Month: October 2006

International Herald Tribune, France
Oct 19 2006

A bold message, lost on Turkey
Vartan Oskanian International Herald Tribune

Published: October 19, 2006

YEREVAN, Armenia Armenia should be rejoicing at the passage of a bill
last week by France’s National Assembly that would make it a crime
to deny the genocide of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire in the early
20th century.

The message from France is clear: So long as Turkey refuses to confront
its own history, others will feel impelled to do so. If, on the other
hand, Turkey embarks on the difficult road of acknowledgement and
reconciliation, then others will have reason to step aside and let
the process take its course.

Instead, we note with dismay that this very strong message is being
lost on Turkey. It continues to surround itself with myths, evade
the past, and thus elude the future.

As we observe the reactions in Turkey, we find it disingenuous for
a country that itself doesn’t allow free speech and criminalizes
even the exploration of certain areas of its own (and therefore our)
history to be so indignant over a law that criminalizes the rejection
and denial of that same history.

After all, the actual, difficult discourse must evolve in Turkey,
and not in France, or Switzerland. It is in Turkey that a free and
open dialogue is deeply needed, and sorely absent. Those who cry
"leave history to the historians" have gagged the historians.

At the same time, Turkey objects vehemently to the involvement of
third countries in a discussion that really must take place between
Turks and Armenians.

No one wants such a dialogue more than Armenia. Yet Turkey has made
such give-and-take between our peoples and our states impossible. In
addition to the restrictions on speech, our borders remain closed.

Nor are there diplomatic relations between our countries.

In other words, there are no opportunities for new experiences, new
memories, new interactions to build up alongside the old. Instead,
there is a lingering security concern about a neighbor that has not
repudiated such state violence.

As Turkey continues to corner itself, it handicaps the future of this
region and impacts the lives of its people and ours. Worse, those
extremists who understand the great risks and costs of tolerance,
openness and rapprochement, are emboldened.

We are not the only neighbors in the world who have a troubled
relationship. Yet it is exactly because we live right next door that
we must be willing and prepared to transcend the past.

France’s principled acknowledgement of the 20th century’s first
genocide offers the hundreds of thousands of French Armenians, all
descended from genocide survivors, the dignity that they have been
denied because of the Turkish government’s continuing insistence that
the atrocities they lived through are unproven myths.

There is no doubt that if the word "genocide" had existed in 1915,
every one of the hundreds of articles in newspapers around the world
would have used it. Look how frequently the word is used today to
describe events and cases where the scale and depth of the carnage
are even smaller.

When a government plans to do away with its own population to solve
a political problem, that’s genocide. The U.S. ambassador to Turkey
from 1913 to 1916, Henry Morgenthau Sr., called what he witnessed the
"Murder of a Nation." Others called it "race murder." They did so
because the term genocide did not exist yet.

Those who deposed the Ottoman rulers – the early leaders of modern
Turkey, including Kemal Ataturk – actually court-martialed those
who instigated these crimes. Today’s Republic of Turkey, which has
inherited the nationalism of its founders but not their memory,
spends untold amounts to convince the world they didn’t happen.

Not just money. Today, their continued insistence on rejecting and
rewriting history costs them credibility and time. Today’s Turks do
not bear the guilt of the perpetrators, unless they choose to defend
and identify with them.

It is a political reality that both Turkey and Armenia exist today
in the international community with their current borders. It is a
political reality that we are neighbors. It is a political reality
that Armenia is not a security threat to Turkey. Finally, it is a
reality that today’s Armenia calls for the establishment of diplomatic
relations with today’s Turkey.

Armenia has no preconditions for establishing diplomatic relations.

Nor is Armenia opposed to Turkey’s membership in the EU. We’d like
to see Turkey meet all European standards. We’d like to see Turkey
become an EU member so that our borders will be open and we can
cooperate to build a secure, prosperous region.

We can only assume that Europe will expect that a Turkey which is
serious about EU membership will come to terms with its past. A few
in Turkish society have begun that difficult process of introspection
and study. We can only welcome this process.

It is essential that the international community does not bend the
rules, does not turn a blind eye, does not lower its standards, but
instead consistently extends its hand, its example, its own history
of transcending, in order for Armenians and Turks, Europeans all,
to move on to making new history.

Vartan Oskanian is the minister of foreign affairs of Armenia.

YEREVAN, Armenia Armenia should be rejoicing at the passage of a bill
last week by France’s National Assembly that would make it a crime
to deny the genocide of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire in the early
20th century.

