending over the last two years had gone on weaponry and equipment, with large sums also spent on infrastructure.

“In recent years, many barracks and headquarters have been built and military colleges and medical facilities have been repaired,” said Jafarli. “A new building at the [military] central hospital has come into use. There’s no lack of uniforms for the military, though we still have unresolved problems with full-dress uniforms.”

In 2006, Azerbaijan bought five MiG-29 fighters from Ukraine. In its annual report to the United Nations Weapons Register, Kiev says it also sold around 60 military vehicles and 22,000 small arms to Azerbaijan last year. Azerbaijan is currently negotiating with Pakistan for the purchase of 24 Chinese-made JF-17 Thunder combat planes, worth between 16 and 18 million dollars each.

Some experts say that the defence money is being misspent, and complain that the budget is not open to scrutiny.

Alekper Mamedov, who heads Azerbaijan’s Centre for Democratic Civil Control of the Armed Forces, said fundamental problems in the army are not being resolved, and increases in salaries and benefit payments have little effect when the cost of living is going up so fast.

He said funds that should have gone on the wages of junior officers had been spent on repairing buildings.

“The changes in the army are cosmetic in nature.” said Mamedov. “Compared with previous years, military units in rear positions are somewhat better provided with food and clothing, but those that are stationed in outlying areas are still in lamentable condition.”

Mamedov said cases of food poisoning were frequent. “The public is well aware that the army receives poor-quality food,” he said. “And this is a result of defence spending not being transparent.”

The Reserve and Retired Officers group has produced which says that officers had found it impossible to get the financial compensation they were entitled to claim in lieu of food and leave allowances, while those serving on the front line close to Karabakh were not getting the extra pay they are due on time.

Major Ilgar Verdiev of the defence ministry’s press service said the defence budget could not be scrutinised in detail because Azerbaijan was still “at war” with Armenia.

He insisted there were no problems with nutritional and clothing supplies, and the food supply system was getting better every year.

Major Verdiev said the government was doing its best to solve outstanding problems. Two apartment blocks containing a total of 165 flats in Baku would soon be handed over to military families and blocks of flats were also being built in the towns of Shemkir, Ganja and Geitep, he said.

Captain Safarov does not expect to receive a flat in the near future. The army is still full of officers who cannot afford to own property, he said. In January, he will make another attempt to get a mortgage from the bank.

Rashid Suleimanov is head of Manoeuvre, a military think-tank, and a correspondent with the APA news agency in Baku.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Armenia to Close Nuclear Plant

29 Nov. 2007

YEREVAN, Armenia (AP) — Armenia approved a plan Thursday to shut down its lone nuclear power plant, following years of pressure from foreign nations concerned about its Soviet-era design and safety.

The government gave no date for closing the Medzamor reactor, located about 20 miles west of the capital, Yerevan. The 27-year-old plant, which supplies nearly half the country's electricity, halted operations after a 1988 earthquake but was restarted during an energy shortage in 1995.

Since then, Armenia has been under constant pressure to close the plant due to safety concerns and possible design flaws. The European Union has pledged $295 million in loans and other assistance to help close it.

The shutdown could cost up to $280 million, Energy Minister Armen Movsisian said.

Armenian officials have long refused to shut it without another source of electricity.

Last week, the United States said it would fund a preliminary feasibility study on building a new nuclear plant.

President Robert Kocharian has said that building a new, 1,000-megawatt plant — double that of Medzamor — would cost more than $3 billion.

In 2004, Russia's state-run electricity grid operator, RAO Unified Energy Systems, assumed financial control of Medzamor in a deal struck to relieve Armenia's massive debts to Russian energy suppliers. UES and Armenia now share management of the plant.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

A Story of Survival Armenians remember those slain by Turks

Tuesday, November 27, 2007
The Post-Standard - Syracuse.com, NY
By Renée K. Gadoua Staff writer

Richard Roomian's father left his family in Armenia - then a part of the Ottoman Turkish Empire - in 1915 to come to America and earn a living as a tailor.

He settled in Syracuse and soon sent money for his family to flee oppression from the Turks and join him. His parents never made it.

His mother - Richard Roomian's grandmother - was killed before she could board a boat. His father - Roomian's grandfather - died on a forced march out of Armenia that left an estimated 150,000 people dead.

That's the story of every Armenian. They have immediate relatives that were killed," said Roomian, a leader in Central New York's Armenian community.

A recent failed congressional resolution would have labeled as genocide the deaths of Roomian's grandparents and hundreds of thousands of other Armenians by Turks beginning in 1915.

Roomian says the resolution would have been a cathartic step toward forgiveness, while opponents say such a resolution was not an appropriate congressional action. Others pointed out a resolution could harm U.S. relations with Turkey.

Many scholars view the deaths of 1.5 million Armenians during the World War I era as the first genocide of the 20th century. Turkey's leaders say the deaths occurred during inter-ethnic conflict.

Roomian says it's important that people understand the Armenians' story of survival. He was born and grew up in Syracuse, home to an Armenian community of about 350 families. He now lives in Rochester and serves as chair of the

parish council of St. Paul's Armenian Apostolic Church, 310 N. Geddes St., Syracuse.

The church serves as a cultural center for many Central New York Armenian-Americans.

St. Paul's is one of 10 Armenian Apostolic churches in New York. Others operate in Binghamton, Rochester and Niagara Falls. A second Armenian church in Syracuse, St. John's, 372 W. Matson Ave., closed a few years ago.

About 1.3 million Christian Armenians worship in about 110 churches in the United States, said Michael O'Hurley-Pitts, spokesman for the Armenian Church headquarters in New York.

The church, a branch of the Oriental Orthodox Christian Church, was founded at the foot of Mount Ararat in ancient Armenia, which is now in Turkey. Mount Ararat is believed to be where Noah's ark came to rest after the biblical flood.

Christianity became the national religion of Armenia in 301 A.D., a fact that's still significant, O'Hurley-Pitts said.

"Armenians' Christian identity is tied up in their national identity," he said.

O'Hurley-Pitts is disappointed the resolution was abandoned.

"If we favor the passage of the resolution, it is because we cannot pick and choose which crimes against humanity are worth recognizing and which are not," he said.

At the very least, he said, the proposed resolution raised interest in Armenian history.

"The Armenian people don't need an act of Congress to tell them there are gaping holes in their family trees," he said.

Armenians began arriving in Syracuse about 1894, according to "Like One Family: The Armenians of Syracuse," a 2000 book by Arpenia S. Mesrobian, former director of Syracuse University Press.

"Even while the recently arrived immigrants sought to establish themselves in a new land, their minds and hearts remained with the families and compatriots they had left behind in a homeland which most of them would never see again," she wrote in the preface.

That's how Nevart Apikian, of Syracuse, remembers her youth. Her father came from Armenia to America about 1910.

She was a charter member of the now-defunct St. John's Armenian Church and remembers attending picnics with Syracuse's Armenians.

"Everybody would talk, and people gave $25 or $50 to $100 for people who needed it in Armenian organizations," she said.

She said people were passionate about their homeland, but rarely talked openly about what they experienced.

"You didn't ask questions," she said. "You got little snippets."

Renee K. Gadoua can be reached at rgadoua@syracuse.com or 470-2203.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Azerbaijan Defense Minister Hints at War

27 Nov. 2007

ASTANA, Kazakhstan (AP) — The long-standing dispute over the Armenian-controlled territory of Nagorno-Karabakh could spark a new war if it remains unresolved, Azerbaijan's defense minister said Tuesday.

"As long as Azerbaijani territory is occupied by Armenia, the chance of war is close to 100 percent," Safar Abiyev said during a meeting in Kazakhstan of defense chiefs from ex-Soviet republics.

His startlingly worded remark was a reminder that Azerbaijan has not ruled out use of force in recapturing Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding areas.

Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding territory that is also part of Azerbaijan have been controlled by Armenian and ethnic Armenian forces since a shaky 1994 cease-fire ended one of the bloodiest conflicts that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union. The six-year war killed 30,000 people and drove more than 1 million from their homes, including many of the region's ethnic Azeris.

Azerbaijan and Armenia remain locked in a dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh despite more than a decade of coaxing from international mediators led by the United States, Russia and France to resolve the region's status.

Gunfire breaks out regularly along the border between Azerbaijan and Armenia and in the regions near Nagorno-Karabakh.

Armenian Defense Minister Mikhail Arutyunian said he sees no alternative to a peaceful settlement, the RIA-Novosti news agency reported.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Armenian patriarch visits Chicago faithful

27 Nov. 2007
Pueblo Chieftain, CO
By MARGARET RAMIREZ and KAROUN DEMIRJIAN
McCLATCHY-TRIBUNE
In his Holiness Kareking II's words "In spite of all the crimes committed against Armenia, our people have never been filled with hate toward the Turkish people".

I concur with that statement. It is Turkey that portrays Armenians as hating Turks, because it is convenient for them to hate Armenians. Hate is emotion and does not speak to reason. Armenians are seeking understanding from Turkey in order to protect themselves from future repeats of the genocide. It is a shame that many journalists pick up from Turkey's PR propaganda that Armenians hate the Turks.
CHICAGO - Robed in gold and black vestments with a jeweled cross on his forehead, His Holiness Karekin II, patriarch of the worldwide Armenian Apostolic Church, anointed the entrance of a modest, brick church in Chicago on Wednesday and urged his people to remain on the path toward faith.

Outside St. Gregory the Illuminator Church, old and new generations of Armenians sang hymns of their native country nation as Karekin climbed onto a step ladder and blessed the new, bronze doors. As the crowd watched, he dipped his thumb in holy oil and traced a cross above the entry. Inside the building, Karekin told more than 200 worshipers that the anointing of the doors was a symbolic gesture to remind Armenians to continue living their Christian faith.

‘‘My exhortation to you all . . . is to walk always in the ways that are leading you to the church,’’ Karekin said. ‘‘With God, we have stayed together . . . Faith in God has helped us survive.’’

As Catholicos of all Armenians, Karekin is the spiritual leader of the world’s 7 million Armenian Orthodox Christians, including 1 million in the United States and about 10,000 in the Chicago area. This pontifical trip is Karekin’s second visit to the U.S. and his first to Chicago.

‘‘I’m overwhelmed by this visit by His Holiness,’’ said Raelene Ohanesian, 33, who wept after the patriarch blessed her. ‘‘He represents our heritage, our conversion to Christianity. We have such a long history of struggle and it’s our faith that has gotten us through.’’

Before the blessing at St. Gregory, Karekin met with Chicago’s Roman Catholic archbishop, Cardinal Francis George. On Wednesday night, the Armenian patriarch also attended a public prayer service with ecumenical leaders at a Greek Orthodox Church.

Karekin’s trip has taken him to New York, Boston, and Washington, D.C. to spread a message of ‘‘Bringing Faith Home.’’ He has stressed efforts to remember faith and culture, which are tightly intertwined in the Armenian community, and bring back Armenians who have left the church.

Karekin’s visit comes on the heels of an explosive debate in Washington regarding a painful piece of Armenian history. Earlier this month, a congressional committee approved a nonbinding resolution that condemns as genocide the killing of 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey nearly a century ago as genocide. The resolution, though largely symbolic, unleashed an international furor that offended the Turkish government, a key supporter of the American presence in Iraq. President George W. Bush opposed the resolution, saying it could damage efforts to end the war in Iraq.

At an interview in his hotel suite at the Four Seasons, Karekin said the recognition of the killings as genocide is necessary to prevent further atrocities. He expressed disappointment that the resolution had faced opposition in Congress due to Turkey’s logistical importance in the war.

‘‘The best way to prevent similar kinds of atrocities is through recognition and condemnation,’’ Karekin said. ‘‘Values such as these should never be sacrificed for political interests.’’

‘‘Our people are a Christian people. . . . In spite of all the crimes committed against Armenia, our people have never been filled with hate toward the Turkish people.’’

Though Karekin did not speak of the genocide resolution at St. Gregory’s Church, it was on the minds of many. Karekin offered a special blessing to 100-year-old Helen Polaian, a survivor of the genocide.

‘‘It happened,’’ said Diane Abezetian, ‘‘regardless of the resolution or what anyone says. We know it happened.’’

Although the community is united politically, the religious identity is strained by division within the Armenian church. The church became divided administratively about 50 years ago as the former Soviet Union curbed religious freedom. Some Armenian churches broke off and switched allegiance to the Lebanon-based See of Cilicia. Others remained loyal to the Armenia-based church.

Today, Armenia is an independent republic, but the split in the church remains. One branch is headed by Karekin and based in the Armenian city of Etchmiadzin. The other is led by His Holiness Aram I and based in Lebanon. As supreme patriarch, Karekin is pre-eminent. The division means that there are two Armenian archbishops in the United States. Archbishop Oshagan Choloyan, who reports to Aram, and Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, who is under Karekin.

When asked if there was any hope for reconciliation, Karekin said church leaders have formed committees to discuss healing the rift.

‘‘You cannot have two bishops. I am hopeful we will one day have a solution,’’ he said.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Mrs. Evans Reveals Intriguing Details of her Husband’s Recall

Sassounian's column of Nov. 29, 2007

By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
America's foreign policy is corrupted by the Turkey's policy of denial. When will politics take a back seat to human rights. Genocide recognition must not be sullied by politics.
More than two years after her husband became the first U.S. diplomat to publicly acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, Donna Evans revealed some of the behind-the-scene details of Ambassador John Evans’ tenure in Armenia and his dramatic forced retirement from the U.S. Foreign Service. She spoke at the Armenian Assembly’s Annual Capital Region Holiday Reception held at the Armenian Embassy in Washington, D.C., on November 18.

Mrs. Evans began her talk by describing the phone call she received from her husband, telling her, “Assistant Secretary of State Beth Jones had just informed him that he was the State Department’s choice to be assigned as Ambassador to Armenia in the summer of 2004. She told him that it was a small country but growing in importance and had a significant assistance program and a new Embassy was being built. She encouraged him to accept it and he did, without hesitation.”

After Senate confirmation, Amb. Evans and his wife moved to Armenia in fall 2004. Mrs. Evans described the constant “tension” because the “unwritten policy of the State Department was that the word ‘genocide’ had to be in quotation marks and, if spoken, it would be referred to as the ‘g’ word.” She said Foreign Service officers “knew, for certain, that the word ‘genocide’ was a strict taboo.”
She went on to state, “The Armenian genocide was a very sensitive subject and therefore avoided in diplomatic circles in Yerevan. The wives of other ambassadors did not talk about it even in private. The first time we drove by the Genocide Memorial my husband whispered to me ‘there’s the Genocide Memorial.’ I looked over and caught a fleeting glance of the spire. As I turned back, our driver’s eyes caught mine in the rear view mirror. I was so uncomfortable. My husband told me that we were allowed to go there once a year, on April 24th.”

Amb. Evans’ problems began during his speaking tour of the Armenian communities in the United States in early 2005. Upon the couple’s arrival in California, Mrs. Evans said her husband informed her that “he was going to use the word ‘genocide’ and that it might cost him his job." She said she was "stunned at first but then very proud of him. I hoped that telling the truth would result in no more than a reprimand and that he would be marginalized for a while. I thought that losing his job was the very worst-case scenario.”

Once her husband used the term “genocide” in public, Donna Evans was amazed that the Armenian American media did not rush to publicize it immediately – “It was as if they were protecting the Ambassador.” Eventually, after a press release from ANC revealed that Amb. Evans had actually used the words “Armenian Genocide” during his talk at Berkeley, she said her “husband went on to Washington to brief the State Department on what had transpired. The reaction was not pretty to say the least” which made her “sick at heart.” Meanwhile, the Ambassador did not know “whether his recall orders would be on his desk when he returned to Yerevan. I did not know whether I would be returning to Yerevan myself.”

Mrs. Evans had harsh words for the State Department for buckling under Turkish pressure. “It was unthinkable that the Turkish ambassador and the Government of Turkey had enough clout to get a knee-jerk reaction from the State Department and cause the recall of an ambassador,” she said.

Leaving his ambassadorial post voluntarily was out of question, Mrs. Evans said. “Not resigning was the right thing to do. My husband had not committed a crime, he only acknowledged a crime,” she said.

Upon returning to Yerevan, Mrs. Evans said her husband went on carrying out his diplomatic duties and “acted as if it was business as usual.… However, each morning he arrived at the office wondering if the morning e-mail and telegram traffic would include his official recall. Then, on July 2, 2005, the dreaded telephone call came.” Dan Fried, the Assistant Secretary of State, called to inform that her husband’s position was “about to be posted as open for the summer of 2006 and that we could be removed at any time,” she said.

Mrs. Evans said she was “furious” particularly since this call had come “just before July the 4th, Independence Day and axed a professional diplomat with 35 years of faithful service to his government -- and a 12th generation American -- just because he said ‘genocide’ in an academic setting in the United States.”

Mrs. Evans further revealed that she wrote a personal letter to First Lady Laura Bush because she said she believed “in spouse power.” She never received a reply.
When the word got out -- this writer was the first to report that Amb. Evans was about to be recalled for his statement on the Armenian Genocide -- Mrs. Evans reported that “the pressure was on…[there was] wild speculation in the Armenian papers, some calling my husband a hero and others not so flattering and some downright ridiculous. Again the press had a field day. My husband’s answer had to be ‘I serve at the pleasure of the President.’ I died a little every time I heard him say it.”

Notably, Mrs. Evans revealed that during those tumultuous days, “the diplomatic community” supported her husband “privately.” She then described April 24, 2006 as “an unforgettable day” in her life when thousands of Armenians from all walks of life tied yellow ribbons to a fence at the Genocide Memorial Monument in Yerevan, in support of her husband. “How this was pulled together and who supported it is a remarkable story. I wish I could give them all a hug individually. This event inspired us to stay strong during a very trying time,” she said.

As they say, the rest is history. The White House cut Amb. Evans’ service short and announced the nomination of his successor, Richard Hoagland, who never made it to Armenia.

Showing her continued support for the reaffirmation of the Armenian Genocide, Mrs. Evans said that when the House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted the Armenian Genocide resolution, it was one of the happiest days of her life.

However, she was “stunned and outraged” when her husband showed her the letter that was signed by eight former Secretaries of State opposing the congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide. “How could Secretaries of State so blindly sign such a document? What I would say to the former Secretaries of State is ‘shame on you’ for being used by the Turkish lobby. By your actions, you have set back any progress that has been made to normalize diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey. It would have been better to remain silent. A special shame on Secretary [of State Alexander] Haig because he served under President Reagan, who acknowledged the genocide,” she said.

Donna Evans described her dismay at some of the negative reactions to the genocide resolution. “What followed was the worst turn of events that I had witnessed in all my time in Washington. The supporters of the recognition of the genocide were in shock and awe at the cruel commentaries, articles, and Internet buzz. What we were witnessing was a hyper-overkill of a human rights issue.”

She concluded her remarks with heart-warming words: “The Armenian experience has woven itself into my soul like the intricate carvings in the Khachkars. It is beautiful, it is sad and it is hopeful. So what do we do now? We don’t give up. We bide our time and return to the fight, more experienced, better informed and therefore better armed. Most important of all we continue to educate. Grassroots support is vital. You are vital. This issue needs to be resolved. You and your ancestors deserve an apology and recognition of the first genocide of the 20th century…the Armenian Genocide.”

Labels:

Monday, November 26, 2007

Accident Kills Three Employees of Azerbaijani Baku Electricity Network

Azerbaijan, Baku / Тrend corr K. Zarbaliyeva / An accident occurred in the Narimanov District of Baku.
What a shame that instead of through the cemetery they could not get around the cemetery. I do not think it was because of lack of lands around the cemetery.
During removal of a stone fence surrounding an old Armenian cemetery located behind the Odlar Yurdu University, three employees of the Bakielektrikshabaka OJSC ( Baku electricity network) were trapped in the ruins.

One victim aged 25 and 30 years old, was taken to the hospital and died, the other two are still in the hospital, according to a Trend correspondent reporting from the scene of the accident.

A road is being constructed through the Armenian cemetery. The area was fenced due to construction work.

The Narimanov District Prosecutor’s Office confirmed the reports and said an investigation has been launched into the case.

Accident Kills Three Employees of Azerbaijani Baku Electricity Network (UPDATED)
26.11.07 13:38

Azerbaijan, Baku / Тrend corr K. Zarbaliyeva / An accident killed three employees of the Bakielektrikshabaka ( Baku electricity network) Narimanov office.


According to the Narimanov District Prosecutor’s Office, a stone fence collapsed during the repair of cables in substation 215 in the Bakielektrikshabaka Narimanov office. As a result, three employees of Bakielektrikshabaka – Isa Hajiyev, Elnur Mustafayev, and Elmar Nasibov died.

A criminal case was filed on violation of technical safety regulations resulting in accidental death.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Rare Armenian manuscripts dazzle and delight

November 21, 2007
Swissinfo, Switzerland

Image caption: An exquisite example of a manuscript, the "Gospels of Perugia", 1331 (Bodmer Foundation, Geneva)- To watch, click on the article at the bottom.

An exhibition of exquisitely illustrated Armenian manuscripts has opened for the first time in Switzerland at the Martin Bodmer Foundation in Cologny near Geneva.
The documents of great cultural importance reveal how ancient and medieval Armenian literature was dominated by both Christian thought and scientific curiosity.

"This exhibition is truly unique," said exhibition curator Valentina Calzolari. "It's the first time that Armenian manuscripts, a majority of which come from Armenia's famous library, the Matenadaran, have ever been shown in Switzerland."

Armenia, which shares borders with Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Iran, is one of the earliest Christian civilisations.

It has a rich cultural heritage, the result of being repeatedly invaded and spending many years under Turkish or Persian control. Despite that, the Armenian language and identity has survived largely intact.

Around 40 manuscripts, dating from the ninth to the 17th century, are on display at the "Illuminations of Armenia" exhibition.

Calzolari, who is also the director of the Armenian Research Centre at Geneva University, said the religious element was very important during this period. Armenians, she said, were and still are a "Christian people par excellence".

She said that historians had always sought to find elements of national identity in Christian thought and in literature. This has manifested itself in translations of the Bible and in religious writings.

This exhibition is truly unique.

Valentina Calzolari, curator

Scientific side

But this is not the only side to the Armenians, who "have been interested from the very beginning of their literary endeavours in the sciences too. They have always been fascinated by everything that was not considered sacred," said Calzolari.

"Therefore we also have astrological manuscripts, musical manuscripts and historical ones which tell of the exploits of Alexander the Great."

There are many rarities among the texts, such as the first ever manuscript miniature on a non-religious subject: a book of hymns depicting scenes from an epic 5th-century battle fought between the Armenians and the Persians.

"On two of the pages you can admire the Persians on the one side, with their elephants," said Calzolari. "And on the other, Armenian general Vardan Mamikonian with his valiant companions, in the midst of strenuously defending the Christian faith but also - and above all - the Christian identity of the Armenians."

Also shown are Armenian versions of philosophical texts. One of them includes a commentary by the great Armenian scholar, the Neo-Platonist Davide Invitto, who neatly encapsulates the country's dual interest in subjects both religious and secular.

Next to it is a plain, sober manuscript containing no illustrations, "but is of major importance", according to Calzolari.

"It's one of the first medical texts. It's not a translation of a Greek, Syrian or Arab text, but one written directly in Armenian by [the founder of Armenian medieval medicine] Mekhitar Heratsi."

Zodiac

Another curiosity shows the astrological sign of Pisces. The text around it explains the zodiac, and includes an astrolabe – an early way of helping to tell the time – as well as some songs.

Calzolari says it was almost certainly used by merchants on their travels to help read the skies and alleviate periods of boredom.

The "Illuminations of Armenia" exhibition is also showing a series of photographs, taken by French religious art and architecture historian, Régis Labourdette, depicting the architectural dimensions of the cross as used in 7th-century Armenian churches.

"It was the intention of the organisers... to show these two symbols of the continuity of Armenian culture: the book and the stone – the churches," said Calzolari. "Because this is what they are still considered to be by the Armenians today."

swissinfo, based on an Italian article by Paola Beltrame in Cologny

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Georgia, Azerbaijan: A New Oil Terminal, and More Money for Baku

November 21, 2007
Stratfor
There is a mistake in the article below. Russia does not have peacekeepers deployed in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Summary

Georgia and Azerbaijan inaugurated a new oil terminal in the Georgian Black Sea port of Kulevi. Not only does this translate into more oil and petroleum products for the West, it also means Baku's coffers will be full like never before.

Analysis

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev opened a new oil terminal Nov. 21 in Georgia's Black Sea port of Kulevi. The Kulevi terminal, which Azerbaijan's state-owned oil company SOCAR will run, will start with a capacity of 100,000 barrels per day (bpd), but that is expected to double.

The Kulevi oil terminal will supply the West with crude oil and refined products from Azerbaijan, which has received increasing attention as Europe looks to decrease its energy dependence on politically hot countries such as Russia, and as Azerbaijan seeks export options outside its typical use of Russian energy infrastructure. Over the past two years, Azerbaijan and Europe have built an energy relationship, with the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline and Turkey-Greece Interconnector (TGI) natural gas pipeline coming on line. What is different about Kulevi is that a third of the exports will be refined petroleum products -- something Azerbaijan has not exported to the West before.

The Kulevi terminal will make Azerbaijan the big winner -- especially financially. The BTC alone has brought $3 billion to Azerbaijan in the first year of operations. The money flow is expected to increase vastly with the TGI and now Kulevi coming on line.

Energy wealth has doubled Azerbaijan's gross domestic product, but the sudden wealth is very worrying to certain of Azerbaijan's neighbors because the majority of the money is going toward defense. Azerbaijan's defense budget has jumped from just a few hundred million a year to a billion this past year. The country is arming itself, and neighboring Armenia is closely watching. The two countries have been deadlocked over the Azerbaijani secessionist region of Nagorno-Karabakh -- a conflict that has flared into a war in the past. Azerbaijan's armament now has many wondering if Baku is planning another conflict against a neighbor that has been cut out of the region's recent energy wealth.

But there is another player in this game: Russia. Moscow has continually been part of the negotiation over Nagorno-Karabakh and currently has peacekeepers deployed there. Should the conflict spin up again, Russia would definitely sweep into action as the "great mediator." Currently it is playing both sides by supplying both Armenia and Azerbaijan with weapons, though Baku obviously has its own money to buy them. However, as Azerbaijan becomes more of an energy rival to Russia, Moscow has an increased interest not only in arming both sides, but also in seeing Azerbaijan fully destabilized by embroiling itself in a messy conflict.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

South American Coalition Condemns and Recognizes the Armenian Genocide

22 Nov 2007
HULIQ

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay--The parliament of a South American Coalition representing several countries of the continent, known as MERCOSUR Monday adopted a resolution recognizing and condemning the Armenian Genocide, reported the Armenian National Committee of South America.

MERCOSUR, which is a trade organization representing Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay condemned the “Armenian Genocide, perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire, which took 1.5 million lives from 1915 to 1923.”

The MERCOSUR resolution also expressed its support for the Armenian Cause and called on all countries to recognize the Genocide.

The resolution was introduced by the representatives of Argentina and Uruguay, and after approval by the Human Rights Committee, was approved by the entire MERCOSUR parliament.

MERCOSU member states Argentina and Uruguay have already recognized the Genocide, followed this year by another South American nation, Chile.

The Armenian Genocide was carried out by the "Young Turk" government of the Ottoman Empire in 1915-1916 (with subsidiaries to 1922-23). One and a half million Armenians were killed, out of a total of two and a half million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Turkey: From Bloody Birth to Power Broker

21 Nov. 2007
Antiwar.com, CA
by Ann Berg

According to legend, its flag sprang from the reflection of a star and the crescent moon in a pool of native warriors' blood. The national anthem exults, "Martyrs would gush out were one to squeeze the soil!" Of all the Muslim countries created after World War I, only Turkey succeeded in expelling Western occupiers to achieve a modern statehood that many consider miraculous. Today, its treatment by the U.S. as a backwater pawn has roused the nation to defiance: 86 percent of all Turks now hold a negative view of America.


Ruled by Muslim Turks since 1453, the Ottoman Empire entered a long period of decline during the 19th century. Shrinking in territories and burdened with war debt, it defaulted on its international loans in 1875, drawing France and Britain to Constantinople – present-day Istanbul – to collect repayment from the Ottoman treasury. When the sick man of Europe crumbled during World War I, world leaders carved it into a dozen pieces under the 1920 Treaty of Sevres and subsequently refined the borders under the Sykes-Picot agreement. A mandate system that allowed the newly formed entities varying degrees of independence delineated five states: Britain claimed Iraq, Palestine, and Transjordan (now Jordan), while France took Syria and Lebanon.


Because the Entente powers considered the Anatolian Turks incapable of self-rule, they parceled the strategic coastal areas among the victors. The British, the French, and the Italians sent occupation forces to Constantinople, and Greece, staunchly backed by Britain, took over the Aegean port of Smyrna (Izmir). Its goal was to restore Constantinople – the seat of the Greek-speaking Christian empire for a millennium – to its Byzantine glory. And finally, to the east, the Bolsheviks were eager to stamp a communist footprint on this strategic landmass. Strapped for foreign exchange, Russia needed unencumbered transit from the Black Sea through the Dardanelles to export its wheat surplus and newly discovered crude oil.

Against this backdrop, by 1922, the Turks drove out the Greeks (who had advanced into the central plateau with the goal of capturing the newly declared capital of Ankara), expelled the European powers, and reclaimed large territories to the east from Armenia. The Turkish-Greco war still lingers bitterly. Historical records blame the Greeks for a scorched-earth policy as they were driven out of Smyrna, while others depict the Turks burning the Greek and Armenian Christian villages to the ground. Witnesses say that 75 percent of Smyrna was destroyed. Standing on the waterfront of the ancient Mediterranean port, I asked a Turkish friend what happened during the postwar deportation of the remaining Greek and Armenian communities, and he quietly told me, "The boats came and they went."

By 1923, all Western forces had demobilized. Turkey established most of its modern-day borders under the Treaty of Lausanne. Although the U.S. had stayed out of the Turkish wars, Turkey's success at Lausanne caused the U.S. ambassador to Germany to proclaim, "Christian civilization was crucified … and the Stars and Stripes were trailed in the mire in the interest of a group of oil speculators."


Kemalism

Anyone visiting the capital city of Ankara is struck by the ubiquitous presence of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish state. His likeness appears in every visual form imaginable, gracing photographs, paintings, busts, masks, bas-reliefs, and statues. On the main thoroughfare, his face gazes out at the street procession from gigantic Orwellian tapestries unfurled from the tops of buildings. The symbolism is forceful – it serves the citizenry as a permanent reminder of Turkey's struggle for independence 84 years ago (Oct. 29) and fuses the state and the man into an enduring mythological unity.

Ataturk's life was a one-man revolution of breathtaking proportions. Officially, he is credited with the establishment of a modern, Western-leaning republic that included a civil code and language reform, universal education, equal inheritance and voting rights for women, and the abolition of the Caliphate, as well as industrial projects, including railway development and state-run manufacturing. Accounts of his personal life are dizzying: war hero, president (Time dubbed him "dictator"), educator, arts patron, father of seven adopted daughters – all of which he managed while drinking himself to death by age 57. But beneath the glowing biography is a darker story of Kemalism. While espousing republican principles and secularism, the doctrine sought to unify Turkey as one culture and one language by forced assimilation. The new republic outlawed mystical and ecstatic orders such as Sufism and denied the Kurds – a minority accused of deviant worship and orgiastic sexual practices – basic expression of culture and language. As early as 1925, uprisings were repressed with bombardment, slaying, and hanging. Beneath the philosophy of rational enlightenment lay brutal repression and a strong dose of militarism.


