Month: November 2009

APA, Azerbaijan
Nov 21 2009

President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev: `If Armenia lengthens time,
negotiations will be ended’

[ 21 Nov 2009 14:10 ]

* `If the next meeting with Armenian president does not give results,
our hopes for the negotiations will be ended not leaving other way for
us’

* `Decisions of international organizations and UN Charter allow us to
liberate our lands by military way’

Baku ` APA. `This injustice cannot be continued. How long will the
violation of international law continue? We show good will now. We
make concession participating in the negotiations’, said President
Ilham Aliyev in his speech during the opening of new settlement for
IDPs near Veyisli village of Gornaboy region, APA reports quoting
AzerTAC news agency. The president reminded that OSCE Minsk Group was
established in 1992 for liberation of Azerbaijani lands from the
occupation. `The Minsk Group was not established that to establish
second Armenian state in the historic land of Azerbaijan ` Nagorno
Karabakh. UN Security Council passed four resolutions. There is no
other organization in the world above the UN Security Council. If its
resolutions are not fulfilled, it means that the Security Council has
low influence or the norms of international law don’t work. If it is
so let everybody to know its work. If the international law doesn’t
work let us to know our work. We don’t violate any law. We are trying
to do everything within the law, within the norms of international
law. Following that OSCE summits passed decisions, which were not
fulfilled. What are we to do? Do we expect? How long? Why Azerbaijani
citizens cannot return to their homelands? Why population of Kelbajar
cannot return to Kelbajar? It is because Armenians don’t want that.
Why? What right they have to do that? These issues had to be solved
long ago. We want to solve it via negotiations, peacefully. On the
other hand, it is not correct to reconcile with this situation. How
long can we reconcile?’

President Ilham Aliyev said he would meet with Armenian president in
the next few days. `Sometimes these meetings are successful. But
Armenian side tries to lengthen the time sometimes. The last meetings
didn’t give any result because Armenian side demonstrated
non-constructive position. What reason of that? May be they were
encouraged by the process of normalization of the Turkish-Armenian
relations. It created wrong thoughts for them that the
Turkish-Armenian borders will be opened and Karabakh issue will be put
aside. But the processes show that it will not take place. Strong
position of Azerbaijan and Turkish community, statements and promises
by the Turkish leadership show that Turkish-Armenian relations cannot
be normalized without solution of Nagorno Karabakh problem. Armenian
side should understand it’.

The head of state said there was and intensive economic development in
Azerbaijan. `But Armenian economy was almost paralyzed. Our economic,
political and diplomatic successes and strengthening of defense
potential are enhancing our position. But we need in the result. We
need that they peacefully leave our lands. Then it will bring a peace.
Then nobody will say that why Azerbaijan is strengthening its defense
potential? Sometimes we hear from the international forces that why
Azerbaijan is armed. It does not concern anyone? We are not armed at
the expense of theirs. We are armed at own expense, at the expense of
our opportunities. What must we do? What must we do to solve this
issue comprehensively and for ever?’

President Ilham Aliyev informed about the essence of negotiation
process. `I can say now that first alteration Armenian side agreed is
that they will withdraw forces from only four regions, which are
located throughout railway along Araz River. Other regions will remain
under their control until uncertain time. The negotiation process
considers withdrawal from five regions at first and then from Kelbajar
and Lachin. But it is not full solution of the problem. We want
Azerbaijani citizens to return to Nagorno Karabakh, to Shusha `
historic city of Azerbaijan. If it doesn’t take place, the problem
will not be solved for ever. We must do so that the agreements will
not create background for further undesirable developments. If the
agreement doesn’t satisfy us, the problem can be raised and create
threat again. I am always telling the Armenian side that you must do
so that we can satisfy with the agreement, because if don’t satisfy,
the problem will be raised again tomorrow or 10 years later’.