The message from France is clear: So long as Turkey refuses to confront
its own history, others will feel impelled to do so. If, on the other
hand, Turkey embarks on the difficult road of acknowledgement and
reconciliation, then others will have reason to step aside and let
the process take its course.

Instead, we note with dismay that this very strong message is being
lost on Turkey. It continues to surround itself with myths, evade
the past, and thus elude the future.

As we observe the reactions in Turkey, we find it disingenuous for
a country that itself doesn’t allow free speech and criminalizes
even the exploration of certain areas of its own (and therefore our)
history to be so indignant over a law that criminalizes the rejection
and denial of that same history.

After all, the actual, difficult discourse must evolve in Turkey,
and not in France, or Switzerland. It is in Turkey that a free and
open dialogue is deeply needed, and sorely absent. Those who cry
"leave history to the historians" have gagged the historians.

At the same time, Turkey objects vehemently to the involvement of
third countries in a discussion that really must take place between
Turks and Armenians.

No one wants such a dialogue more than Armenia. Yet Turkey has made
such give-and-take between our peoples and our states impossible. In
addition to the restrictions on speech, our borders remain closed.

Nor are there diplomatic relations between our countries.

In other words, there are no opportunities for new experiences, new
memories, new interactions to build up alongside the old. Instead,
there is a lingering security concern about a neighbor that has not
repudiated such state violence.

As Turkey continues to corner itself, it handicaps the future of this
region and impacts the lives of its people and ours. Worse, those
extremists who understand the great risks and costs of tolerance,
openness and rapprochement, are emboldened.

We are not the only neighbors in the world who have a troubled
relationship. Yet it is exactly because we live right next door that
we must be willing and prepared to transcend the past.

France’s principled acknowledgement of the 20th century’s first
genocide offers the hundreds of thousands of French Armenians, all
descended from genocide survivors, the dignity that they have been
denied because of the Turkish government’s continuing insistence that
the atrocities they lived through are unproven myths.

There is no doubt that if the word "genocide" had existed in 1915,
every one of the hundreds of articles in newspapers around the world
would have used it. Look how frequently the word is used today to
describe events and cases where the scale and depth of the carnage
are even smaller.

When a government plans to do away with its own population to solve
a political problem, that’s genocide. The U.S. ambassador to Turkey
from 1913 to 1916, Henry Morgenthau Sr., called what he witnessed the
"Murder of a Nation." Others called it "race murder." They did so
because the term genocide did not exist yet.

Those who deposed the Ottoman rulers – the early leaders of modern
Turkey, including Kemal Ataturk – actually court-martialed those
who instigated these crimes. Today’s Republic of Turkey, which has
inherited the nationalism of its founders but not their memory,
spends untold amounts to convince the world they didn’t happen.

Not just money. Today, their continued insistence on rejecting and
rewriting history costs them credibility and time. Today’s Turks do
not bear the guilt of the perpetrators, unless they choose to defend
and identify with them.

It is a political reality that both Turkey and Armenia exist today
in the international community with their current borders. It is a
political reality that we are neighbors. It is a political reality
that Armenia is not a security threat to Turkey. Finally, it is a
reality that today’s Armenia calls for the establishment of diplomatic
relations with today’s Turkey.

Armenia has no preconditions for establishing diplomatic relations.

Nor is Armenia opposed to Turkey’s membership in the EU. We’d like
to see Turkey meet all European standards. We’d like to see Turkey
become an EU member so that our borders will be open and we can
cooperate to build a secure, prosperous region.

We can only assume that Europe will expect that a Turkey which is
serious about EU membership will come to terms with its past. A few
in Turkish society have begun that difficult process of introspection
and study. We can only welcome this process.

It is essential that the international community does not bend the
rules, does not turn a blind eye, does not lower its standards, but
instead consistently extends its hand, its example, its own history
of transcending, in order for Armenians and Turks, Europeans all,
to move on to making new history.

Vartan Oskanian is the minister of foreign affairs of Armenia
nion/edoskan.php

Orhan Pamuk’s Nobel Prize throws Turkish nationalists
by Ron Margulies, Istanbul

Socialist Worker, UK
Oct 19 2006

We may have our own views about Orhan Pamuk’s novels, but there can
be no doubt that Pamuk richly deserves the prize both in literary
terms and as a man with deeply-held views which he is not afraid to
express regardless of the consequences.

Watching the Turkish media and political world squirm and agonise has
been as joyful and magnificent as the expression on Pamuk’s face must
have been upon hearing the news.

The prize was announced on the very same day that the French parliament
voted to make it a criminal offence to deny the Armenian holocaust. In
1915, the dying Ottoman Empire drove its Armenian citizens into a
forced migration, which caused one million or more to perish.