After World War II

Since the Korean War and following Turkey's entry into NATO (never mind that it is nowhere near the Atlantic), the U.S. has assumed Turkey would dutifully bow to America's dictates. But Turkey – boosted by its booming economy and its perception of the U.S. as a clumsy brute at its doorstep – is experiencing a resurgence of nationalism. Its parliamentary rejection in 2003 of the coalition's plan to stage the Iraq invasion through Turkish territory and its embrace of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan – a devout Muslim – have caught the U.S. completely flatfooted. The U.S. government fails to see that its transformative design for the region and Turkey's desire for border integrity and economic expansion are on a collision course.

On the economic front, Turkey, which has an energy deficit, envisions becoming an energy transit hub. Its southeastern port of Ceyhan is the terminus for one pipeline originating from the Caspian Sea port Baku (BTC) and another from Kirkuk, Iraq. Turkey projects earning several hundred million dollars in transit fees per year from these two pipelines and sees the restive Kurdish region as a threat to its plans. It has announced intentions to secure a long-term supply contract with Kirkuk and strongly opposes Kurdish plans to incorporate the city (once claimed by Turkey after WWI) into the semi-autonomous northern Iraqi region. Similarly, Turkey plans to expand trade with Iran, notwithstanding U.S. disapproval. According to the Turkish press, trade has grown from $2.3 billion to $6.7 billion between 2003 and 2006, and the two countries have signed a preferential trade pact on a series of goods. Iran (along with Russia) supplies Turkey its gas needs, which have been growing in pace with the economy.

On the political side, Ankara and Tehran progressively share a cause that unites them – a "war on terror" against the PKK and its Iranian arm, PJAK. For Turkey, the growing attacks by the PKK against Turkish forces are not just acts of terrorism (the U.S. view), but the embodiment of the separatist movement that wants to chip off its southeastern region. Turkey sees duplicity in America's role: the U.S. condemns the PKK, but not PJAK – finding the latter useful for provoking Iran. Hence, Turks overwhelmingly support the military crossing the border – not just to crush the rebels but to commit an act of defiance against the superpower.

As it begins to play a role of regional political power broker, Turkey openly bristles at American sermonizing and patronizing, especially since it correctly warned the U.S. how instability would ripple through the whole region following the Iraq invasion. As a country that criminalizes "insults to Turkishness," it views the recent U.S. congressional effort to recognize as genocide the Ottoman Turks' massacre of Armenians in 1915 to be an irreparable blow to its alliance with the U.S. Fiercely proud of its revolutionary birth and protective of its sovereign borders, the rising crescent will increasingly exert its own will in the region. For the U.S., that means one more miscalculation in a bloody field of failures.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Secretaries Albright and Cohen Should be Removed from Genocide Task Force

Posted November 20, 2007
Huffington Post, NY
Harut Sassounian

How hypocritical of Madeleine Albright and William Cohen, former Secretaries of State and Defense, to announce the formation of a task force on prevention of genocide, when two months ago they wrote a letter to the U.S. Congress against a resolution on the Armenian Genocide!

One would have thought that genocide denialists would not be the most qualified people to lead an effort on averting future genocides. Yet, this is exactly what happened last week.

Albright and Cohen shamelessly stood in front of TV cameras at the National Press Club in Washington on November 13 to declare that they are co-chairing a new "Genocide Prevention Task Force." The other members of the task force are Sen. John Danforth, Sen. Tom Daschle, Amb. Stuart Eizenstat, Michael Gerson, Secretary Dan Glickman, Secretary Jack Kemp, Judge Gabrielle Kirk McDonald, Amb. Tom Pickering, Julia Taft, Vin Weber and General Anthony Zinni. This effort is jointly sponsored by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the American Academy of Diplomacy, and the United States Institute of Peace. The task force has five working groups dealing with early warning, pre-crisis engagement, preventive diplomacy, military intervention, and international institutions. It is expected to issue its report in December 2008.

Cohen told members of the media with a straight face that the task force is going "to look certainly to the past for lessons" in order to prepare a set of recommendations to the U.S. government on how best to respond to future threats of genocide. He stated that mass violence is "inimical to human behavior, to human decency, [and] to our sense of humanity....We can no longer live in a state of denial or willful indifference." These bold words are from a man whose company, The Cohen Group, is affiliated with DLA Piper, one of the major lobbying firms hired by the Turkish government, at a cost of $100,000 per month, to deny the facts of the Armenian Genocide.

As soon as the two former high-ranking officials finished delivering their opening remarks at last week's press conference, they were confronted by skeptical members of the press and Armenian activists who questioned their sincerity and pointed out their hypocrisy. This accusatory exchange was covered extensively by CNN, AFP, AP, and The Jerusalem Post.

Albright and Cohen were asked by a reporter: "How do you reconcile your work in trying to build a moral American sentiment, an unconditional consensus against genocide, when just very recently both of you signed letters urging America not to recognize the Armenian Genocide?" Albright, forgetting her earlier words about learning from the past, quickly shifted the mission of the group to the future. Carefully avoiding the term "Armenian Genocide," she acknowledged that "terrible things happened to the Armenians -- a tragedy.... While we were Secretaries, we recognized that mass killings and forced exile had taken place, and we also said that the U.S. policy has been all along for reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia on this particular issue." She also said that her earlier letter to Congress against the genocide resolution merely questioned whether "this was an appropriate time to raise the issue." Secretary Cohen, in his turn, referred to the Armenian Genocide as "the human suffering that took place between 1915 and 1923." He said he was concerned that the Armenian resolution "might result in reactions on the part of the Turkish government that could place our sons and daughters in greater jeopardy [in Iraq]." The two officials gave evasive answers when another reporter asked whether they were advocating that "for political expediency purposes we shouldn't be taking action on future genocides because of what it could mean to U.S. interests."

A third reporter then pointedly asked if Albright and Cohen were in fact saying: "If our friends do it, it's not genocide; if our enemies do it, it is genocide.... If you are going to define genocide by who does it, not by what it is, your task force is in trouble."

Exposing his ignorance on the issue of the Armenian Genocide, Secretary Cohen said: "I don't know that the UN has declared that genocide occurred in the Armenian situation." He must not be aware that back in 1985 the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, by a vote of 15-1, adopted a report which included a section acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. "The experience of the Armenians does indeed conform with the UN Convention," a fourth reporter shot back at Cohen and added: "The two of you have personally worked toward ensuring that the United States government does not take a stand recognizing the Armenian Genocide. However, taking on this new role, how can you reconcile your positions and the U.S. foreign policy?"

Given their repeated attempts to block the reaffirmation of the Armenian Genocide resolution, both during and after their tenure in government, Secretaries Albright and Cohen should be removed from the leadership of the Genocide Prevention Task Force. They have undermined their own credibility and lost the moral standing to speak on the topic of genocide. One cannot deny a genocide and then turn around and act as a defender of its victims. Furthermore, Secretary Cohen has a personal conflict of interest due to his firm's affiliation with a company that lobbies for Turkey against the congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide. This fact alone should disqualify him from membership, let alone leadership, of the genocide prevention group.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Turkey and Azerbaijan Strengthen Economic, Security Ties

20 Nov 2007
World Politics Review Exclusive
Marianna Gurtovnik

The early-November visit to Azerbaijan of the newly elected President of Turkey, Abdullah Gul, highlighted the strategic importance of the Turkey-Azerbaijan relationship and the two countries' common economic and security interests. As such, it attracted much attention in the Azerbaijani media, where analysts happily noted that Azerbaijan was the first country visited by the Turkish leader since he assumed his post in July. As Azerbaijaini political scientist Rustam Mammadov suggested in the wake of the trip, Gul's visit even had implications for the complex political situation unfolding in the Middle East. Speaking to the News - Azerbaijan agency, Mammadov said "the situation in Iran and Iraq as well as Turkey's deteriorated relations with the United States and the European Union require careful consideration on the part of the Turkish leader and his Azerbaijani counterpart."

Fighting the PKK

Indeed, Gul's visit to Azerbaijan occurred amidst events that have prompted Turkey's leaders to shore up support from long-time allies such as Azerbaijan. The Turkish leadership was particularly exercised by the Kurdistan Workers' Party's (PKK) intensified incursions into Turkey. Speaking at a press conference in Baku, Azerbaijan's capital, Gul said that the United States should bear responsibility for the fight against terrorists throughout Iraq and not just in selected provinces. He also told journalists that Turkey expected Azerbaijan's cooperation against the PKK. On Nov. 6, Azerbaijan's parliament, the Milli Majlis, announced its intentions to recognize the PKK as a terrorist organization, a step may help address the Turks' lingering misgivings about the PKK's allegedly deep roots in Azerbaijan.

In light of Turkey's recent spat with Iraqi Kurds, Azerbaijan and Turkey are also worried that the energy security in the region might be jeopardized. Global Insight, a Boston-based economic forecasting publication, last month noted the threat the PKK poses to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline if Turkey pursues retaliatory strikes in Kurdistan. The BTC carries oil from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan to Georgia and Turkey. Over half of the pipeline -- 669 of 1,092 miles -- passes through Turkish territory that is home to significant numbers of ethnic Kurds.

The Milli Majlis intends to have a draft statement on the PKK ready before the end of November. But naming the PKK a terrorist organization might have little practical effect given the absence in Azerbaijan of a comprehensive legal, diplomatic, and administrative strategy against terrorism. Until such a plan is in place, Azerbaijan should rely on international anti-terrorism conventions to which Azerbaijan is a party when developing specific measures to combat PKK, says Baku-based political analyst Rauf Mirkadyrov. But he insisted that such measures be fully transparent. "This is necessary in order to avoid the abuse of power by law enforcement officials," Mirkadyrov wrote in a Nov. 9 analysis in the Azerbaijani daily Zerkalo.

Azerbaijani authorities have traditionally taken the threat of terrorism seriously. Earlier this month, local security forces quashed what appeared to be a massive Islamist plot against government offices and the British and American embassies in Baku. Both embassies briefly suspended their operations following the arrest of several suspects and the killing of one member of the terrorist group.

Cultivating Regional Allegiances

Azerbaijani-Turkish relations received another boost last month when Azerbaijan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the resolution to recognize as genocide the early-20th century massacre of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire that was adopted last month by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives. The Azerbaijan Foreign Affairs Ministry's Oct. 12 statement condemned the resolution as "wrong and biased . . . and harmful for the developments in the region and globally." The statement further backed "the Turkish call to examine the archival documents related to the World War I tragedies . . . before taking steps."

The Azerbaijan-Turkey alliance against Armenia dates back to the early 1990s. Following Armenia's occupation of the Azerbaijani enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh and seven adjacent Azerbaijani regions in 1992-1993, Turkey closed its border with Armenia. Turkish officials link the reopening of the border to Armenia's return of the occupied lands to Azerbaijan. Indicative of Turkey's ambitions to assert itself as a regional peacekeeper, President Gul noted earlier this month in an interview with Azerbaijan's Turan news agency that "Ankara is ready to lend its efforts to the maintenance of peace and stability in the South Caucasus region."

Turkey's Economic Designs

Bilateral economic relations represented another prominent item in the Turkish president's agenda in Azerbaijan. Gul and his Azerbaijani counterpart, Ilham Aliyev, signed several bilateral agreements, including ones pertaining to long-term economic cooperation and mutual economic privileges.

Speaking to the press in Baku, Gul pointed out that over 2,000 Turkish firms have created 50,000 jobs in Azerbaijan and invested $5 billion in Azerbaijan's economy, including the energy sector. To prove his intention to solidify economic ties with Azerbaijan, Gul included 200 Turkish entrepreneurs in his delegation. The move was supposed to mollify Turkish businessmen who complained that Gul's predecessor, Ahmed Necet Sezer, rarely brought them along on his foreign trips. But the change failed to produce the desired effect: Turkey's business elite were disappointed with Gul's choice of small- and medium-sized business owners over the country's top financiers. Their Azerbaijani counterparts appeared to agree. Rashad Rasullu, secretary general of the Baku-based Azerbaijan-Turkey Businessmen Union, believes that Turkey should move more aggressively to avail itself of new investment opportunities in Azerbaijan. In a Nov. 6 interview with the Turkish Daily News, Rasullu said that Azerbaijan "needs help and experience to adapt itself to the rest of the world. Turkey should not miss this chance of becoming a stronger partner."

Gul's rhetoric about "brotherly ties" between the Turks and other regional Muslim nations did not appear to particularly excite Azeris, who have heard such rhetoric many times from Turkish presidents. Yet, lofty speeches aside, Gul did not lack ambitious ideas, and displayed an eagerness to push them forward. In an interview to the Turkish newspaper Today's Zaman prior to flying to Baku, he talked at length about his plans for new energy and transportation networks that will connect Turkey to the South Caucasus and further to Kazakhstan and even China. He said he hoped that a new natural gas pipeline from Baku to the Turkish port of Erzurum via Tbilisi, Georgia, would be completed by the end of 2007, followed, in a few months, by a railway linking Baku and Tbilisi with the Turkish city of Kars. Gul sounded confident that these projects would become a reality soon, citing the example of the BTC pipeline, which became operational in 2005 despite the initial strong doubts about its feasibility.

This is not Turkey's first attempt at economic influence in post-Soviet Azerbaijan. In the mid-1990s, Turkey scaled back an attempt to boost its economic presence in Azerbaijan, partly because of local corruption but also because it lacked the resources to become the regional superpower that it aspired to be. A decade later, Turkey seems to be attempting a comeback. Given the latest turbulent changes across the region and in Turkey itself, it is now in greater need of strong alliances with its neighbors. Whether President Gul's Administration will be successful at forging these alliances remains to be seen.

Marianna Gurtovnik is a freelance analyst based in the United States. She covers governance reforms, foreign policy, and civil society developments in the Newly Independent States.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Turkic countries issue false statements on Armenian Genocide

20.11.2007
PanARMENIAN.Net

The summit of friendship, fraternity and cooperation of Turkic countries issued a Baku Statement on the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire in 1915-1923. The statement says in part that “attempts of parliamentarians of some states to express an erroneous attitude about historical events are nothing but a preconceived approach to the entire Turkic world.”

Turkic states claim that statements about the Armenian Genocide do not base on the historical truth. “Armenia did not respond to Turkey’s official proposal to open archives and form a joint Turkish-Armenian commission of historians,” the document says.

The authors furnish absolutely false data as regards the Armenian population in Turkey in the early 20th century. “Some 150 thousand of Armenians lived on the Turkish territory at that period. Historical facts, documents and evidence of witnesses prove that the events taken place in 1915-1918 were conditioned by hostilities between the Turkish army and Armenian armed unites, which yielding to Russia and some western states stabbed Turkey in the back… Armenians brutally killed over 2 million of Turks.”

Concluding the statement, the authors emphasize that “bringing these facts to the notion of the international community, we once again state that investigation in historical disputes is the business of historians but not politicians,” Bakinsky Rabochy newspaper reports.

According to the data of the Constantinople Patriarchate of the Armenian Apostolic Church about 2.5 million if Armenians lived in six vilayets of Western Armenia. 1.5 million of Armenians lived in Istanbul, Izmir and other major cities. In February 1915 the Young Turks triumvirate adopted a secret directive on deportation and slaughter of the Armenian population of Turkey. Over 1.5 million of Armenians were killed, many died of starvation and diseases.

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

Easing Armenia's Transition to a Market Economy

19 Nov. 2007
World Bank Group, DC

Challenge:

With independence in 1991, Armenia suffered a severe economic contraction. Between 1990 and 1993, GDP dropped by more than 50 percent. This led to hyperinflation, a budget deficit that reached a high of 55 percent, factory closures, little electricity supply, and large-scale emigration. About 80 percent of the population survived on humanitarian assistance and more than half the population lived below the poverty line.

Approach:

A series of 10 projects—spanning a dozen years—supported Armenia’s economic reform program to restore and maintain macroeconomic stability, create conditions for economic growth, and improve living conditions. These broad areas would form the foundation for the transformation of the economy from a centralized model to a market-based one. The program included a rehabilitation credit for 1995-1996, five structural adjustment credits between 1996 and 2004, two structural adjustment technical assistance credits between 1996 and 2002, and two poverty reduction support credits beginning in 2004 and ongoing. The technical assistance projects supported the implementation of the eight adjustment operations by providing the necessary expertise for strengthening institutions.


Over this 12-year period, Armenia has achieved spectacular income growth – by about 10 percent on average per year, rising to 13-14 percent in 2005 and 2006 – and poverty reduction – from 56 percent in 1998 to 30 percent in 2005.

Approach Highlights:
Financial Discipline and Public Sector Management
- Economic stabilization: inflation fell to 0.6 percent in 2005 from 176 percent prior to the adjustment program; the budget deficit fell from 9 percent to 1.9 percent; growth has averaged about 10 percent per year.
- Improving budget management through the adoption of a rigorous medium-term expenditure framework to manage the scaling-up of sector reforms.
- Improving customs and tax administration and broadening the tax base.
- Improved payment discipline in energy: collections increased from 30 percent to 85 percent.

Private Sector Development- Removal of nearly all price controls and trade barriers.
- Adoption of key financial legislation early in the program: a real property code, bank insolvency law, bankruptcy law, collateral law.
- Reduction in bureaucracy: Armenia ranked 34 in the World Bank Group’s Doing Business 2007 report.
- Privatization of nearly all state-owned enterprises.

Social Development:- Adoption of a poverty reduction strategy that provides a powerful tool for policy formulation.
- Significant increase in budget allocations for health and education, doubling from 2002 to 2006.
- Family poverty benefit and pensions increased by more than 50 percent during 2002-04.

IDA Contribution:

- The 10 projects totaled US$410 million of which US$382 million came from IDA financing and US$28 million from other sources-principally the Netherlands, as well as Argentina.
- Operations were in rapid succession, providing sustained financial and technical support to the government and generating a critical mass of reforms that helped to raise living standards.
- More than just providing critical deficit financing, the projects also provided a genuine opportunity for the government to benefit from external expertise. Technical assistance came from IDA and bilateral donors, with significant support from the Japanese Policy and Human Resources Development fund.
- Parallel investment operations in water, health, education and power were mutually reinforcing. For example, improved energy regulation and ownership policies supported by policy-based credits were matched by investment lending in energy.
- These policy operations were closely linked to IMF stabilization and poverty reduction programs.

Next Steps:- IDA is providing two more Poverty Reduction Support Credits that focus on supporting the government to strengthen corporate and public governance, including tax and customs, and competition policy and human development. These policy-based projects are closely linked with on-going sector-specific projects.
- The completion of the credit series will coincide with the parliamentary and presidential elections of 2007 and 2008, respectively. Future policy-based lending will depend upon budgetary needs and the government’s commitment to pursuing a reform agenda.



Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Monday, November 19, 2007

Carrying A Big Stick

Published: 11/19/2007
Turkish Press, MI

BY SAMIL TAYYAR
AKSAM- President Abdullah Gul’s three-day visit to Azerbaijan ended yesterday. The call made by Gul to Armenia during the visit was very important. Some in Armenia might believe he was carrying a big stick, but his visit was important for reflecting the real political situation in the region. In addition to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, taken together the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas line, the railway extending to Kars and the forthcoming Marmaray connecting the European and Asian sides of Istanbul under the Bosporus will constitute a strategic energy, transportation and communication corridor from China to Europe . In Gul’s words, you could get on a train in China , enter Turkey from Kars and then, after passing under the Bosporus, proceed to Europe , also on train. In addition, oil and gas from the Caucasus will be able to be transported to Europe via Turkey . Let’s add Turkey ’s possible European Union membership to this as well. These huge projects will have a big impact on the entire region, but an atmosphere of peace and stability is necessary towards this end. Those who can’t accept the key role to be played by Turkey in the years to come might want to sabotage this atmosphere. Terrorist attacks and the so-called Armenian genocide claims can be seen as part of this.


Gul said this to Armenia : If you want to take your share in the region, then you have to join this caravan. In other words, either stay poor or get rich. But throughout the long history of the Caucasus region, not even the most steadfast ruler has reigned for more than 50 years. This is a region that has seen fierce clashes. The 70 years of the Soviet Union was an exception. When Gul put Sheikh Shamil’s sword in his hand at the Gence Art Museum , he said, ‘As this is the Caucasus , the sword should always rest ready in its scabbard.’ In other words, you could face a threat anytime, so you should be careful. Turkey is aware of this, and the world is aware of Turkey . Particularly after the option of a cross-border operation by Turkey into Iraq came up, people are paying more attention to Turkey . Moreover, Turkey has made its power felt on the international stage as a global actor.


The Saudi king will arrive in Turkey today. In addition, the Jordanian king, Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas will all visit Ankara next week. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora is also due to visit. During the upcoming Middle East conference, regional problems will be discussed but these bilateral contacts in Ankara are important for evaluating regional problems from a different perspective. Meanwhile, Gul says that everybody knows the importance placed on Turkey . But Turkey isn’t watching on the sidelines from Ankara . The fact that during Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to the US this week Gul also paid his first official visit to Azerbaijan , and even visited Gence –the first such visit for a Turkish statesmen to this place, just 60 kilometers from Armenia -- is rich with meaning.


Gul will visit Turkmenistan early next month. In addition, there are plans for visits to Uzbekistan , Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan as well. We used to call these regions our brothers, but then a new concept of relationship was developed. Gul defined it by saying that if you act only with excitement, you won’t accomplish anything, and so you must fuse enthusiasm and pragmatism. Meanwhile, Turkey ’s EU membership bid hasn’t been forgotten. On this issue, Gul said that the important thing for Turkey to know its needs and implement reforms. He added that if only this had been done and membership talks had started earlier, the situation would have been different. He’s quite right, but we should stop being mired in the past. If Turkey can continue this vision, Turkey will become a global country with a huge impact on world politics. Imagine you’re a country in the middle of a strategic corridor extending from China to Europe, an EU member, and the Caucasus is the EU’s neighbor. Some people might call this a dream. But today such huge projects as the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline, which yesterday was only a dream, are a reality. The foundation of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway will be laid next year. As Gul said, if we can cast away the shackles in our minds, new dreams will come true in the years to come.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Sunday, November 18, 2007

AXA to pay descendants of victims of the Armenian genocide - report - Forbe

This story comes at a time when the Armenian genocide recognition is in full focus in the USA. Let this be a testimony for the perseverance of the descendants of the Armenian genocide survivors towards the ultimate goal of the recognition of the Armenian genocide by Turkey. This will be a win for Turkey's democracy.

read more | digg story

Report: Israel trying to 'Judaize' Temple Mount

Published: 11/18/2007
JTA
If Turkey is saying what it is as it sees it to Israel, why is Israel not doing the same regarding the Armenian Genocide?
Israel is trying to destroy the Muslim nature of the Temple Mount, according to a report by a Turkish mission.

The Turkish team sent to inspect the Israeli excavations near the Temple Mount blamed Israel for attempting to harm sites holy to Muslims and for conducting what they call unnecessary digs near the Mugrabi Gate, according to the Turkish daily al-Zaman, which published large parts of the report Sunday.

The mission also criticized Israel for not cooperating with the Muslim Wakf.

The Turkish team visited the site in March, but the report's release was delayed due to political concerns, including the recent debate over the Armenian genocide issue.

The Turkish Consul General, Ercan Ozer, who is an architect, an archeologist, a geologist and a history professor, warned that "Israel is trying to change Old Jerusalem's character and to 'Judaize' the history of the Temple Mount," Yediot Achronot reported.

Israel's foreign ministry responded to the report saying "Israel is cooperating fully with UNESCO, which had sent a professional team to the site of the dig and published a report refuting all the allegations against Israel."

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Greenway park plaque will mention Armenian genocide

November 17, 2007
Boston Globe, United States

Final wording to be determined by city, Turnpike Authority

By Thomas C. Palmer Jr.
Globe Staff

A park being donated for the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway by the nonprofit Armenian Heritage Foundation will include a plaque that refers to all immigrant groups but also makes an explicit reference to the Armenian genocide of the early 20th century.

more stories like thisWording suggesting the park commemorates the 1.5 million deaths of Armenians around 1915 at the hands of Turks contradicts the intentions of planners over the last decade, who insisted the Greenway not be politicized or be a place for statues, plaques, or memorials.

Although the wording for a plaque is not final, officials of the Mayor's Central Artery Completion Task Force, an influential advisory group, acknowledged at a meeting this week that the specific historic event would be mentioned.

Nearly 100 years after it occurred, the Armenian genocide remains an intensely emotional issue. Turkey, an ally of the United States in a part of the world where the United States has few friends, rejects the term genocide. The Turkish government has said a proposed congressional resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide would severely damage US relations.

In Boston, the final say on the plaque will be made by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority and the City of Boston, which both support the proposed wording. The city and the agency are negotiating with the task force and the Armenian Heritage Foundation, a local group that is sponsoring the park, on the project.

The park and plaque are the result of a campaign by the local Armenian community since 2000 to find a Boston location for a commemoration of their ancestors. Because the gift of a park was opposed by some planners and community activists, the plaque's proposed wording has been broadened to refer to the diverse set of immigrant groups that, like the Armenians, sought refuge in the Boston area.

One objection has been that the Armenian Heritage Foundation did not follow the specific public process for Greenway proposals approved by the Federal Highway Administration.

"I would like to go on record that this is not acceptable as a process," Anne Fanton, a member of the task force, said Thursday. "We want to be certain that this never happens again."

The proposed park, with a 60-foot-diameter paved labyrinth, a sculpture, and water jet and reflecting pool, has been hailed as inspired in design and supported by many in the North End community.

The issue of the plaque's wording surfaced several times during a Thursday meeting on the park. North End community leader Nancy Caruso said she understood from previous private meetings that the park would be dedicated to all immigrants but not have a specific reference to the genocide.

But, asked specifically whether there would be mention of the words "Armenian genocide," task force cochairman Rob Tuchmann said, "There will be."

James M. Kalustian, representing the Armenian Heritage Foundation, the group sponsoring the park, agreed. "The current wording as being discussed includes a reference to the Armenian genocide," he said.

Yesterday, Erkut Gomulu, president of the Turkish American Cultural Society of New England, who has opposed placement of the park on the Greenway, said any plaque should not reference a specific group's history.

"It's supposed to be inclusive of all communities, right?" he said. "It's claimed it will not be a memorial. On the other hand it will have 'genocide' in the wording."

The board of the conservancy that will assume responsibility for operating the Greenway once it's completed has called for a moratorium of at least five years on any memorials.

"An awful lot of people have worked hard to try to get to a place that works for everyone," said conservancy chairman Peter Meade. "We want the Greenway to become a noncontroversial place where everybody in our community is welcomed."

But Meade's organization does not have an active role in the discussion.

Tuchmann said he did not consider the park or the plaque a memorial. Genie Beal, a member of the task force and chair of the board of the Boston Natural Areas Fund, yesterday agreed.

"It says 'Armenian genocide' in the last line. I think that's a good solution," said Beal. "It's not a memorial, it's a 'thank you' " to the foundation for the gift of a park.

Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Saturday, November 17, 2007

NEW TURKISH INTERNET REGULATIONS SIGNAL FURTHER RESTRICTIONS ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH

The Jamestown Foundation
November 16, 2007 -- Volume 4, Issue 214
Gareth Jenkins
Supported by America? Turkish democracy in action? Anything is acceptable as long as you are a friend of America, but if it were China then it becomes repression!
Amid fading hopes of EU membership, there are increasing signs that the Turkish authorities are tightening restrictions on freedom of speech.

A new set of regulations for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) published in the Turkish Official Gazette on November 1, 2007, makes it compulsory for all commercial ISPs to take measures to prevent access to “illegal content” and use government-approved filters to block users from visiting undesirable websites. In addition, all commercial ISPs are now obliged to record details of all the websites visited by their subscribers and store the data for a period of at least one year.

The new regulations have caused outrage in the Turkish ISP community, which has described them as not only limiting freedom of expression but, also as a gross violation of privacy.

“Turkey is becoming a police state,” complained Mehmet Ali Koksal, a member of the board of Turkish Information Technology Association (TBD) (Milliyet, November 11).

But the new requirements have received little coverage in the mainstream Turkish media, with the result that few Turks are aware that they are now effectively under surveillance each time they access the Internet.

[...]

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Thursday, November 15, 2007

The Turkish alternative

Yossi Sarid tells it as it is. If other politicians did the same then perhaps Turkey will understand that it is to their advantage to recognize the Armenian genocide. In this respect both Shimon Peres and George Bush junior have failed.

read more | digg story

Archbishop Vicken Aykazian is installed as President of the National Council of Churches

Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, a Turkish-born priest who represents the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern) in Washington, was installed Thursday (November 9) as the President of the National Council of Churches in the USA.

The installation was a moving and colorful ceremony attended by hierarchs, clergy and laity in St. Vartan Armenian Cathedral in New York. Also installed was the NCC's new general secretary, the Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, and other NCC officers. (See related story)

On January 1, 2008, the Archbishop will succeed President Michael Livingston, who has served in the office since January 2006.

His Eminence Archbishop Aykazian is the 24th NCC President since the Council's beginnings in 1950.

He is the third Orthodox president and the first from the Oriental Orthodox tradition. (Other Orthodox presidents were the Very Rev. Leonid Kishkovsky, Orthodox Church in America, 1990-91, and Elenie K. Huszagh, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, 2002-03

Vicken Aykazian was born in Siirt, Turkey, in 1951. He studied theology at the Armenian Patriarchate in Jerusalem and was ordained a deacon in 1968 and later a celibate priest in 1971.

In 1992, His Holiness Vasken I, Catholicos of All Armenians at Holy Echmiadzin in Armenia, ordained him a bishop.

Archbishop Aykazian, who holds a Ph.D in history and is working on a second Ph.D in theology at Catholic University in Washington, is an active ecumenist. In addition to his contributions to the NCC as a member of the Governing Board, he has been active in the World Council of Churches as a member of the Mission and Evangelism Unit, the Orthodox Task Force and the Central Committee.

The archbishop is the legate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern) in Washington, and ecumenical officer.

He has also served as Primate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church in Switzerland from 1992 to 1996.

As pastor of the Armenian Church of Switzerland from 1980 to 1992, he established and organized new church communities in Zurich, Bern, Kreazlingen and Lugano.

Archbishop Aykazian is fluent in English, Armenian, French and Turkish.

Since its founding in 1950, the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA has been the leading force for ecumenical cooperation among Christians in the United States.

The NCC's member faith groups -- representing a wide spectrum of Protestant, Anglican, Orthodox, historic African American and Living Peace churches – include 45 million persons in more than 100,000 local congregations in communities across the nation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contact Philip E. Jenks, 212-870-2228, or Daniel Webster, 212-870-2252


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Turkey motivated blocking of air space for Armenian planes by security reasons?

15.11.2007 16:38 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Armenian Foreign Ministry requested Turkey to explain the reasons of blocking the air corridor for Yerevan-Beirut and Yerevan-Aleppo flights, RA MFA Spokesman Vladimir Karapetian told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. No explanation has come yet, he said.

November 13 an Armavia-owned Yerevan-Beirut flight had to turn back to Yerevan, since the Turkish authorities blocked the air space.