The head of state said new settlements for the internally displaced
persons would be constructed in the next years too. `But it is not a
solution of the problem. The solution is in the liberation of
Azerbaijani lands from the invaders. We do everything necessary to
achieve our goals. The work done in the negotiations process, our
economic opportunities and army-building make Azerbaijan strong. If we
are not strong we cannot solve the Nagorno Karabakh problem, because
international interferences don’t give a result. Indeed these
interferences have political character. Sometime the international
forces calmed down the occupant countries immediately. We saw these
events in the history. But the international community didn’t show
strong position when the Azerbaijani lands were occupied. Therefore we
have to rely on our force and we have to be strong to solve the
problem fairly, within the national interests of Azerbaijan and on the
basis of international law. I don’t doubt that we will achieve it’.

Azerbaijani leader said he would go to the meeting with Armenian
president in Munich with his program. `This meeting should play
decisive role in the negotiation process. There were several meetings
without results. If the next meeting doesn’t give results, our hopes
for the negotiations will be ended not leaving other way for us. We
must be ready for that. Recent army-building development has is goal.
We spend billions of resources to strengthen our army and we purchase
new arms, techniques and we enhance our position on the line of
contact. We do that because we never rule out this alteration. We have
full right to liberate our lands from the occupation and the
international law recognizes our right. We want to solve the problem
peacefully to prevent the war. But Armenia is wrong if it thinks that
we will always participate at the negotiations. The negotiations will
last until the end of our hopes. But if Armenian side tries to
lengthen the time and to hold endless negotiations, the talks will be
ended. There are 30-40-year negotiations in some places. But that
situation will not be repeated here’.

President Ilham Aliyev said international, political and diplomatic
factors supported Azerbaijan’s position. Decisions of international
organizations and UN Charter allow us to liberate our lands from the
invaders by military way. We don’t want to interfere in the territory
of other country. Everybody knows that present Armenia was formed in
the historic lands of Azerbaijan. Khanate of Iravan, province of
Zangazur ` all these are the lands of Azerbaijan. Iravan was presented
to Armenia in 1918. Later they raised territorial claims against
Azerbaijan again. They created one Armenian state in the Azerbaijani
lands and now they intended to create second one. It is not logical.
Azerbaijani people, Azerbaijani state will never allow it. Nagorno
Karabakh will never be independent. We don’t allow it. Therefore
Armenia must take serious steps in the negotiations. They must take
the steps, but not us. What we can make concession? What we occupied
that make it concession? We will not make concession. Our concession
is peaceful solution of the problem’.
From: Baghdasarian

news.az, Azerbaijan
Nov 21 2009

Azerbaijani delegation off to Black Sea assembly session in Moscow
Sat 21 November 2009 | 08:54 GMT Text size:

An Azerbaijani delegation led by the speaker of parliament, Ogtay
Asadov, will attend the 34th plenary session of the Black Sea Economic
Cooperation (BSEC) Parliamentary Assembly in Russia on 22-24 November.

Members of parliament Asaf Hajiyev, Mubariz Gurbanli, Musa Guliyev,
Jale Aliyeva, Imamverdi Ismayilov and the head of parliament’s
administration, Safa Mirzayev, and other officials are in the
delegation, parliamentary press secretary Akif Tavakkuloglu told
journalists on Saturday.

The BSEC Parliamentary Assembly will focus on the water resources of
the Black Sea, the beneficial use of the region’s natural resources,
improving legislation in this field, developing environmental
awareness in member countries and organizational and other issues.
Tavakkuloglu said Ogtay Asadov would address the meeting.

"One of the issues concerns Azerbaijan – the environmental damage done
by Armenians to the Karabakh region of Azerbaijan – will be raised at
the meeting. The participants will be informed that this poses a
threat not only to Azerbaijan, but to the whole region and world."