Turkish governments have always denied that there was a systematic
attempt at ethnic cleansing, that so many Armenians died and that
this was a holocaust. They admit to a figure of 300,000, claim that
there was killing on both sides and that the whole incident was an
unfortunate but unavoidable sideshow of the First World War.

Pamuk, whose every novel is a literary event and sells hundreds of
thousands in Turkey, was prosecuted last year for simply saying to
a German journalist that a million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds had
been killed in Turkey. He was neither the first nor the last writer
to be prosecuted under Law 301 which makes it a crime to "insult
Turkishness", but he was the most prominent internationally. Like
most of those prosecuted under 301, he was acquitted. But he also
became a figure of hate for the right and most of the media.

Normally, a Turk winning an international prize (like a Turkish team
winning a football game abroad) would be cause for jubilation and
nationalistic frenzy. In this case, however, the right didn’t know
what to do! On the extreme right, the response was "Pamuk is a traitor,
he sold his country, and this is his reward".

The more common response, expressed in one particular newspaper
headline, was "I don’t know whether to be glad or sad".

Even those who praised Pamuk and agreed that he deserved the prize
for his novels couldn’t stop themselves from saying that he may not
have been given it if he hadn’t spoken out about the Armenians. Prime
Minister Erdogan telephoned Pamuk to congratulate him, but President
Sezer pointedly did not do so.

But most amusing of all was the sight of politicians and journalists
who have never said a word about any of the many anti-democratic
laws in Turkey rage about the anti-democratic vote in the French
parliament. Having never worried about Law 301 here, they suddenly
became very concerned about the democratic rights of any French
citizen who wishes to say that there was no Armenian holocaust.

In ten years time nobody will remember any of these people. Unlike
Pamuk, who has already taken his place in world literary history.

.php?article_id=9979

GEORGIA: Will mob halt Assyrian Catholic centre?

By Felix Corley, Forum 18 News Service <;

Forum 18, Norway
Oct 19 2006

Assyrian Catholics in Georgia’s capital Tbilisi fear more mob
attacks, after a religious and cultural centre was attacked by a mob,
Forum 18 News Service has learnt. "The Orthodox Church and
fundamentalists don’t want a Catholic presence," Fr Benny Yadgar told
Forum 18. "If we start to use the centre for worship these fanatics
could attack our people with knives and wooden posts. Our people have
a right to be protected." Fr Yadgar insists that the problems do not
come from the authorities, but a current signature campaign could
lead to pressure on the authorities. Police have refused to comment
to Forum 18 on the attacks. The Georgian Orthodox Church and the
Parliamentary Human Rights Committee – unlike human rights activists,
religious minorities and the Human Rights Ombudsperson – have refused
to defend the Assyrian Catholics. "I called on Patriarch Ilya to
defend our church, but he says it is not his business," Fr Yadgar
stated.

One month after a hostile mob invaded and damaged a new religious and
cultural centre Tbilisi’s Assyrian Catholics are building in the
Georgian capital, the community lives in fear of attack. "The
Orthodox Church and fundamentalists don’t want a Catholic presence in
Georgia," the community’s priest Fr Benny Yadgar told Forum 18 News
Service from Tbilisi [T’bilisi] on 18 October. "I fear that if we
start to use the centre for worship these fanatics could attack our
people with knives and wooden posts. Our people have a right to be
protected."

Giorgi Khutsishvili, head of the Tbilisi-based International Center
of Conflict Negotiations, said the "disturbing" attack was instigated
by fundamentalist Orthodox determined to prevent a Catholic church
being built. "This is a clear issue: the Assyrian community has the
right to build its centre," he told Forum 18 on 18 October. "So what
if it is going to be used for worship?" His centre has hosted a
meeting of the multi-faith Religions Council to discuss the issue.

Fr Yadgar insists that the problems do not come from the authorities.

"The government says: ‘Go ahead, don’t worry!’" he told Forum 18. He
added that the police had offered to send officers to protect the
building, as long as the Assyrians paid for it, an offer the
community had turned down. "We don’t want the police to have to stand
at the doors of our place of worship." But he fears that a signature
campaign now underway in the local district could lead to further
pressure on the authorities. "They go around saying they need 200,000
signatures to block us."

Fr Yadgar said the office of the Human Rights Ombudsperson has been
sympathetic and has scheduled a 27 October meeting to discuss their
concerns to which he and the Catholic bishop, Giuseppe Pasotto, have
been invited.