Meanwhile, a source told PanARMENIAN.Net that Turkey blocked the air corridor for security reasons, as the route to Syria goes across the territory controlled by Kurdish rebels.

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Armenia: Sad Fate of Azeri Graves

15 Nov. 2007
Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK

Link to original article by Naira Bulgadarian in Vanadzor, Armenia. Published in CRS No. 411, 20-Sept-07

By Naira Bulgadarian in Vanadzor, Armenia (CRS No. 419 15-Nov-07)

When I heard that the Azerbaijani cemetery in the village of Nor Khachakal, in Lori district, had been repaired by the NGO Helsinki Civil Assembly, I felt an urge to see with my own eyes the graves of Azerbaijanis who once lived in the country.

In 1988, a dispute over Nagorny Karabakh broke out in the Caucasus, with most ethnic Azerbaijanis leaving Armenia and vice versa. As the conflict grew, monuments were destroyed in both countries - especially graveyards. In the once Azerbaijani-populated village of Saral, which was renamed Nor Khachakal, its two Azerbaijani cemeteries are abandoned, and many of the headstones broken.

Last year, the Armenian culture ministry was allocated two million drams (about six thousand US dollars) of government money to collect information about Azerbaijani cemeteries and cultural monuments in Armenia. This study identified a total of 69 cemeteries in Armenia and another 52 in Nagorny Karabakh and the seven Armenian-controlled territories outside Karabakh.

The study concluded that more of the cemeteries had been preserved than had been destroyed. The government then chose not to allocate money for their restoration after deciding that the graveyards had no intrinsic cultural value.

However, the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly did a study of the Azerbaijani cemeteries in the region last year, which showed they were in a ruinous state, and decided to use grant money to restore them.

I wanted to see the places that used to be home to Azerbaijanis now perceived as “the enemy”, to see the state of the graves and tell the former Azerbaijani residents of Armenia about the fate of their dear ones’ resting places.

The urge to write became even stronger, when I saw Azerbaijan, who’d come to Armenia at the invitation of the organisation implementing the rehabilitation works, praying at the old cemetery in Nor Khachakal. There they conducted a special worship ritual, asking God to give rest to the souls of those buried there, and thanking the Armenians for trying to restore the graves.

On that day, the cemetery was strewn with white carnations - the first flowers laid there for 18 years. Seeing those graves now restored and covered with flowers, one could not help thinking once again how wrong it was to bear a grudge against the dead, how wrong were those who, embittered by the conflict, took their anger out on the graves.

Armenia’s Azerbaijani cemeteries should be written about, I thought, for the sake of peace and greater tolerance between the two societies.

Less than a year later, I went to Nor Khachakal again only to be disappointed: I had hardly entered the cemetery, when I noticed that the plate giving details of the renovation of the graves was already broken.

However, local residents - Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan – seemed to know nothing about it, while the head of the village promised to find the wrongdoers.

Conversations with the villagers proved discouraging. I, who wanted to write about how humane it was on part of the Armenians to repair the cemetery in Nor Khachakal, now had to listen to stories about Armenian cemeteries razed to the ground after the war. They said that potatoes were grown where an Armenian cemetery used to lie in Azerbaijan and offered to prove their claims with videotapes sent to them by their former neighbours and acquaintances from Azerbaijan.

The picture was even gloomier in the village of Arjut, several kilometres away from Nor Khachakal. Some graves had disappeared altogether.

I felt a pain that one feels when seeing something that is left to the mercy of fate, even if it belongs to a different culture, and it strengthened my belief that it was wrong to keep silent about it.

And patriotism has nothing to do with it. It’s not unpatriotic to speak about the shoddy treatment of graves, even if they belong to the other side.

After the article was published, I had to listen to and read many critical comments about the inappropriateness of writing about Azerbaijani graves at a time, when they were destroying Armenian cemeteries and Khachkars (ornate Armenian stones commonly used to mark graves).

I felt somewhat subdued when a person who had probably never in any way contributed to promoting peace questioned my love of motherland and professionalism.

But this did not last long, because when you are a journalist and writing about people and their fates, it is not your emotions, but the objective reality that matters most.

Naira Bulgadarian is an IWPR contributor in Vanadzor, Armenia.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Nagorno-Karabakh: Risking War

14 novembre 2007
International Crisis Group, Belgium
Europe Report N°187

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Armenia and Azerbaijan have failed to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, even though the framework for a fair settlement has been on the table since 2005. A comprehensive peace agreement before presidential elections in both countries in 2008 is now unlikely but the two sides still can and should agree before the polls to a document on basic principles, which if necessary clearly indicates the points that are still in dispute. Without at least such an agreement and while they engage in a dangerous arms race and belligerent rhetoric, there is a risk of increasing ceasefire violations in the next few years. By about 2012, after which its oil revenue is expected to begin to decline, Azerbaijan may be tempted to seek a military solution. The international community needs to lose its complacency and do more to encourage the leaderships to prepare their societies for compromise and peace.

In 2006 the co-chairs of the Minsk Group (France, Russia, the U.S.), authorised by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to facilitate negotiations, proposed principles for settlement: renunciation of the use of force; Armenian withdrawal from parts of Azerbaijan surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh; an interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh, with substantial international aid, including peacekeepers; and mutual commitment to a vote on Nagorno-Karabakh’s final status after the return of displaced Azeris. These principles, which were essentially identical to those proposed by Crisis Group a year earlier, still offer the best framework for a deal. Indeed, the sides have publicly said they generally agree with the concept but lack of political will to resolve the remaining key issues, especially the Lachin corridor, has undermined the process and turned stakeholder optimism into cynicism. None of the parties feels that there is any urgency to settle the conflict.

Azeri and Armenian leaders have also failed to engage their constituents in discussion of the merits of peace. The European Union (EU), the U.S. and Russia have not effectively employed political and economic pressure for a settlement. The anticipated focus on domestic politics in Yerevan and Baku as well as several of the Minsk Group countries in 2008 means that even the incremental diplomatic progress that has been made could well be lost.

Oil money has given Azerbaijan new self-confidence and the means to upgrade its armed forces. It seems to want to postpone any peace deal until the military balance has shifted decisively in its favour. Yerevan, which itself has done surprisingly well economically, has also become more intransigent and increased its own military expenditures. It believes that time is on its side, that Nagorno-Karabakh’s de facto independence will become a reality increasingly difficult to ignore. Playing for time is dangerous for all concerned, however. The riskiest period could be around 2012, when Azerbaijan’s oil money is likely to begin to dwindle, and a military adventure might seem a tempting way to distract citizens from economic crisis. Important oil and gas pipelines near Nagorno-Karabakh would likely be among the first casualties of a new war, something Europe and the U.S. in particular have an interest in avoiding.

The wider international community, not just Minsk Group co-chairs, should coordinate efforts to impress on Baku and Yerevan the need for progress, specifically early agreement on a basic principles document. Nagorno-Karabakh needs to be put at the centre of relations with both countries. The EU special representative in the region should become more active on the issue, and the EU should use the first reviews of its action plans with both countries to promote conflict resolution and the development of transparent, credible institutions which can underpin peace efforts. Engagement is needed now to avoid the danger of war in a few years.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To the Governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan:

1. Agree before the 2008 elections on a document of basic principles making provision for:

(a) security guarantees and the deployment of international peacekeepers;

(b) withdrawal of Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh forces from all occupied territories adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh, with special modalities for Kelbajar and Lachin;

(c) return of displaced persons;

(d) Nagorno-Karabakh’s final status to be determined eventually by a vote, with an interim status to be settled on until that time; and

(e) reopening of all transport and trade routes.

2. Failing consensus on a comprehensive document, agree what can be agreed and clearly identify the points still in dispute.

3. Encourage politicians to make positive references to peace and the need for compromise in their 2008 election campaigns.

To the Governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan and the De Facto Nagorno-Karabakh Authorities:

4. Respect the 1994 ceasefire, refrain from the use of force, halt the rise of defence budgets and cease belligerent and provocative rhetoric directed at the other.

5. Promote track two diplomacy and debate about compromise solutions, including on the above principles, encourage parliaments to lead these debates and facilitate contacts between Azeris and Armenians.

6. The de facto Nagorno-Karabakh authorities should end support for settlement of occupied territories with Armenians, including putting an end to privatisation, infrastructure development and establishment of local government structures in those areas;

7. Azerbaijan should allow Karabakh Azeris to elect the head of their community and make a concerted effort to increase transparency and reduce corruption so that oil revenues are used to benefit all citizens, particularly internally displaced persons (IDPs).

To the Minsk Group Co-Chairs (France, Russia, the U.S.) and the Wider International Community:

8. Make a renewed effort to secure agreement on basic principles, with remaining points of disagreement clearly indicated, in order to maintain continuity in the process and to provide a starting point for negotiations between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan after the 2008 elections.

9. Raise the seniority of the co-chair representatives and make resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict a key element of bilateral and multilateral relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan.

10. Make public more information on the substance of negotiations and avoid artificially fuelling expectations by overly optimistic statements.

11. In the case of the European Union:

(a) increase the role of the Special Representative for the South Caucasus (EUSR), who should observe the Minsk process, support direct contacts with all parties, travel to Nagorno-Karabakh, visit IDPs in Azerbaijan and, with the Commission, assess conflict-related funding needs; and

(b) use European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) reviews and funding to promote confidence building, as well as institution building and respect for human rights and the rule of law.

Tbilisi/Brussels, 14 November 2007

Click here to view the full report as a PDF file in A4 format. For more information about viewing PDF documents, please click here. This document is also available in MS-Word format

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Shame on US for weak stance on Turkey

13 Nov. 2007
Hellenic News of America, PA

COMMUNITY COMMENTARY:
Shame on US for weak stance on Turkey

By Theodore M. Polychronis
Regarding recognition of the Armenian Genocide in the U.S. Congress ("Genocide vote gets postponed," Oct. 27): When the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad questioned the genocide perpetrated against the Jews by Adolf Hitler, our entire administration and Congress, as well as some academics (such as the infamous Columbia University President Lee C. Bollinger), protested vehemently and expressed moral outrage. Many of these people are urging severe punishment of Iran, including going to war against it.

To my knowledge, the Germans did not deny their crimes committed against the Jews, and we never concerned ourselves with their feelings during the Nuremberg trials and later, and as far as I know they continue to pay reparations to this date. We did the moral thing.

When a nonbinding resolution is introduced in our U.S. Congress to call the genocide perpetrated against the Armenians by the Turks (only about 20 years before Hitler) a genocide, our administration and pathetic Congress go wild and refuse to do so, lest the Turks be offended. They then proceed to present the arguments that our entire Iraq war effort will collapse and that, if the Turks are upset, this will have dire effects on the national security of the United States. And they proceed to laud Turkey as being the only "secular democracy" in the region, and if we pass such a nonbinding resolution (acknowledging a historical event) all will be lost forever. The position of our administration and Congress in this affair is unacceptable, shameful and immoral. The fact of the matter is that the genocide against the Armenian population in Turkey did occur, as did the genocide against the Greek populations in the region at about the same time, and the refusal of our elected representatives to accept it does not alter this fact.

To dispel some of the myths perpetrated by the well-funded Turkish lobby and their powerful agents here in the U.S., the present-day Turkey is not, in my opinion, a democracy and has never been one.

Turkey depends on the U.S. and its handouts. Until recently, and probably still today, Turkey has been a large recipient of U.S. aid, military and economic.

Turkey is an international outlaw nation, maintaining after more than 30 years a disputed occupation of part of the Republic of Cyprus, maintaining a blockade of the Republic of Armenia, threatening Kurdish Iraq, threatening Greece and its Aegean islands and continuously violating the Greek airspace.

The "democratic" Turkish state, which imprisons people for ?insulting Turkishness,? has embarked on a campaign against the large Kurdish minority.

Sadly, our U.S. press and media collaborate with the Turks and go to great lengths to present them in a favorable light, in spite of facts. An example was the newspapers calling the recently elected Turkish President Gul a "former Islamist" (I am curious to ask exactly what a "former" Islamist is).

Let us also briefly refresh our memories as to what kind of allies the Turks are, when they prohibited our military to use some bases in Turkey during our invasion of Iraq.

To all this I ask, where is our moral outrage? We don�t need Turkey; Turkey needs us. Our free speech rights supersede the limitations of the Turkish dictators. To allow the Turks with their sordid historical and human rights record to lobby and interfere with our political institutions and dispute our decisions and beliefs and threaten us when we disagree is unconscionable.

How dare the Turks impose upon us their undemocratic censorship on our free speech and our right to call a spade a spade ? and the Armenian Genocide a genocide?

And what are we to think of our elected representatives and administrations on the matter?

Shame on all of us.

THEODORE M. POLYCHRONIS is a Glendale resident.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Frozen Karabakh war could flare again -think-tank

Tue Nov 13, 2007

MOSCOW, Nov 14 (Reuters) - A 20-year-old conflict between ex-Soviet neighbours Armenia and Azerbaijan could re-ignite into a war that would threaten the region's oil exports, an influential think-tank said on Wednesday.

The two countries fought a war in the 1990s over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh which killed about 35,000 people and displaced over one million. A ceasefire was agreed in 1994 but the search for a lasting peace is stalled.

The Brussels-based International Crisis Group (ICG) said in a report the fragile truce is under threat because Azerbaijan is using cash from oil exports to beef up its military and both sides are refusing to compromise.

A major oil pipeline linking Azerbaijan's Caspian Sea oilfields to the Mediterranean Sea runs a few kilometres (miles) to the east of Nagorno-Karabakh. Operated by a BP-led (BP.L: Quote, Profile, Research) consortium it will soon pump one million barrels of oil a day.

"The international community needs to take the threat of war seriously," said Magdalena Frichova, ICG's Caucasus Project Director. "The risk of armed conflict is growing, and the dangers of complacency enormous."

The report said the riskiest period could be around 2012, when Azerbaijan's oil exports are expected to start slowing, possibly triggering economic problems.

"A military adventure might seem a tempting way to distract citizens from economic crisis," ICG said in a preface to the report.

"Important oil and gas pipelines near Nagorno-Karabakh would likely be among the first casualties of a new war, something Europe and the U.S. in particular have an interest in avoiding."

The dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh is one of four so-called frozen conflicts which erupted across the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s and are still unresolved. The other conflicts are in Georgia and Moldova.

Nagorno-Karabakh is recognised internationally as part of Azerbaijan but since the war it has been under the de facto control of ethnic Armenian separatists.

The separatists, who are supported by neighbouring Armenia, also control a large chunk of Azerbaijan's territory adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh.

Azerbaijan says it will restore control over the territory, and has refused to rule out using force.

The ICG report said the United States and European Union should make resolution of the conflict a condition of their relations with Azerbaijan and Armenia.

It also said Baku and Yerevan should sign a document of basic principles to establish ground rules for peace talks. It said this should be done before elections in both countries next year which could complicate the search for peace. (Editing by Catherine Evans)


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Hitler's Globe Sells for $100,000

Nov 14, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A globe that once belonged to Adolf Hitler has sold at auction for $100,000 — more than five times the expected amount.

{Armenian} American soldier John Barsamian found the globe in the ruins of Hitler's Eagle's Nest retreat in the Bavarian Alps in May 1945.

Barsamian, now 91, of Oakland, recently decided to sell it while he is alive so he can personally tell the story behind it, said his son, Barry Barsamian. Both Barsamians watched the bidding Tuesday at Greg Martin Auctions.

The winning bid came from San Francisco entrepreneur Bob Pritikin.

Experts had estimated the item would only bring $15,000 to $20,000.

Other globes presumed to have been owned by Hitler have been extensively researched for authenticity. But there is no uncertainty about the origins of Barsamian's wartime trophy, since he had all the military paperwork that allowed him to bring it back to the United States, including a certificate that reads "1 Global Map, German, Hitler's Eagle Nest."

"This is probably the most airtight documentation I've run across in some time," Greg Martin, proprietor of the auction house, said before the sale. "We have pictures of the guy there at the time, standing in the ruins holding the globe like a newborn baby."


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

The Four Faces of the Turkish Genocide of Assyrians

11-13-2007
AINA
Human Rights Without Frontiers International

On April 1, the Assyrians will celebrate their traditional New Year and remember the 1915-1918 Ottoman Genocide in which half a million of their forebearers lost their lives. This should remind us that the "Armenian genocide" also affected other Christian minorities such as the Assyrians, the Chaldeans and Greek Orthodox.

The title of this press service " Four Faces of the 1915-1918 Genocide " is a reference to the shared atrocities suffered by four Christian minorities of the Ottoman Empire--the Armenians, Assyrians, Chaldeans and Greek Orthodox--whose genocide at the hands of the rulers of war-time Turkey resulted in the annihilation of over two-thirds of their population.

The four stories which follow tell of mass shootings, torture, forced migration for the survivors and the suffering of a people displaced or destroyed simply for reasons of their faith.

Katherine Magarian saw her father and dozens of other family members brutally slain by the invading Turks in the Armenian massacres that began in 1915.

The Reverend John Eshoo and Kerime Cercis described the suffering of the Assyrians and Chaldeans at the hands of the Ottomans in details available only >from an eye-witness or a survivor. Maria Katsidou-Symeonidou told of the exodus >from her home village during Orthodox Easter of 1920.

As the last of the remaining survivors and now first and second-generation descendents of the victims of the 1915-1918 genocide remember and respect the memory of those lost, Human Rights Without Frontiers Int. welcomes the recognition of the "Armenian Genocide" by some countries and supports the collective campaign for further recognition to include the Assyrians, Chaldeans and Greek Orthodox. Human Rights Without Frontiers Int. also encourages Turkey to sign and ratify the Framework Convention on National Minorities of the Council of Europe.

The Armenian Face: Katherine Magarian's Testimony

I saw my father killed when I was nine years old. We lived in Palou, in the mountains. My father was a businessman. He would go into the countryside, selling pots and pans, butter and dairy products. The Turks, they rode in one day and got all the men together, bringing them to a church. Every man came back outside, their hands tied behind them. Then they slaughtered them all, like sheep, with long knives.

They all died, 25 people in my family died. You can't walk, they kill you. You walk, they kill you. They did not care who they killed. My husband, who was a boy in my village but I did not know him then, saw his mother's head cut off. The Turks, they would see a pregnant woman and cut the baby out of her and hold it up on their knife to show those around.

My mother and I, we started running. They got one of my sisters and then one of my other sisters, she was four, but she ran away. My mother was hit by the Turks, she was bleeding as we went. We walked and walked, and I was saying "Ma, wait, I want to look for my little sister,"' but my mother slapped me, saying "No! Too dangerous, we keep walking." It got darker and darker, but we walked. Still, I did not know where. The Turks had taken over our city.

Two, three days we walked, with little to eat. Finally, we found my sister who had run away. Then we walked to Harput and I see the Turks and I want to run, but they are friendly Turks, my mother told me. She said, "You go live with them now, you'll be safe," and I was. I worked there, waiting on them, cleaning, but I was alive and safe. But I did not see my mother for five years. She was taken to the mountains to live, and she saw hundreds of dead Armenians, hundreds of them, who had been killed by the Turks, the bodies were all over.

Years later, my mother said to the Turks, "I want to see my child," and they let her come back. She came to the house at night. She did not know me, but I knew it was her. Her voice was the same as I remembered it. I told her who I was, and she said, "You are my daughter!" and we kissed, hugged, and cried and cried.

My mother later heard of an orphanage in Beirut for Armenians, and we went there after the Turks kicked us out of our country. I spent four years there, and again, I didn't see my mother until a priest got us together. In 1924, she came to this country to meet family who left before the genocide. Three times now, I have lost my mother.

Sometimes, near the anniversary of the slaughter, my mind goes back there. You know, when I was 14, maybe 15, I have a dream, Jesus comes to me and says "Give me your hand," and I want to get up and go with him but I cannot get up. Then I am in the mountains, where all the dead were that my mother would later tell me about, and I see flowers, every kind of flowers, no bodies, and it is beautiful. Then I see the ocean and a boat, the boat that would take me to Cuba years later. I think this was God saying to me that I would be fine. I was lucky to live, I guess. God made me lucky (1).

The Assyrian Face: Reverend John Eshoo's Testimony

You have undoubtedly heard of the Assyrian massacre of Khoi, but I am certain you do not know the details. A large part of our people had migrated here and one fourth of our refugees were stationed in Sardavar (Khoi). These Assyrians were assembled into one caravan and all shot to death by guns and revolvers. Blood literally flowed in little streams and the entire open space within the caravan became a pool of crimson liquid.

The place was too small to hold all the living victims for the work of execution. They were brought in groups, and each new group was compelled to stand up over the heap of the still bleeding bodies and shot to death in the same manner. The fearful place became literally a human slaughterhouse, receiving its speechless victims for execution in groups of ten and twenty at a time. At the same time, the Assyrians, who were residing in the suburb of the city, were brought together and driven into the spacious courtyard of a house. The Assyrian refugees were kept under guard for eight days, without anything to eat except a handful of popcorn served daily to each individual. This consideration was by no means intended as a humanitarian act but merely to keep the victims alive for the infliction upon them of the most revolting tortures at a convenient time set for their execution.

Finally they were removed from their place of confinement and taken to a spot prepared for their brutal killing. These helpless Assyrians marched like lambs to their slaughter, opening their mouths only to say "Lord, into thy hands we commit our spirits." The procession of the victims was led by two green turbaned Sayids [the highest religious order in Islam], one with an open book in his hand, reading aloud the passages pertaining to the holy war whilst the other carried a large-bladed knife, the emblem of execution.

When the procession arrived at the appointed place, the executioners began by cutting first the fingers of their victims, join by joint, till the two hands were entirely amputated. Then they were stretched on the ground, after the manner of the animals that are slain in the Fast, but these with their faces turned upward and their heads resting upon the stones or blocks of wood. Then their throats were half in cut so as to prolong their torture of dying and whilst struggling in the agony of death, the victims were kicked and clubbed by heavy poles. Many of them, still labouring under the pain of death, were thrown into ditches and buried before their souls had expired.

The young and able-bodied men were separated from among the very young and the old. They were taken some distance from the city and used as targets by the shooters. They all fell, a few not mortally wounded. One of the leaders went close to the heaps of the fallen and shouted aloud, swearing by the names of Islam's prophets that those who had not received mortal wounds should rise and depart, as they would not be harmed any more. A few, thus deceived, stood up but only to tall this time dead by another volley from the guns of the murderers. Some of the younger and beautiful women, together with a few little girls, who pleaded to be killed, were forced into the harems of Islam against their will. Others were subjected to such fiendish insults that I cannot possibly even describe. Death, however, came to their rescue and saved them from the vile passions of the demons. The Assyrian victims of this massacre totalled 2,770 men, women and children (2).

The Chaldean Face: Kerime Cercis's Testimony

I was thirteen years old when the massacre began. My father worked for the customs authorities in Siirt. I lived together with my parents, Cercis and Hane, my three brothers, Kerim, Yusuf and Latif, and my grandfather. Our house in the quarter of Ayn Saliba was raided in the spring of 1915 by twenty bandits. Within this raid, my father and my grandfather were stabbed to death. My mother, my brothers and I were taken to a strange village. After the city went through a big massacre, where all my relatives had been killed and thrown into a big hole, the Kurds brought me to the other Chaldean girls in the village of Zevida where I spent one year. Every night the Kurds abused me.

A year later I went back to Siirt in the company of a Muslim woman. This woman brought me to Abdul-Ferid, the new owner of our former home. She believed Abdul-Ferid would feel sorry for me and, therefore, help me but this was quite the contrary. He threw me out of the house. One Chaldean, who was serving as a nanny for a Turk, helped me. I should carry water for the family and care for the garden. One day when I wanted to take water from the source a soldier came my way.

His name was Abdullah and was carrying water for the hospital of Siirt. He kidnapped and brought me to his mother, Fatum Hanum. She showed me the hole where all the killed Christians been thrown in and said: "The same will happen to you if you don't follow our rules!" It was a terrible sight, all the bones and the hair of people lying down there. When we returned to the house she told me: "Did you get what I told you, little heretic?" I was so frightened that I even could not answer.

Abdullah was abusing me sexually and in many other ways. For three years I had to undergo this terrible treatment, I served for the old witch and followed everything she ordered. Then the famine began to reign in the village and everyone was suffering from hunger except the slave driver Abdulriza. His depot was full of food which he had stolen from the Christian's houses. Abdullah could not look after his family any longer. Therefore, he told his mother to take his children and go begging for money but she had decided for the voyage to Istanbul. The voyage lasted three months and what Fatum and the children did to me in the meantime is too unbelievable to even describe. When we reached Istanbul she sold me to a Muslim woman, who knew one of my relatives. I begged her to bring me there and finally she did. Now I am living in my relative's house, which called Zeki Hirize and works as a shoemaker.

These are the names of my killed relatives: My parents Cercis and Hane, my brothers Latif, Yusuf, Kerim (killed by Abdul-Ferid who inhabits our former house), my grandparents on both sides, my uncles Pitiyon, Tevfik, Bulos and my aunts Hatun and Helena. All of our possessions, the house, furniture, gold, jewels, everything belongs now to Abdul-Ferid, who has taken everything (3).

The Hellenic Face: Maria Katsidou-Symeonidou's Testimony

I was born in Mourasoul village, Sevasteia/Sivas district, on 15 August 1914. I remember the deportations well. In 1918, I was about four years old, when one day I saw my father in the village square. I ran to him and asked him for the pie he brought me every day from the family-owned mill. He replied: "Oh, my child! The Turks are going to kill me and you will not see me again." He told me to tell my mother to prepare his clothes and some food for him. That was the last time we saw him. They killed him along with another ten men.

I remember another time when a Turk warned our village, saying that all the young men should leave. This because the next day, Topal Osman, would be coming. Indeed, those that left, were saved. They still killed fifteen men, including the teacher, the village president and the priest. Topal Osman had caught three hundred and fifty men from neighbouring villages. He had them bound, murdered and thrown into the river that ran through our village. I still remember the echo of the shots. They were hauling the bodies by ox-cart for nine days to bury them. Most of them were unrecognisable, as their heads had been cut off.

In 1920, around Easter, the Turkish Army came and told us to take with us everything we could. We loaded up the animals, but the saddle-bags tore open and most of us were left without food. On the deportation march, the Turkish guards would rape the women, one of whom became pregnant. In the Teloukta area, about half our group was lost in a snow storm. From there, they took us to a place without water, Sous-Yiazousou, where many died of thirst. Soon afterwards, as we passed a river, all of us threw ourselves at the water, people fell over each other in the rush and many drowned. We reached Phiratrima, which was a Kurdish area and they left us at a village near a bridge. It was here that the pregnant girl gave birth to twins. The Turks cut the new-borns in two and tossed them in the river. On the riverbank, they killed many more of the group.

The killings ended only with the agreement for the Exchange of Populations (1923). This is how we were saved. I came to Hellas in 1923. As I was an orphan, I arrived with the American Mission, at Volos (Thessaly). From there, we went to Aedipsos, to Larissa and finally to Aetorrahi village, Elassona district, where I settled (4).

(1) Katherine Magarian's story was originally published in the Boston Globe on 19 April 1998.
(2) Excerpted from The Flickering Light of Asia, Reverend Joel Werda, Chicago, 1990, P. 156-58.
(3) Kerime Cercis was interviewed in 1918 in Istanbul.
(4) Maria Katsidou-Symeonidou died in November 1997.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: , , ,

If Our Friends Do It, It Is Not Genocide

November 13, 2007
Corporate Crime Reporter, DC
Frankly, what a farce is this? No country can get away by denying a genocide whether it is a friend of the USA or not and whether it happened yesterday or 92 years ago.

A country's past behaviour dictates its future behaviour. So Turkey does what it knows best, that is bully. If Turkey blackmails America with the lives of Americans then America decides that there was no Armenian genocide. Former Secretary Madeline Albright and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen you have the gall to work against the recognition of the Armenian genocide and then set up a task force to prevent genocides. You are an embarrassment to humanity. To prevent genocides you need to stand up to bullying. Frankly none of you can.
The Genocide Prevention Task Force was unveiled at the National Press Club this morning.

The task force is being co-chair by former Secretary of State Madeline Albright and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen.

It’s being convened by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the American Academy of Diplomacy, and the United States Institute of Peace.

In addition to Cohen and Albright, its members include: John Danforth, Tom Daschle, Stuart Eizenstat, Michael Gerson, Dan Glickman, Jack Kemp, Gabrielle Kirk McDonald, Tom Pickering, Julia Taft, Vin Weber, and Anthony Zinni.

“The world agrees that genocide is unacceptable and yet genocide and mass killings continue,” Albright said. “Our challenge is to match words to deeds and stop allowing the unacceptable. That task – simple on the surface – is in fact one of the most persistent puzzles of our times. We have a duty to find the answer before the vow of ‘never again’ is once again betrayed.”

“We are convinced that the U.S. government can and must do better in preventing genocide – a crime that threatens not only our values but our national interests,” Cohen said.

But after the opening remarks, Cohen and Albright hit a buzz saw of skeptical questioning from reporters in the First Amendment Room.

“How do you reconcile your work in trying to build a moral American consensus against genocide when just very recently each of you signed letters urging America not to recognize the Armenian genocide?” a reporter asked Cohen and Albright.

“This mission is about the future,” Albright answered. “We want to look at ways to try and prevent genocide and mass killing. That is the purpose of this task force. The former Secretaries of State recognized that terrible things happened to the Armenians and tragedies. The letter was primarily about whether this was the appropriate time to raise the issue.”

“The fact is that all of us who signed were concerned about the level of killings and the human suffering that took place between 1915 and 1923,” Cohen said. “There was also a very deliberate decision to say that we are engaged in warfare at the moment. We have our sons and daughters who are at risk. And we felt that to have the resolution brought might result in reactions on the part of the Turkish government that could place our sons and daughters in greater jeopardy. It was a very practical decision that was made. This was not to say that we overlooked what took place in the past. We are saying – at this point forward, what do we do? How do we marshal public opinion? How do we marshal political action? How do we generate the will to take action in a society that has been reluctant to do so in the past? It involves multiple levels of complexity.”

“If we are saying that this isn’t the right time to acknowledge this genocide, does that mean that you are arguing that for political expedience purposes, we are not going to be taking action on nor should we take action on future genocides because of what are perceived to be U.S. interests?” another reporter asked.

“We are saying there are no absolutes in this,” Cohen answered. “We are going to try and set forth a set of principles that will serve as a guide. And hopefully that guide will allow political leadership in this country and elsewhere. This is not something where the United States is advocating unilateral action. We are talking about the United States taking a lead to help shape public opinion – certainly domestically but also internationally. And this will involve multiple considerations, multiple political factors that have to be taken into account. We hope this endeavor will be successful in pursuing mass killings and genocide in the future.”

“I also do think that it is important to recognize that even if terrible things happened in the past, they do not need to happen in the future,” Albright said. “And that is what this is about. In no way does it put the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval on anybody’s behavior. On the contrary. It is to examine people’s behavior. It is very important for us to move forward.”

“It sounds as if you are both saying – if our friends do it, it is not genocide,” said another reporter. “And if our enemies do it, it is genocide. Professor at the University of Haifa, Ilan Pappe, has written recently that he believes there is genocide ongoing in Gaza and ethnic cleansing in the West Bank. But you folks wouldn’t agree with that because Israel is our friend and we couldn’t say that about Israel. Secretary Cohen, you say – we can’t say that about Turkey and the Armenian genocide because our boys and girls are in harm’s way. If you are going to define genocide by who does it, not by what it is, your task force is in trouble.”