APA

news.am, Armenia
Nov 21 2009

Cynical crime against Armenian cultural and religious heritage

13:41 / 11/21/2009 Kurieri news of Rustavi2 (Georgian pro-governmental
TV channel) showed footage from the scene where Armenian church Mughnu
Surb Gevorg (Mughni) collapsed late at night on Nov. 19. The reporter
said that the church collapsed in Sololaki [an Old Tbilisi part of the
city]. The incident occurred late at night as the dome collapsed. No
injuries have been reported only several cars parked nearby were
damaged.

Kurieri reporter David Kashiashvili when asked what the reason of the
incident was being present at the scene declared, `Locals say the
church crumbled with age at about 4 a.m. Cars parked nearby and the
roof of one house were damaged. Two families have applied to local
Municipality about the housing issues.’

`What was the reason of collapse?¦dilapidation?’ ‘ Kashiashvili asked
a local. The answer was, `Yes, dilapidation.’

`The church did not function. It was a dangerous structure and the
level of the existing threat of collapse will be examined. It is a
monument thus, the decision should be made from the point of cultural
heritage. But this is a fact that the church is under a threat of
collapse,’ said another local.

`According to a legend, it is here where Saint George’s hand is
buried. The church was ancient. A historic monument has been this
church on Akhospireli street that collapsed late at night. You have
already heard that locals demand that the destroyed parts be
demounted, although the ministry of culture is to decide on it.
However, no representative of the ministry has arrived at the scene
yet. Locals have collected signatures to demount the collapsed
fractions,’ Kurieri reporter goes on reminding the viewers of words
that the locals have not said. And besides, not a single word was
uttered about that the church was Armenian.

Thanks that at least a small piece in The Georgian Times daily says
the church is Armenian. `Armenian church damaged in Tbilisi. A wall of
an Armenian Church on Abo Tbileli Street, Sololaki District, Tbilisi,
collapsed last night. The collapse damaged other nearby buildings, but
luckily, no one has been injured. The Armenian Church was closed due
to the critical state of the historic building. Locals say that the
recent rains inflicted more damage on the church and the wall of the
amortized building ruined as a result. District governor viewed the
damaged building and promised the locals to allocate funds for
rehabilitation works,’ news dated Nov. 19 bears signature of Rustavi2.
It is odd, isn’t it?

NEWS.am correspondent made inquiries among Tbilisi citizens (among
them Georgians and Amenians). They find it strange that the church ‘
which is officially said to be a cultural monument ‘ has been
neglected, became dramatically ramshackle and ‘ finally giving up the
struggle with natural and manmade lesions ‘ collapsed. The people are
perplexed at the scene whereas tens of new Gergian churches are
constantly built in the country. Contemplating these developments they
come to conclusion that what is taking place with Armenian churches is
a cynical crime against cultural and religious heritage of Georgia’s
ancienest population ‘ the Armenian community. Armenians played a
central role in cultural and historic aspects in what it became known
as Tbilisi ‘ but this is another story¦

As NEWS.am informed early the Mother See of Holy Etchimadzin and
Georgian eparchy of AAC have repeatedly requested Georgian
authorities, Patriarch’s office, and international organizations to
return the Mughni St. Gevorg church along with other five Armenian
churches. The problem has been addressed by media however, Georgian
leadership keep ignoring the issue. Georgian Patriarch’s office
presented an argument that it considers the churches disputable and
that is why they cannot be returned. It should be mentioned that
Mughni St. Gevorg is the second church that has been demolished in
Georgia, the first was destroyed in 1989.

news.az, Azerbaijan
Nov 21 2009

Turkey makes recommendations on Karabakh to OSCE Minsk Group
Sat 21 November 2009 | 08:38 GMT Text size:

OSCE Minsk Group US, Russian and French representatives have completed
technical work to measure the Lachin corridor, a mountain pass within
the official borders of Azerbaijan that is the shortest route
connecting Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh.

The foreign ministries of the countries have informed Ankara about the
completion of the work.