Forum 18 was unable to reach Georgi Siradze, police chief for
Vake-Saburtalo district where the Assyrian Catholic centre is based,
to find out how the rights of the community will be protected.

Reached on 19 October, the duty officer said the police were not
allowed to give information to journalists and refused to give
Siradze’s number.

Fr Yadgar said the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate has failed to speak
out against the threats. "I called on Patriarch Ilya to defend our
church, but he says it is not his business."

Despite the fact that the attack was widely reported in the media and
was the subject of a debate on Rustavi-2 television, Zurab
Tskhovrebadze, spokesperson for the Orthodox Patriarchate, told Forum
18 on 19 October he had never heard anything about any problems over
the Assyrian Catholic centre. "If it was true, of course it would be
unacceptable for us Orthodox to use force, whether for political or
religious ends."

The Orthodox Patriarchate retains a powerful hold over society and
the government and has successfully prevented almost all minority
faiths from openly building new places of worship in recent years
(see forthcoming F18News article). Some Georgian Orthodox priests
have a record of inciting mob violence against religious minorities
(see eg. F18News 25 May 2005
=569). Intolerance of
religious minorities is widespread within Georgian society, despite
some legal improvements (see F18News 24 May 2005
=568).

Georgia’s politicians have shown little interest in the Assyrian
Catholics’ concerns. "This was not an attack – it was merely
misinterpretation of the feelings of people," Lali Papiashvili,
deputy head of the Parliamentary Human Rights Committee, told Forum
18 from Tbilisi on 19 October. "People were falsely informed by some
kinds of activists that the building may cause religious problems for
the local population." She denied that anyone would object to the
building of a non-Orthodox place of worship. "I don’t have any
information that the Assyrian population is afraid."

Papiashvili’s colleague, Elene Tevdoradze, who chairs the
Parliamentary Human Rights Committee, was equally unconcerned. "I
haven’t been to the Assyrian centre, but I’ve received no
complaints," she told Forum 18 from Tbilisi on 18 October.

Human rights activists and other religious minorities, however, have
defended the embattled Assyrian Catholic community. "The city
authorities were wrong to take into account Orthodox objections to
the Assyrian centre," Bishop Malkhaz Songulashvili, head of Georgia’s
Baptist Church, told Forum 18 on 4 October. Support for the Assyrians
has also come from the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Lutherans,
Fr Yadgar told Forum 18.

Fr Yadgar said the new centre was invaded by a mob of about 60 people
on 18 September, three or four days after anonymous, undated leaflets
started to circulate in the district, stirring people up against the
Catholics and urging them to come to the centre. "The letter alleged
that Catholics are aggressive proselytisers who killed our monks in
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It also alleged they marry
cats and dogs and give the Eucharist to animals."

Fr Yadgar was away at the time of the mob invasion, but Giuni Gulua
was one of two community members who tried to explain to television
journalists and to the mob why the community was building the centre.

"Part of the mob obviously had no clue as to why they were there, but
the other part was very aggressively hostile, saying we had no right
to build a Catholic church," she told Forum 18 on 19 October. "We
explained that we had all the legal documents we needed to build the
church, but many of them weren’t prepared to listen to us. We then
left to avoid any possibility of violent confrontation." She said
some of the mob then went down to the cellar and damaged the interior
walls.

Fr Yadgar said the cultural centre deliberately combines classrooms
and meeting rooms with a sanctuary for worship. "Without
Christianity, we Assyrians have no culture, so it is natural the two
go together," he told Forum 18. "But in any case, we are not
recognised in law as a religious organisation and do not have the
right to build a church." After initial difficulties (see F18News 14
November 2003 ) , he
eventually managed to get all the approvals they needed from the city
authorities. Construction work began in 2004, he added, but finding
the necessary money has delayed building. "Because of the situation
in Iraq we have had no support from there."

Although all the external work is now complete, Fr Yadgar said
completing the interior could take another year, especially in the
wake of the damage and any potential attack. (END)

For the comments of Georgian religious leaders and human rights
activists on how the legacy of religious violence should be overcome,
see

For more background see Forum 18’s Georgia religious freedom survey
at

A printer-friendly map of Georgia is available at
las/index.html?Parent=asia&Rootmap=georgi

October 20, 2006

PRESS RELEASE

Western Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America
H.E. Archbishop Moushegh Mardirossian, Prelate
6252 Honolulu Avenue
La Crescenta, CA 91214
Tel: (818) 248-7737
Fax: (818) 248-7745
E-mail: [email protected]
Website:

DURING A MEETING WITH THE ARMENIAN ECCLESIASTICAL BROTHERHOOD
SPIRITUALITY MUST RADIATE THROUGH OUR LIVES AND OUR MISSION

On the morning of Thursday, October 19, H.E. Archbishop Moushegh
Mardirossian, Prelate, welcomed executives of the Armenian
Ecclesiastical Brotherhood to the temporary Prelacy offices in Encino.
Also participating in the meeting was Christian Education Department
Co-Director Very Rev. Fr. Barthev Gulumian, who is the representative
of the Prelate at the Ecclesiastical Brotherhood.