“I don’t know that even the UN has declared that genocide occurred in the Armenian situation,” Cohen said. “We are trying to look forward rather than backwards. On the issue of whether genocide is taking place in the West Bank and Gaza – certainly that will be part of [what] the task force [is] looking at.”

“Yes, there is an element of pragmatism,” Cohen said. “If someone else’s son or daughter is in harm’s way, that is a factor that I as an American citizen and as a former Secretary of Defense would have to take into account. And would. And I think anyone serving public office necessarily has to have a set factors to take into account. It is not absolute. This will not be a document that says – this is when the line is crossed, this is the action that will be taken. These are going to be guidelines. They themselves will serve a valuable purpose. It will help to at least raise the issue to a level of both domestic and international concern – hopefully stirring action. That is our goal.”

“When you are in the government, and you have to make very tough decisions, you have to look at the overall picture,” Albright said. “Otherwise, we are not going to get off the ground. These are very, very hard issues. I would definitely not accept your definition – if friends do it, it’s okay, and if enemies do it, it is not. I find that just an unacceptable premise. This task force is going to set forth guidelines for practical action by the United States government. Which is why we want to present this by the end of next year.”

“You can have all kinds of emotional arguments why something is wrong and then you never get it off the ground,” she said. “You ultimately have to take practical action. That is what is happening in the United States. We are not going to get ourselves into emotional appeals. Because that is not going to work. We are interested in practical steps.”

“The experience of the Armenians does indeed conform with the UN Convention,” another reporter shot back at Cohen. “In fact, Elie Wiesel has said that the denial of the genocide is the final stage of the genocide. The two of you have personally worked toward ascertaining that the United States government does not take a stand recognizing the Armenian genocide. This is of course based on real, practical political considerations, that you mentioned. However, taking on this new role, how can you reconcile your positions and the U.S. foreign policy? How can you provide credibility that your recommendations will be of use to the United States in its foreign policy and will not be words on a piece of paper that will be acceptable but the US will not follow up on?”

“You talk about political expediency,” Cohen responded. “As Secretary of Defense, I had responsibility for every man and woman who was serving in our armed forces. And yes, I would have to take into account whether or not I was placing them in greater jeopardy in order to make a declaration for something that happened back between 1915 and 1923. I would have to weigh that. And frankly, I think the former Secretaries of Defense – Republicans and Democrats alike – all came to the same conclusion. We could not put our men and women in greater danger under these circumstances. Does that mean that we are not in a position to look forward and say – here are some of the things that happened in the past, here are some of the things we did not do in the past, here is something that needs to be done in the future? There is no absolute right or wrong. It’s not all black and white. We are going to have to take these into account. You as a private citizen will be in a position to say – here is a document issued by this esteemed group. What do you Mr. President, what do you Mr. Secretary, intend to do about the atrocities currently taking place in x-country? Are your abdicating your moral leadership, abdicating the U.S. responsibility to lead? To gather and galvanize international support to do something – disinvestment in that particular country, condemning the leadership of that country? Having dealt with ethnic cleansing in the past, to take that experience, as well as what took place in Armenia, as well as what took place in Rwanda, now in Darfur, and say – this is how we have to lead on this issue.”

“It’s important to recognize what we said in the letter,” Albright said. “While we were secretaries, we recognized that mass killings and forced exile had taken place, and we also said that the U.S. policy has been all along for reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia on this particular issue. I do think that one of the things that this task force will ultimately recommend is that the parties to the problem have to acknowledge what happened. That is part of the issue. There is not one answer to fit all. This task force is about the future – about preventing genocide.”

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Hrant Dink posthumously honored with AAA Distinguished Humanitarian Award

13.11.2007 14:31 GMT+04:00
PanARMENIAN.Net

More than 400 Armenian Assembly supporters from across the country gathered at the Beverly Hilton Hotel on November 3rd to pay tribute to one of the most prominent Armenian voices in Turkey, the late Hrant Dink. Dink’s widow Rakel was on hand to accept the Assembly’s Distinguished Humanitarian Award posthumously bestowed upon Dink.

Mrs. Dink, who traveled from Turkey to accept the award, delivered a moving and thought-provoking speech, recalling that her husband fought tirelessly for Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. He was searching for a way to help both Armenians and Turks heal and move forward while acknowledging the truths of history, Mrs. Dink said, speaking in Armenian.

She then noted that past events or traumas can only be overcome by understanding and forgiveness, and that her husband was always “telling people to empathize with others, to try to understand and share their pain. He did this with “enormous courage, perseverance, excitement and love,” she said.

Mrs. Dink also discussed efforts in the U.S. to reaffirm the Armenian Genocide. She noted that the U.S. lawmakers who are considering the Armenian Genocide resolution all know the truth, but that they are simply putting politics before ethics.

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Reporters Without Borders: 301 needs "deeds not words"

13 November 2007
The New Anatolian / Ankara

The Reporters Without Borders (RSF) have urged the Turkish authorities to move to end the words and start acting to change Article 301 of criminal law allowing prosecution for “insulting Turkish identity” after the Turkish Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin declared the government intends to amend the law.

“It’s been two years now since, alongside Turkish journalists and press freedom organizations, we have called for the law to be amended and proceedings dropped against those who criticize, on the pretext that they are” insulting Turkish identity,” the worldwide press freedom organization declared.

“We cannot forget that Turkish authorities have used Article 301 as a tool of terrible repression. It gives voice to and stokes up nationalist tensions at work in Turkey and finds fervent advocates in the Turkish legal system,” the organization said.

Turkish journalist of Armenian origin Hrant Dink who was murdered on January 19, 2007 was himself prosecuted under this article. His son, Arat Dink was given a one-year suspended prison sentence on 11 October, for reprinting in the weekly Agos an interview given by his father to the Reuters news agency, in which he recalled that the massacres of Armenians between 1915 and 1917 were genocide”, it continued.

Justice Minister Sahin told the Anatolian News Agency that the Justice and Development (AK) Party government had decided to amend Article 301. He stressed that the council of ministers would “at the first opportunity” examine about five drafts on the basis of proposals from civil organizations, select some and then seek debate on them in parliament.

This statement was in response to the conclusions of the annual progress report on Turkey unveiled by the European Commission.

The report stressed that “considerable effort is still required on freedom of expression” and urged the Turkish government to take “immediate steps” in this area.

Turkish President Abdullah Gül told the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on 3 October that he was in favor of amending Article 301. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, made similar promises in November 2006 ahead of the publication of the annual EU report.

Article 301 headed “denigration of Turkish identity, of the republic, the institutions or organs of state”, says whoever "openly denigrates the government, organs of state justice or military or police structures” risks a prison sentence of six months to three years.

Not only do the Turkish courts severely apply this law, but they ignore paragraph 4 which stipulates that, “Expressions of thought intended to criticize shall not constitute a crime”.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

First Nationwide Turkish Survey Reveals Millions of Turks Support Genocide Bill

Sassounian's column of Nov. 15, 2007
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

The Assembly of Turkish American Associations recently featured on its website a reference to “the first nationwide public survey” conducted in Turkey on the Armenian Genocide and the congressional resolution on this issue. The poll was carried out earlier this year by “Terror Free Tomorrow” in collaboration with Istanbul-based “ARI Movement” and U.S.-based “ARI Foundation.”

The survey showed that 78% of Turks oppose the congressional resolution on the Armenian genocide, while 7.4% support it. Turkey’s leaders may be happy that the majority of Turkey’s citizens oppose the resolution, but they conveniently overlook the fact that the 7.4% who support it represent more than 5 million Turks who believe that the U.S. Congress should recognize the Armenian Genocide. Furthermore, another 8.5% or close to 6 million Turks have a neutral position on this issue.

When asked their reason for opposing the genocide resolution, only 36% said that it was because they did not believe that a genocide occurred. This means that almost two-thirds of Turkey’s population opposes the bill for completely different reasons: 42% said they mistrusted the impartiality of the U.S. Congress, while 18% preferred that historians make that judgment.

The most amazing finding of the survey was that fully 50% or 2.5 million of Turks supporting passage of the Armenian Genocide resolution justified it by saying that “Turkey should recognize the past wrong of its genocide against Armenians;” 13.7% said that “Turkish recognition of the Armenian genocide will help reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia,” and 26.1% said that “The U.S. Congressional resolution is not binding law and will not affect official American policy toward Turkey.”

When asked if the approval of the resolution would improve or worsen the respondents’ opinion of the United States, 73% of the Turks said such an act would worsen their opinion of the U.S. This is not surprising at all, since a recent Pew Research Center poll showed that 91% of the Turks already disliked the United States. What is shocking, however, is that 4.5% of those surveyed, which translates into more than 3 million Turks, said that the approval of the genocide resolution by the U.S. Congress would improve their opinion of the United States! Another 22% or 15 million Turks said that congressional approval would not affect their opinion of the U.S., did not know or did not answer.

When asked if Turkey should refuse to assist the U.S. war effort in Iraq if the Armenian resolution were to be adopted by the U.S. Congress, 83% of the respondents said they would oppose any cooperation with the U.S., while 8.5% or close to 6 million Turks said they would still support the U.S. in Iraq.

In response to another question, 78% said that they would favor taking action against the U.S. for adopting the genocide resolution (boycotting American products, demonstrating against the U.S., voting for candidates opposed to the war in Iraq). However, 11% or 7.5 million Turks said they would take no action against the U.S. for adopting the genocide resolution. Another 11% had no answer or opinion.

Another shocking answer was given by the Turkish respondents when asked why the U.S. Congress may approve the Armenian Genocide resolution: 42% said because of anti-Muslim feelings in the United States, 31% said due to domestic U.S. politics, and 12% or the equivalent of 8.5 million Turks said because “the Armenian Genocide is a proven historical fact!”

The results of the survey are not surprising. The overwhelming majority of the Turkish public, after being fed by their leaders a steady diet of lies on the Armenian Genocide for more than 90 years, naturally is bound to disbelieve that such barbaric acts were committed by their ancestors. However, the real news revealed by this survey is that, despite all the years of brainwashing, millions of Turks not only refuse to believe their government’s denialist propaganda, but have the courage, at a great risk to their own safety, in “face-to-face” interviews, to acknowledge publicly that the Armenian Genocide is a fact and that the U.S. Congress must approve the Armenian Genocide resolution.

The long years of Armenian efforts for the international acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide seem to be bearing fruit not only around the globe but also within Turkey itself, despite that country’s draconian laws which ban any reference to that crime. The news reports of these efforts, fueled by the Turkish government’s extensive denialist measures, have created a massive amount of information on the Armenian Genocide which is reaching large segments of the Turkish public for the first time. The above Turkish survey shows that outside pressure is gradually making Turks face the dark and ugly chapters of their past.

Labels: , ,

Monday, November 12, 2007

Assyrian Genocide Scholar Tours U.S.

11-12-2007
AINA
By Rosie Malek-Yonan

Like an umbilical chord still connected to its bitter past, the Assyrians cannot detach from the events perpetrated against their nation by the Ottoman Turks, Kurds and Persians in the shadows of WWI. The past looms unsettled. The past waits patiently and stubbornly to be made right so that the Assyrian nation can finally be at peace. The Assyrian nation has been mourning its dead for 92 years. It is time to lay them to rest with honor. It is our human right.

Assyrian nationalists and educators such as Mr. Sabri Atman are doing their part to educate and create worldwide awareness of the recognition of the Assyrian Genocide.

This week, Assyrians of America welcome Mr. Atman in their midst. His arrival in the U.S. is indeed a bittersweet encounter for the Assyrians of this region. We are reminded of the importance of remaining vigilant today in safe guarding our history and our past to ensure our nation's future so that it may be free from oppression and persecution.

Mr. Sabri Atman, founder and director of the Assyrian Seyfo Center in Europe, is presenting a lecture on the topic of the Assyrian Genocide entitled "Genocide, Denial, and the Right of Recognition." The five-city American tour that began in Los Angeles on November 9th at the Assyrian American Association of Southern California, will continue on to San Jose (November 10th), Turlock (November 11th), Detroit (November 16th), and end in Chicago (November 17th) before he heads for Armenia with the same powerful message.

I had the honor of attending Mr. Atman's lecture in Los Angeles. He presented the facts clearly and succinctly. But what was most striking about his presentation was his unshakable conviction to demand justice for his Assyrian nation from the Turkish government.

"Today we are not blaming every Turk or Kurd for the past events. But this was done to us in their name," said Mr. Atman.

Indeed, the silence of the majority and the opposition of many today to recognize the Genocide of the Assyrians, Armenian and Greeks, only emphasizes the support of the denial of these Genocides.

Mr. Atman carried with him a palm size reddish stone from his homeland in Southeast Turkey where he is banned from ever visiting. The stone is a constant reminder of the bitter memories of not just his family's past but also the past of the Assyrian nation that is perpetually battling 92 years of defiance by the Turks.

Like most Assyrian families, the death of his grand parents at the hands of the Ottoman Turks, is a memory that follows him daily. "The Assyrian nation has inherited incredible scars."

"We Assyrians live in many different countries, but our existence is not recognized. Our fundamental rights are not recognized," said Mr. Atman. According to him, the year 1915 was one of the dirtiest pages of Turkish history and consequently, "the Assyrian people did not just suffer a tragedy. They suffered a genocide!"

It is true that as children, we Assyrians grew up learning and hearing about the atrocities committed against our nation during WWI. "We shed tears of blood," resonated Mr. Atman. A statement I know only too well when I remember the eyes of my own grandmother, who was a survivor of the Assyrian Genocide. She was one of the lucky ones, unlike the rest of her family.

"We are the grandchildren of the Genocide. They owe us an apology."

An apology that is long overdue.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Turkey's new envoy says genocide bill impedes reconciliation

11/10/2007
Los Angeles Daily News, CA
By Bridget Johnson, Staff Writer

U.S. lawmakers should not fixate on the Armenian Genocide bill, which is an insult to many Turks and a roadblock to reconciliation between Turkey and the Armenian community, the new Turkish consul general in Los Angeles said.
Reconciliation is based on acknowledgement of the past and not on forgetting it. If the consul thinks the recognition of the genocide is an insult to Turks how about the insult of its denial by Turkey to Armenians?
In a recent interview with the Daily News, R. Hakan Tekin said his country strongly objects to the Armenian Genocide legislation that passed the House Committee on Foreign Affairs last month, which labels as genocide the killings of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire during World War I.

The committee's 27-21 vote has raised ire in Turkey and was slammed by some U.S. lawmakers and commentators for the potential harm it might do to U.S. relations with Turkey, a longtime strategic ally of America and NATO partner.

Turkey briefly pulled its U.S. ambassador, Nabi Sensoy, back to Ankara after the vote.

"It certainly had an effect on our bilateral relations," Tekin said of the bill, which was shelved late last month under increasing political pressure.

"It's about our history and it's about, in our opinion, a misreading of our history... To many of us, it's even insulting. ...
It is a deliberate misreading of history by Turkey in order to protect a false sense of nationalism.
"We don't know now where it will end," Tekin said Wednesday at the Wilshire Boulevard consulate.

Turkey severed military ties with France after that country's lower house passed a bill last year making it a crime to deny the Armenian killings were genocide.
But the trade with France increased since.
Tekin, who assumed the consul general post six months ago, said lawmakers should not "legislate history." He noted that in 2005 Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan asked Armenian President Robert Kocharian to form a joint commission of historians to study the disputed 1915 events, a proposal that has not been accepted.
This is a fallacy, Kocharian had responded that diplomatic relations has to be established first. How can a discussion take place under condition of blockade on the premise that Armenia and its Diaspora should abandon the pursuit of the recognition of the Armenian genocide?
"We are not scared of our history, and we are not trying to hide anything," Tekin said. "And if this commission is established, we will accept whatever result it reaches. ... It is (time for) the Armenian side to make a move."

Tekin believes it is the size and influence of the U.S. Armenian community that has kept the issue alive.
It is more the influence of Turkey hiding behind the apron of its NATO alliance and its blackmail of the US which has derailed the pursuit of justice by a large citizenry of the USA.
"Why are the Armenian events of 1915 brought to the Congress of the U.S.?" he asked. "Because there is a strong Armenian voting bloc in the country.
It is brought up by US citizens in order to feel that their adopted country reflects their history as recorded in its archives.
"Why is not, for instance, the massacres in Kenya carried out by the then-British imperial government not brought to the Congress? Because there are no Kenyan voters here.
If enough Americans of Kenyan decent get organized and there is sufficient evidence in the US archives that is also possible and it is their right to do so.
"When you politicize history, you pick and choose and you lose objectivity, and then you are prone to the pressures of narrow group interests."
Truth is never subject to politics. This is a lesson Turkey must understand by discarding its PCA 301 which penalizes any discussion on the Armenian genocide under the pretext of insulting Turkishness. Turkey has no lesson to give here to Americans.
Tekin also said Armenians in Armenia appear less focused on the past than the Armenian Diaspora.
Most Armenians are against having an open border with Turkey as long as the latter refuses to recognize the 1915 Armenian genocide, according to a new U.S.-funded opinion poll. Here.
"It doesn't seem that for the Armenians of Armenia proper, it carries that much priority ... because Armenia now has much more serious problems for day-to-day life," he said.

Unfortunately, he said, continued lobbying by Armenian groups in the U.S. on claims that the Turks slaughtered more than 1 million Armenians from 1915 to 1918 hurts chances at reconciliation.

"And that's really sad, in my opinion, because both countries, Turkey and Armenia, have a lot to gain to improve their relations, to establish normal relations in our region," he said. "We need that."
Turkey has a lot to gain by isolating Armenia in order to achieve its long held goal of depopulating it so that it can establish its long sought Turanic empire with the Asian Turkic speaking nations. That was the aim of the genocide and it has not changed so far because Turkey has not recognized it and therefore Armenia does not feel safe having the second largest army of NATO as its neighbour.
When asked about the potential of the resolution to revive hostilities between the two communities, Tekin brought up the history of assassinations of Turkish diplomats in Los Angeles: Consul General Mehmet Baydar and his deputy, Bahadir Demir, slain in 1973 by Gourgen Yanikian at a Santa Barbara hotel; and Consul General Kemal Arikan, shot to death by Harry Sassounian and a second gunman in Westwood in 1982.

A group calling itself Justice Commandos for the Armenian Genocide claimed responsibility at the time for Arikan's slaying.

"(It) has been ignored by many people here that two of my predecessors ... have been killed by Armenian terrorists here in Los Angeles, and nobody speaks about that," Tekin said. Black-and-white portraits of the three slain men adorn the wall outside the door to Tekin's office.

The consul general now receives special protection from the State Department, Tekin said.
Tekin must be happy that Armenians have chosen the rout of democracy and should revise its own policy of denial.
Still, Tekin said Turks and Armenians have a lot in common: They are bonded not only by a border, but by cultural similarities as well.
So Turkey must act accordingly by recognizing the genocide so that the process of reconciliation begins in earnest.
"In a thousand years, maybe we had this trouble period of 20 years, 15 years, and the result here is a hostility," he said. "In Turkey, we don't preach hatred toward Armenia."
Armenians in Turkey have been smothered by the love of the Ottoman Turks to the point that they lost their nationhood in Turkey. Present day Turkey still continues the genocide by its denial. With such demonstrated love there is no room left for hatred.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Robert Fisk: Holocaust denial in the White House

10 November 2007
The Independent
"Who would have thought that the leader of the Western world – he who would protect us against "world terror" – would turn out to be the David Irving of the White House?"

President Bush, US State Secretary Rice and Defence Secretary Gates have embraced the biggest terror, genocide, in their global war on terror! What a sad fall for the US.

"How terrible an irony did Gates utter. For it is these very "roads and so on" down which walked the hundreds of thousands of Armenians on their 1915 death marches. Many were forced aboard cattle trains which took them to their deaths. One of the railway lines on which they travelled ran due east of Adana – a great collection point for the doomed Christians of western Armenia – and the first station on the line was called Incirlik, the very same Incirlik which now houses the huge airbase that Mr Bush is so frightened of losing."
The Turks say the Armenians died in a 'civil war', and Bush goes along with their lies

How are the mighty fallen! President George Bush, the crusader king who would draw the sword against the forces of Darkness and Evil, he who said there was only "them or us", who would carry on, he claimed, an eternal conflict against "world terror" on our behalf; he turns out, well, to be a wimp. A clutch of Turkish generals and a multimillion-dollar public relations campaign on behalf of Turkish Holocaust deniers have transformed the lion into a lamb. No, not even a lamb – for this animal is, by its nature, a symbol of innocence – but into a household mouse, a little diminutive creature which, seen from afar, can even be confused with a rat. Am I going too far? I think not.

The "story so far" is familiar enough. In 1915, the Ottoman Turkish authorities carried out the systematic genocide of one and a half million Christian Armenians. There are photographs, diplomatic reports, original Ottoman documentation, the process of an entire post-First World War Ottoman trial, Winston Churchill and Lloyd George and a massive report by the British Foreign Office in 1915 and 1916 to prove that it is all true. Even movie film is now emerging – real archive footage taken by Western military cameramen in the First World War – to show that the first Holocaust of the 20th century, perpetrated in front of German officers who would later perfect its methods in their extermination of six million Jews, was as real as its pitifully few Armenian survivors still claim.

But the Turks won't let us say this. They have blackmailed the Western powers – including our own British Government, and now even the US – to kowtow to their shameless denials. These (and I weary that we must repeat them, because every news agency and government does just that through fear of Ankara's fury) include the canard that the Armenians died in a "civil war", that they were anyway collaborating with Turkey's Russian enemies, that fewer Armenians were killed than have been claimed, that as many Turkish Muslims were murdered as Armenians.

And now President Bush and the United States Congress have gone along with these lies. There was, briefly, a historic moment for Bush to walk tall after the US House Foreign Relations Committee voted last month to condemn the mass slaughter of Armenians as an act of genocide. Ancient Armenian-American survivors gathered at a House panel to listen to the debate. But as soon as Turkey's fossilised generals started to threaten Bush, I knew he would give in.

Listen, first, to General Yasar Buyukanit, chief of the Turkish armed forces, in an interview with the newspaper Milliyet. The passage of the House resolution, he whinged, was "sad and sorrowful" in view of the "strong links" Turkey maintained with its NATO partners. And if this resolution was passed by the full House of Representatives, then "our military relations with the US would never be as they were in the past... The US, in that respect, has shot itself in the foot".

Now listen to Mr Bush as he snaps to attention before the Turkish general staff. "We all deeply regret the tragic suffering (sic) of the Armenian people... But this resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings. Its passage would do great harm to our relations with a key ally in NATO and in the global war on terror." I loved the last bit about the "global war on terror". Nobody – save for the Jews of Europe – has suffered "terror" more than the benighted Armenians of Turkey in 1915. But that NATO should matter more than the integrity of history – that NATO might one day prove to be so important that the Bushes of this world may have to equivocate over the Jewish Holocaust to placate a militarily resurgent Germany – beggars belief.

Among those men who should hold their heads in shame are those who claim they are winning the war in Iraq. They include the increasingly disoriented General David Petraeus, US commander in Iraq, and the increasingly delusional US ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, both of whom warned that full passage of the Armenian genocide bill would "harm the war effort in Iraq". And make no mistake, there are big bucks behind this disgusting piece of Holocaust denial.

Former Representative Robert L Livingston, a Louisiana Republican, has already picked up $12m from the Turks for his company, the Livingston Group, for two previously successful attempts to pervert the cause of moral justice and smother genocide congressional resolutions. He personally escorted Turkish officials to Capitol Hill to threaten US congressmen. They got the point. If the resolution went ahead, Turkey would bar US access to the Incirlik airbase through which passed much of the 70 per cent of American air supplies to Iraq which transit Turkey.

In the real world, this is called blackmail – which was why Bush was bound to cave in. Defence Secretary Robert Gates was even more pusillanimous – although he obviously cared nothing for the details of history. Petraeus and Crocker, he said, "believe clearly that access to the airfields and to the roads and so on in Turkey would be very much put at risk if this resolution passes...".

How terrible an irony did Gates utter. For it is these very "roads and so on" down which walked the hundreds of thousands of Armenians on their 1915 death marches. Many were forced aboard cattle trains which took them to their deaths. One of the railway lines on which they travelled ran due east of Adana – a great collection point for the doomed Christians of western Armenia – and the first station on the line was called Incirlik, the very same Incirlik which now houses the huge airbase that Mr Bush is so frightened of losing.

Had the genocide that Bush refuses to acknowledge not taken place – as the Turks claim – the Americans would be asking the Armenians for permission to use Incirlik. There is still alive – in Sussex if anyone cares to see her – an ageing Armenian survivor from that region who recalls the Ottoman Turkish gendarmes setting fire to a pile of living Armenian babies on the road close to Adana. These are the same "roads and so on" that so concern the gutless Mr Gates.

But fear not. If Turkey has frightened the boots off Bush, he's still ready to rattle the cage of the all-powerful Persians. People should be interested in preventing Iran from acquiring the knowledge to make nuclear weapons if they're "interested in preventing World War Three", Bush has warned us. What piffle. Bush can't even summon up the courage to tell the truth about World War One.

Who would have thought that the leader of the Western world – he who would protect us against "world terror" – would turn out to be the David Irving of the White House?


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

US House must uphold truth and justice with Armenian genocide resolution

Friday, November 09, 2007
JURIST
Where have the good individuals gone in Turkey? Turkey's denial and imperial hangover have put them in the endangered species list! Turkey is doing what it has always known best, threaten!
Frank V. Zerunyan, Esq. [Chairman, Board of Governors of the Armenian Bar Association; Mayor Pro Tem, City of Rolling Hills Estates]: "The People’s House of the United States of America must follow its tradition and uphold the truth above all else. The speaker of the House of Representatives must bring HR106 to a floor vote because the resolution is morally, intellectually, historically and legally consistent with our American values. We Americans must insist that our leaders promote truth, justice and the rule of law. We have a long tradition of accepting human dignity as an inalienable right and as the basis of our jurisprudence. No one could have described it better than Alexander Hamilton when he said “The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among the old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of divinity itself; and can never be erased or obstructed by mortal power.”

“Never again” to Armenians, Jews, Cambodians, Rwandans, Darfurians is not just a slogan in the context of the human rights debate in the world; it is a call to meaningful action to eradicate genocide from the world. Experts and scholars confirm that each perpetrator has used previous crimes against humanity with impunity. Indeed Adolph Hitler himself in 1939, before the invasion of Poland, reminded his commanding officers in a passionate speech “who still talks now days of the extermination of the Armenians?” Denial is part of and a completion of this crime against humanity. Our values simply do not permit us to be co-conspirators to the commission of or to the completion of the crime of genocide.

At stake today in Washington DC, of course, is the question of whether the United States House of Representatives should offend Turkey by voting on a resolution condemning the Armenian Genocide of 1915. All actors in this debate are playing the roles they have played for decades. Turkish generals and ministers are threatening our military ties, the closure of our bases, air space and logistics routes. Ironically however, even before any word of this resolution, those routes were already closed to our sons and daughters when our nation went to war to liberate Iraq. There is also a new threat by our own government; “radical Islam”. Most if not all credible experts will agree that this threat is simply not credible as the Republic of Turkey will never chose this form of a regime over the great and overwhelming legacy of its founding father Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Moreover, such a threat completely undermines contemporary Turkish identity.

While the Republic of Turkey may react negatively in the short term (I think to their own detriment), recognition of the Armenian genocide is warranted for several reasons. First, the HR106 declares the truth; a truth that 23 other countries, 40 American States and countless Counties and Cities have already recognized. Second, no one discusses or even mentions our influence and the basis of our influence over the Republic of Turkey. The truth is that we brought Turkey into the NATO Alliance without which Turkey’s security could not be guaranteed. We support Turkey’s membership into the European Union; an economic “must” for the survival of Turkey into the 21st Century and beyond. We granted Turkey a most favored nation trading status resulting in more than $7 billion in annual trade and $2 billion in US investments in Turkey. Only Israel and Egypt outrank Turkey as recipients of US Foreign assistance. Third, it is inconceivable that even back in the days when the US prized West Germany as a buffer and deterrent against the Soviet Union, we Americans would have refrained from condemning The Shoah (the Holocaust) at Germany’s behest.

Finally and more importantly to this American of Armenian decent, it brings finality and closure, bringing back human dignity to humanity lost almost a century ago. I assume most of you know the eternal resting grounds of your great grand fathers and grand mothers; I don’t. My ancestors formed the first Christian nation in the world (301 A.D.) only to become the invisible Christians in unmarked graves in the early stages of the 20th Century.

I am the great-grand son of a victim and the grand son of a survivor. Ironically, I live today as the direct result of the kindness of a Turkish gentleman (Effendi) who had the humanity to shelter my grand father. I applaud his humanity and encourage our leaders to follow in his footsteps."

Opinions expressed in JURIST's Hotline are the sole responsibility of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, or the University of Pittsburgh.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

Turkey opts for 2nd highest bid for Petkim

November 10, 2007
The Post, Pakistan
Agence France Presse
Smart move for Turkey's business!
ANKARA: Turkey's Competition Board has approved the sale of state-run petrochemicals company Petkim to the second highest bidder in a July tender, the Anatolia news agency reported Friday.

A consortium of the Azerbaijani oil company Socar, Turkey's Turcas and Saudi-based Injaz Projects had made the second highest bid of 2.04 billion dollars (1.39 billion euros) for a 51-percent stake in the company.

The board did not give a reason as to why the tender was not awarded to the highest bidder, a consortium of the Kazakh Caspi Neft and Eurasia companies, the Russian bank Troika Dialogue and a number of Kazakh investors, which offered 2.05 billion dollars.

Turkish newspapers reported after the tender that 65 percent of Troika Dialogue's shares belonged to a major Russian-Armenian investor described as a chief financer of the Armenian diaspora.

Armenians have for years been pushing for the recognition as genocide of the mass killings of their kinsmen during World War I under the Ottoman Empire, modern Turkey's predecessor. Ankara categorically rejects the genocide label.

The Competition Board's decision is subject to approval by the Privatisation Board for the takeover to be finalized.

Turkey held a first tender for 88.86 percent of Petkim in June 2003, which the controversial business family Uzan won with a bid of 605 million dollars.

But the deal was cancelled two months later when the financially-strapped Uzans failed to fulfill required conditions.

A second tender in August 2003 failed for lack of investor interest. In April 2005, 34.5 percent of the company's shares were sold to Turkish and foreign investors in a public offering worth 267 million dollars.

About 39 percent of Petkim shares are currently traded on the Istanbul stock exchange.

Petkim controls one-third of the petrochemical market in Turkey and employs about 4,000 people.

It posted a net profit of 41 million dollars in 2006.

Privatisation is a key element in Turkey's economic programme, backed by a 10-billion-dollar loan from the International Monetary Fund, as it recovers from two severe financial crises in 1999 and 2001.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Abolish genocide alliance forms

Fri, 09 Nov 2007
From "NCC News"

New York, November 9, 2007--An effort to eliminate genocide around the world began in a conference room at the Interchurch Center today near the campus of Columbia University.

Representatives of churches, the United Nations, and human rights organizations brought their ideas, concerns and hopes together in an effort to forge an alliance to abolish genocide.

