Month: May 2008

FREE SPEECH REFORM SAID APPROVED BY TURK PARLIAMENT

ChristianToday, UK
April 30 2008

Turkey’s parliament approved a long-awaited revision of a law
criticised by the European Union for limiting free speech in the
candidate country, but writers and activists say the reform does not
go far enough.

Turkey’s parliament approved a long-awaited revision of a law
criticised by the European Union for limiting free speech in the
candidate country, but writers and activists say the reform does not
go far enough.

State news agency Anatolian said the reform to article 301 of the
penal code was approved early on Wednesday with 250 votes for and 65
against amid fierce criticism from the nationalist opposition.

The article has been used to prosecute hundreds of writers, including
Nobel Literature Laureate Orhan Pamuk, for "insulting Turkishness".

After the reform, it will be a crime to insult the Turkish nation,
rather than Turkishness, and the justice minister’s permission will
be required to open a case. The maximum sentence will be cut to two
years from three.

But writers and publishers fear they will continue to face frequent
trials as they argue that the changes are minor while other laws
restricting freedom of expression remain intact.

Brussels had also given a lukewarm response to the reform. On a
recent trip to Turkey, European Commission President Jose Manuel
Barroso said it was a step in the right direction.

The EU has said easing restrictions on free speech is a test of
Turkey’s commitment to political reform as Ankara looks to advance
slow-moving membership talks which began in 2005.

Defending the reform against criticism from the opposition, Justice
Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin said there would still be restrictions on
insulting Turkey.

"With this change, it is not a question of letting people insult
Turkishness freely," he told parliament.

NATIONALIST OPPOSITION

The reform has been controversial in Turkey, where nationalism has
grown in recent years along with disillusionment with the EU. The
bill, passed after eight hours of mostly late-night debate, had been
delayed several times amid stiff opposition from nationalists.

Armenian-Turkish editor Hrant Dink, who was shot dead by an
ultra-nationalist youth last year, had been convicted under article
301.

Turkey’s far-right Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) accused the
government of betraying the country’s identity, and instead pandering
to EU demands that it reform laws prohibiting Turks from insulting
their nation.

MHP leader Devlet Bahceli told a meeting of his party ahead of the
vote the reform would be a "historical mistake".

"Slandering Turkey’s honourable history, insulting the Turkish nation
and the values of Turkishness has become a habit with the AK Party’s
political thinking, which lacks a sense of identity," he said.

The main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) also opposed the
reform. The pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP), whose members
often end up in court for expressing views on the Kurdish issue,
wanted to abolish the article.

Article 301 has notably been used against writers such as Pamuk
for comments on the massacres of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in
1915-16. Turkey denies claims by Armenians and many Western historians
that the killings constituted genocide.

TURKEY SOFTENS LAW RESTRICTING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, CRITICS SAY "NOT ENOUGH"

The New Anatolian, Turkey
April 30 2008

The Turkish parliament amended a controversial law late Tuesday
and softened an article in the penal code which restricts freedom
of expression.

The parliament worked late into the night to legislate the changes
in the controversial article 301 of the penal code.

Calls for reform to the law have grown since the 2007 murder of Hrant
Dink, a Turkish journalist of Armenian descent who had been taken to
court for allegedly insulting "Turkishness."

The EU has criticized Article 301 saying it restricts freedom of
speech.

Article 301 of the penal code has been used to prosecute Nobel Prize
winner Orhan Pamuk and other intellectuals.

Since 2003, hundreds of people have been tried under the controversial
law.

However, critics argue the amendments do not go far enough. Insulting
the Turkish nation will still be a crime, punishable by two years
in jail.

Parliament voted 250-65 in favor of a government-backed proposal.

Under the reformed law:

It will be a crime to insult the Turkish nation, rather than
Turkishness.

The justice minister will be required to approve the request of a
prosecutor to open each case.

The maximum sentence will be two years in jail, rather than
three. Accoridng to the new regulations a jail sentence of up to two
years can be suspended by the judge. Thus some of the victims of the
law can also escape prison with suspended sentences.

The EU has long called for changes to Article 301, arguing that the
law places severe restrictions on free speech in Turkey. The issue
has threatened to stall Turkey’s EU accession talks.