During the meeting, the Brotherhood executives briefed the Prelate
on their current and future activities. The Prelate commended their
devotion to the Armenian Apostolic Church, as well as their role
in the spiritual nourishment of Armenian youth, and subsequently
reaffirmed the Prelacy’s support to the Ecclesiastical Brotherhood.

The Prelacy has a history of collaboration with the Brotherhood
including, but not limited to, Prelacy clergy members visiting the
center of the Brotherhood to lecture to the faithful.

In keeping with the collaborative tradition, the members requested that
the Thanksgiving event they are planning for November 20 be held under
the auspices of the Prelate. Furthermore, on the evening of Saturday,
October 21st, Very Rev. Fr. Barthev Gulumian will be lecturing to the
youth at the Brotherhood’s center on the Armenian Church and Halloween.

The Turkish UNIFIL Troops Set off for Lebanon

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Oct 19 2006

Thursday , 19 October 2006

A. Noyan Ozkaya, JTW (Ankara) – Some part of the Turkish military unit
to participate in the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon (UNIFIL II)
set off on Thursday from Mersin Port. 95 soldiers of the 261-strong
engineering company left the Mersin Port after a sending-off
ceremony. The rest of the land unit will be sent on Friday by air
from Ankara to Beirut, and non-military vehicles will be sent overland
through Syria. The Turkish military unit is commanded by a major and
is composed of 261 personnel, 24 of which are civil engineers and 63
engineering vehicles, including non-military ones.

The Turkish engineering unit will be located in the village of
ash-Shaatiyah, 8 km. southeast of Tyre (Sour), and is expected to
help rebuild damaged bridges and roads. The initial location of the
Turkish troops was Baqbuq, a village in the south of Tyre, but it
was changed two days ago to ash-Shaatiyah because of the risk posed
by undiscovered landmines beneath the would-be headquarters of the
Turkish contingents in Baqbuq.

Besides the land units, a frigate from the Turkish Naval Forces
was sent to Lebanon on October 6. The frigate, TCG Gaziantep, began
patrolling off the Lebanese coast on October 15. The frigate includes
234 military staff and is commanded by a lieutenant colonel.

Turkish troops are the first Muslim peacekeepers to arrive in Lebanon
for the expanded UN force.

The Lebanese political leaders, including Hizbullah, have given their
consent for the participation of the Turkish troops in the peacekeeping
force. Turkish participation in the UNIFIL II is opposed only by
the Armenian community, with an estimated population of 150.000, or
nearly 4% of the Lebanese population. On October 13, an estimated 5.000
Armenians in Lebanon protested Turkey’s participation in the UN force.

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 19 2006

If our Ambassador to Paris had been Armenian…

ALI H. ASLAN
10.19.2006 Thursday – ISTANBUL 20:41

The first Turkish novel, "Akabi Story" was written by Armenian Vartan
Pasha in the middle of the 19th century and printed in the Armenian
alphabet. What an interesting manifestation of fate is that the first
Nobel Prize for Turkish literature has an Armenian element as well.

Our successful novelist Orhan Pamuk, who was subjected to national
anger after referring to events experienced by Anatolian Armenians
during World War I in a way different than the ‘official history’
rhetoric, received this prestigious award.

Carefully followed by the world’s elite, the Nobel Prize’s presentation
to a Turk should normally be expected to make a positive impact
on Turkey’s image. However, the bestowal of the prize on an author
whose name has been identified with the Armenian question due to some
outdated legal practices, such as Article 301, that are contrary to
freedom of expression will most likely create some new hurdles for
Turkish diplomacy.

There are many who tie the Nobel committee’s choice to political
reasons. We are also angry with the latest efforts of the French
parliament to outlaw views that deny the so-called Armenian
genocide with complete disregard to freedom of expression. However,
it is obvious that we have not been able to overcome the vengeful
Armenians. They increasingly gather the world intelligentsia behind
them and deal defeat after defeat to Turkey. Wherever we go in the
international community, an "Armenian genocide" ghost appears in front
of us. The attacks in the U.S. Congress have been warded off so far,
but actually the illness long ago infected that place as well.