In his opening prayer Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, president of the National Council of Churches USA (NCC), called upon God to "grant rest to all who have perished in genocide." The archbishop is the diocesan legate and ecumenical officer of the Diocese of the Armenian Orthodox Church of America. He was installed in his two-year elected office the previous night at St. Vartan's Armenian Cathedral in New York City.

"Inspire our leaders with wisdom, compassion and resolution in the face of evil," the NCC president said concluding his prayer.

"As long as I am General Secretary of the NCC this will be a living concern, not a one-time symposium," said the Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, the NCC's new general secretary, in his remarks welcoming the participants to the all day consultation.

The event was sponsored by the NCC, Genocide Watch, the Center for International Conflict Resolution at Columbia University, and the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University.

One panel discussion focused on the political challenges to abolishing genocide. The group heard from the Honorable Francis Deng, the United Nations' special adviser for the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities. A former member of the government of Sudan, Dr. Deng described how the politics of identity is now being defined in religious terms.

"The role of religion is shaping identities that become 'conflictual'," said Dr. Deng. He told of his own experience in Sudan. He grew up in a traditional African family with its own religion, attended a Roman Catholic school and became a Catholic. Some of his brothers attended Islamic schools and became Muslim. Later he lived in a Protestant area of his country and attended a Muslim school.

These different religions describe one another very differently, Deng said, who suggested each faith tradition needs to emphasize with one another their common goodness and not to divide people because of their professed faith.

A second panel took up the complicity of Christians in genocide. The speakers examined how the church participated in Rwanda, Germany, Bosnia and in the United States in the genocide of Native Americans.

Dr. Andrea Bartoli, a Roman Catholic from George Mason University, noted Rwanda was a predominantly Catholic country. He acknowledged the Catholic Church was not only silent but in some places actively participated in the genocide.

The church "failed to convert hearts and minds," said Bartoli, suggesting those who took part in the genocide "acted not as Catholics but identified as some other" group.

The German genocide of the Jews was viewed by a Lutheran theologian through the lens of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the World War II theologian who wrote and preached against the Third Reich. He was executed in the waning days of the war.

Dr. Christiane Tietz, currently at the Center for Theological Inquiry at Princeton University, said a bad interpretation of Martin Luther's doctrine of two kingdoms--the kingdom of the world and the spiritual kingdom--led to many Lutherans participating in the laws and actions of the government that let to the extermination of the Jews.

"The church as the community of the saints is a community which transcends and bridges racial and national differences," said Dr. Tietz. "If it does not, then Christ is not the Lord of the church. The church is not there for itself; it has to care for those persecuted. It has to be there for others."

A Serbian Orthodox priest and former U.S. foreign service officer in the Balkans, Dr. Milan Sturgis, reminded the group that the date this genocide discussion took place was the 69th anniversary of "kristalnacht" which began the rounding up of Jews in Germany. Dr. Sturgis related many of his experiences in Bosnia, Serbia and Kosovo including the loss of cousins, aunts and uncles "who were slaughtered."

"Religion was perverted into a political identity," Dr. Sturgis said. He told of witnessing Serbian priests blessing Serb militias, Roman Catholic priests blessing Croatian militias and imams blessing Muslim militias.

"We need to be more concerned with forecasting and prevention [of genocide] rather than laying blame," said Dr. Sturgis.

Concluding the panel was Dr. Anne Marshall, a United Methodist and member of the Muskogee Nation. Dr. Marshall said Native Americans suffered both a physical as well as cultural genocide.

"Until there is an acknowledgment that genocide has happened here by churches and governments there can't be healing and wholeness," said Dr. Marshall.

Dr. Antonios Kireopoulos, NCC's associate general secretary for international affairs and peace, who organized the forum, said the next step is to involved more groups and create a true alliance to abolish genocide. The structure of this forum--prayer, historical record, Scriptural reflection, sharing and a call to action--will be offered as a template to other faith communities.

"God loved us so much that we have been given the power to change the world," said the Rev. Bob Edgar, former NCC general secretary, in the closing "sending forth." He urged participants to put flesh on their words. "May God bless you in your activism," said Edgar.

-----

NCC News contact: Philip Jenks, 212.870.2228, pjenks@councilofchurches.org or Dan Webster, 212.870.2252, NCCnews@ncccusa.org

Latest NCC News at www.councilofchurches.org


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Friday, November 09, 2007

Hrant Dink’s children abandon Turkey

07.11.2007 16:56 GMT+04:00
PanARMENIAN.Net
Turkey must wear this as a badge of shame!
Arat Dink, the son of slain Agos editor Hrant Dink, and his family abandoned Turkey and settled in Brussels, Inge Drost, a Spokesperson for the Federation of Armenian Organizations of the Netherlands, told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. Hrant Dink’s daughter domiciled at Hague last year, she said.

Turkish media says Arat Dink left Turkey because ‘he and his family were in jeopardy’.

In October Arat Dink stood trial under article 301 for re-publishing his father’s interview where he spoke about the Armenian Genocide, what is rated as “insulting Turkishness”

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Experts respond to Turkey's Prime Minister on the Armenian genocide question

Nov 06, 2007
Medill Reports Washington
by Mrinalini Reddy
Erdogan below presents the refinement of Genocide denial. No one is fooled Erdogan. It is just a shame to the conscience of this world that it lets Turkey bully this world carying a gun on its belt. Where is justice in this world?
WASHINGTON -- Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan was in Washington Monday to meet with President Bush to discuss mounting tensions between the Turks and Kurdish rebel factions in Northern Iraq.

Also on the agenda was the Armenian genocide resolution which passed in the House Foreign Affairs Committee last month. The Medill News Service spoke with two experts who have challenged Turkey’s position on the Armenian question and asked them to respond to Erdogan’s comments.

Turkish scholar Taner Akçam, author of “A Shameful Act : The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility,” is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the killings of Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915.

Edward Alexander is a retired U.S. Foreign Service officer and author, born in New York to Armenian parents who fled Turkey.

Erdogan: "Our documents indicate that there is no genocide that has taken place. Those who claim it must prove it. Having simple lobbying activities and trying to achieve a result in this way is unacceptable to Turkey. "

Alexander: "The evidence is overwhelming and to many Armenians, it is utterly preposterous for anyone, especially the Turkish government, to deny what is historical truth. For my research, one of my sources was the German press. My other source was the cables that were sent to Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. ambassador in Turkey at the time of the genocide. These are documents that cannot be refuted. In addition, I did research eye-witness reports in Merseburg, Germany."

Akçam: "Our Prime Minister is wrong because we can prove the genocidal intent without any problems. One set of documentation are the trials in Istanbul between 1919 and 1921. These are the indictments, verdicts, hand-written testimonies and eye-witness accounts which were recorded during that time. There is a lot of evidence here showing the killing of the Armenians. The originals of these documents are not known. We assume that they have been destroyed after Turkish nationalists took over Istanbul. [Turkish officials] only trust the documents in prime ministerial archive today in Istanbul. I can show very easily, based on prime ministerial archives, the genocidal intent of Ottoman Turkey. I will publish a book in the Turkish language in 2008 where I am presenting more than 500 documents from prime ministerial archives in Istanbul."

Erdogan: "What took place was called deportation because that was a very difficult time....Given the context of the time and the events that took place, there was provocation by some other countries and the Armenians became part of the rebellion in those years."

Alexander: "One of the newer arguments that they are raising now is that it was the Armenians who attacked the Turks. This is ridiculous. How the Armenians would have done this, having been disarmed, calls for a great stretch of the imagination."

Akçam: "The argument says there were Armenian uprisings. It is simply a lie. The deportations were taking place before any Armenian uprising. There was only one incident in April 1915 and the deportation decree occurred at the end of March. They were individual Armenian deserters and even Armenians were against them. Not only were Armenians deported from eastern Anatolia, they were deported from the entire Anatolia, despite being totally integrated into the Turkish life."

Erdogan: "I wrote a letter to President Kocharian [Republic of Armenia] in 2005. We have suggested the establishment of a joint historical commission and we said that we would make available all documents in our archives…. We aim to reach a common understanding of this painful period in our history, but I still, to date, have not received a response to my letter in 2005."

Alexander: "The position of the Armenian government has always been that they want to have diplomatic relations with Turkey, with no pre-existing conditions. However, the Turkish government did not accept this and laid down its own conditions: 1) the Armenian Diaspora should stop talking about the genocide 2) Armenia and the Azerbijani government should declare peace."

Akçam: "It is a good suggestion. If there is a problem you cannot solve, you have to find ways to talk to each other. First, you need diplomatic relations. How can you establish a commission without even talking? Turkey has pre-conditions for diplomatic relations, which Armenia does not want."

Erdogan: "It is my sincere wish that the US Congress does not keep this resolution and does away with the discussion of this resolution altogether."

Alexander: "This doesn’t surprise me. There is a very strong feeling in the Congress that this may not be the best time to bring up the resolution because of the Iraq/Kurdish situation. The main thing is that it should not be shelved. You have scholars at the International Association of Genocide Scholars come up with the same conclusion. It is simply a move on the part of Turkey to delay the resolution in the hope that eventually those who are true survivors will have died and their offspring, like myself, will be so elderly. I am 87. Turks are hoping that time will weaken the arguments and memory."

Akçam: "The U.S. resolution does and does not matter. It doesn’t matter because it will be a psychological victory, but won’t really solve anything. It does matter because Turkey must understand that threatening with its political strategic power will not solve its list of problems. For instance, Turkey cannot become a member of the European Union if talking about history is a crime."

Erdogan: "This is a problem of the Armenian Diaspora. They are looking for a way to create some sort of benefit for itself and this is what they have found. If this works, then they look to achieve some gains from it. If not, the world will have lost a lot of time."

Alexander: "I don’t know what the gains would be. We are asking only for justice."

Akçam: "It is a stupid distinction to think that there is a difference between Armenians and Armenians in the Diaspora. They are all asking that the perpetrator must face their history."
The distinction is only in the mind of Turkey trying to pit Armenia against its Diaspora while it is blockading Armenia. What a low game to play. Turkey's attitude towards Armenians has not changed which in effect proves that the genocide has been committed and still continues.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Ethnic cleansing

November 10, 2007
Daily Mirror, Sri Lanka
By Gamini Akmeemana

The Armenians were deported en masse and massacred by Turkey during World War I. The survivors and descendants, now living in the former Soviet republic of Armenia, remain barred from returning to their homeland by successive Turkish governments, who continue to officially deny the massacre.

Interestingly, the word genocide, now commonly identified with the killing of Jews by the Nazis during World War II, was first used by Winston Churchill while referring to the massacre of the Armenians.

Not only has Turkey denied that this, first mass scale ethnic cleansing of the 20th century, ever took place. The Soviets who established a republic in their territory for the survivors pursued a policy which led to the destruction of invaluable evidence of the genocide. Stalin banned the Tashnag Party, a key element in Armenian politics. Survivors destroyed evidence - photographs, diaries, letters etc. - because the Soviet secret police began to associate such material with Tashnag political actitivity.

The result is that written and pictorial evidence of the genocide, which killed an estimated 1.5 million Armenians, is scarce. Despite this, the Museum of the Armenian Genocide near Yerevan, the capital of the Armenian republic, has on display a collection of unique photographs which show graphic evidence of the mass deportation and the genocide.

The photographs, which had never been shown in public till recently, were taken by employees of the German Deutsche bank in 1915 - when Ottoman Turkey had entered World War I on Germany's side - to send to the bank's head office as proof of their claims that the Turks were massacring their Armenian population. A German engineer sent one photo of Armenian men being led to their execution by the Turkish police.

The bank officials were upset that the Turks were using the railway built with German money to deport the Armenians to distant concentration camps. The railway network was built for military purposes, not genocide. Interestingly, apart from the civilians who took the photographs and alerted their superiors, German soldiers sent to modernize the Turkish army too, witnessed these massacres.


Armin Wegner, a second lieutenant, took photographs of dead and dying Armenian women and children (the young women were almost all raped before being killed). But such conscientious acts were rare. Other German officers who witnessed the massacres remained silent, and some of them became Nazis who took part in massacres of Jews and other peoples during World War II.


In 1915, Turkey claimed that the Christian Armenians were supporting Britain, France and Russia - the Ottoman empire's opponents during the war. Officially, it was claimed that the Armenians were being merely deported to areas where they wouldn't be a security threat.


The decision was hardly a hasty one. An elaborate ethnic-cleansing plan had been drawn out earlier. The war provided the excuse the Ottoman government was looking for. Entire families and communities were forced out of their homes and sent on death marches. The men were shot or killed with axes, and the women and children driven out into the desert to die of thirst, starvation and disease. Mass graves are still being discovered today, some as far as Syria (then part of the Ottoman empire). There were so many people to be killed that the Turkish military often sought the assistance of Kurdish tribesmen in their grisly task.

The idea was to destroy the Christian Armenian minority as a people, pure and simple. This is starkly similar to the Nazis Final Solution for the Jews - that every Jew should end up in the gas chambers. In Sept. 1915, Turkish Interior Minister Talaat Pasha cabled to his subordinate in Alleppo, Syria, that: "You have already been informed that the government…has decided to destroy completely all the indicated persons (Armenians) living in Turkey…their existence must be terminated, however tragic the measures taken may be, and no regard must be paid to either age or sex, or to any scruples of conscience."

The above is an order the Nazis would have been proud of. Recent research has revealed that Turkish officers often produced "doubles" of their genocide orders. In other words, telegrams asking their subordinates to make sure that Armenians were properly fed and sheltered during the "resettlement" were sent alongside the death-sentence orders.

Luckily, some of the books published following the genocide have survived. Captain Sarkis Torossian, a much-decorated Armenian officer of the Turkish army, was sent to fight the British in Palestine but was horrified to find thousands of dying Armenian refugees in the Syrian desert. Incredibly, he found his own sister among them and rescued her, but his fiancée died in his arms.

"I raised Jemileh in my arms, the pain and terror in her eyes melted until they were bright as stars again, stars in an oriental night…and so she died, as a dream passing,' Torossian wrote in a book published in the United States in 1929.

After this terrible shock, he defected from the Turkish side, and fought with T. E. Lawrence's Arab militias against the Turks.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Presidential elections scheduled for February 19

09.11.2007

YEREVAN (YERKIR) - Garegin Azarian, the chairman of the Central Electoral Commission (CEC) of Armenia, said that the date for the presidential election has been set for February 19, 2008. He made the statement for the Public Television and Public Radio. Later today the schedule of the main arrangements for the preparation and conduct of the election will be determined at the CEC meeting.

The official statement says that according to Part 2 of the Article 88 of RA Electoral Code, CEC President Garegin Azaeryan is authorized to inform that in conformity with Article 51 of RA Constitution, the presidential elections will be held on February 19, 2008.

According to Part 3 of the Article 88 of RA Electoral Code, the day of the election is declared a day-off.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

ARMENIA URGES ‘POLITICAL SOLUTION’ IN GEORGIA

Nov 8, 2007
Armenialiberty.org, Armenia
By Astghik Bedevian

Armenia is closely following the developments in Georgia and hopes for a quick settlement of internal political tensions in this neighboring republic, Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said in Yerevan on Thursday.

“Georgia’s stability is a major issue for Armenia. Georgia is a friendly country, our neighbor and we would want to see a stable country. We closely follow the developments. At this moment I can express a hope that it will become possible to reach a political solution shortly. I think that should be the goal of all parties,” Minister Oskanian said at a joint press conference with his Lithuanian counterpart in the Armenian capital.

During the meeting with Petras Vaitiekunas earlier in the day Oskanian, according to his press service, in particular, underlined that “the continued development of cooperation and deepening of integration with the European Union and other European structures will contribute to stabilization of political systems in the region’s countries as well as will help form a culture of a constructive dialogue between the government and the opposition.”

Speaking at the press conference, the Lithuanian foreign minister announced that the political instability prompted a change in his schedule and that he would leave Armenia for Georgia in what appears to be a trip to convey a message of the European Union to this South Caucasus republic.

The EU and NATO on Thursday expressed their concern at the imposition of emergency rule in Georgia and called for an urgent resumption of dialogue between the government of Mikheil Saakashvili and the opposition.

Saakashvili, who came to power in Georgia through the so-called “Rose Revolution” in 2003 and has since repeatedly stated that he wants his country to aim for NATO and EU membership, accuses Russia of stirring up popular unrest against him, after thousands of Georgians took to the street accusing him of corruption.

“We want to send a very clear and strong signal that Georgia’s European path is of utmost importance, to show to the Georgian people that they are not alone. Non-violence is what is important,” Vaitiekunas stressed in Yerevan.

The foreign ministers of Armenia and Lithuania on Thursday signed a memorandum on cooperation between their departments on matters of European integration.

Both emphasized the high level of bilateral ties between the two countries and their dynamic development, expressing mutual interest for deepening the political and economic relationship in the future.

The Armenian Foreign Ministry’s press service quoted Oskanian as emphasizing during his meeting with Vaitiekunas that Armenia is ready to study possibilities of cooperation with the Baltic nation in specific areas as part of the EU-Armenia Action Plan.

The Lithuanian foreign minister also reportedly underlined that relations with Armenia are among the priorities for his country’s foreign policy and stated that official Vilnius sees good prospects for Armenia’s European integration and continues to show active involvement and assistance in the implementation of democratic reforms in the South Caucasus countries, including Armenia, and strengthening their relations with the European Union and NATO.

The sides agreed that the two countries have room for developing their bilateral relations in the economic field and in this regard they placed importance on the upcoming visit of Lithuania’s prime minister to Armenia, during which a business forum is planned to be organized.

Oskanian also presented to his Lithuanian counterpart in detail the latest developments in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. The sides also exchanged views around issues of energy security in the region, Oskanian’s press office said.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Manoogian Foundation donates $1.2M to UM Armenian studies

November 7, 2007
Crain's Detroit Business, MI
By Jonathan Eppley

The Taylor-based Manoogian Simone Foundation announced Wednesday the gift of $1.2 million to the Armenian Studies Program at the University of Michigan to advance the study of Armenian history and culture.

The gift will fund graduate and post-doctoral fellowships, visiting scholar programs, graduate workshops and expand the Summer Language Institute in Ann Arbor.

“This gift will expand the program by providing funds for young scholars to study Armenian language and history, both in Michigan and Armenia,” foundation president, Louise Manoogian Simone, said in a statement.

The gift is part of UM’s $2.5 billion fundraising campaign, the Michigan Difference.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Jewish leaders hope to leave genocide controversy behind

November 8 2007
The Jewis Advocate
By Rachel L. Axelbank

Andrew Tarsy'No further action' ruling disappoints Armenian community

Following last Friday’s much-anticipated annual meeting of the Anti-Defamation League’s National Commission, local leaders are looking to the future.

Those involved in the ongoing controversy regarding the ADL’s stance on the massacre of some 1.5 million Armenians in the early 1900s have been looking forward to the meeting as one that would definitively clarify National Director Abraham Foxman’s statement that the massacre was “tantamount to genocide.”

Following the meeting, the ADL National Commission issued a statement that it had “decided to take no further action on the issue of the Armenian genocide.”
New England Regional Board Chair James Rudolph said he is satisfied with the outcome of the meeting and the implications of the issued statement.

“It’s clear to us that there was always an intent to unequivocally recognize the Armenian genocide,” Rudolph said.

ADL New England Region Director Andrew Tarsy, who also attended the annual meeting, agreed with Rudolph.

“The commission thoroughly debated the issue, and I think it’s time to move on,” he said.

According to Khatchig Mouradian, editor of the Watertown-based Armenian Weekly, the local Armenian community had not expected ADL to reverse its position regarding a congressional resolution on the matter but had hoped that ADL New England delegates would at least make a clear statement in recognition of the genocide.

“It was an utter disappointment when the statement came out that even that minimal thing was not met, especially when it also turned out that the ADL commissioners from New England believed that the decision was fine,” he said.

House Resolution 106, which calls for the United States’ recognition of the Armenian genocide, was approved last month by the House Foreign Relations Committee and was, until recently, expected to reach the floor before Congress adjourned for the year. However, a full house vote has been postponed indefinitely at the request of some of the bill’s sponsors, who Mouradian believes were motivated by fear that pressure from the Turkish government would cause the resolution to be voted down.

“Turkey resorted to blackmail, and actually it worked,” Mouradian said. “I’m not in favor of our government giving in to blackmail.”

While the ADL meeting produced no official verdict on HR 106 specifically, the Boston Globe reported that a New York ADL commissioner had asked other commissioners to sign a letter stating their strong disagreement with the resolution as well as the New England chapter’s position on the matter.

In recent months, the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston has been a leader in encouraging ADL to recognize the genocide. And while JCRC has yet to take a position of its own regarding HR 106, Executive Director Nancy K. Kaufman speculated that it would emerge in support of the resolution.

“I think what we’re doing is taking our lead from the congressional delegation,” Kaufman said. “No one wants to spark an international conflict with Turkey right now, including the Armenian community.”

Kaufman also expressed regret over the controversy and its ramifications.
“I’ve been very sad that ‘No Place for Hate’ has been the target [of topical antagonism toward the ADL] because I think it’s a good program,” she said, referring to the ADL’s anti-prejudice program from which Massachusetts municipalities – among them Lexington, Newton and Watertown – have been withdrawing in the months since the controversy began.

Meanwhile, Foxman has been critical of Boston’s Jewish community leaders. In the published transcript of a September interview with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Foxman implicated Kaufman – as well as Combined Jewish Philanthropies President Barry Shrage – in his discussion of the rift created between the national ADL office and the Greater Boston area.

But the controversy has diverted attention from the important work that Jewish organizations do, including fighting hatred, promoting good interfaith and interethnic relations, and supporting Israel, according to Jonathan Sarna, Brandeis University professor of American Jewish History.

“This has been an enormous diversion, because I don’t think most people in the Jewish community have any doubt that terrible things were done to the Armenian community,” Sarna said. “My hope is that we can move away from that issue – which is not one to which so much community attention should be devoted – and focus on the issues that are important: Jewish continuity, Israel and community relations.”
But, according to Mouradian, the Armenian community is not prepared to consider the matter settled.

“The ADL is saying ‘We don’t care about your genocide,’” he said. “I believe it is a very insulting position, and I can’t see how the Armenian community is going to say ‘OK, let’s go home now.’”

Kaufman, though sympathetic to the Armenian community’s position, echoed Sarna’s call for the Jewish community to move forward.

“For the Armenian community obviously it’s not over,” she said. “I’d like to think in Boston it’s over because the ADL office here did a bold and unprecedented thing. I think we need to move on.”

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Third Quarterly Media Monitoring Report: Full Text

30-10-2007
Bıa news centre
Erol Önderoglu

The third quarterly report of the Bia Media Monitoring Desk has appeared, detailing violations of press freedom and the freedom of expression in the months of July, August and September 2007.

According to the quarterly report of the Bia Media Monitoring Desk, relating to events in July, August and September 2007, 125 people, most of them journalists, and six media institutions have been tried for expressing their thoughts freely.

This report lists the violations of the freedom of expression under seven headings:

- Murder, attacks and threats
- Detentions and arrests
- Trials and investigations
- Corrections and seeking legal redress
- European Court of Human Rights
- Reactions to censorship
- RTÜK [Radio and Television Supreme Council] practices
- Murder, Attacks and Threats

Two security officers who were involved in the taking of photos of O.S., the murder suspect of Agos editor Hrant Dink, together with gendarmerie and police in the tea room of the Samsun Department for Terrorism, are now on trial. At the first hearing at the fourth penal court in Samsun on 28 September, the defendants Metin Balta, the acting director of the Terrorism Department, and Ibrahim Firat, police officer at the department, did not attend. The hearing has been postponed until 2 November in order to take their statements and evaluate demands. [...]

[...] In the Objektif programme on Fox TV, broadcast on 20 September, Sirin continued to threaten journalist Ali Bayramoglu of the Yeni Safak newspaper, [...]. He said: “I was surprised at Ali Bayramoglu’s approach in this matter. What is such a writer doing in such a climate? This community needs to examine this writer carefully.” Bayramoglu had previously been threatened after publishing an article entitled “Our Life is in Danger” on 4 July, in which he pointed out the importance of solving the Hrant Dink murder. He received an email message saying, “If you continue to write like that, you will end like Hrant Dink”. The matter has been taken to the prosecution.

Lawyers of the Dink family have appealed against the decision of the Trabzon Governor’s Office not to allow the investigation of Ramazan Akyürek, the head of the Intelligence Unit at the Police Department, Resat Altay, former police chief in Trabzon, and police officers Engin Dinc, Faruk Sari, Ercan Demir, Özkan Mumcu, Muhittin Zenit and Mehmet Ayhan. The governor’s office is basing its refusal on a report by investigators of the Ministry of the Interior who had prepared a report.

[...]

Aris Nalci, the news editor of the weekly Turkish-Armenian “Agos” newspaper has said that although there has been a decrease in email threats, they do continue. High school student R.D. was arrested on 2 August for sending the newspaper a threatening email one day after editor-in-chief Hrant Dink’s murder. In his first statement R.D. said, “I sent that message in a moment of ignorance.” He was then sent to Bayrampasa prison in Istanbul.

[...]

On 13 July, lawyers of the Dink family appealed against the decision of the Samsun Public Prosecution to dismiss proceedings against police and gendarmerie officers who formed close relationships with Hrant Dink’s murder suspect O.S. after his arrest.

In the Hrant Dink murder trial, joint attorneys appealed against the decision of the court to release four of the eighteen detained suspects, Salih Hacisalihoglu, Osman Alpay, Irfan Özkan and Veysel Toprak, from detention at the first hearing of the case on 2 July. In the appeal to the 9th Heavy Penal Court in Istanbul, it said: “Basic and critical issues which are needed to shed light on this case are to be found in the actions of the released suspects.”

The international Reporters Without Borders (RSF) reacted to a report by the Police Department, which said that the murder of journalist Hrant Dink was organised by “a group based on friendship”. RSF said, “This report is attempting to clear the security forces. The question that really needs to be answered is why the warnings of Erhan Tuncel were ignored. The police said that ties with Tuncel were cut in November 2006, but he said at the hearing, ‘I told the police that an attack against Hrant Dink would be organised.’”

In a press briefing on 3 July, one day after the first hearing in the Hrant Dink murder trial, lawyer Fethiye Cetin called for the trial of all the gendarmerie and police officers whose relations with the murder suspects have emerged, and who did not prevent the murder despite knowing about it. Cetin cited Article 83 of the Penal Code, which deals with “related crimes”, and demanded that these officers be tried as part of the murder case.

At the first hearing of the Hrant Dink murder trial at the Istanbul 14th Heavy Penal Court, the release of detained defendants Salih Hacisalihoglu, Osman Altay, Irfan Özkan and Veysel Toprak was decided. Defendant O.S., tried for being the suspected gunman, used his right to silence. Erhan Tuncel, tried for incitement to murder, said: “I served the state. I do not know why I am here.” Defendant Yasin Hayal said: “Tuncel deceived us. He planned the murder. It was him who built the bomb that was thrown at Mc Donald’s [in an earlier incident in Trabzon].” The first hearing lasted all day. All eighteen defendants were questioned and the demands of the defense and the joint attorneys were listened to. Requests of both sides to widen the investigation were accepted. The court case was to continue on 1 October.

[...]

Trials and Investigations

[...]

The case against the Belge Publications for translating and publishing Prof. Dr. Dora Sakayan’s “An Armenian in Turkey” (The Memoirs of Garabet Haceryan) and George Jerjian’s “The Truth Will Set Us Free” will continue on 3 October. Because the court cannot reach Jerjian, publisher Ragip Zarakolu is on trial instead. For Sakayan’s book, both Zarakolu and translator Atilla Tuygan are on trial. Zarakolu faces up to 7.5 years imprisonment demanded for “degrading and ridiculing the State and the Republic” and “insulting the memory of Atatürk”. Tuygan faces six years imprisonment for “degrading and ridiculing the army”.

[...]

Dink family lawyer Erdal Dogan is on trial for saying that "Hrant was particularly worried about Veli Kücük getting involved in his trial". Veli Kücük, a retired brigadier general who is infamous in Turkey for his involvement in the "deep state", is said to have threatened Dink. There is no investigation against Veli Kücük. Kücük is demanding 10,000 YTL compensation for being portrayed as a “murderer” and for being accused without justification. At the hearing on 18 September, the Beyoglu 4th Penal Court requested more evidence from both sides. The trial will continue on 22 November.

[...]

A Recep Akkus and an Asim Demir have filed a criminal complaint against the “Radikal” newspaper for translating two articles into Turkish and publishing them. The articles in question are “New Evidence of Armenian Genocide” by the experienced Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk from the “Independent” newspaper and “How Sincere is the ‘Never Again’ Slogan?” by Jeff Jacoby from the “Boston Globe”. Radikal’s responsible editor Hasan Cakkalkurt may face a trial under Article 301 for “degrading Turkishness”. The complaint is still being investigated.

Fuat Turgut, the defense lawyer of Yasin Hayal, a suspect in the Hrant Dink murder trial, is demanding a total of 20,000 YTL compensation from “Radikal” columnist Perihan Magden, “Birgün” journalist Ahmet Tulgar and Dink family lawyer Erdal Dogan. The trial was opened on 12 September. In an article published on 5 July 2007, Magden had described Turgut as a “freak showman”. On the same day, Tulgar wrote of him as “mad and showy”.

[...]

Yücel Sayman, former president of the Istanbul Bar Association, who accused Kemal Kerincsiz’s lawyers of influencing the judiciary at the first hearing in the trial against journalists from the “Agos” newspaper, is being tried for insulting those same lawyers. The hearing in question was on 10 May 2006, when editor-in-chief Hrant Dink, editor Arat Dink and licence holder Serkis Seropyan were being tried. Following a complaint by Kerincsiz, Sayman will have to appear at the Sisli Penal Court in February 2008. Article 125 of the Penal Code is being cited, and up to two years imprisonment are being demanded.

[...]


On 3 August it was reported that the Supreme Court of Appeals ratified the decision of the Sisli Penal Court to drop its case against writer Orhan Pamuk. Pamuk had been on trial under Article 159 of the old Penal Code after saying in an interview with weekly Swiss magazine “Das Magazin” that “One million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds have been killed on this soil”. Up to three years imprisonment had been demanded, but when the Ministry of Justice had refused permission for trial, the Sisli court had dropped the case.

On demand of the Ministry of the Interior, Mayor Abdullah Demirbas of the Sur municipality in Diyarbakir lost his post in June and the municipal council was dissolved. The Sur municipality had offered its services in Kurdish and Arabic as well as Turkish. Now the 8th Chamber of the State Council has opened a case against Demirbas and council members for “abusing their position” and “violating the law on insurgency”. In the indictment, prison sentences ranging between one and three and a half years are demanded for the council members deciding on the multilingual services and Osman Baydemir, the mayor of Greater Diyarbakir. A total of 21 persons will be tried at the Diyarbakir 2nd Penal Court on 7 November for “abusing their position” and “violating the law on Turkish letters”. Demirbas has been acquitted in another case concerning an article entitled “Local Government in Light of Multilingual Municipal Services” which he had presented to the European Social Forum.