Critics, of the amendments, however, say there are several other
articles in the penal code which the conservative hardline nationalist
prosecutors could exploit to prosecute writers and journalists who
want to express their views as many articles are too flexible and
open to interpretation.

"WORKING GROUP WILL HARDLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM"

A1+
[04:12 pm] 30 April, 2008

On April 17 the Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE) passed a
resolution on Armenia according to which Armenia’s leaderships are to
release those detained on political motivations, conduct an independent
investigation of the March 1 unrest, start a dialogue with the
opposition and review the amendments to the Law on conducting meetings,
assemblies, demonstrations and rallies. Under Serzh Sarkissian’s decree
a working group has been set up to investigate the March 1 events.

At today’s news conference Leader of the "Zharangutiun" (Heritage)
Party Raffi Hovannissian Raffi Hovannissian wished the commission
success hoping they will realize the seriousness of their mission.

In reply to reporters’ question whether the commission will help the
country return to the path for democracy, Raffi Hovannissian said,

"I think they are not supposed to solve problems but to present
to the head of state a package of proposals which stem from the
PACE resolution. I cannot express an opinion beforehand. I said
there is some controversy because the resolution also targets at
participants. Therefore, I do not think that the solution will be
reached through this working group.

With regard to RoA Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian’s ad hoc report
on the March 1 events, Raffi Hovannissian says the report is very
important for Armenia from the analytical and informational point
of view. Besides, the report meets international standards. The
"Zharangutiun" leader thinks the Ombudsman should be involved in the
independent experts’ panel on the March 1 unrest.

CONJECTURAL NOT STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT: TURKISH U-TURN POLICY
By Azad Aslan

Kurdish Globe, Iraq
=4F7D894FE44EAD80319290700E0E4024
April 30 2008

Vehicles of Turkish army are moving near the border with Iraq. PRESS
PHOTO

Without radical democratic reforms and a genuine U-turn policy in
its Kurdish national question, Turkey will remain a serious threat
for the future of south Kurdistan.

While Turkish air force renewed their air attacks against PKK bases in
Iraqi Kurdistan, the top political and military body of the Turkish
establishment, the National Security Council (MGK), gave the green
light for talks with Iraqi Kurds in its last regular monthly meeting
on April 24. For several years, Turkey has refused dialogue with the
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and has yet to recognize the KRG
as a legal political establishment in Iraq.

MGK released a statement, stating: "Activities in the legislative
field, which constitutes the basis of national consensus in Iraq,
and developments toward restoration of Iraq’s standing in the region
have been assessed; it has been considered that it will be beneficial
to continue consultations with all Iraqi groups and movements."

MGK’s decision is crucial to establish relations between KRG and the
Turkish government, which is run by the AKP (Justice and Development
Party). It is commonly argued that the AKP tends to make contact
with the KRG while the army has refused so far to have any official
relations between Turkey and the KRG. MGK’s decision in that sense
may be seen a U-turn in official Turkish policy toward the KRG. It
is now possible for the AKP to invite KRG Prime Minister Nechirvan
Barzani to Turkey for bilateral talks.

This U-turn in Turkish policy vis-a-vis the KRG should not be
seen a radical political shift within the Turkish establishment
toward the Kurdish national question in general and Iraqi Kurdistan
in particular. It reflects the Turkish adjustment to conjectural
developments both at home and in the region at large. In other words,
such a seemingly positive political attitude of Turkey is temporary
and prone to be altered as possible new political conditions may arise.

Political formation of the Turkish regime since 1923 has been
anti-democratic and totalitarian despite the fact that since the second
half of the 20th century Turkey moved to a multi-party system. At the
root of anti-democratic political formation of the Turkish regime lies
the construction of an artificial Turkish nation upon the ruins of a
multi-ethnic and multi-religious Ottoman Empire. The founders of the
Turkish Republic, Kemalists, were the continuation of the Committee
of Union and Progress (CUP). It would not be wrong to argue that
Kemalists’ post-war vision of Turkish nationalism was clearly rooted
in the ideas and practices of the CUP. The main objective of CUP,
particularly from 1913 when the Ottoman Empire lost 1/3 of its land,
was to secure the Ottoman state and make it 99% Muslim. CUP seized the
opportunity of World War I and eliminated Armenians during the 1915
genocide campaign. The Armenians were the only sizeable non-Muslim
elements remaining within the Ottoman Empire.