It comes out of incubation during periods whenever the immune system
is weakened in Turkish-American relations. Sooner or later it will
eventually reach its goal.

As a grandchild of the Ottomans, who treated minorities in a much
more civilized way than its contemporaries did, I get upset when
controversial aspects of our history are highlighted in the West. On
the other hand, I believe that our neglect has also played a big role
in events coming to this point, and I bemoan this.

If only we had been able to take reasonable precautions against
the exploitation of some of our non-Muslim citizens by imperialists
during the final period of the Ottomans. If only we had been able to
realize our passage to the nation state model by better protecting our
multi-cultural, multi-religious and multi-ethnical structure. If only
we had kept Turkey’s ties alive through Armenian and Greek Ottoman
Diasporas especially, which formed after the disintegration of the
empire, instead of alienating them this much. If only we had kept the
door open to a return to their motherland and over time forgive even
those who tormented their Muslim brothers because they were fooled by
the land promises of the imperialists. Had we done so, perhaps many
hurdles that are now consuming Turkey’s energy and blocking its path
might have been buried before they were even born.

The Ottomans appointed our Armenian citizens as ambassadors to Belgium,
Italy and England. Here is what I think: If our current ambassador in
Paris was also an Armenian, could the French parliament insult us this
easily? During the 19th century in the Ottoman state, Armenian citizens
were appointed to the following upper-echelon posts: 29 generals,
22 ministers, 33 members of parliament, seven ambassadors, 11 consul
generals-consuls and 41 high-level bureaucrats. If as modern Turkey,
we had done even a small portion of this, who would have adopted the
Armenian genocide thesis?

But alas, Armenians and Greeks, whose century-old criminal records
we haven’t yet erased, even the Jews, whose positive image generally
persisted during the Republic period, still have difficulty today
in openly taking jobs in the Turkish bureaucracy. Recently an ugly
campaign was carried out against Chief of Staff General Yasar Buyukanit
with the claim that he is Jewish. I don’t know if the claim is true
or not. But assuming it is, why should the religious preferences and
ethnic roots of our statesmen be a problem, as long as they remain
loyal to this country, flag and nation?

Actually, it would be a great contribution to both our nation’s
internal harmony and international status if non-Muslim and non-Turkish
elements were comfortable enough to put forth their real cultural
identities in every aspect of life, including bureaucracy.

Those who openly say "I’m Jew, I’m Armenian, I’m Greek, I’m Alevi,
I’m Kurdish, or I’m a religious Sunni" can face serious obstacles,
especially in bureaucratic careers. Hence, most of them hide their
identity by survival instincts and trip up those they see as a
threat. At the root of the political fights that shows our country
as unstable to the world is this type of continuous quarreling. The
Republic of Turkey should be rescued from being a kind of "republic
of pretense" where different elements of the nation hesitate to put
forth their original identities. Instead of trying to deter and punish
those who would like to express themselves honestly, our legal system
should provide them more assurance.

Our ethnic and religious differences can be turned from being our
weak spot, particularly in foreign policy, into being an advantage.

For example, we’re sending troops to Lebanon. Why not put at the
top of our troops a commander who can, with no hesitation, express
his Arab roots and can speak Arabic? After all, the United States
is trying to utilize its ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity
in its global policies. In Iraq, their ambassador (Zalmay Khalilzad)
and number-one commander (General John Abizaid) are of Arab descent.

Turkey is a country which is a home for all cultural colors in the
region. If we know how to respect, protect and utilize our human
heritage, wouldn’t we have social and regional peace more easily?

Wouldn’t we reach our goal of contemporary civilization and EU
membership faster? Wouldn’t we be a more modern and stronger country?

Wouldn’t our enemies lose their biggest trump cards?

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 19 2006

Turks to File over 6,000 ‘Genocide’ Lawsuits
By Adem Yilmaz, Anadolu News Agency (aa), Cihan News Agency,

Gaziantep
Thursday, October 19, 2006
zaman.com

Sevret Saltan, president of the Turkish National Power Veterans
Association said they would open lawsuits for each of the 6,317 Turks
martyred by the French and Armenians while defending their hometown
of Antep, a southeastern Turkish city which was occupied by France
during World War I.

Saltan visited current Gaziantep Mayor Asim Guzelbey.

During their visit, Saltan announced their intention to pursue a
legal course of action, adding, "Our aim is to prove that Armenians,
in cooperation with the French forces, perpetrated genocide in
Gaziantep."

Saltan remarked that they would not remain silent when faced with the
notorious French bill and said that they were ready to provide all
the documents supporting the atrocities perpetrated against innocent
civilians during the occupation of Gaziantep by France.