At the end of July, the Ankara 13th Civil Court of First Instance partially accepted the complaint of a Sükrü Elekdag against “Agos” writer and historian Taner Akcam and decreed that Akcam should pay compensation. Akcam had written an article entitled “Gündüz Aktan and the Saik Issue in the Genocide” and it was published in the weekly newspaper on 6, 20 and 27 January and 3, 10, 17 February 2006. Elekdag, an MP, had claimed that his personal rights were attacked and he was insulted. He had demanded 20,000 YTL compensation. It was decided that Akcam and the newspaper should pay 10,000 YTL and legal interest. Lawyers have appealed against the decision, arguing that it violates the European Convention on Human Rights.

[...]

In the case against Diyarbakir mayor Osman Baydemir, the expert report has been questioned. Baydemir is said to have told the “Tempo” magazine in an interview that “Turks and Kurds cannot live together”. On 24 July the Bagcilar 2nd Penal Court (Istanbul) accepted Baydemir’s lawyer Özcan Intas’s claim that the expert had confused the utterances of Baydemir and DTP Siirt province chair Murat Avci and the lawyer’s demand for correction. The court has ordered the correction, and, if recordings of Baydemir exist, their analysis. Baydemir has been on trial under Article 216 of the old Penal Code for “inciting the public to hatred and hostility”. The case will continue on 6 December.

Eren Keskin, lawyer and former president of the Istanbul branch of the Human Rights Association (IHD), will not be tried for “inciting to hatred and hostility” after a speech she made in the Bulanik district of Mus, in which she used the term “Kurdistan”. The Bulanik prosecution decreed that “however unacceptable it was, it consisted of expressing an opinion” and dropped proceedings. In the justification it said that the suspect had used the term Kurdistan to refer to the area mostly inhabited by Kurds. However, she will be tried for the use of the same term used at a panel entitled “Woman, Society and Family” at the Viransehir Culture and Arts Festival two and a half years ago. Keskin has said that there are 15 trials open against her under Articles 159 and 301.

[...]

The case against Arat Dink and Serkis Seropyan, editor and licence holder of the Agos newspaper respectively, continued on 17 July. The two journalists are being tried for an interview which murdered Hrant Dink gave the Reuters News Agency and for an article entitled “A Vote against 301”. The trial was opened after Recep Akkus of the nationalist Great Lawyers’ Union filed a complaint. The trial, brought under Article 301/1 continues on 11 October. Up to three years imprisonment are being demanded.

[...]

The Ankara 14th Civil Court of First Instance has rejected the complaint of Prime Minister Erdogan against “Sabah” columnist Hincal Uluc. After the murder of Hrant Dink, he had written an article entitled “Sects and Presidential Candidacy”, which was published on 7 February. Erdogan had demanded 20,000 YTL compensation for “serious atttack and slander”, but on 12 July the court rejected the complaint. Uluc had claimed that the positions of Istanbul Police Chief Celalettin Cerrah and Minister of the Interior Abdülkadir Aksu were being protected after the murders of priest Andrea Santoro and journalist Hrant Dink because of their connections with religious sects and that the Prime Minister was closely linked to sects.

[...]

Prime Minister Erdogan has opened a 10,000 YTL compensation trial against journalist Cüneyt Arcayürek for attacking his personal rights. Arcayürek had appeared on the “Politika Duragi” programme of the Kanaltürk channel and is said to have said, “Their insides and their outsides are lies. They are liars.”

[...]

Reactions to censorship and monopolisation

At the end of September, 114 lecturers at the prestigious Bosphorus University (Istanbul) condemned the trial of Prof. Dr. Baskin Oran and Prof. Dr. Ibrahim Kaboglu, the authors of the Minority Rights Report. Among them were Prof. Dr. Nükhet Sirman, Prof. Dr. Ayse Bugra, Prof. Dr. Edhem Eldem, Prof. Dr. Fatma Gök, Prof. Dr. Caglar Keyder and Assistant Prof. Dr. Koray Caliskan. The academics emphasised that the report "does not contain any elements of violence", as was claimed in the justification for the trial. They also demanded the abolition of Articles 301 and 216 and similar articles in the Turkish Penal Code and said, "We view Kaboglu and Oran's trial under Articles 301 and 216 as a restriction of academic freedom."

[...]

The judiciary in Turkey allows for the closure of a whole website if one item contained in it has become the subject of a complaint. After the alternative dictionary Eksi Sözlük and the Antoloji.com websites, the WorldPress.com website was closed in August. Cause for the closure was a complaint by Adnan Oktar. The Reporters Without Borders (RSF) organisation has previously stated that it finds this wholesale closure of a website “radical and disproportionate.”

A Regional Administrative Court has decreed that a park in Diyarbakir cannot be named after human rights activist and publisher Ayse Nur Zarakolu who died five years ago, arguing that she was a person who "supported separatist ideas and spread terrorist propaganda both in her own books and in the books she published". The widower of Ayse Nur Zarakolu, Ragip Zarakolu, journalist at the "Ülkede Özgür Gündem" and publisher, said: "Ayse Nur Zarakolu, like Hrant Dink, was a person who tried to build bridges between our peoples on the basis of mutual respect , and she is one of the people who paid for this with her life."

[...]

On 24 July, the Turkey Journalists' Society (TGC) awarded its Freedom of Press Prizes to Rakel Dink, widow of murdered journalist Hrant Dink, publisher Ragip Zarakolu and lawyer Gülcin Cayligil as representatives of "all those journalists and writers who have suffered and been tried under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code.". TGC president Orhan Erinc presented the awards at the ceremony at Dolmabahce Palace in Istanbul. In his opening speech, he said, "Today censorship is not the direct inspection of newspapers, but the limiting clauses placed in laws." In her acceptance speech, Rakel Dink criticised Cemil Cicek, Minister of Justice when her husband was still alive. He had said, "Let them be happy, they get prizes because of us". Hrant Dink had replied, "Our greatest prize would be the abolishment of Article 301."

[...]


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

A long open letter to Turks

from Raffi Kojian

I'm writing this letter after reading Mustafa Akyol’s open letter to Armenians. I think his was a well written, thoughtful letter that helped many Armenians to understand an open minded Turks position and thoughts. This letter, I hope, will help you understand us. I hope that I can show you what your government has been doing to you as well, and the consequences.


Contents

1 Background
2 The Genocide
3 What to do today
4 Conclusion


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Turkey moves to change speech law

6 November 2007
BBC News

The Turkish government says it will change a controversial law restricting freedom of expression.

Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin said a new bill would be put before the Turkish parliament in the coming days.

The law, known as Article 301, bans perceived insults to Turkish identity or the country's institutions.

It has often been invoked by nationalists against those who argue the Ottoman empire committed genocide against Armenians.

Earlier on Tuesday the European Commission said restrictions on freedom of expression were blocking Turkey's progress towards EU membership.

"It is not acceptable that writers, journalists, academics and other intellectuals... are prosecuted for simply expressing a critical but completely non-violent opinion," EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said.

"The infamous Article 301 must be repealed or amended without delay," he added.

Nobel-winning novelist Orhan Pamuk and Turkish-Armenian writer Hrant Dink were both prosecuted under the law for their comments on the mass killings of Armenians.

Hrant Dink was shot dead outside his Istanbul office in January 2007 and his murder revived a debate about the law.

Many said his prosecution under Article 301 made him a target for radical nationalists.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

DIASPORA-LINKED PARTIES REAFFIRM COMMON POSITION ON KARABAKH, GENOCIDE

6, November 2007
Armenialiberty.org, Armenia
By Astghik Bedevian

Two of Armenia’s oldest traditional political parties wielding considerable influence in the worldwide Armenian Diaspora have reaffirmed their common stance on the foreign policy agenda of Armenians despite differences that exist between them in issues related to domestic politics in Armenia.

The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun, ARF) and the Ramkavar-Azatakan (Liberal-Democratic) Party held a joint forum in Yerevan on Tuesday to discuss a wide range of issues related to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the ongoing efforts aimed at ensuring an international recognition of the Armenian genocide, the rights of ethnic Armenians in Georgia’s Javakheti province, as well as internal political issues in Armenia.

Representatives of both parties stated they have no differences on the problems of Nagorno-Karabakh and the genocide.

Armenia’s oldest traditional party, Social Democratic Hunchakian Party, was also expected to participate in the forum, but refused at the last moment. Hunchakian, which also has large presence in the Armenian Diaspora, is known to have vocally endorsed ex-president Levon Ter-Petrosian’s bid to contest presidency in next year’s elections in Armenia.

“We have the task of representing Armenian problems and Armenia in the world. These are issues where we can cooperate, but we can support different candidates. It can happen and there is no tragedy in it,” ARF Bureau representative Hrant Markarian said

“We should have solidarity at least in pan-Armenian questions,” he added. “Rivalry between Dashnaktsutyun and Ramkavar-Azatakan has a long history. If we find the strength to sit down at a table and discuss issues common for both sides, it should also become an example for Armenia’s political life.”

Dashnaktsutyun has declared its clear intention to field its own candidate in Armenia’s presidential elections scheduled for early next year. Its congress is due to pick a candidate between two nominees later this month.

Vahan Hovannisian, one of the party’s nominees, said regarding Ramkavar-Azatakan: “An ideological rival has a greater value for us than competing with a featureless mass devoid of any ideology.”

Vice-Chairman of the Ramkavar-Azatakan Party Asatur Devletian, for his part, did not exclude a scenario in which the emerging cooperation with Dashnaktsutyun will lead to their support for the party’s candidate at the presidential election. “It is not ruled out, but there has been no discussion and there is no decision on that yet,” he said.

Devletian also said there is no decision on the unification of the Ramkavar-Azatakan structure operating in Armenia with former Karabakh defense minister Samvel Babayan’s Dashink party and Albert Bazeyan’s National Rebirth party.

“A common meeting is needed for Ramkavar-Azatakan to make any decision,” he said, adding that the party currently based outside Armenia plans to relocate its central headquarters to Yerevan in the future.

Both Ramkavar-Azatakan and Dashanktsutyun were founded in the late 19th century when Armenians lived under the Ottoman Empire. The two currently operate both in Armenia and in countries where the Armenian Diaspora is present.

In 1917, Dashnaktsutyun was instrumental in the creation of the short-lived first Republic of Armenia which fell to the Soviet Bolsheviks in 1920. The party established itself within Armenian Diaspora communities after its leadership was exiled by the communists.

Relations between Dashnaktsutyun and Ramkavar-Azatakan are known to have been cool outside Armenia during the years when Armenia was a Soviet republic stemming from differing attitudes towards the Soviet Union. The liberal Ramkavars strongly supported the then Armenian republic, while the socialist Dashnaks favored a tough anti-Soviet line.

After the fall of the USSR both parties reestablished their branches in Armenia. Currently, Dashnaktsutyun is part of the ruling government coalition.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Turkish PM welcomes shelving of US 'genocide' bill

Monday November 5, 2007
Raw Story, MA
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, while he is holding the gun at the USA, says do you believe the truth or believe what I say? What a shame! Erdogan you are so transparent! America you have seen better days! The bastion of freedom no more, down you go with Turkey!
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan Monday welcomed a decision by US lawmakers to shelve debate on a bill labeling Ottoman Empire massacres of Armenians during World War I as "genocide."

Speaking after talks here with President George W. Bush, Erdogan said the House of Representatives resolution on "the so-called Armenia genocide ... has the potential to deeply damage our strategic cooperation."

Fierce pressure from Turkey and the White House appears to have paid off for now, with the resolution's Democratic authors agreeing late last month to delay a full House of Representatives vote after the bill was upheld by the foreign affairs committee.

"We view this with cautious optimism," Erdogan said at the National Press Club, thanking the Bush administration and House members who had spoken out against the resolution for fear of its damage to ties with Turkey.

"We are ready to settle accounts with our history, but our documents indicate that no such genocide took place. In fact our values do not permit our people to commit genocide," the Turkish leader said.

"Those who claim it, must prove it," he said, renewing his offer to the Armenian government to set up a joint historical commission to examine the claims of genocide dating from the dying years of the Ottoman Empire.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

Monday, November 05, 2007

Genocide and Holocaust Deniers Must be Condemned, Not Honored

Nov. 8, 2007
Sassounian's column
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

It goes without saying that those who deny any genocide must be condemned, not honored. There should be no exceptions and no double standards. Yet, periodically, one comes across bizarre situations when those who engage in genocide denial are rewarded rather than ostracized by none other than those who condemn Holocaust denial.

Last month, the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, traveled to Armenia to discuss bilateral trade and review major projects being undertaken by the two countries. After meeting with Armenia’s leaders, the Iranian President visited Yerevan State University (YSU) where he gave a brief talk to students and answered their questions. He carefully sidestepped the issue of the Armenian Genocide, by simply stating that Iran condemns all crimes against humanity. Following the established protocol for all visiting heads of state, YSU officials dutifully handed Ahmadinejad an honorary doctorate and a gold medal. Apparently, no one at the University bothered to make an independent assessment of whether the visiting dignitary deserved to be honored or not. In October 2006, when the President of Romania visited Yerevan, he too was presented an honorary doctorate and a gold medal by YSU, even after he told university students that he was not prepared to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide in order not to ruin his country’s friendly relations with Turkey.

Last month, after YSU hosted Ahmadinejad, various Jewish groups condemned the Armenian University for honoring the Iranian President, a notorious Holocaust denier.
Rima Varzhapetyan, the President of the Jewish community of Armenia, was the first to criticize YSU. Contrary to some American Jewish groups, she is fully entitled to do so, as she does not practice a double standard. Indeed, Ms. Varzhapetyan properly and even-handedly condemns all genocide and Holocaust deniers. Hence, she has earned the moral right to criticize such wrongdoing by her Armenian countrymen.

Other Jewish groups, however, have abdicated that right. Both the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) issued statements last week condemning YSU for honoring Ahmadinejad. It is highly improper and unethical for the AJC to criticize YSU, given AJC’s refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide and its collaboration with Turkey’s denialist regime. This is an egregious example of a double standard. Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others. AJC’s leaders have lost the moral standing to lecture anyone else about the denial of the Holocaust. Therefore, their criticism of YSU cannot be taken seriously.

Even more dubious is the position of Abraham Foxman, ADL’s National Director. After refusing to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide for many years, Foxman was recently forced by influential and righteous Boston-area Jewish leaders to issue a statement that included a reference to the Armenian Genocide. Even more surprising is the fact that Foxman dared to criticize YSU for honoring Ahmadinejad, yet he himself presented Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Turkey and a denier of the Armenian Genocide, ADL’s "Courage to Care Award" back in 2005 at the organization’s headquarters in New York.

It is noteworthy that some members of the Jewish community were quick to criticize Foxman’s actions. Molly Freeman, a reader from Berkeley, California, sent a letter to the editor of The Forward, harshly condemned the ADL for presenting an award to Erdogan.

In her letter titled, “ADL acts hypocritically in honoring Turkish PM," Freeman wrote: "So egregious is the ADL award to a head of a state that denies responsibility for the annihilation of 1.5 million of its own Armenian citizens that I believe the ADL is contributing to antisemitism. What could be more hypocritical and useful to anti-Jewish bigotry than honoring a denier of genocide? The ADL is not making the world safe for Jews; rather it is contributing to our insecurity and to the discontinuity of our moral tradition. I wish that the ADL would take seriously the words of Hillel: What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary. In the case of the award to Erdogan, the ADL is actually denying a cornerstone of rabbinic law as it dishonors its neighbors, the Armenians. By rewarding Erdogan, it is doing something it never would countenance to be done to Jews."

A similarly shameful double standard was exhibited by yet another Jewish group, the American Jewish Congress, which honored Erdogan in 2004 with its "Profiles in Courage" award in New York.

Two Armenian American newspapers, the Armenian Weekly and the Armenian Reporter, in their editorials last week rightly criticized YSU for giving an award to Ahmadinejad. However, both newspapers should have also condemned the ADL and the American Jewish Congress for honoring Turkey’s denialist Prime Minister.

Condemning the denial of the Holocaust should not be a one-way street. There should not be a double standard. The Armenian Weekly’s editorial correctly pointed out that Ahmadinejad and Erdogan have made similar calls for more research to find out whether these atrocities have in fact occurred – a call that is shamefully supported by the ADL and others in the case of the Armenian Genocide, but not the Holocaust. Just as Armenian-American organizations never question the Holocaust, Jewish groups should never question the facts of the Armenian Genocide.

Jews and Armenians and everyone else should apply the same standard in dealing with genocide and Holocaust denial. No one should get away with denying either tragedy and no group should honor anyone who dishonors the memory of the victims of such crimes against humanity.

Labels:

Nature of 1915 events not clarified yet, Turkish PM says

05.11.2007
PanARMENIAN.Net
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan obviously has his own agenda and does not want to acknowledge the response he received from President Robert Kocharian of Armenia, see here.
“The crisis between Turkey and the United States has burst out after passage of the Armenian Genocide resolution by the U.S. congressional panel. This document jeopardizes relations with our ally and is counterproductive as regards the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation,” Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.

The nature of 1915 events has not clarified yet, according to him. “Armenians claim that the law on displacement was targeted at extermination of all Armenians. On the other hand, numerous Turkish, American and European scientists say it was not genocide. Execution of the law was a security measure. We understand that the two states have a different perception of those events. This issue is very delicate for both Armenians and Turks. That is why Turkey insists that the assessment of the events should be given by historians but not parliaments,” the Turkish FM told Italian La Republica.

“I suggested the Armenian President that Armenian, Turkish and even foreign scholars study archives. However, Armenia has not responded yet. The measure of the U.S. committee was not a successful one. We are hopeful that reason will dominate and the bill will not be brought to the House floor,” Erdogan said.

! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Assyrian, Armenian Genocide Monument Erected in Wales

11-5-2007
AINA, CA

Cardiff, Wales -- On Saturday 3rd November 2007, Seyfo Center UK took part in the consecration of a monument in the Temple of Peace in Cardiff, Wales commemorating the victims of the genocide of 1915. This historical step came as a result of the UK team of Seyfo Centre's long strive to foster fraternal relations with the Armenian community, and it crystallised at Mr. Sabri Atman's lecture on the Assyrian genocide on 21st October in London, UK, where Seyfo Center was officially invited by the Armenian coalition, who were present at the lecture, to join them in this momentous occasion. Seyfo Center UK welcomed the invitation and both parties pledged to work together on the recognition of the 1915 genocide.

On arrival at the Temple of Peace the Assyrian and Armenian guests were greeted by some Turkish protesters. Moving calmly and with no hindrance the 300 or so guests made their way into the Temple.

The event started with the a Welsh choir group called, The Red Choir, singing hymns and songs of peace after which Welsh and Armenian speakers welcomed the guests and introduced Mr. Stephan Thomas, the director of the Temple of Peace, as the host. Mr. Thomas also welcomed the guests saying:

"The warm welcome is not only from us but also from some protesters outside". This was followed by laughter and a round of applause.

Mr. Thomas then invited the guests to make their way to the Garden of Peace, located behind the Temple, to unveil the monument.

With the guests surrounding the monument in the Garden of Peace, the Armenian Ambassador to the UK, Dr. Vahe Gabrielyan, and Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas, the Presiding Officer of the National Assembly of Wales, unveiled the monument. A strong round of applause and cheering followed.

The ceremony continued with the blessing of the monument by the Bishop of the Armenian Church, Bishop Nathan Hovhannisian. His Grace presented Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas with a gift sent from the Patriarch of the Armenian Church. The guests were then asked to return to the Temple where speeches and light entertainment were prepared.

In the Temple Mr. Thomas then recited a speech given by Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas. The speech spoke of the friendship between Wales and Armenia that dated back to more than a century when the Wales-Armenia friendship society was formed. It called for the rest of the world to recognise the suffering of the people, for Turkey to end its economical blockade on Armenia and for the UK parliament to also recognise the genocide of 1915.

His Excellency Dr. Vahe Gabrielyan also gave a speech thanking the Welsh for providing a unique opportunity to raise a monument in recognition of the 1915 genocide.

The Assyrian archbishop of the Ancient Church of the East, Dr. Khoshaba Georges, was invited to speak on the Assyrian genocide, where he thanked and welcomed the joint effort made by the Assyrians and Armenians to campaign for the recognition of the genocide, and said, "Hitler once remarked who now remembers the Armenians, well, I want to say that we are all here today, as Assyrians and Armenians not only to remember those Assyrian and Armenian victims but to demonstrate to the world that we shall never forget them and the only process of healing is through full recognition". He then ended his speech with a prayer in the Assyrian language.

Further speeches and poems were read and light entertainment was performed by the Aghtamar Dance Group.

The event ended with the Armenian bishop's closing words of thanks who said, "we must work together to have the Armenian, Assyrian and Pontic Greek's genocide recognised". And he closed the event with a final prayer in the Armenian language.

Seyfo Centre UK met with the directors of the Temple of Peace to discuss future plans, and Mr. Nineb Lamassu conducted a short interview with Mr. Stephen Thomas highlighting the main outcomes of their meeting.

Seyfo Center, United Kingdom

© 2007, Assyrian International News Agency. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, November 04, 2007

Nobel laureate's stand causes an uproar

Updated: 11/04/07 10:54 AM
Buffalo News, United States
By Jeff Simon ARTS AND BOOKS EDITOR
Jeff Simon is very perceptive in his observation below:

"February 2005 – Pamuk is charged by the Turkish government with the equivalent of sedition for talking, in an interview with a Swiss newspaper, about the 1915 Turkish genocide of the Armenians (the second greatest of the 20th century after the Holocaust) and the battles with the Kurds in current Turkey.

“Thirty-thousand Kurds and 1 million Armenians were killed in those lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it,” he said.

The uproar in the international literary world is unanimous. Those condemning the government of Turkey – the keystone of Bush’s Middle East policy because of our bases for the Iraq War – are a who’s who of literary titans: Gabriel Garcia Marquez, John Updike, Salman Rushdie, Umberto Eco, Gunter Grass, Jose Saramago. "

"Oct. 10, 2007 – It becomes clear that, as usual, a great writer was the canary in the coal mine. On this day, a committee of the U.S. House of Representatives votes to recognize and condemn Armenian genocide by the Turks as Pamuk discussed and many Western nations have done. Turkey recalls its Ambassador to America."
All Turkish Nobel Laureate Orhan Pamuk ever wanted to do was write fiction. He never wanted to be the center of a geopolitical storm – and yet he is. Here’s a timeline of how it happened:

February 2005 – Pamuk is charged by the Turkish government with the equivalent of sedition for talking, in an interview with a Swiss newspaper, about the 1915 Turkish genocide of the Armenians (the second greatest of the 20th century after the Holocaust) and the battles with the Kurds in current Turkey.

“Thirty-thousand Kurds and 1 million Armenians were killed in those lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it,” he said.

The uproar in the international literary world is unanimous. Those condemning the government of Turkey – the keystone of Bush’s Middle East policy because of our bases for the Iraq War – are a who’s who of literary titans: Gabriel Garcia Marquez, John Updike, Salman Rushdie, Umberto Eco, Gunter Grass, Jose Saramago.

January 2006 – Charges are dropped. Often cited is Turkey’s desire to be a member of the European Economic Union, where body-slamming dissident writers – especially for what they say in Swiss interviews – is not exactly held with favor.

October 2006 –Pamuk wins the Nobel Prize for literature. In his earlier New Yorker review of Pamuk’s 2004 novel “Snow,” perennial Nobel candidate John Updike virtually nominated Pamuk for the Nobel and predicted the moves against him at home: “We should not forget that in Turkey, insofar as it partakes of the Islamic world’s present war of censorious fanaticism against free speech and truth-telling, to write with honest complexity about such matters as head scarves and religious belief takes courage. Pamuk, relatively young as he is at the age of 54, qualifies as that country’s most likely candidate for the Nobel Prize, and the near-assassination of Turkey’s last winner must cross his mind.”

Sept. 24, 2007 – “Other Colors,” a book of essays by Pamuk, is published in America.

Oct. 10, 2007 – It becomes clear that, as usual, a great writer was the canary in the coal mine. On this day, a committee of the U.S. House of Representatives votes to recognize and condemn Armenian genocide by the Turks as Pamuk discussed and many Western nations have done. Turkey recalls its Ambassador to America.

The final note has yet to happen. Lobbyists lobby and arms are twisted – left arms, right arms, all possible arms. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asks that the resolution be withdrawn. The House backs off a bit.

Just as the fatwa against Salman Rushdie may have been an early tremor of what happened on 9/11, Pamuk’s troubles foreshadowed what could yet turn out to be massive tension between the United States and its strongest Mideast ally.

His part of the world

Pamuk, on the phone during an appearance in Portland, Ore., is adamant about the thing any reader of his novels would know instantly: “I’m a writer. I write fiction. My books are not about explaining my part of the world to the other part of the world. My books, in fact, are about life.”

“I’m a Turk” though, he says, and “for me, it’s a Turkish issue, an issue of human rights and free speech. That’s the point I care about. For me it’s an issue of free speech to be able to talk about that in Turkey. It’s a moral issue, rather than an international political problem.”

While Pamuk will teach at Columbia in the fall and live in the United States with his family, as he has for some years, his brother is still in Turkey. While he says he has no fear about his brother’s welfare for anything he might say, he knows that if he went back home he would have to be accompanied by an “armed guard.”

“Turkey is not a country like totalitarian Russia or China where I’d say something and they’d twist the arm of my brother, that’s wrong.”

The man on the phone is, in fact, clearly uncomfortable in the role of explaining his part of the world to ours but as a dissident apostle of free speech, he is certainly willing. But when the subjects later turn to literature, himself and movies, he is warmer and much wittier – even funny.

One immense problem, he sees, is the Western media. And “what they don’t understand is that in a country like Iran, there are so many secular people. Or in a country like Russia, that there are people who don’t believe in what the government does. There are people who are entirely in disagreement with their governments. ... I think that representation of these people is missing in European and American media.”

“The anger and resentment that is felt against the United States or the West in general is not based on religion. It is not embedded in Islam or, in fact, any other religion but should perhaps be explained and analyzed in relation to other sentimentals than Islam. ... Misrepresentation, poverty, being on the margins, being provincial, not being included in the global decision-making process, made these people feel strong resentment and anger. ... Religion is used and abused by a minority which is manipulating nationalist and loyalist sentiment – for politics.”

The worldly Nobel laureate and practiced analyst on the phone, he says with endearing selfdeprecation, is far from the original writer.

Back when he was previously a visiting writer at the famous writing school at the University of Iowa, “I locked myself in my room and began writing ‘Black Book.’ I was not very social. I was 32. This was the first time I was out of Turkey in so many years. I was also socially shy –not like I am today. Each night there was a dinner invitation. And THAT would upset me – meeting so many people. I was very asocial in Iowa. (Pause). But I wrote very well.”

Though he loves and knows movies, he is not like one of his literary idols – William Faulkner – tempted to write for the movies.

“Even after he won the Nobel Prize, he was writing scripts for money ... He went to Hollywood and wrote that kitsch Hollywood Egyptian film [‘Land of the Pharaohs’ starring Jack Hawkins and Joan Collins]. I don’t want to do that.

“Do I need to do that? I never understood why Faulkner did it. Probably because Nobel money was not big enough then.”

The laugh on the other end of the phone is a huge, runaway guffaw.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

The Non-Vote on Genocide 2007

November 4, 2007 at 10:20:24
OpEdNews, PA
by Daniel Smith
http://www.opednews.com
Daniel Smith provides a very good expose of genocides. He goes into a considerable detail on the Armenian Genocide and focuses on its denial by Turkey. Some of the things he says:

"significant reason for rejecting these events as genocide is the belief that the reputation of Turkey’s “George Washington” – Ataturk – and through him the honor of the entire Turkish people would be sullied even though he did not emerge as the man in charge of the residual Ottoman empire until he led the opposition to the Sevres treaty during 19 20-1923."

"In the end, the definition of “intent “ remains the key to unlocking the legalistic straightjacket into which we have tie ourselves by a misplaced sense of personal and national reputation, “honor,” and latent nationalism.

What we are left with is the observation by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart: “I know it when I see it.” But the world must look and not hide its head in the sand. And by the way, Congress may yet act on one or more of the pending pieces of legislation."
When does a massacre rise to the level of genocide and when does the world render such a judgment?

Those are the unspoken questions underlying this month’s rhetorical firestorm created when leaders in both the Senate and the House of Representatives suddenly highlighted legislation that had been discreetly buried in sub-committees since the middle of March. The virtually identical non-binding resolutions (S.106 and H.106, respectively) called for U.S. foreign policy to reflect “appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide” that occurred during World War I in modern day Turkey – then the Ottoman empire.

The Turkish government went ballistic. Prime Minister Recep Erdogan warned of serious consequences if either chamber of the U.S. Congress passed its bill. The Bush administration warned that approval would – not “could” but “would” – create a serious rupture with an important NATO ally. Turkey is a vital link in the U.S. air logistics system resupplying U.S. forces in Iraq. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in the course of answering a question during a mid-month press conference, noted that 70 percent of all air logistics for Iraq and 33 percent of fuel used in the war flow through or over Turkish territory.

Secretary of State Rice took issue with the timing of congressional leaders. All living former secretaries of state and national security advisors registered opposition to the resolutions. Secretary Gates also took issue with the timing, as did the Commander of U.S. Central Command, Admiral William Fallon, who observed that “the resolution in the House on the Armenian genocide…just sticks a knife in and just runs it around” (New York Post, October 23, 2007).

Ankara’s reaction seemed disproportionately swift and severe, particularly considering that the dates most often given for the mass executions of Armenians are 1915-1918, years before the official founding of the modern state of Turkey by Mustafa Kemal Pasha (Ataturk). A quick search revealed that in every decade since World War II, one or more congressional resolutions condemning the Armenian genocide creates a stir and may even advance down the legislative road – a sparsely-attended hearing or a sub-committee vote in the House of Representatives.

Starting in the 1980s, Ankara upped the ante by hiring top-flight Washington public relations firms to undermine congressional sentiment for pursuing legislation. The significance of this additional element suggests that by the 1980s, Ankara was no longer on the psychological defensive – the “sick man of Europe” as it was described in 1914. Although not initially alarming, the slow emergence of the “new” radicalized practitioners of terror transformed Turkey from a “marginal” player in any NATO-Warsaw Pact conflict to a central position, as the only Muslim-majority and the only “Oriental” member of NATO, in Washington’s (and a reluctant European Union’s) efforts to reduce violence in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other locales in the Middle East.

Still, this year’s response was so vehement that something else must be in play. Without question, Turks believe they have greater freedom to act in 2007 because the Bush administration has failed so miserably in its “global war on terror.” And it has been only 55 months since the Turkish parliament voted against letting U.S. troops cross Turkish territory to participate in the March 2003 invasion of Iraq – and made it stick. Moreover, Turkey’s religious-based ruling Justice and Development party has survived in power (and won 340 of 550 seats in parliament in elections held July 23, 2007) for more than five years without a coup d’etat by the staunchly secularist Turkish military is also a source of newfound confidence in the country.

Both the government and the military also agreed on the need to subdue the Kurdish fighters of the PKK who use the rugged terrain of the Iraq-Turkish border as a base for rest and rearming. This part of Iraq is controlled by the Iraqi Kurdish parties and defended by the 100,000-strong pesh merga. They have proved unable or politically incapable of implementing promises to the Bush administration and Erdogan’s government to halt PKK attacks that are creating a low but constant death toll – similar to the American experience in Iraq – among Turkish units on the border. In response to this failure, the Turkish parliament approved legislation empowering the prime minister and the army chief to send more Turkish troops into Iraq to destroy PKK fighters and base areas.