With the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and its unavoidable
disintegration, the remaining CUP elements launched defense
movements in Anatolia, and this movement gradually evolved toward
what was called Kemalism. The Kemalist movement, upon the final and
decisive victory over the Greek army, and over Armenian and Kurdish
nationalism, during 1920-22 embarked upon a new Turkish state that
was, as A. Roshwald argued, "built on a legacy of genocide and ethnic
cleansing and propagated by a dictatorial regime with little patience
for the niceties of pluralistic policies." The main tenet of Kemalism
was and still is to make Turkey 99% Turk. Nothing clarifies the
Kemalist notion better than the slogan of one of the oldest daily
Turkish newspapers, Hurriyet, which states "Turkey belongs to the
Turks." Decades of forceful assimilation of Kurds in Turkey had this
objective to evaporate all the non-Turkish ethnic communities within
the Turkish identity.

The intention to repeat such well-known historical facts here is to
explain that formation of Turkish political, economic, and cultural
characteristics based on such anti-democratic principles, and that
it would not be an easy task to reform and democratize the whole
Turkish establishment that established, grew, and evolved throughout
the 20th century with a mentality of exclusive Turkish identity. To
put it another way, to expect Turkish political establishment to
democratize itself on the issue of Kurdish national identity would
be illusionary and misleading.

The current political chaos in Turkey, mainly between the Kemalists
and the AKP, is on the one hand resulting due to struggle of interests
between industrial, financial, and newly growing Anatolian capitalist
groups, and on the other hand resulting due to the resistance of
Kemalist elite (the military/bureaucratic class) to preserve its
political, social, and economic privileges within the Turkish political
and economic system. The Kurdish national question in Turkey is used
and exploited as an object in this struggle of interests.

Kurdish political actors must realize that the ongoing political chaos
in Turkey would not evolve toward a democratic regime. Formation
of exclusive Turkish political identity and an almost century-long
stagnant Kemalist ideology are the two main obstacles in the way
toward radical reforms to democratize Turkey.

Turkey was content with its Kemalist state policy throughout the 20th
century as established status quo in the world between so-called
Socialist and Capitalist blocks had not allowed any serious border
change in the Middle East. However, the fall of the Soviet Union
and collapse of status quo provided new political alterations in
the region. Formation of the KRG as a new political body exactly
had taken place in that period. Existence of the KRG as the only
internationally recognized legal Kurdish political entity represents
a real danger to Turkey as its mere existence destroys ideological
foundation of Kemalist ideology on the issue of the Kurds. "Mountain
Turks," as Turkey categorized the Kurds for so many decades, can no
longer be sustained, solely due to now there are Kurds who exercises
a Parliament, a government, and army of its own. Furthermore, these
Kurdish institutions are recognized by a sovereign state constitution
and by the UN. Since 1991, Turkey has been in deep trouble to
reformulate its stagnant Kurdish policy, and particularly Kemalist
elite find it almost impossible to sustain its anti-Kurdish rhetoric;
even they no longer believe in it.

Here lies the crux of the matter, to explain the ways in which Turkey
may be transformed either toward a democratic country in peace
with its multi-ethnic identities or toward a further militarist,
totalitarian, and dictatorial regime. Despite the myopic official
discourse on the Kurdish question and some constitutional reforms
imposed by the EU, there lacks a tangible indication to suggest that
Turkey is on the course toward a democratic country. There is still
strong resistance by both the Kemalist elite and the AKP and others to
recognize political-national identity of the Kurds. Nothing symbolizes
this more clearly than Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
harsh reactions against Sezgin Tanrikulu, head of the Lawyer Union
of Diyarbakir, who demanded right to education in native Kurdish
language in those areas where the Kurds constitute a majority.

With this political background of Turkey, it is difficult to
optimistically interpret MGK’s decision to allow relations with
the KRG. In its statement, as mentioned above, MGK refrains to use
the acronym KRG, instead using "all Iraqi groups." Neither is there
any sign to observe of Turkish officials using the term "Kurdistan
Region," but rather referred to the region as "northern Iraq." This
suggests the insistence of Turkish official discourse to reject the
terms of Kurdistan.

The burning question to ask then is why Turkey indirectly moves to
establish relations with the KRG? The answer is not straightforward and
must be analyzed within the framework of interconnected issues. Turkey
realized that it would not be an accomplished short-term policy
to eliminate or diminish the KRG’s position within Iraq. Turkey,
particularly since the fall of Saddam, tried very hard to become
involved in Iraqi affairs and redirect it toward a unitary state
system rather than a federal political system. Post-Saddam Iraq’s
unitary state system was indeed one of the conditions of Turkey in
its negotiations with U.S. pre-war period to open its borders to
U.S. soldiers in order for the U.S. to have a northern front. Using
the PKK threat as pretext, Turkey militarily threatened and finally
attempted to occupy Iraqi Kurdistan but failed in its objective. This
realization forced Turkey to make adjustments in its current policy
toward Kurdistan Region.

To exploit energy sources and have its share in the petroleum and
natural gas sector in Iraqi Kurdistan, Turkey realized the necessity
of having some kind of official relations with the KRG. Prime Minister
Barzani’s recent successful visit to Iraq to resolve outstanding issues
between Baghdad and Erbil convinced Turkey that the KRG position in
Baghdad is getting stronger than otherwise believed as weakening. Iraqi
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s government crackdown on al-Sadr, who
shares the Baathist mentality of a unitary Iraqi state, indicates for
the first time ever the seriousness of the Iraqi central government
to implement the Iraqi Constitution, which includes federalism.

Iraqi Kurds’ strong resistance against the latest Turkish military land
incursion into south Kurdistan convinced the Turkish establishment that
further conflict with the KRG will intensify the link between the Kurds
on both sides of the border. In other words, with its reactionary and
militarist policy, Turkey obliquely consolidates Kurdish nationalism
both in south and north Kurdistan. Despite the official discourse of
KRG and Kurdish leaders, it can easily be observed that southern Kurds
are more sympathetic toward their brethren in north Kurdistan. The
danger for Turkey is that further consolidation of solidarity and
unity between southern and northern Kurds may in mid-term open the
possibility of consolidated and unified Kurdish nationalism. By
semi-recognition of the KRG as the "northern Iraqi administration,"
Turkey hopes on the one hand to foil southern Kurds’ closeness toward
the Kurds in the north and on the other hand to have a free hand to
deal with its own Kurds.

Establishing relations between Turkey and the KRG is also
a U.S. policy, which needs the alliance of both the KRG and
Turkey in its policy in Turkey. Mainstream Turkish commentators
stressed that Turkey is under pressure by the U.S. to recognize
the KRG. Such semi-recognition of the KRG in that sense would ease
Turkish-U.S. relations, which are under strain mainly due to Turkish
policy toward Iraqi Kurds.

Whatever reason(s) push Turkey to make semi-official relations with
the KRG, it would be imperative for the KRG not to jump in and hastily
make official relations with Turkey and capitalize on it. The KRG
must have well-thought and worked-out plans that define parameters
of any official or non-official relations with Turkey. Any official
relations with Turkey without doubt would require some compromises
on the KRG’s part. It is essential for the KRG to have its red lines
on some critical issues that should send strong signals to Ankara and
other capitals that the KRG is not open for negotiations or prepared
to bargain on these red lines issues.

Here are some suggestions to draw parameters of KRG’s relation
with Turkey. Under any context, the KRG should not bargain on the
territory of Kurdistan as a whole. This requires the KRG to continue
its insistence on Kirkuk and other disputed areas of south Kurdistan.

The KRG should refrain itself under any condition from proposing
officially any political solution to the Kurdish national question in
Turkey. In other words, the KRG should not be a partner in dealing with
the Kurdish question in Turkey. The solution to the Kurdish national
question in Turkey primarily depends on the Kurds in the north, and
what kind of political solution that is aspired to ultimately is up
to the Kurds in Turkey.

The question of the PKK presence in Iraqi Kurdistan is a serious
issue and without doubt Turkey would ask the KRG to denounce the
PKK as a terrorist organization and uproot them in territory under
the jurisdiction of the KRG. This issue must be tackled by Kurdistan
Parliament and should not be a topic of negotiation between Turkey
and the KRG.

Iraqi Kurdish leaders should realize that in their relations with
Turkey, the KRG has the upper hand. The KRG has been recognized
by a number of international bodies, and more than 10 embassy
and consulates opened in Erbil including France, Britain, U.S.,
Iran, and Russia. Relations with Baghdad are better now than ever
before. Iran’s attitude toward the KRG is more positive than Turkey. In
that sense, the KRG does not really need an exit route via Turkey
to the world. Turkey, on the other hand, is in serious trouble with
internal crises and the Kurdish national question of Turkey has never
been so internationalized. The current Turkish policy toward the Kurds
has never been under scrutiny by international powers. Under these
circumstances, the KRG can utilize this Turkish move but should not
have any illusion of its outcome.

Without radical democratic reforms and a genuine U-turn policy in
its Kurdish national question, Turkey will remain a serious threat
for the future of south Kurdistan. There are no solid indicators to
expect strong bilateral relations to be developed between the KRG and
Turkey. Rather than emphasizing and wasting energy on establishing
relations with such a difficult "neighbor," the KRG must spend its
energy and resources on further democratization of its institutions,
the betterment of livelihood of its population, and it must invest in
a healthy development of the national identity of the Kurdish nation.

ARMENIAN PM WELCOMES TURKISH DIALOGUE REQUEST

Turkish Press
April 30 2008

YEREVAN – Armenia is ready to start dialogue with Turkey on improving
relations if Ankara does not set preconditions to talks, Armenia’s
new prime minister said Sunday.

The two neighbors have no diplomatic links after Ankara severed ties
in protest against Armenian occupation of the Nagorno-Karabakh region,
over which Armenia fought Turkey’s ally Azerbaijan in a war in the
early 1990s.

"I confirm the readiness of the government of Armenia to engage in
constructive dialogue and establish relations without preconditions,"
the press office of the Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarksyan said
he wrote in a letter to Turkey.

An Armenian-backed administration controls the Nagorno-Karabakh
region. Armenia and Azerbaijan are still officially at war over the
mountainous area.

Last week Turkey’s foreign minister said he had sent a letter to
Armenia calling for dialogue. Armenia is a mainly Christian state
of around three million on the edge of the Caucasus which hosts a
pipeline pumping oil to Europe from Asia.

Armenia also accuses Turkey of genocide during the violence at the
end of World War I. Turkey denies the accusations and says that both
Christian Armenians and Muslim Turks died in the fighting.

"I assure you that our efforts will be aimed at ensuring peace,
tolerance and stability in our region," Sarksyan told Turkey in
the letter.

Sarksyan took over as prime minister earlier this month. He had
previously been central bank chief.

"THIS IS MERELY CONDEMNABLE"

A1+
[06:24 pm] 30 April, 2008

Today ARF Dashnaktsutiun MP Ruzan Arakelian posed a question to the
RoA Government concerning the increase of transport fees. RoA Deputy
Premier Armen Gevorgian said the relevant bodies had been assigned
to study the matter and find solutions. "We shall inform you as soon
as we draw a final conclusion," he said.

Nonpartisan deputy Victor Dallakian wondered why Karen Demirchian’s
statue hasn’t been erected in Yerevan up to nowadays.

On December 27, 1999, President Robert Kocharian signed a decree on
erecting a statue to Karen Demirchian to perpetuate the latter’s
memory. Nine years have passed but no work has been done. I think
that it is inadmissible from humane and moral points of view.

Minister of Education Hasmik Poghossian said that no tender has been
announced in the country in this respect. Nevertheless, the state
budget of 2009 will earmark money for the monument erection.

Victor Dallakian wondered whether the Government hasn’t had time
over the past nine years to erect a statue in memory of Karen
Demirchian. This is merely condemnable.

MARCH TO TALIN

A1+
[08:47 pm] 30 April, 2008

On April 30 a march was held in Talin in defence of political figures
and azatamartiks detained on March 1. The marchers, mostly women,
crossed 7 kilometers signing patriotic songs and shouting "Free
political prisoners," "Go away, Serzh," etc. A group of women from
Yerevan joined the marchers on the way to Talin.

They were escorted by highway forces who ensured the marchers’
security.

Drivers stopped for a moment in sheer bewilderment to inquire about
the march. They either passed away in silence or raised their hands
as a sign of solidarity.

The participants of the march organized a collection of signatures
in defence of the detainees. The signatures will be forwarded to the
Human Rights Ombudsman.

They said the detainees are "national heroes and not criminals. They
should be awarded and not tried."

Afterwards, the marchers headed to Yerevan.

Reminder, six of the detainees /Hovhannes Ghazarian, Dzora and Mkrtich
Sapeyans, Haik Gevorgian, Armen Avagian, Lendrush Tonoyan/come from
Talin. Tigran Baghdasarian has taken to flight.

GOVERNEMNT PROJECT CONFIRMED

Panorama.am
20:20 30/04/2008

Today the National Assembly affirmed the Government project by 87 for
and 4 against votes. The members of Heritage party voted against the
project. Note that in a press conference held on today the head of
the party said that they disliked some parts of the project.

According to the Government project 2008-2012 it planned to register
8-10% GDP in four years. The project covers the problem of creating
jobs, decreasing poverty to 11.2% and decrease of social disruption.

TURKISH FREEDOMS REFORM CRITICISED AS INADEQUATE

EuroNews, France
April 30 2008

Turkey’s writers and political activists say an attempt by parliament
to increase freedom of speech in the country does not go far enough.

The crime of "insulting Turkishness" is being removed from the penal
code after being used to prosecute hundreds of writers. However Turkish
deputies have opted to keep the punishment of up to two years in jail
for anyone who insults Turkey as a nation. Parliament voted by five
to one in favour of the revision. Only the Nationalists were strongly
against it, accusing the government of pandering to the European Union.

The reaction on the streets was mixed: "This should have been done a
while ago in a democratic country," said one man. "I think there could
still be some abuses under the new article, given the geopolitical
position of our country" said another man.

The European Union has welcomed the change in the law as a step
forward in Turkey’s commitment to political reform.

Political Analyst, Bahedir Kaleagasi said: "Most of the cases, most
of the investigations against intellectuals, ended with no punishment
anyway, but the fact that the article existed, and the way it was
interpreted by some prosecutors, has created a certain pressure,
which is why a change was required, addressing really cases where
an institution is insulted rather than an intangible concept such
as Turkishness."

However, thousands of people have been taken to court in the past
five years, and 745 people have been convicted. There have also been
wider consequences. Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was shot
dead after being found guilty of insulting Turkishness by writing an
article about Armenian genocide.

The Nobel Literature Laureate Orhan Pamuk was also charged for the
same crime, after the law was introduced in 2005, but for him the
case was dropped.

MHP’S BAHCELI SUGGESTS TAKING 301 AMENDMENT TO REFERENDUM

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
April 30 2008

Opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader Devlet Bahceli has
suggested that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party)
take a planned amendment to Turkish Penal Code (TCK) Article 301,
which penalizes "insulting Turkishness," to a referendum.

Bahceli, speaking at his party’s parliamentary group meeting yesterday,
hit back at the governing AK Party over attempting to amend the
controversial article and called on Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan to take the planned 301 amendment to referendum.

"Esteemed Prime Minister, if you have the courage and if you trust the
will of the Turkish nation, why don’t you ask our nation whether it
wants the values of Turkishness and the honorable history of Turkey
to be insulted," asked Bahceli.

After years of foot dragging, the government finally submitted a
proposal to Parliament on April 7 to amend Article 301, which has
been used in the prosecution of several intellectuals, journalists
and activists for "insulting Turkishness."

Under the proposed changed, the approval of the justice minister
will be necessary for a prosecutor to proceed with a 301-related
investigation. Other changes in the draft include making it a crime to
insult the "Turkish nation" instead of the ambiguous term "Turkishness"
and lowering the maximum jail sentence for such an insult to two
years from three.

"If the prime minister refrains from taking the 301 amendment to a
referendum, then I say to him for the last time: Do not pave the path
for insulting the values of the Turkish nation. Keep in mind that a
single wrong step you take will translate to a breaking point for our
nation. Turkish nationalists will never forget what has been done so
far," Bahceli noted.

He also claimed the government will amend a series of articles
enshrined in the TCK and the Counter-terrorism Act after Article
301. "The AK Party is responsible for the insult campaigns begun
against the values of the Turkish nation. Who is disturbed by Article
301? Those who wish to label Turks as perpetrators of genocide against
Armenians," he said.