Saltan said that they were going to open compensation lawsuits on
behalf of the 6,317 massacred people and defend the violated rights
of their ancestors in the international arena.

Saltan further noted that they spoke to Aziz Canatar, president of
the Gaziantep Bar Association, and asked the association for
assistance.

"The Gaziantep Bar Association is going to help us and will conduct
the required research. We will call those accusing us of genocide to
account for what they did in Gaziantep."

Emphasizing the documents in their possession concerning the mass
killings of Turks by French forces, Saltan remarked "If we win the
lawsuit, we will build a great monument for the martyrs of
Gaziantep."

Saltan also said they discovered that 93 women were martyred in
either their homes or in the street in addition to male victims.

Noting that 36 out of 93 women were martyred in their homes, he
stated that their intention was to gather all the documents and
information together in one place.

Gaziantep Bar President, Aziz Canatar said they would submit Servet
Saltan’s demand to the Turkish Bar Association, and confirmed that
they were willing to take action on behalf of Turkey at the European
Court of Human Rights after accumulating all the evidence and
documents available

[Comment] Turkish-Armenian reconciliation is not far away
19.10.2006 – 15:01 CET | By Bahadir Kaleagasi

EUObserver, Belgium
Oct 19 2006

EUOBSERVER / COMMENT – The European Parliament, the European
Commission, the majority of the European and French media,
intellectuals, historians and jurists have pointed out that the
recognition of an Armenian genocide is not a legal process. I agree
with that.

To impose it as a new pre-condition to Turkey’s EU membership would
be counter-productive and unjust. This is also the view of the Turkish
citizens of Armenian origin. Patriarch Mesrob II and the intellectual
leader Mr Hrant Dink are very clear on this.

As Mr Dink pointed out several times to the media, "it is immoral to
take advantage of the debate on the Armenian genocide to create new
obstacles for Turkey’s EU membership process."

The Armenians of the Ottoman Empire suffered terribly during World
War I. This was a very difficult era of human history with rising
nationalisms, falling empires and geo-strategic games over the oil
resources of the Middle East and the Caspian Sea.

I share the pain of the Armenians and understand them extremely well,
being the descendents of peoples who suffered immensly during those
years.

It is a clear disinformation to claim that Turkey is in denial towards
this human tragedy, however. Several court cases and condemnations
took place during the last years of the Ottoman Empire on this issue.

Blow to freedom of expression The Turkish parliament in a recent
resolution called for the establishment of an international and
independent committee of historians to examine the whole truth and
to find out about the responsibilities of all government officials
from all countries concerned in the loss of innocent Armenian lives
during World War I.

Probably, it is around the term of "genocide" that an intellectual
blockage occurs in the minds and positions of all parties – because
it reminds one of the Holocaust which was another horrible event,
but of another nature.

Actually, Turkish Armenians are part of the Turkish republican and
secular society. Moreover, there are more than 100,000 immigrant
workers from the Republic of Armenia in Turkey.

They usually work as baby-sitters, nurses or in other services which
require close human contact and deep mutual confidence.

There are a lot of reasons why some Armenian voices on the genocide
are wrong.

Not only could they further fan anti-Muslim feelings in France and
in Europe, they could also be a blow to freedom of expression – not
exactly the standard that EU members want to adopt while lecturing
Turkey about being ever more respectful of human rights and democratic
norms.

A dozen European countries have laws against denying the Holocaust.
Those laws are based on the threat posed by die-hard anti-Semites
who still subscribe to Hitler’s racist theories.

The Armenian question poses no such dangers in Europe. Playing politics
with it trivialises not only the Holocaust, but also the Armenian
tragedy. Turkish and Armenian peoples are culturally close to each
other and share a common past and a common geo-strategic destiny.

Reconciliation is not far away This is why I am confident that
reconciliation is not far away. This also is why any aggressive and
non-constructive attack against Turkey is harmful to this process. The
reconciliation will naturally happen within Turkey’s EU integration
process.

This can only happen in a European atmosphere of mutual respect and
understanding rather than via aggressive accusations.

Some positions and actions of certain political segments in France on
this issue serve only the interests of ultranationalists in Armenia
and anti-Europeanists in Turkey – for example the proposed law passed
by the French National Assembly on criminalising different opinions
on the Armenian victims in the Ottoman Empire.

Many prominent French historians, jurists and other intellectuals have
already expressed their concerns about this. Let me just emphasise
once more that Turkish and Armenian peoples will find their historical
reconciliation. The European integration process can contribute to
this achievement.

Initiatives to divert Turkey from the EU process or to introduce
anti-democratic laws are by definition gifts to ultranationalism and
an invitation to further conflicts.

The European integration process is a great achievement of the 20th
century. Let’s take the example of this visionary project to continue
to overcome the remaining problems of our small European continent.

The same vision, rationalism and wisdom is required to reach
reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey. As global citizens of the
21st century, we have the responsibility to face our common destiny
and common future peacefully, respectfully, rationally and without
prejudice to each other’s dignity.

Bahadir Kaleagasi is the representative to the EU of TUSIAD – Turkish
Industrialists’ & Business Association. The article represents his
personal view.

Mail & Guardian Online, South Africa
Oct 19 2006

Turkey’s Parliament raps France’s ‘genocide’ Bill

Ankara, Turkey
19 October 2006 02:14

Turkey’s Parliament backed on Tuesday a declaration condemning the
French National Assembly’s approval of a draft Bill that would make
it a crime to deny Armenians suffered genocide by Ottoman Turks in
1915.

But the government stopped short of taking measures against French
interests and companies, aware this could harm Turkey’s economy more
than France’s.

Diplomats say the genocide Bill, approved by the lower house last
Thursday, is unlikely to become law due to resistance from the upper
chamber, the Senate and President Jacques Chirac.

Turkish lawmakers said much damage had already been done.

"Naturally, approval of the draft by the French Parliament will
inflict irreparable damage on political, economic and military
relations between Turkey and France," said the declaration which had
the backing of all political parties.

It said Armenia would pay a "heavy price" for using lobbies in France
and in other countries against Turkey, although it did not say what
that might entail.

Turkey has no diplomatic relations with Armenia due to the tiny
ex-Soviet republic’s occupation of territory belonging to Ankara’s
Turkic-speaking ally Azerbaijan.

France is home to Europe’s largest Armenian diaspora.

Ankara denies Armenians’ claims they suffered a systematic genocide
in Turkey during World War I, saying both Christian Armenians and
Muslim Turks died in large numbers in a partisan conflict that
accompanied the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.

In Tuesday’s debate in the Turkish Parliament, Foreign Minister
Abdullah Gul said the "baseless" Armenian claims were nothing more
than political propaganda.

"We hope this bill stops halfway and that the French come to their
senses," Gul said.

Gul said the French Bill violated the principle of free speech, a key
requirement of the European Union, which Turkey hopes to join. He
said Ankara would fight the Bill in international courts if it ever
became law in France. – Reuters

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Finnish Foreign Minister Calls Armenia Bill ‘Foolish’
By Foreign News Desk

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 19 2006

Thursday, October 19, 2006
zaman.com

Finland’s foreign minister Erkki Tuomioja criticized France harshly
for their bill criminalizing the denial of an Armenian genocide and
said that the French parliament "has made a bad mistake."

Finland currently holds the rotating EU presidency.

His comments were published on a foreign ministry website.

"Parliaments shouldn’t make laws regarding historical facts," he said.

"Lawmakers should never intervene in such self-evident and
self-questioning political arguments and the atmosphere of debate
that emerges in the aftermath through legislating them. However,
France unfortunately did not behave according to this principle with
the Armenian genocide bill that passed the lower house. I think France
has made a big mistake and it should quit this mistake immediately."

He also remarked, "I personally think that ‘genocide’ is the right
term to describe what was experienced at that time and I hope Turkey
will become ready to accept this reality."

Bill Likely to Weaken EU’s Power

Finland’s foreign minister Erkki Tuomioja opined that it would not
be politically astute for parliaments and governments to legislate
historical facts.

"The EU has repeatedly demanded that Turkey abolish the notorious
Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code. Many Turks, including the Nobel
Prize winning writer Orhan Pamuk have been sued so far, using this law
that considers that the thoughts they expressed were offensive to the
Turkish state. Now conservative people in Turkey might not pay heed
to the EU’s calls and may question whether the EU has such a right."

In the meantime, two prominent French historians, Pierre Nora and
Francoise Chandernagor, repeated their criticism of the bill in
question.

Speaking on French television on France-3 in an open debate, Nora
stated "Those under the influence of Armenian voters, also the
deputies against Turkey’s EU membership process, are taking advantage
of this bill."

Chandernagor, who said that the bill had opened a Pandora ‘s Box,
stated, "There is no end to this; there are approximately 15 bills
waiting to be discussed about historical events; even about the
Crusades. Where will this lead us?"

The Association of Freedom for History, founded by Nora and
Chandernagor with a group of French academics, has harshly opposed
the bill.