All authorities in Turkey stress that they will act only if the Iraqi and coalition forces fail to rein in the PKK. They are not keen to become further enmeshed in going after the PKK given the history of the Armenian suppression. When spelled out, the psychology of repression is ugly, as the following thumbnail sketch of Armenia’s history and a more general look at 20th century genocides reveal.

The History of the Armenian Genocide
At the end of the 19th century, the once-mighty Ottoman Empire was struggling to control its restive Christian Armenian minority. Estimates of the number killed in uprisings against the autocratic ottoman sultans in the last decade of the 19th century run to more than 100,000. Ironically, it was a group of army officers – the “Young Turks” – concerned about the widening gap in capabilities between Ottoman and European armies, who forced the sultan to accept limitations on his power. Not content sharing power, three officers – Mehmed Talaat, Ismail Enver, and Ahmed Djemal – engineered a coup d’etat in 1913 and assumed total control of the government as well as the military. The next year they took Turkey into World War I on the side of the Central Powers (Imperial Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire) – the losing side.

But the war also held promise to be an excuse for solving what some in the new regime called the “Armenian problem.” The vision of the triumvirate was a New Turkey – called Turan – stretching from the Mediterranean islands off Turkey’s western flank all the way across Central Asia to the Caspian Sea. Some 500,000 Armenians were in this broad area whose boundaries included much of the historic Armenian homeland. With the Eastern Front pitting Turks against Russians, “special measures” were required to insure the integrity of the war effort.

- All weapons held by Armenians were confiscated as the population was considered sympathetic to their fellow Christians in Russia.

- The 40,000 Armenians in the Turkish army were disarmed and converted to labor battalions.

- In April 1915, Armenian political, cultural, religious, and other elites were seized in coordinated raids and then killed. Mass arrests of Armenian men and their execution followed. Ironically, some Kurds joined in the killing. The allied powers warned the Turkish rulers to stop, but with the war grinding on, the implied threat was toothless.

- Undeterred, the three rulers initiated new measures against women and children –forced marches with little food or water, with the victims in some cases being marched into the desert.

- In May, 1918, Ottoman troops attacked eastward into the Caucasus to destroy what remained of the Armenian homeland in their bid to reach the Caspian Sea. The Armenians fought the invaders to a standstill, and then the whole enterprise collapsed when, shortly before Armistice Day (November 11, 1918) the ruling junta fled to Germany where they received asylum. Despite more calls for a war crimes trial, the three men were tried in absentia, found guilty, but never punished.

Meanwhile, in Anatolia (Asia Minor) a more moderate group of “Young Turks” took over. After lengthy negotiations, this government signed in 1920 the Treaty of Sevres which reduced Turkey to a shadow of itself, re-created a large Republic of Armenia, and called for a referendum to be organized among the Kurdish populations in and around Anatolia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria to determine if an independent Kurdistan was desired.

However, the treaty was flatly rejected by another group of highly nationalistic officers. Led by Mustafa Kemal, they successfully waged war on France, Armenia, and Greece to force renegotiation of the Serves treaty. The result was the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne which effectively created the boundaries of modern Turkey, left a rump Armenia as part of the emerging Soviet Union, and scuttled the referendum on Kurdistan, leaving the Kurds the largest ethnic group with no independent homeland.

Did the Ottoman Rulers Commit Genocide? This, then, brings us back to the question of what makes mass murder or massacres genocide. The distinction hinges on discovering or discerning the “intent” of those doing the killing, as is clear from Article II of the 1948 Convention Against Genocide: “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such….”

Arriving at a conclusion, unless proclamations or other statements of intent have been published, can be problematical before the fact of a genocide starting. For those with time and inclination, being familiar with the circumstances of 20th century genocides and massacres might permit earlier scrutiny of causes and processes that led to the horrendous slaughter of civilian’s in that century and that have carried over into the 21st century.

The first seven years of this century have already re-taught us the basic lesson that naming an atrocity genocide – as the U.S. did in the Sudan – does not prevent or stop the killing, even with the possible penalties for any found guilty as described in international law.

Certainly, time does not appear to be a factor. In Rwanda 800,000-900,000 ethnic Tutsis and ethnic Hutus who refused to participate in the organized killing perished in the space of 100 days in 1994. But in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, the executions and forced labor that eventually claimed 2 million intellectuals, city dwellers, and “elites” ran four years (1975-1979).

The numbers who perish also is non-determinative as to whether genocide has been committed. In 2004, Germany acknowledged as a genocide the 1904 systematic destruction of 80,000 Herero tribesmen in what was then called German Southwest Africa (today’s Namibia) in retaliation for the deaths of 100 Germans killed when the Africans rebelled against brutal German rule.

Contrast this event with what Joseph Stalin was doing in the Soviet Union in 1932-33.

He purposefully condemned to death by starvation 7 million men, women and children in the Ukraine where his program to collectivize agriculture was being resisted, sometimes violently. Tiring of the unceasing defiance, he ordered the Red army to seize every grain of the harvest of autumn and winter 1932 and to completely seal Ukraine’s border so no foodstuffs could enter Ukraine.

Furthermore, between 1934-1938, Stalin orchestrated a massive purge of Communist Party, members, the intelligentsia, and army officers whose loyalty to him he questioned. Some 13 million wee killed or sent to gulags. In the army the purge removed so many experienced officers that when the Nazis attacked in 1942, the Red army came perilously close to total collapse – which, had it happened, would have gone into history as one of the most egregious self-inflicted errors ever made in warfare. (As it was, the Russian people bolstered the army at both St. Petersburg (then Leningrad) and Moscow against the efforts of the Nazi armies.)

In terms of the number of people killed, Stalin is surpassed only by Mao Ze-Dong. Again, excluding the lives lost in Mao’s military campaigns against the Chinese Nationalists and the Imperial Japanese army in the 1930s and 1940s, the Chinese civilian population endured three major assaults – the subjugation of Tibet (1949-50), the Great Leap Forward (1958-1961), and the Cultural Revolution (1966- 1969) – that claimed as many as 1.2 million, 43 million and 7 million lives, respectively.

War, of course, offers the perfect counterpoint by which murders and revenge slayings among civilians are concealed. The world knows so much about the World War II Holocaust in part because the Germans kept meticulous records on the 6 million souls – Jews, ethnic Poles, Romas (gypsies), and “undesirables” – exterminated during the period 1938-1945.

In the Pacific, Japanese troops are believed to have killed 300,000 Chinese civilians and prisoners in six weeks (December 1937- February 1938) in what is called the “Rape of Nanking.” The broad consensus today holds that over the entire 1937-1945 time frame of significant combat in Asia, non-combatant deaths due to Japanese invasion, occupation, and execution is approximately 6.8 million.

(In 1984, UNESCO estimated the total number of civilian fatalities during 1937-1945 at between 21-27 million – nearly the same as military losses.)

The World War II examples share a common characteristic: both occurred within the conscious context of “low level” combat or preparation for escalating armed conflicts when tensions already would be high and moral restraints weakened. Yet while the deaths of 6 million at the hands of the Nazis earn the condemnation of “genocide” by ordinary men and women, of religious and secular leaders around the globe, most of the other atrocities – at least as they are spoken of and written about – do not carry the stigma of “genocide.”

Genocide: Avoiding the Specific (Turkey) While Condemning the Universal
The Armenian genocide, for the Turks, arguably also shares this association with war and “defense of the nation-state” against internal subversion and should not be singled out as genocide. (The U.S. internment camps in World War II are a less drastic example of the same mind set.) As regrettable as the killings may be, the Turks see the deaths as part of the larger war they were waging against the imperial Russian army and, after Lenin’s successful revolution forced the new regime in St. Petersburg to withdraw its army, were still threatened by the new Communist regime.

The other and perhaps from the point of view of the Turkish people the more significant reason for rejecting these events as genocide is the belief that the reputation of Turkey’s “George Washington” – Ataturk – and through him the honor of the entire Turkish people would be sullied even though he did not emerge as the man in charge of the residual Ottoman empire until he led the opposition to the Sevres treaty during 19 20-1923.

In the end, the definition of “intent “ remains the key to unlocking the legalistic straightjacket into which we have tie ourselves by a misplaced sense of personal and national reputation, “honor,” and latent nationalism.

What we are left with is the observation by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart: “I know it when I see it.” But the world must look and not hide its head in the sand. And by the way, Congress may yet act on one or more of the pending pieces of legislation.

Colonel Daniel M. Smith graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1966. His initial assignment was with the 3rd Armor Division in Germany. He then served as an intelligence advisor in Vietnam, following which he earned a graduate degree at Cornell University and taught philosophy and English at West Point.

Subsequent intelligence and public affairs assignments were at Fort Hood, Texas; the Army Materiel Research and Development Command, where he was speechwriter for the Commanding General; the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); and Headquarters, Department of the Army. Six of his years with DIA were in London in the British Ministry of Defense and n as Military Attache in the U.S. Embassy. Colonel Smith retired in 1992. He joined the non-partisan Center for Defense Information in April 1993 becoming Associate Director in 1995 and Chief of Research in 1999.

Colonel Smith, a graduate of the Army Command and General Staff College, the Armed Forces Staff College, and the Army War College, joined the Friends Committee on National Legislation in September 2002 as Senior Fellow on Military Affairs.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

It's time to tell it like it is about Armenian genocide

Sunday, November 4, 2007
San Francisco Chronicle
Roxanne Makasdjian
The statement below is extremely important and America's prestige will suffer because of it.

"Turkey's strategic interests are much more dependent on good relations with the United States than vice versa. If we tolerate Turkey's blackmail, we actually weaken our position in the strategic relationship and embolden others in the region to blackmail us."

In fact the more Turkey denies the genocide the more it becomes transparent in its denial. Now it has dragged America down with it. Ironically Armenians have more faith in the future of Turkey as a democratic state the Turkish leaders and America.
The Armenian genocide resolution pending in Congress (HR106) has prompted debate about whether it's the right time for the United States to officially recognize the systematic annihilation of the Armenian population in Turkey, perpetrated by the government of the Ottoman Empire in 1915. Against increasingly bold denials of history and unjustifiable intimidation by Turkey, now is the best time for our country to tell it like it is.

A wave of disinformation has been disseminated by the Turkish and U.S. administrations since the resolution passed the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on Oct. 10. Turkey's threats have included cutting off the use of our air base, thus restricting our military shipments, and intervening in northern Iraq, destabilizing the only relatively quiet part of that country. The rationale for those threats is deceptive, the resolution being a convenient excuse to threaten to disrupt U.S. military actions in Iraq to advance Turkey's own interests.

The fact is that we needn't become hostage to blackmail. In 2003, without an Armenian genocide resolution up for a vote, Turkey refused to allow us to use our base at Incirlik to invade Iraq. We carried out the invasion successfully anyway. The United States has numerous military bases in the area - in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Bulgaria, the United Arab Emirates and Afghanistan - from which we can operate.

The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and the Turkish Daily News have all quoted U.S. officials saying that if Turkey cut off our base or supply lines, it would not greatly affect our military operations. And, according to a recent article in Defense News, the Armenian genocide resolution wouldn't even "dent" U.S. arms sales to Turkey. Several years ago, when France passed a similar resolution, arms sales between France and Turkey were back to booming within months.

Turkey's strategic interests are much more dependent on good relations with the United States than vice versa. If we tolerate Turkey's blackmail, we actually weaken our position in the strategic relationship and embolden others in the region to blackmail us.

Turkey's threats against the Kurds in Iraq are also not new, nor a result of the pending resolution. Successive Turkish governments have had claims on the oil-rich, northern Iraqi region of Kirkuk and Mosul from as early as the 1930s. Turkish governments have also treated their 20 million Kurds worse than second-class citizens.

Anti-Americanism has reached new heights in Turkey not because of the Armenian genocide resolution, but because of opposition to the U.S. intervention in Iraq and the consequent formation of a Kurdish autonomous government controlling the oil revenue in northern Iraq. As Graham Fuller, former vice chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Council, wrote recently, "Turkish-American relations have been deteriorating for years, and the root explanation is simple and harsh: Washington's policies are broadly and fundamentally incompatible with Turkish foreign policy interests in multiple arenas."

Despite all this, the United States has been enabling Turkey's denial of the genocide, damaging our reputation and giving a junior ally the upper hand in a relationship in which we should be leading. Last year, the U.S. government went as far as dismissing our ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, for discussing the Armenian genocide. President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have recently gone further, referring to the Armenian genocide as an open historical question needing more study.

This position contradicts the vast majority of historians and Holocaust and genocide studies that recognize this event as unambiguous genocide, as well as the abundant documentation in our own national archives, including the memoirs of the U.S. ambassador to Ottoman Turkey in 1915, Henry Morgenthau, who wrote of witnessing the "extermination of a whole race."

Turkey has even reached into our educational system by lobbying against inclusion of the Armenian genocide in our textbooks, and against local remembrances of the genocide, as was the case when Armenian Americans purchased San Francisco's Mount Davidson Cross in memory of their slain forefathers.

In Turkey today, discussion of the Armenian genocide is a crime carrying as many as 10 years in prison. Scores of writers, professors and community leaders are being prosecuted under this law, legitimizing the undemocratic, nationalist fervor of the Turkish masses. In this context, the government's call for a commission of Turkish and Armenian historians to study the "events of 1915" is simply a way to bury the truth.

Contrary to opponents' claims, House Resolution 106 does not condemn present-day Turkey for the crimes of its predecessor, nor does it demand that Turkey recognize the genocide. It simply reaffirms the historical record, a necessary affirmation when faced with massive denial. Congress has passed recent resolutions reaffirming the truth of the Holocaust as well as the genocides in Cambodia, Ukraine, Bosnia and Darfur.

Most recently, we watched Bush and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi give the Congressional Gold Medal to the Dalai Lama, despite China's warnings that such action would be detrimental to U.S.-China relations. Giving in to similar warnings from Turkey would highlight the hypocrisy in that action and signal to the world that we have a clear double standard when it comes to human rights. The longer the United States helps Turkey's denial, the longer the denial will continue, and the longer we'll be hostage to it. Instead, we should help steer Turkey toward democracy, for its own sake - and ours.


Roxanne Makasdjian is chair of the Bay Area Armenian National Committee. Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com.

This article appeared on page E - 3 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Protests fail to halt memorial

Nov 3 2007
ic Wales, United Kingdom
by David Williamson, Western Mail

A MEMORIAL commemorating the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in the early 20th century is being unveiled today in the Welsh capital.

The Presiding Officer of the National Assembly for Wales, Lord Elis-Thomas, will take part in the ceremony outside the Temple of Peace in Cardiff , and will attribute the deaths to “one of the biggest genocides the world has ever seen when”.

Armenians claim 1.5 million people were either murdered or died through starvation. Turkey insists there was no policy of genocide and claims 300,000 Armenians died in inter-ethnic violence.

The announcement that the memorial was due to be unveiled provoked angry protests from the Turkish community last month.

More than 200 messages protesting against the monument’s erection have been sent by members of the Turkish community in Wales, elsewhere in Britain and from Turkey itself over the decision to erect the pillar of pink stone and Welsh slate.

The controversial topic also hit the headlines when Democrats in the US Congress agreed to delay a vote on a Bill which censured the Ottoman Empire for the killings. President Bush had warned the vote could permanently damage US relations with Turkey.

Lord Elis-Thomas said, “Wales’ relationship with one of the oldest states and the oldest Christian Church in the world goes back centuries and the fact that the funds for this fine memorial have been raised entirely by the Armenians who live in Wales, and that it will occupy a special place here in the Temple of Peace, reflects the vibrant Welsh interest in the history of Armenia.”

In March 2000, a majority of Assembly Members voted in support of a motion by Rhodri Glyn Thomas acknowledging the genocide. It also called on the UK Government to block Turkey’s admission to the EU until it acknowledged the crime.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Armenian Genocide Monument to be Unveiled in Wales

2 Nov. 2007
HULIQ, NC

6vote Several hundred Armenians from across the United Kingdom will gather at the Temple of Peace, Cardiff at 1.00 p.m. on Saturday for the unveiling of the first public monument to the Armenian Genocide in the UK.

Permission has been granted by the United Nations Association Wales and the monument will stand on land owned by the National Assembly of Wales. The monument will be unveiled by the presiding officer of the National Assembly, Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas and the Armenian Ambassador, Dr Vahe Gabrielyan.

Welsh and Armenian choirs as well as Armenian dancers will take part in the unveiling. Canon Patrick Thomas, a well-known Welsh writer, will speak on the topic of "Armenia and Wales" and Mike Joseph, a highly respected Welsh-Jewish historian and academic will speak about Member of Parliament Aneurin Williams, the Welsh lobbyist for Armenia in Parliament during the time of the Genocide. Prayers will be said in Welsh, Armenian and Aramean.

The Monument is a "thank you" to the people of Wales for the Recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the political cultural and religious representatives of the nation.

Wales has distinguished itself by being the first country within the UK to recognize the Armenian Genocide at both national and regional levels.
This event is unique for a number of reasons. This is the first time a plot of land has been allocated in a public area within the UK for a memorial to the victims of the Armenian Genocide.

The stone is Welsh, the design is Armenian, the stonemason is Welsh and the inscription is by the hand of a Bishop of the Armenian Apostolic Church. The commemorative words are in Welsh, Armenian and English.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Friday, November 02, 2007

Press Availability With Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan

November 2, 2007
US Department of State, DC
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Below it says:

"And I also want to bring up the issue of the 1915 events as they're being taken up in the American House of Representatives. This is perceived in Turkey as a card that's being used against Turkey. Is there anything that you can say about this as well?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, on the House resolution and the events of 1915, I think it's clear, and we've received from our Turkish colleagues an expression of gratitude for how hard the United States Government worked to see that this resolution would not pass, not because we are unconcerned about the historical events (inaudible) there, where they were tragic and brutal events, but because we do not believe that this resolution would have served any good purpose.

And we're going to continue to work against the resolution. We are encouraging Turkey and Armenia to come together both to address their history, but also to address their future, because these two countries are going to prosper better in a circumstance in which there are relations between Turkey and Armenia. And so that would be our hope."

Condi as Ali calls her, the border and diplomatic relations are issues between Turkey and Armenia but the genocide denial is an issue concerning the Armenian Diaspora and human rights. So please do not sell out human rights, have the courage to speak out against the Penal Code Article 301 which punishes by jail the open discussion of the genocide in Turkey and even abroad. America the defender of human rights! What a joke!
Ankara, Turkey

FOREIGN MINISTER BABACAN: (Via interpreter.) -- members of the press today. We are welcoming from the United States of America Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Secretary Rice this morning arrived in Ankara and later met with the Prime Minister, and we've had meetings here as well at our Foreign Ministry. And later, we will visit the President.

In our meeting this morning and in our meetings with Secretary Rice especially we discussed issues involving a few countries: the situation in Iraq; the situation in northern Iraq; issues regarding the PKK terror organization; issues such as Iran and the Middle East peace process; and regional issues and problems involving -- concerning our two countries. Separate from this, regarding the events of 1915, we discussed the events of 1915 as they were being addressed by the U.S. Congress.

In our meetings, we have discovered once again that -- we have confirmed once again that many of the things that we face, many of the issues for both of our countries are the same. The United States for us is a friend and an ally, and at the same time our strategic partner. Within this framework, these issues should be addressed. We are in agreement that these issues should be addressed together.

And I turn the microphone over to Secretary Rice.

SECRETARY RICE: Thank you very much, Minister Ali. Thank you very much for having me here. I want to begin just by noting, since we are here in the Foreign Ministry, that a few days ago, Mr. Inonu, who was the Vice Premier and Foreign Minister of Turkey, passed away after a long illness. He passed away in Houston. He was a good friend of the United States and a true patriot for Turkey. And I want to offer my condolences to the Turkish people and to his family.

As my colleague has said, we've had wide-ranging discussions with the Prime Minister and then in our own channels, and we will continue those discussions. I want to take a moment to thank you very much for hosting the meeting that we are about attend in Istanbul, the neighbors conference. Turkey has been a good friend of the United States and a good friend of Iraq. And we appreciate very much that you are going to host that conference.

We've had wide-ranging discussions about Iran, about Lebanon. We talked about the Middle East peace process. I know that Ali has just been from a 12-country tour of the region, and so he had a lot of updated information to give me.

And of course, we've had a significant discussion of the problems in northern Iraq and the problem of PKK terrorism. And I affirmed to the Prime Minister as well as to the Foreign Minister that the United States considers the PKK a terrorist organization and indeed we have a common enemy that we must find ways to take effective action so that Turkey will not suffer from terrorist attacks. That is destabilizing for Iraq; it is a problem therefore of security for the United States and Turkey, and we will work together to achieve our goals.

Thank you very much for having me here.

FOREIGN MINISTER BABACAN: (Via interpreter.) Esteemed friends, we are going to take two questions. I can take two questions and the Secretary can take two questions.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) Secretary Rice, Turkey for a long time has been working with the United States on the issue of PKK terrorism as they're waiting for something to be done. When you met with Prime Minister Erdogan, it was said that you were going to come to Ankara with some suggestions within a few days. In your visit today, what kind -- what do you envision for the United States and Turkey to do together, and when do you expect results?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, I first confirmed and affirmed with the Prime Minister that we consider this a common threat, not just a threat to Turkey, but a threat to the interest of the United States as well. We are indeed talking about how to enhance some of the activities that we have already begun in terms of information sharing, intelligence sharing. But we want to look to a plan for effective action against the PKK. It will require not just the United States and Turkey, but also the Iraqi Government, and that is a discussion that I plan to have when I see Prime Minister Maliki later on today.

The President will meet with Prime Minister Erdogan on November 5th and they will be able to further our discussions. I did want to hear from my Turkish colleagues about their ideas and about how we might move this forward. But I want to just underscore again, this is going to take persistence, it's going to take commitment. This is a very difficult problem. Rooting out terrorism is hard. We are learning that all around the world. But with commitment and with persistence, I'm certain we'll be able to make progress. And we want to do so in a way that improves the prospects for a stable and democratic Iraq on the border with Turkey because ultimately, as my Turkish colleagues have said many times, a unified and stable Iraq is very much in Turkey's interest as well as in the interest of the region.

QUESTION: A question for each of you. For the Foreign Minister, what would you like to see the United States do that it's not doing now to confront the PKK rebels? And did you ask Secretary Rice for anything specific in your meeting today?

And Madame Secretary, your former envoy for the border region and the PKK, General Ralston, is quoted today as saying U.S. inaction on the PKK matter may drive Turkey to act. Has the U.S. been too slow to react here and are you playing catch-up now?

FOREIGN MINISTER BABACAN: (Via interpreter.) To respond to the first question, as you know, in the struggle against terrorism, many instruments are at hand. With the struggles -- we have been subjected to attacks by the PKK terror organization for years and we've lost many of our citizens because of these attacks. What we expect from all of our friends, from the entire international community on the subject of the struggle against terrorism, is cooperation and solidarity. There can be very many different formats in terms of cooperation and solidarity.

With a strategic approach, we in a timely manner want to be able to use all these instruments that are available to us. My good friend Condi's visit today will facilitate a closer cooperation with the United States of America, initiate a closer cooperation with the United States of America in terms of the struggle against terrorism. There's no doubt that the continuation of these talks will continue Monday in Washington. And our hope, our desire, is that as a country that has been the target of big terrorist attacks, the United States will understand the situation that we're in and will understand the frustration that we are in and the outrage and the anger that we feel, and be aware of this so that in this visit we have seen this openly. And what's important is that in the subsequent periods that at the highest levels the interests and the efforts will be made at the highest levels to continue the struggle with solidarity against this terror organization.

SECRETARY RICE: We have taken several steps over the last -- particularly the last several months of the last year to enhance our ability to cooperate together in the sharing of intelligence and the sharing of information, in the way that we assess the situation. But I think it's fair to say that we believe, the President believes -- and he will say to Prime Minister Erdogan -- that we all need to redouble our efforts. And the United States is committing to -- committed to redoubling those efforts because we need a comprehensive approach to this problem.

I want to repeat that all across the world, we're seeing that it is not easy to root out terrorists who hide in remote areas and hide in villages. It's a hard problem and so we need a comprehensive approach. The Prime Minister has talked about a comprehensive plan and we started to talk about some of the elements of that today. And when he is in Washington, I think that they will talk more about those elements.

But no one should doubt the commitment of the United States to this issue because, as I've underscored, this is not just a problem for Turkey. This is a problem for Iraq, this is a problem for the United States. And so we have a common enemy and we need a common approach to dealing with the problem that we find ourselves -- with the problem with which we find ourselves.

FOREIGN MINISTER BABACAN: (Via interpreter.) After one final question, we should complete the press conference.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) Secretary Rice, in the statement that you made previous to coming here regarding a possible military operation by Turkey, you have indicated that you were trying to discourage a cross-border operation that would destabilize Iraq. But you may as well recognize that stability in Iraq has been not in place. And you've referred to northern Iraq as Kurdistan a few times. Is this something that you're doing with specific purpose or was this unintentional? Because we know that you, obviously, respect the territorial integrity of Iraq as well.

And I also want to bring up the issue of the 1915 events as they're being taken up in the American House of Representatives. This is perceived in Turkey as a card that's being used against Turkey. Is there anything that you can say about this as well?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, on the House resolution and the events of 1915, I think it's clear, and we've received from our Turkish colleagues an expression of gratitude for how hard the United States Government worked to see that this resolution would not pass, not because we are unconcerned about the historical events (inaudible) there, where they were tragic and brutal events, but because we do not believe that this resolution would have served any good purpose.

And we're going to continue to work against the resolution. We are encouraging Turkey and Armenia to come together both to address their history, but also to address their future, because these two countries are going to prosper better in a circumstance in which there are relations between Turkey and Armenia. And so that would be our hope.

As to northern Iraq, nobody is a stronger supporter of a unified Iraq than the United States and than I am, on behalf of the United States. There is a Kurdish Regional Government. We expect that Kurdish Regional Government to exercise its responsibilities as well for what happens in territory in which it is governing. But the north of Iraq and all of Iraq are part of a single, unified Iraq. The United States does not stand for the partition of Iraq. I said this yesterday to a group of Iraqis. And I would just note that I haven't heard Iraqis talking about a partition of their own country, and so obviously the territorial integrity is important.

As to the stability of northern Iraq and of this region, it is absolutely the case that there cannot be terrorism emanating from that territory or it will contribute to instability in northern Iraq. But any actions that we take need to be both effective and need to reinforce our overall goal of a stable and unified Iraq that can be a good neighbor for Turkey and for the other neighbors who will be gathering at this conference in Istanbul.

QUESTION: Thank you. Nicholas Kralev of Washington Times. I'd like to ask both of you what role can Iran play in resolving the PKK issue? They have been supportive of Turkey. Is this an opportunity to engage Iran perhaps in a constructive way?

And Madame Secretary, a point you made on the plane flying over here that the PKK problem is not -- does not date back to yesterday or the war, but does, in fact, go back decades. As you know, there is a widely held view in Turkey that the war in Iraq has created conditions that have helped the PKK. Were you in your comments yesterday trying to avoid perhaps responsibility for the conditions you might have created that have helped the PKK?

FOREIGN MINISTER BABACAN: (Via interpreter.) Valued friends, Iran is our neighbor and in Iran there is PJAK, PJAK, similar to the PKK terror organization, and Iran is also subject to attacks by them. And everybody knows the relation between PJAK and the PKK. During our visit to Tehran and during the Iranian Foreign Minister's visit to Turkey, we evaluated the situation with Iran as well, and they share their thoughts with us in terms of what kind of support they would be able to give us.

But I want to say this openly. Right now, in the general area of Iraq, there is American control and in the north Iraq, despite having good intentions, their capabilities are very limited in terms of the struggle against the PKK. On the other side, in the north, in the authority in the north we have doubts regarding the regional government in the north because of their statements that seem to sympathize with the PKK.

So in our struggle against the PKK, we need a structure that will combine both political will and action. So our expectations from the United States are very high, and if the U.S. Administration -- the U.S. Administration will play a key role if we are to struggle against the PKK. And in periods ahead of us, we want action, methods that have -- methods that have action, and we need to work on actually making things happens. This is where the words end and action needs to start.

Thank you again for your --

SECRETARY RICE: Yes, very briefly. First of all, I think it is historically accurate that this is not a problem of the last few years. There have been times when PKK activism has been very strong. I fully acknowledge that the circumstances are different today because there is a U.S. role, and I have said a U.S. obligation, to help to do something about the problem of the PKK in northern Iraq. In fact, it's something that we stated at the time of the liberation of Iraq, that the United States would not tolerate the use of Iraqi territory for terrorist activity. So I think that should be very clear.

Again, the United States and Turkey and Iraq, even if it has limited capabilities, and the regional government has a common interest in not having the events in northern Iraq lead into a destabilization of Iraq as a whole. And so I am quite certain that we can find ways to cooperate for effective action.

We also want to see action. We want it to be effective, we want it to be well-considered and we want it to be action that is going to really help us to get a handle on what has been a festering problem and, frankly, lately, with PKK attacks a more acute problem.

2007/T18-2

Released on November 2, 2007

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Government Approves Controversial Mining Project

1, November 2007
Armenialiberty.org, Armenia
By Anna Saghabalian

Dismissing strong objections from environmentalists, the government gave on Thursday the final go-ahead for the development of a massive copper and molybdenum field in northern Armenia which will lead to the destruction of 357 hectares of rich forest.

The Teghut deposit close to the Georgian border is estimated to contain 1.6 million tons of copper and about 100,000 tons of molybdenum. The Armenian Copper Program, a large mining enterprise that extracts and smelts ore from other parts of the northern Lori region, plans to spend more than $200 million on turning the deposit into a huge mine. The Liechtenstein-based company secured the Armenian Environment Ministry’s mandatory approval of the project earlier this year.

The ministry gave the clearance despite strong resistance from Armenian environment protection groups. The latter argue that the resulting destruction of 128,000 trees would wreak further havoc on Armenia’s forests that have already shrunk dramatically since the early 1990s.

ACP admits the heavy environmental cost of its plans but says it will be more than offset by 1,400 new jobs which it has pledged to create in the unemployment-stricken depressed area. The company has also pledged to build new schools and make other investments in the local infrastructure.

The government accepted these arguments, formally approving land allocations needed for the start of open-pit operations at Teghut. ACP already began preparations for the those operations this summer.

Minister of Trade and Economic Development Nerses Yeritsian said after a weekly cabinet meeting that the government also took into consideration the opinion of local governments who are in favor of the project. “We have held detailed discussions with them and unanimously arrived at the conclusion that the benefits and revenues which the country will receive from those investments will substantially outweigh the environmental and other costs,” Yeritsian told reporters.

Yeritsian said that estimates of the resulting environmental damage are grossly exaggerated and are “not the result of serious scientific analysis.” He also argued that ACP undertook to finance the planting of tens of thousands of new trees elsewhere in Lori.

Non-ferrous metals and ores are currently Armenia’s main export products. The local mining sector is dominated by ACP and the German-owned Zangezur Copper-Molybdenum Plant operating in the southeastern Syunik region.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

ARMENIA 57TH ACCORDING TO ECONOMIC STABILITY INDICATOR

01/11/2007
Source: Panorama.am

Economy and Values Research Center recently published its annual world report on competitiveness. Armenia is in the 93rd place among 131 countries. Last year, Armenia was in the 82nd place among 125 countries. Armenia is ahead of Moldova, Tajikistan, Ghrghzstan in terms of the indicator.