Turkish newspaper Hurriyet reports with reference to diplomatic
sources that Turkey has intensified its diplomatic activity on the
settlement of the Karabakh problem. Though the protocols signed
between Armenia and Turkey do not mention Nagorno-Karabakh, the issue
is the only stumbling block in the normalization of relations between
the two countries. Ankara has clearly said to Yerevan that
normalization of ties is out of the question without progress on
Karabakh, Hurriyet said.

Turkey has presented its recommendations on normalizing ties with
Armenia to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s
Minsk Group, which is mediating a settlement of the conflict:

1) The liberation of all seven occupied districts of Azerbaijan. At
the first stage, Armenia should withdraw its troops from Agdam,
Gubatli, Zengilan, Jebrail and Fizuli, while Kelbajar and Lachin
districts, lying between Karabakh and Armenia, will be liberated after
the status of the Lachin corridor has been settled and Azerbaijani
refugees have returned there.

2) The start of talks on peacekeeping forces and the status of
Nagorno-Karabakh.

3) The signing an interim agreement on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh.

All these issues will be discussed during negotiations between Turkish
Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and his Armenian counterpart Eduard
Nalbandyan in Athens on 1-2 December within the framework of the OSCE
summit, and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov in
mid-December in Ankara. The newspaper also stresses the importance of
the meeting of the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents in Munich on 22
November.

Hurriyet

news.az, Azerbaijan
Nov 21 2009

Azeri MP: Armenia misleads world community
Sat 21 November 2009 | 08:28 GMT Text size:

Siyavush Novruzov "The Armenian leadership tries to mislead the world
community by all means", MP Siyavush Novruzov told reporters.

The Turkish and Russian officials said the agenda of talks with
Armenia contains the issue of Nagorno Karabakh and liberation of the
occupied lands. The opening of the Armenian-Turkish borders depends on
the settlement of these issues.

Novruzov voiced confidence that the Turkish parliament will not ratify
the Armenian-Turkish protocols without liberation of the Azerbaijani
regions.

1 news.az

news.az, Azerbaijan
Nov 21 2009

Archil Gegeshidze: I do not foresee lasting Russian presence in our region
Sat 21 November 2009 | 07:56 GMT Text size:

Archil Gegeshidze News.Az interviews Amb. Archil Gegeshidze, Senior
Fellow of Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies.

How can you assess the established geopolitical situation in the South
Caucasus region?

The situation is undesirable and there are still too many division
lines. We are yet too far from integration. A small territory has so
many lines, so many walls both inside Georgia and the region ` between
you and Armenia. This is not favorable for our countries that are at
the start of their development. Certainly, some has more resources,
others less, but they are not enough for independent development
without cooperating with other countries in the region. Our location
made us mutually dependent which causes the need for our economic and
other interaction. Thus, the current situation does not promote the
peaceful and rapid development of our region. If once we manage to
jump over our head and overcome the political differences and
disputes, we will be able to settle all the issues of our national and
regional interests effectively and through joint efforts. We have no
regional conscience and regional responsibility. We all work for
ourselves and this is harmful for our future. There are some
possibilities and theoretical ways out of the situation but we lack
pragmatism, lack state vision of the future in decades. This is a
vision that should be a basis for the decisions possibly seeming
tactically unprofitable but capable of bringing more benefits within
decades. We lack all these, therefore, the region is suffering. For
this purpose, the neighbors in our region, including small and big
players, are not ready to let us closer, integrate with those
institutions that they created and that have been the most favorable
ones through outthe history. This is a reality that needs changes.

There are countries in our region that bind their future to the West
and there is a country that is inclined towards Russia. How do you see
the overcoming of barriers in these conditions, as the interests of
Russia and West clash again?

The difference you mentioned is a temporary event. This difference
results from the unsettled Karabakh problem. As soon as it is settled,
Armenia will also draw the due conclusion, because as a nation, it is
more inclined to western values than to those Russia propagates. Thus,
this division line is temporary. Though, I do not know how long it
will last, perhaps, until the Karabakh conflict exists. If the
Turkish-Armenian rapprochement leads to the settlement of the Karabakh
conflict, it will cause changes in Armenia’s course. Thus, in this
regard, I do not foresee the lasting Russian presence in our region.

Considering your opinion, it is possible to say that Russia is not
interested in the settlement of the Karabakh conflict for the purpose
of not surrendering Armenia to the West?

Unlike the conflicts in Georgia, Russia is less involved into the
Karabakh conflict and, therefore, is less interested in its
preservation. It has interest in Karabakh though not so great because
unlike Georgia Armenia’s immediate escape to the west is not at issue
in the case of the Karabakh conflict. Armenia may escape but Russia
also may preserve tools to allow its temporary presence in Armenia.
Georgia escapes in any case. Even after August war of the last year
Georgia has not changed its foreign policy. Therefore, answering your
question, I would say that Russia has less potential to resist
internal and external tendencies that stimulate the outcome, which
means Russia has not so many reserves to resist this process. Georgia
has such reserves but they did not work as Russia initiated war. In
case with Karabakh, Russia will be unable to trigger war: it does not
border either on Karabakh or Armenia and there are no Russian citizens
in Karabakh. This is the main difference. In this regard, Karabakh
problem has more chances to be settled than the conflicts in Georgia.

How do see the settlement of conflicts in Georgia after the August war
and recognition of independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by
Russia?

I think nothing will change in the nearest future as Russia is greatly
interested in preservation of the new quo status after the August war.
Only through this will Russia be able to prevent Georgia’s integration
with NATO or NATO’s penetration into the South Caucasus. Economic
sanctions against Georgia did not work, neither did the hopes for the
firth column in Georgia. On the whole, the pro-Russian policy is
unpopular in Georgia. Thus, the overall pro-western vector is based on
public consensus. Russia could stop this process only through this.
Now Russia will long be standing its ground and I do not know how long
this will last. Some of my colleagues consider that in the near future
Russia will have to quit the Caucasus as it will go through the
processes that happened in the Soviet Union. Let’s hope so! I do not
know when happens. Earth revolves on its axes more rapidly for Georgia
than it does for Russia. We cannot wait for changes or for the second
perestroika in Russia. We will have to find a common language with
Abkhazs and South Ossetians as we will have to live together.

This is a long lasting process requiring Georgia’s transformation from
a post-Soviet state into a European country with its mentality and its
institutions. The contrast of the overall development and living
conditions in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and the rest of Georgia
should be obvious. Moreover, time should pass for Abkhazians to
understand that the proximity to Russia is not profitable for them in
terms of development. If Georgia manages to take practical steps for
institutional integration in EU (I mean closing, but not full
integration), if we manage to conclude a contract of free trade with
the EU within the Eastern Partnership initiative, thus replacing the
lost Russian market with a wider European market, if our citizens are
able to travel to Europe without visas or under simplified visa
regime, this will make Georgia attractive. The Cyprus variant when a
separatist part of the island is now striving to reunification with
the rest part can repeat. This is quite realistic.

Leyla Tagiyeva
News.Az

Aysor, Armenia
Nov 21 2009

Aliev again poses new war threats

In case of fruitless negotiations between Armenian and Azerbaijani
Presidents to be met today in Munich, the region may again go in war,
said Ilham Aliev, according to some Russian media which quote
Azerbaijani leader.

`If this meeting brings no results, then we will exhaust all hope, so
in this case we will have no choice. We must be ready for such
developing,’ said Aliev keeping in view the military actions against
Armenia.

During the travel to Geranaboysky region of Azerbaijan, Aliev said:
`Of course, all works in military sector have its certain objective.
We spend billions on weapons, enginery, we strengthen our positions on
borders as we never lost sight of this outcome, and never will. We
have full rights to set the territories free through hostilities.’

`The International Law backs these rights of ours,’ he added.

President Aliev stressed that all negotiations which were held before,
had no results, so this upcoming meeting in Munich will become
decisive.

Today, Azerbaijan
Nov 21 2009

Azerbaijan must submit its own plan on settlement of Karabakh
conflict: political expert

21 November 2009 [11:29] – Today.Az

Day.Az interview with Azerbaijani political expert Vafa Guluzade.

Day.Az: What action Azerbaijan should take to prevent Armenia to
return to details of the conflict resolution that had already been
agreed upon earlier?

Vafa Guluzade: Azerbaijan must submit its own a plan of settlement of
the Karabakh conflict in talks with Armenia. Those plans that the OSCE
Minsk Group have developed do not meet Azerbaijan’s interests.
Azerbaijan should get plan of action which is advantageous to it to be
discussed at the talks.

Q: A few days ago Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry stated that withdrawal
of Armenian troops from occupied Azerbaijani territories has been
negotiated. What are your views on this statement?

A: Indeed, withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied Azerbaijani
territories is imminent once a peace agreement is signed. But Armenia
resists signing of the agreement because it requires Karabakh to be
recognized as an independent or attached to the territory of Armenia.
Such a stance impedes a peace treaty and negotiations on the return of
Azerbaijani refugees to the occupied territories.

Q: Why did the Armenian parliament decline to recognize independence
of the break-away `Nagorno-Karabakh Republic’?

A: I think it was dictated by Russia, because it could affect world
community’s attitude to Armenia. Armenia added separatist
Nagorno-Karabakh to its territory with an internal act in Soviet
times. But it is impossible to achieve international recognition of
the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh without Azerbaijan.

Q: Can the OSCE MG be re-organized?

A: OSCE Minsk Group is "stillborn" organization. So, I think nothing
will help it.

Q: A few days ago Day.Az published photos which showed a cemetery
destroyed by Armenians in the occupied Agdam region. How Azerbaijan
can counteract these acts of vandalism?

A: Azerbaijan is a victim of occupation and the international
community is doing nothing in our favor. There is a joke – when
American gangster kills someone, he says "I’m sorry, friend, this is
not personal, it’s just business." West therefore turns a blind eye to
it because it is only their "business". For this reason, the United
States, France, the United Kingdom and others turn a blind eye to the
fact that Armenia is destroying our homes and burns our lands.

Day.Az

URL:

Aysor, Armenia
Nov 21 2009

The children are not toys, they are people

On November 20 is the recurrent anniversary of acceptation of the
UNO’s Convention for `Children’s rights’.

The convention has been passed by the General Assembly of the UNO on
November 20 in 1989 by the resolution 44/25 and is open for signing,
for ratification and for joining it.

The Assembly being concerned with the issue that in many countries the
conditions of the children are critical, called for all the countries
to join the convention, taking into consideration the bad social
conditions, disasters, military conflicts, exploitation, illiteracy,
hunger and illnesses the children face in the whole world.

Each year the UNO suggests the organizations, intergovernmental and
non governmental institutions to activate their efforts in spreading
more information about the Convention in order to promote the
understanding of it.

Armenia as well is a member of that Convention and yesterday too in
Armenia was celebrated the day of passing the Convention.

On that occasion Hovhannes Tamamyan, the Chief of the Police
Department’s Criminal Investigations Division, said that `The
teenagers should be informed about their rights and duties and many
works should be carried out.’

On the occasion of the anniversary of the Convention for `Children’s
rights’ the Junior fund of the UNO organized the exhibition of Vigen
Mnoyan called `The children are not toys’ in the National Assembly of
Armenia. At the evening the children’s choir gave a concert.

news.am, Armenia
Nov 21 2009

Europeans have two reasons to be concerned about Turkish democracy

10:07 / 11/21/2009`When Nicolas Sarkozy rejects accession for Turkey
on the grounds of Europe’s `natural borders,’ everybody know that he
is speaking of `cultural borders”, reads the article by Jean-Francois
Bayart, the director of National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS)
published in French Libération. The article is titled `An Islam
Compatible with the Republic’. NEWS.am posts the full text.

`And Turkey’s culture is Islam: It would be incompatible with Europe,
and even with the Republic [France].

Yet Turkey has been a republic since 1924. Islam has democratized in
Turkey. It has appropriated the idea of the nation, republican
institutions, the civil code (introduced in 1926 and modelled on Swiss
legislation), the market economy, education, the mass media and
scientific knowledge. It has adopted the political party as method of
political participation and, because it is as theologically and
ideologically varied as in the rest of the Muslim world, it has given
rise to a pluralist education, the one rivaling the other to a greater
or lesser degree. The believers have also themselves divided up their
votes across the political checkerboard, while non-believers have
voted for Muslim parties.

More than that, Islam has made a decisive contribution to the
democratization of the Kemalist republic. By virtue of the
parliamentary system, successive Muslim parties or conservative
parties with a religious sensibility, close to brotherhoods, have
incorporated within the republican institutions the religious masses
that do not identify with the aggressive secularism of Kemalism and
filled the space that could have fallen to the jidahist groups. They
supported the move of the peasant farmers to the cities during the
rural exodus. They lent a voice to those of the Kurds who sought to
express their defiance of a centralizing state but without joining the
armed struggle of the PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party]. They also
permitted the rise of the Anatolian elites that the Kemalist
establishment was confining to the periphery.

On the other hand, Kemalist nationalism is less secular than it
claims. It is ethno-confessional, like its counterparts in the Balkans
and Caucasus. In the Kemalist republic nationals of Turkish origin or
Sunnis of the Hanefite rite are implicitly more citizens than the
Kurdish, Alevi, and Christian and Jewish inhabitants. But the origin
of this implicit discrimination does not have much to do with Islam as
a religion. It is political and is part of the unleashing of a
cultural nationalism from the latter half of the 19th century as well
as of the crossed operations of ethnic cleansing that followed, the
genocide of the Armenians being its culmination. The same logic is
found at work for the benefit of Orthodox, Catholics or Jews, or
Shi’is or even Sunnis, depending on the Balkan, Caucasian, or Middle
Eastern country in question. After all, an Arab Israeli is a little
less Israeli than a Jewish Israeli and it is not so long ago that that
religion ceased to be indicated on the identity cards of the Greeks.

The paradox of Turkey is due to the fact that the secular nationalists
are the ones that hold this ethno-confessional conception of
citizenship and the ruling Islamic party, the AKP [Justice
andDevelopment Party], with the support of the conservatives, is
questioning it. Closing the door to Europe on Turkey by claiming it is
a Muslim country is clearly to play the game of this conception. There
is, moreover, a certain coherence in hearing Nicolas Sarkozy, a man so
concerned about &`national identity,’ inadvertently assume the slogan
of the Turkish far right: &`France, you must like it or leave it!’ On
the other hand, many Turks who are not necessarily believers but who
vote for the AKP to oppose nationalist authoritarianism, say to
Europe, along with the left-wing intellectual Murat Belge: &`Do not
allow us to become fascist!’

The Europeans have two reasons to be concerned about the future of
Turkish democracy. It is not in their interest to see the development
of an ultranationalist Moscow-Ankara axis. And they bear a direct
historical responsibility for the development of these
ethno-confessional nationalisms in the Eastern Mediterranean, which
they fuelled ideologically and supported politically, even militarily,
under cover of &`protection’ ‘ a self-interested one ‘ of Christian
minorities. We are still paying the price in Lebanon, in Palestine, in
Iraq, in the Balkans, of the disastrous way the &`Orient question’ was
handled.The failure of negotiations between Turkey and the European
Union would be a continuation of this disaster.’