USA, Switzerland and Denmark are found as the most competitive three countries. Our strategic partner, Russia, is in the 58th place.

According to the same publication, Armenia continues to take 57th place in terms of the indicator of economic stability. Low level of inflation and small state debt as compared with GDP contributed to such figure. Armenia is in the 99th place in terms of health and elementary education. In terms of market effectiveness, the country is in the 104th place.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Rattling the Cage: Jews of power, Jews of truth

Oct. 31, 2007
THE JERUSALEM POST
Larry Derfner
I thank the Jews of conscience who are on the side of Armenians fighting against the denial of the Armenian genocide. The world is a better place because of them because of the hope they inspire in humans. As to the rest who support the denial, let the suffering of the Armenians be a forewarning to you, since this denial is state sponsored and not carried out by individuals. As the Armenian Genocide presaged the Jewish Holocaust the state denial of the Armenian Genocide will presage the denial of the Jewish holocaust.
How long are Israel and its lobby in Washington going to go on living this ridiculous, transparent lie? How long are they going to hock the world about the Holocaust while acting as Turkey's number two accomplice, number one being the White House, in denying the Armenian genocide? Again, Congress has demonstrated it won't recognize that the Ottoman Empire, Turkey's predecessor, deliberately wiped out about 1.5 million Armenians in 1915-17. Again, the president of the United States has scared Congress off with a big assist from the Anti-Defamation League and other American Jewish "defense" organizations. (Historically, the American Jewish Committee has led the Israel lobby's effort to shut Congress up about the genocide and the Ottoman Empire's culpability.)

This time, the main reason given was American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Without Turkey's good will and cooperation, it was argued, the US would not be able to get weapons and equipment to its soldiers in battle. This is obviously a serious concern - but the White House, Israel and the Israel lobby have been hushing up the Armenian genocide for decades, when there were no American troops in Iraq or Afghanistan. This is not the real reason.

The real reason is that in war and peace, Turkey is a critical strategic ally and economic partner of the US and Israel, and the US and Israel do not want to risk upsetting this ally, so, with help in Congress from the ADL, AJC and the like, they enforce the lie that there was no Armenian genocide. Or if there was a genocide, it is not clear who was responsible. Or if it is clear that the Ottoman Empire was responsible, it is not clear that Turkey should inherit the guilt.

"This is a matter for historians to decide," goes the Israeli and American Jewish establishment line.

The historians, however, decided a long time ago. More than 125 Holocaust scholars - including Elie Wiesel, the late Raul Hilberg, Deborah Lipstadt, Daniel Goldhagen and Yehuda Bauer - have signed ads in The New York Times demanding acknowledgment that the Ottoman Turks committed genocide against the Armenians.

Wiesel testified in Congress on behalf of such a resolution. The International Association of Genocide Scholars - which is studded with Jewish names - holds the same view as a matter of course.

SOMEWHERE around three reputable historians disagree. They are led by Bernard Lewis, who may be the world's foremost scholar of Islam, but who, among world scholars, is certainly the foremost enthusiast of Turkey.

There are probably fewer historians who doubt the Armenian genocide than there are scientists who doubt evolution. Maybe we should reserve judgment on evolution, too.

A key Jewish argument for continuing this policy of denial is that breaking it would endanger the 20,000 or so Jews of Turkey, whose leaders have warned against crossing their government on this matter. But if Israel and its lobby in Washington really believe this, then they've as much as sentenced the 25,000 Jews in Iran to death, haven't they? Is anyone in the Israeli government or AIPAC suggesting that they lower the volume on Iran for the sake of Iranian Jewry? So the Turkish Jewish community isn't a real reason for denying the Armenian genocide, it's another excuse.

The one and only genuine moral argument for public Jewish denial of the Armenian genocide is the Jewish people's historical debt to Turkey. For 500 years, up through the time of the Nazis, Turkey gave life-saving refuge to Jews running from persecution, and did so in a welcoming spirit.

This historical truth can't be denied, either. And it presents Jews with a heavy moral dilemma. For Jews to recognize the Armenian genocide is an undeniable act of disloyalty to Turkey, to which we owe an unpayable debt of gratitude.

But I don't think it's terminal disloyalty, I don't think it's unforgivable disloyalty. With time, it's not something that can't be made up for with other acts of Jewish or Israeli gratitude.

Denying the Armenian genocide, on the other hand, is an unforgivable, terminal betrayal not only of the Armenians, but of truth, of decency, of the legacy of the Holocaust, of ourselves as Jews, of ourselves as people.

What's more, the Jewish moral debt to Turkey is at best a secondary motive in Israel's and the Israel lobby's campaign of genocide denial. Their overriding concern is Israeli security and economics.

Which, of course, is a 100% legitimate concern. Security and economics are the primary concern of every nation, and Israel is part of the family of nations. But the thing is this: If Israel and the Israel lobby can pursue practical self-interest alone, they can't insist that the rest of the world act like Righteous Gentiles.

They can't go on intoning that "the world stood silent" during the Holocaust when they - the leaders of the Jewish world - act as front-line enforcers of silence on the Armenian genocide.

It's one or the other: morality or realpolitik. As a nation of the world, Israel, along with its lobby in Washington, have always chosen realpolitik. What they may not know, however, is that by now the world sees through them.

The world doesn't take seriously what an Israeli leader or an American Jewish macher has to say about the Six Million, not when it sees that same Israeli leader and American Jewish macher shushing everyone over the murders of 1.5 million other innocents.

Thankfully, those politicians are not the only Jewish voices on the Armenian genocide, or on the Holocaust. There is also Wiesel, Lipstadt, Goldhagen, Bauer, Congressman Adam Schiff, Yossi Sarid and many, many others.

Either you value truth first, or you value power first. Every Jew, every person, makes the choice.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Armenian genocide topic in class

2 Nov. 2007
Advertiser-News

VERNON —Vernon teacher Phil Tintle presented Sam Azadian with a plaque in appreciation of his commitment to telling the story of the 1915 Armenian Genocide. Now in his 80s, Azadian has been a regular visitor to Tintle’s Issues of Conscience class at Vernon Township High School for several years and always captivates the students with his ability to make history come to life, albeit sadly. Azadian, co-founder and chairman of the Times Square Armenian Genocide Commemoration, grew up with a father, mother and sister who survived and escaped the 20th century’s first genocide.

In the Spring of 1915, the Turkish government ordered the systematic deportation of the Armenian people. Village by village and town by town, men, women and children were taken away and murdered. An entire nation was destroyed and the Armenian people were effectively eliminated from their homeland of nearly 3,000 years. The genocide was from 1915 to 1923. Over one million people died in 1915 alone. To this day, the Turkish government claims the people were just “casualties of war,” blaming World War I on causing the deaths. Congress recently tried to pass a resolution condemning the killings as a genocide, but strong opposition killed the measure, at least for another year.

Azadian was invited by Tintle to speak to his class, which covers the topic of genocide throughout history. As a result of his commitment to his family history and Armenia, Azadian has been named Man of the Year by both the Knights of Vartan and the Armenian General Athletic Union.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

For Kurds In N. Iraq, A Familiar Foreboding Shelling by Turkey Leads Many to Flee

Thursday, November 1, 2007; Page A01
Washington Post Foreign Service
By Sudarsan Raghavan
Do you believe if Turkey says it is only after the PKK? Once successful they will try again guaranteed. See below:

"Michael, Deshtetek's mayor, is worried about history. He sees parallels with Turkish massacres of Armenian Christians in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire.

"We believe what happened in Armenia can happen to us at any moment," Michael said.

From the gates of the church, he gazed up at the Turkish base and flag, his back straight, his silence defiant."
DESHTETEK, Iraq, Oct. 31 -- The last three women left this tiny hamlet on Monday, carrying no more than their clothes and prayers. They joined 250 villagers who fled in the past two weeks, locking their homes and their yellow church and driving away on a desolate road scarred by war. Only 11 men remain, their lands separated from Turkey by a thin, emerald river winding through a fertile valley.

For several months now, Turkish forces have been shelling this rugged terrain from mountain bases, including a massive one perched above Deshtetek, in an effort to root out Kurdish guerrillas. An immense Turkish flag, its white crescent and star gleaming in the sun, is painted on the mountainside.

During the rule of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party, Deshtetek's community of Chaldean Christians was driven from here, their ancestral homeland, to Mosul and Baghdad. Two years ago, they came back to this remote edge of northern Iraq to escape religious persecution and sectarian violence. Now, as the shelling from Turkey intensifies, a familiar dread has returned to their lives.

"This is our fate," said Zaito Warda Michael, 75, Deshtetek's mayor. "We have to flee all the time."

Along Iraq's border with Turkey, Kurds are caught in the crosshairs of a long-simmering conflict between Turkey and the guerrillas of the Kurdistan Workers' Party or PKK, which threatens to open a new front in the Iraq war. Several thousand civilians have fled their homes, propelled as much by the shelling as fear of the unknown. The pace of their departures picked up after Turkey's parliament two weeks ago voted to authorize the military to invade. Turkish attacks, including aerial bombings, have burned scores of fields and orchards, the villagers' main source of income and food.

But the campaign has done little to stop the guerrillas. On Monday, it took a half-hour's drive from Deshtetek, through these forbidding mountains, to run into four fighters, wearing grenade belts and clutching rifles, heading into Turkey. Their outpost was less than a mile from a border checkpoint operated by the Kurdish regional government, the semiautonomous body that administers northern Iraq.

The Iraqi Kurds have had an ambivalent relationship with Turkey. During a period of intra-Kurdish strife in the mid-1990s, Turkish forces were allowed into northern Iraq to pursue the PKK, and they remain in the area. On Wednesday at least 10 Turkish tanks were parked around their military base near the town of Bamerni.

Following the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, Iraqi Kurds feared the Turks would enter their region to undermine Kurdish autonomy and seize Iraqi oil. Since then, Turkish investment in northern Iraq and cross-border trade have grown.

As fellow Kurds, many villagers sympathize with the PKK, which has fought to carve a Kurdish state out of Turkey but now seeks Kurdish autonomy. But the villagers deny Turkish accusations that they support the guerrillas. They have little confidence that Iraq's weak central government can solve the crisis and place their hopes in the Iraqi Kurds' main Western backer. "Our destiny is in the hands of the United States," said Yusef Ali, 50, a farmer in the village of Kashan, which was shelled last week.

The tensions arise in a region finally reaping peace after generations of suffering, in contrast to the rest of the country. "We want to build irrigation projects, a church, a mosque, or pave a road," said Khalid Aziz, the mayor of Batifa, to which many families have fled. "We don't want war. We have witnessed too many wars in our lives."

Jamil Oraha, 53, moved back to Deshtetek from Mosul after Sunni insurgents started using the telephones in his call center to threaten Iraqis working with the police and the U.S. military. They warned Oraha that they would detonate a hand grenade in his store if he didn't cooperate.

For 13 months, he found stability in his village, along with other Chaldean families, Catholics who observe a rite of worship developed, in part, in the Mesopotamian region. The regional government built 25 houses colored in shades of cream and lime-green. Families returned from Mosul, Baghdad, even as far away as the southern city of Basra. That they faced a Turkish military base across the valley was never a threat. "We knew our roads and lands. They knew theirs," Oraha explained.

In February, their calculus changed. Shells began to fly over their village, pounding mountainsides, valleys and farms. Since then, Turkey has bombed this patch of Iraq's border at least 97 times, with as many as 800 shells and six aerial assaults, said Col. Hussein Thamer, the regional head of Iraq's border guards. No Iraqis were killed, but several were injured, he said.

"The Turks always say their target is the PKK," said Thamer, whose men patrol 125 miles of Iraq's border with Turkey. "But since February, nobody from the PKK has been injured."

In the office of Aziz, the mayor of Batifa, colorful folders are stacked on the floor, each an accounting of damage caused by the shelling. So far, he said, 1,100 farmers have filed complaints. One farmer lost 300 apple trees, each one at least 20 years old, he said.

On Monday, an hour after the last female residents left Deshtetek, the remaining men gathered inside a house, where a rifle rested against a sofa. All stayed behind to protect their lands and property.

"We have no choice," said Salim Michael Warda, 39, a farmer. "All we own in our lives is here."

Since the attacks, the village school has shut down because teachers were afraid to commute to the border. Their pastor also left. The men can no longer fish in the river. They said they have thousands of dollars worth of ripe walnuts they cannot take to market.

"Now, we are afraid to go out -- we can't even go get wood," said Zarro Kutto Zarro, 53. "If we go out, they will hit us."

A few days ago, at least 20 shells struck the lands around Deshtetek. One tore a six-foot-wide hole in the narrow, buckling road leading out of the village.

Three miles away along the same road, which coils through a line of oatmeal-colored mountains stretching from the border, the Muslim village of Parekh sits silent, save for the howling wind. Once there were 400 residents. Now, there are six.

"They fled because the news was bad," said Sabria Yusef Amar, frail and angular-faced, in her 50s.

She has lived alone since her family fled. Shells struck the mountainside above their house, but Amar refused to leave the village where she was raised. She was tired of running, she said.

"Whatever God has decided, it will happen," she said.

In the late 1980s, Hussein's government evicted Amar and her family and took them to a desert camp. Several of Amar's relatives were executed, she said, their bodies never found -- victims of the Anfal campaign, in which Iraqi authorities systematically killed tens of thousands of Kurds. She later moved to Zakho and didn't return to her village until two months ago, when the regional government built her family a small purple house.

"We were so happy. I felt that our life before Anfal would come back," Amar said. "Now we are afraid that the Turks will come here and deprive us of this gift."

About 1 a.m. Oct. 21, shells began to rain around Kashan. Sayran Hussein, 40, grabbed her children and hid in a nearby canal until dawn, as did scores of other villagers. The next morning all 30 families, including nearly 100 children, fled to Zakho.

Several days later, they heard on a newscast that Turkey's prime minister would visit Washington in November. They returned to their village, reasoning that any invasion would surely wait until after that meeting. Just in case, they left the elderly and the frail in Zakho.

On Sunday, a group of village elders gathered on a porch to discuss the geopolitics that rule their plight. During the Anfal campaign, the entire village -- people living in mud houses and caves -- fled to Turkey, where officials initially blocked U.N. assistance and confined the Kurds to camps.

"Saddam killed us and chased us to Turkey. We came back from Turkey. Now, Turkey is chasing us and trying to kill us," said Abdullah Abdal, 80.

He, like his neighbors, believes that Turkey's motive is to seize control of Iraq's oil -- not tackle the PKK. "There are 25 million Kurds in Turkey. They love the PKK. They should solve their problems inside Turkey," said Abdal. "We have nothing to do with the PKK."

Others expressed admiration for the guerrillas.

"The PKK are also Kurds," said Hadji Abdullah, 53. "Why should we fight and kill them?"

Less than a mile away, large charred patches pock the mountainside, where gray and orange shell fragments lay scattered.

"With artillery and bombs, we can hide. But if they launch an offensive, where can we hide?" said Yusef Ali, as he and his 5-year-old child picked up some bomb fragments.

"Turkey is practicing what Saddam was doing to us. That's why we're afraid," said Fateh Mahmoud, 53, a farmer. Seconds later, he added: "The U.S. has always supported us. Why are they not applying pressure on Turkey to stop these attacks?"

In Deshtetek, Jamil Oraha is worried about the future. "The central government can't protect itself. How can we ask it for help?" Oraha said, shaking his head. "We can't go back to Mosul. We can't go back to Baghdad. The cheapest house in Zakho is $400 a month. Where can we go?"

Michael, Deshtetek's mayor, is worried about history. He sees parallels with Turkish massacres of Armenian Christians in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire.

"We believe what happened in Armenia can happen to us at any moment," Michael said.

From the gates of the church, he gazed up at the Turkish base and flag, his back straight, his silence defiant.

Staff researcher Robert E. Thomason in Washington contributed to this report.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: ,

Armenian Genocide Denial: An American Problem by Dimitri Anastasopolous

1 Nov. 2007
Artvoice, NY
This article correctly states that: "a resolution ostensibly designed to respond to the massive denial of genocide inside Turkey inadvertently reveals a form of genocide denial inside the United States."

"Bush has forgotten that he promised in 2000 to officially recognize the genocide if elected president."

"many of the genocide perpetrators were part of the Young Turk movement that succeeded the Ottoman Empire, including the modern Turkish state’s third president, Mahmut Celal Bayar, who served from 1950 until 1960. That fact alone explains why the Turkish government wants to kill the resolution."
The US House Foreign Relations Committee this week voted to bring a resolution (HR106) to the floor commemorating the Armenian genocide of 1915-1923. After a firestorm of criticism warning of the potential negative impact of the resolution on US-Turkish relations, many of the resolution’s co-sponsors quickly flip-flopped on the issue: They’re now set to vote against it.

The opponents of the resolution in Congress and in the news media tend to argue that, since the facts surrounding this genocide are in dispute, the Armenian genocide is a matter best resolved by historians, not politicians. Ironically, even as many in the US media advise the political elite to kill the resolution, the reasons cited for doing so tend toward a denial that the Armenian genocide ever occurred. As a result, a resolution ostensibly designed to respond to the massive denial of genocide inside Turkey inadvertently reveals a form of genocide denial inside the United States.

For the purposes of this commentary, however, let’s put aside the genocide resolution issue. It has its positives and negatives, of course, but for now I’ll let others weigh the scales.

Many opinion pieces and news editorials repeat the idea that the issue of the Armenian genocide should be left to historians, because, after all, it is a historical dispute. Of course, this is a paradoxical point. This stance ignores the fact that nationalist historians are the ones disputing the genocide in the first place. Representative John Murtha took this very approach to the resolution this week: “This happened a long time ago,” he noted, “and I don’t know whether it was a massacre or a genocide, that is beside the point.” Unsurprisingly, George Bush declared that the last thing Congress should be doing is deciding the “history of an empire [the Ottoman] that doesn’t even exist any more.”

Evidently, Bush has forgotten that he promised in 2000 to officially recognize the genocide if elected president. Moreover, Bush once again got his history wrong. The Armenian genocide resolution actually includes the post-Ottoman period up until 1923. Indeed, many of the genocide perpetrators were part of the Young Turk movement that succeeded the Ottoman Empire, including the modern Turkish state’s third president, Mahmut Celal Bayar, who served from 1950 until 1960. That fact alone explains why the Turkish government wants to kill the resolution. Turkey clearly feels that their modern state is a direct successor of the great empire. This week, one Turkish diplomat, Egemin Bagis, made a point of comparing the youth, folly and foolishness of the United States’ “mere” 200-year-old government with the fact that the Turks “have had a state for 1,000 years.” Obviously, Turks are quite proud of Ottoman accomplishments—as they should be. The Ottomans were among the most beneficent rulers of the era that spanned from 1500 to 1850.

Bush is obviously hanging by his nails in Iraq, and he’s grasping for any kind of logic that will prevent the resolution from coming to the floor. After all, he is not totally against politicians making judgments on history, even when they inflame and offend other nations. Just this week, a controversy erupted when Bush cozied up to the Dalai Lama and China took umbrage at the implied recognition of their atrocities in Tibet. Several months ago, he supported a resolution on the Holocaust at the United Nations as a response to the denials coming from the president of Iran. Bush, moreover, has never demurred from labeling the massacres in Rwanda, Sudan, Bosnia and Saddam’s Iraq as genocides. Indeed, US officials often make both political and historical judgments on massacres when they refer to genocides as genocides, but only in the case of the Armenian genocide is this designation withheld. Why is that?

The answer is simple: Genocide denial in the United States occurs only when one of our allies is also in denial. It also helps that Turkey spends millions each year in an effort to deny the genocide before our Congress, in our media and at our universities. A few years ago Microsoft became embroiled in a controversy after being pressured by the Turkish government to whitewash the genocide in its Encarta Encyclopedia. There is indeed a concerted effort to “cleanse” American recognition of the genocide—not only in our Congress but in our culture as well. One wonders if this resolution would even be at issue were it not for the concerted efforts to continually deny it. In a sense, the resolution addresses the denial of history more than it commemorates those who died in the genocide.

The New York Times this week revealed that former Representatives Bob Livingston and Richard Gephardt were traipsing around the Capitol delivering campaign funds to congressmen—such as Bobby Jindal, now governor-elect of Louisiana, and Mississippi’s Roger Wicker, who, after their visits, quickly dropped sponsorship of the resolution and declared their opposition to it. Both Livingston and Gephardt represent lobbying firms under contract with the Turkish government, which is paying these firms tens of millions to stay on top of the issue. The New York Times article quotes former congressman Stephen Solarz—whose firm received $165,000 this summer lobbying for Turkey under an arrangement with Livingston: “The Turks have done everything they possibly could” to dismiss HR106. Meanwhile, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, a resolution sponsor, called Turkey’s lobbying “the most intense I’ve ever seen.” Gephardt, who supported Armenian genocide recognition when he was in Congress, has produced a pamphlet that contests the genocide now that he’s a lobbyist.

There’s a lot of collateral damage in the media in the wake of official pronouncements casting some doubt on the genocide. Left-wing and right-wing organs such as The Nation, the Washington Times, the Atlantic Monthly, the Wall Street Journal, etc., have all bought into the idea that there is some question about the authenticity of the genocide—a question, they go on to argue, that is best left to academics. In fact, the editor of the Washington Post openly speculated that the genocide did not occur in the fashion that the Armenian lobby claims. The truth is that it is easy to find a historian that will counter the Armenian claims. There are university press publications that do so as well. Until this week, however, few news organizations or political weeklies went so far as to actually delve into the history. In the latest issue of the National Review, the editors cite several of the more well known Armenian genocide deniers in the United States:

Only a few cranks dispute the Gulag and the Holocaust. Indeed, Holocaust denial is not denial at all; it is really a sly endorsement of murdering Jews. But historians of the first rank—Norman Stone, Gunter Lewy, Justin McCarthy and Bernard Lewis—firmly dispute that the Ottomans ordered an Armenian genocide. They point out that no orders to exterminate have ever been produced (some were incompetently forged); that Ottoman files examined after defeat found no incriminating evidence; and that investigations afterwards by British and American military officials led to the release of their Ottoman suspects.

To be sure, there are also arguments on the other side by able historians—and the sheer number of deaths is suspicious. What that means, however, is that this is a historical dispute to be settled by historians rather than by legislators who in this matter are simply ignoramuses. It is an absurdity as well as an outrage that Bernard Lewis, our leading scholar of the Ottoman world, should have been fined by a French court for violating a law that condemns and seeks to punish “denial” of the Armenian genocide. America and Europe must abandon these foolish attempts to resolve disputes in history and other disciplines by legislative fiat. The costs are too high: for Professor Lewis, one franc; for the French court, a revelation of its own Keystone Kops ridiculousness; and for America—let’s not find out.

The opening phrase in this argument is at once telling. Characterizing critics of Holocaust recognition as “Only a few cranks,” the editors immediately set the Armenian issue apart as one on which judgment must be reserved because it is in dispute. It is worth also remarking on the concerted effort here to present the Democratic sponsors of the genocide resolution as unfit to lead the country in foreign policy. Of course, the editors of the National Review firmly supported (and are still firmly in support of) the current administration’s invasion of Iraq; hardly the best judges of US foreign policy. Yet the editorial itself is a piece of amazing mendacity. The editors enlist a few fringe historians (with the exception of Bernard Lewis) who are willing to contest the genocide, and then they go on to hail such historians as scholars of the first rank. Even more suspect is the fact that these historians (including Lewis) work for, or are on the board of, institutes endowed by the Turkish government, such as the Institute of Turkish Studies at Georgetown University. In one infamous incident, Heath Lowry, who had formerly worked as a lobbyist for the Turkish government, was appointed as professor of Turkish Studies after the Turkish government had endowed a chair at Princeton University. Lowry had not held an academic position at an American university prior to that and had never published in academic journals or presses. His ties with the Turkish government were exposed when a memo ghost-written for the Turkish ambassador to the US was attached to a letter sent to Holocaust scholar Robert Jay Lifton attacking Lifton’s work on the Armenian genocide. This incident reveals some of the power plays and connections between historical scholarship, certain academics, political elites, foreign governments and the national news media.

Scott Jaschik’s article (“Genocide Deniers”) of October 16 in the Chronicle of Higher Education highlighted the complicated web of Turkish political influence in academia. “The problem with encouraging the [historical] debate,” Jaschik writes, “is that so many experts in the field say that the debate over genocide is settled, and that credible arguments against the idea of a genocide just don’t much exist. The problem, many say, is that the evidence the Turks say doesn’t exist does exist, so people have moved on.”

Genocide scholars specifically criticize some of the historians mentioned by the National Review editorial for “ignoring or dismissing massive amounts of evidence, not only in accounts from Armenians, but from foreign diplomats who observed what was going on—evidence about the marshaling of resources and organizing of groups to attack the Armenians and kick them out of their homes.” Furthermore, historians (whose International Association of Genocide Scholars officially recognizes the genocide) argue that Turkey has ably exploited the insistence in the American media that two sides to every story must always be presented. A seemingly noble idea. Yet when the president of Iran shows up in New York claiming there are historical sources that cast the Holocaust into doubt, few take up the historical debate—with good reason.

It must be noted that Turkey has, in fact, engaged Armenia on the genocide issue. Turkey has even offered to have a team of historians look through their archives in order to decide, once and for all, whether genocide took place. A fair offer. While the Armenians aren’t keen to accept it because of their distrust of Turkish historians, they further fear that by accepting the Turks’ offer, their involvement in the investigation would actually (ironically) cement the issue in perpetual dispute.

I would propose, however, that the Armenians should trust Turkish historians such as Dr. Taner Akcam of the University of Minnesota, one of the few scholars to have undertaken research in the Turkish state archives. Or Dr. Fatma Gocek from the University of Michigan, who has written several important articles on the Armenian genocide from the perspective of a Turkish scholar of the Ottoman Empire’s dissolution. Akcam’s book, A Shameful Act, describes his research in the archives. It then goes on to conclude not only that a genocide sponsored and systematically exploited by the Turkish state (such as it was at the time) was undoubtedly committed, but also that its premeditated nature was evident.

This makes the Turkish offer of a joint Turkish-Armenian commission curious, since the few historians who have seen the state’s documents seem to draw the same conclusion. Perhaps Turkey is relying on a form of intimidation through its national laws which criminalize statements claiming the Armenian genocide occurred. Akcam himself was charged with treason after declaring the massacres a genocide, and other Turks who have noted the genocide, such as the Nobel Prize novelist from Turkey, Orhan Pamuk, have also been charged under the notorious Article 301 for insulting “Turkishness.” Another Turk who fell afoul of the law was the news editor Hrant Dink, of Armenian heritage, who was gunned down by a right-wing fanatic. Dink’s son was convicted just this past week for publishing his father’s last news article citing the genocide. Is there a disincentive for a Turkish historian to go into the archives and risk being jailed? The answer is obvious. Outside Turkey, the vast majority of the academic world—with access to documents from Armenian archives, the firsthand eyewitness accounts of Western diplomats such as US Ambassador to Turkey, Robert Morgenthau, the evidence that has arisen in Akcam’s research—views the Armenian genocide as a dead issue.

If, as genocide scholars maintain, the final crime of genocide is denial, then after reading this week’s editorials in the US news media, one gets the feeling that the Armenian genocide has not yet ended.

In a Tom Toles cartoon this week, a character remarked: “Never forgetting is easier…if you don’t remember.” Ain’t that the truth?


Dimitri Anastasopoulos is Assistant Professor of English at SUNY Buffalo.

Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels:

Spanish parliament condemns Franco

By DANIEL WOOLLS, Associated Press Writer
Wed Oct 31, 3:41 PM ET
I have a great respect for Spain who can reach into the past for reconciliation with the present. However the denial stance that Turkey is deliberately taking towards Armenians with open support by the American Administration fills me with contempt.
MADRID, Spain - Parliament condemned Gen. Francisco Franco's nearly 40-year dictatorship Wednesday in historic legislation addressing a dark chapter of Spanish history that had been largely off-limits.

The bill sponsored by the Socialist government and passed by the lower house of parliament also makes symbolic amends to victims of the 1936-1939 Spanish Civil War. It formally denounces Franco's regime, mandates that local governments fund efforts to unearth mass graves from the Civil War and declares as "illegitimate" the summary military trials that led to the execution or imprisonment of thousands of the general's enemies.

The legislation orders the removal of all Franco-era symbols such as streets and plazas named after him or generals who fought for him. There are dozens of such symbols in Madrid alone.

Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, whose grandfather was among the tens of thousands executed by Franco's forces, had made the legislation a top priority and cobbled together an agreement between his ruling Socialists and several smaller parties.

Conservative critics complained angrily that the bill digs unnecessarily at old wounds and does away with a spirit of reconciliation that accompanied the transition to democracy after Franco died in 1975.

The bill pays tribute to all victims of the war, including Roman Catholic clergy and others executed by militia loyal to the elected, leftist Republican government that Franco rose up against in 1936.

It also bans political rallies at a site know as The Valley of the Fallen, which includes Franco's mausoleum. The site is the most potent symbol of the dictatorship and is a magnet for yearly processions of right-wingers nostalgic for Franco's rule.

The legislation, known as the "Law of Historical Memory," must still pass the Senate — considered a formality — and be published in the government gazette before it becomes law. That is expected in November.

The legislation passed despite the fierce objections from Zapatero's conservative opponents, who accused him of being driven by vengeance to rekindle national acrimony doused during Spain's transition to democracy. The culmination was approval of a democratic constitution in 1978.

The process featured an unspoken pact among parties to put the suffering of the war years behind them in the interest of rebuilding. No war crimes trials were held.

Other countries that lived through wartime atrocities did hold trials — junta-era Argentina, or post-Nazi Germany, for instance. But for the most part, Spain is now trying to atone for the past by simply honoring victims, without punishing anyone.

Proponents say the new legislation was a long time coming.

"This is a very important moment for Spain," said Emilio Silva, president of an organization that leads efforts to exhume the bodies of civilians killed by Franco's forces in the war.

"But this law is the beginning, not the end, and it is long overdue. Many, many victims and relatives of those killed have already died without receiving any justice," he said.

Polls show that many Spaniards see the law as divisive.

"For me this reopens wounds I thought we had agreed to close in 1978," said Gonzalo Lopez Orozco, a 34-year-old lawyer. "I don't know what this'll be good for."

Eduardo Zaplana, a spokesman for the conservative opposition Popular Party, denounced the bill as "unnecessary" and "prejudicial to national harmony."

Angel Acebes, No. 2 in the Popular Party, was even more blunt in the run-up to the vote.

"Zapatero wants to divide Spaniards and turn them against each other," he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Maria Teresa Fernandez de la Vega chided the Popular Party for its stance.

"There isn't a single line of this law that couldn't be backed fully by a democrat." She said the opposition arguments against the law amounted to "shadows."

"The truth, like the light, always makes its way through," she said.

While the Popular Party has pushed itself toward the political center in the three decades since Franco's death, it was founded by a top Franco minister.

The Civil War left a half-million people dead, becoming a proxy fight between Hitler's Germany and the Italy of Benito Mussolini — both of whom backed Franco — and Communist forces including the Soviet Union, which backed Spain's elected left-wing government.

Atrocities were committed on all sides, though the victorious fascists are generally considered to have committed the lion's share.

Many see the Spanish conflict as a precursor to World War II.

______

Associated Press Writer Paul Haven contributed to this report.


Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.

Labels: