Month: February 2015

WALES’ ARMENIANS: STILL CAMPAIGNING FOR RECOGNITION OF THE GENOCIDE SUFFERED BY THEIR PEOPLE IN 1915

walesonline.co.uk
February 3, 2015 Tuesday 8:20 PM GMT

By Martin Shipton

Genocide is a highly emotive term – so much so that when a cross
commemorating the Armenian “genocide” was placed outside the Temple
of Peace in Cardiff a few years ago, it was soon smashed up.

In Turkey it remains a crime to use the term when describing the
events of 1915 that saw nearly 1.5m ethnic Armenians murdered.

Among many others, the Turkish Nobel Prize-winning novelist Orhan
Pamuk has faced prosecution after telling his country to admit to
what happened. But so far there is little sign of Turkey doing so.

In Wales, where there is a small but thriving Armenian community,
preparations are under way to mark the centenary. But community members
are disappointed by the lack of support shown for their cause by the
Welsh Government.

Historians have described what happened in Turkey 100 years ago as
the first full-scale ethnic cleansing of the 20th century.

Armenians were uprooted from their homes by the thousand, deported
to remote locations within Turkey and murdered.

The political scientist RJ Rummell has written: “Turkish leaders
decided to exterminate every Armenian in the country, whether a
front-line soldier or pregnant woman, famous professor or high bishop,
important businessman or ardent patriot. All two million of them.

Rummell has used the term “democide” to describe “the murder of any
person or people by their government, including genocide, politicide
and mass murder”.

Of the Armenian massacres he wrote: “Democide had preceded the Young
Turks’ rule and with their collapse at the end of World War I, the
successor Nationalist government carried out its own democide against
the Greeks and remaining or returning Armenians. From 1900 to 1923,
various Turkish regimes killed from 3.5 million to over 4.3m Armenians,
Greeks, Nestorians and other Christians.”

Based on all the available evidence, Rummell estimates that the
Turks murdered between 300,000 and 2,686,000 Armenians – probably
1.4 million.

A report in the New York Times from November 1915 reported the
testimony of an American committee set up to investigate the
atrocities. It quotes an unnamed official representative of the
committee who went to a camp occupied by displaced Armenians saying:
“I have visited their encampment and a more pitiable site cannot be
imagined. They are, almost without exception, ragged, hungry and sick.

This is not surprising in view of the fact that they have been on the
road for nearly two months, with no change of clothing, no chance to
bathe, no shelter and little to eat. “I watched them one time when
their food was brought. Wild animals could not be worse. They rushed
upon the guards who carried the food and the guards beat them back
with clubs hitting hard enough to kill sometimes.”

“To watch them one could hardly believe these people to be human
beings. As one walks through the camp, mothers offer their children
and beg you to take them. In fact, the Turks have been taking their
choice of these children and girls for slaves or worse. There are very
few men among them, as most of the men were killed on the road. Women
and children were also killed. The entire movement seems to be the
most thoroughly organised and effective massacre this country has
ever seen.”

Many relatives of Cardiff businessman John Torosyan, a leading
member of the Welsh Armenian community, were murdered, including his
grandfather’s twin.

He said: “More than 75% of Armenians were killed. At the time Britain
was at the forefront of calls for justice for this genocide. The word
‘genocide’ was in fact coined by a Jew, Raphael Lemkin, with the
Armenians uppermost in his mind.

“One hundred years on and how things have changed. The UK Government’s
position is clear – they do not want to use the word genocide because
it would upset Turkey, a Nato ally.

“Nevertheless, 22 other countries have accepted the Armenian genocide
as fact, some of them being in Nato with no diplomatic or trade issues
with Turkey.

“Neither Israel nor Jewry in the UK including such commendable
organisations as the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust acknowledge the
Armenian genocide.” Progress in Wales towards getting official
recognition of the genocide

Mr Torosyan said there had been progress in Wales towards getting
official recognition of the genocide: in 2004 a vote was taken by
Gwynedd council to recognise it, and last year a plaque was erected
at the council’s offices in Caernarfon.

He said: “Prior to 2006 the Armenian community participated in the
Holocaust Memorial Day events in Cardiff. It was then a hit and miss
affair, where we were remembered in some years but not in others. The
last even we participated in actively was in 2010.

“In 2007 the National Assembly gave us some land at the Temple of
Peace and allowed the word ‘genocide’ to be used on the memorial. The
then Presiding Officer conducted the opening ceremony.

“We had two statements of opinion where a majority of AMs accepted the
reality of the Armenian genocide. The Church in Wales voted unanimously
to recognise April 24 as Armenian Genocide Day and special prayers
were written in Welsh and English.

“We currently have three memorials in Wales – at the Temple of Peace,
in Caernarfon and at St Deiniol’s Church at Hawarden, Flintshire,
where Armenians gave a silver chalice, a silver Bible and a stained
glass window in recognition of help given by Britain at the time of
the first Armenian genocide in 1896.

“Soon we will be erecting a statue at St Davids Cathedral, the
spiritual centre of Welsh Christianity.

“Unfortunately we feel that with the exception of the Church in Wales,
the country’s official institutions are now completely sidestepping
the Armenians’ cause. The Welsh Government deems it a foreign policy
matter and not within the remit of a devolved administration. This
is a very convenient and easy solution, but it ignores the Armenian
community in Wales.

“We wrote to the First Minister last year, but only received an
acknowledgement. Our appeals for nine months that Holocaust Memorial
Day events this year should just mention the Armenian victims fell
on deaf ears. Unfortunately Cardiff is toeing the Foreign Office line.”

Geoffrey Robertson QC, one of Britain’s most distinguished human
rights lawyers, wrote a lengthy legal opinion six years ago condemning
the UK Government’s unwillingness to describe the events of 1915 as
genocide. His conclusion said: “The truth is that throughout the life
of the present Labour Government and – so the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office (FCO) admits – throughout previous governments, there has been
no proper or candid appraisal of 1915 events condemned by Her Majesty’s
Government (HMG) at the time and immediately afterwards in terms that
anticipate the modern definition of genocide and which were referred
to by the drafters of the Genocide Convention as a prime example of the
kind of atrocity that would be covered by this new international crime.

“HMG has consistently … wrongly maintained both that the decision
is one for historians and that historians are divided on the subject,
ignoring the fact that the decision is one for legal judgement and
no reputable historian could possibly deny the central facts of the
deportations and the racial and religious motivations behind the
deaths of a significant proportion of the Armenian people.”

Mr Robertson states that the “inevitable” conclusion is that the
treatment of the Armenians in 1915 answers to the description of
genocide. “Foreign policy is a matter reserved to the UK Government”

A Welsh Government spokesman said First Minister Carwyn Jones had
written a letter to Mr Torosyan dated September 1 last year, which
said: “I am writing in response to your letter of July 17 on behalf
of the Armenian community in Wales.

“Foreign policy is a matter reserved to the UK Government and one for
which the Welsh Government has no remit. However, the UK Government
has acknowledged the terrible suffering that was inflicted on the
Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th Century. The
crimes committed were rightly and robustly condemned by the British
Government of the day.

“While we remember the victims of the past, our priority today must
be to promote reconciliation between the peoples and governments of
Turkey and Armenia.”

The spokesman issued a slightly amended statement to us, which said:
“Foreign policy is not devolved, but we condemn any persecution and
mass loss of life.

“The UK Government has acknowledged the terrible suffering that
was inflicted on the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire in the
early 20th century and the crimes committed were rightly and robustly
condemned by the British Government of the day.

“The First Minister has paid homage to Armenian victims during
Holocaust Memorial commemorations in the past and there are a number
of memorials in place around Wales including one in the capital. But
while we remember the victims of the past, the priority today must
be to promote reconciliation between the peoples and governments of
Turkey and Armenia.”

ARMENIANS HAVE ALWAYS STRIVED FOR IRAN’S LOFTY IDEALS: MP

Iran Daily
Feb 3 2015

An Armenian member of Iranian parliament (Majlis) says Armenians have
always strived for IranË~Hs noble ideals, saying Iranian Armenians
have tried hard in the struggle against despotic regimes in both
Constitutional and Islamic revolutions.

In a ceremony to commemorate the 36th anniversary of the Islamic
Revolution, held in Armenian church in Orumieh, Karen Khanlari said
the Islamic Revolution was a great movement to administer lofty human
values, justice, freedom, and divine teachings, IRNA reported.

Armenian Iranians, along with their Muslim, Assyrian, Jewish, and
Zoroastrian brothers have lived in this glorious land for hundreds
of years and have made great sacrifices to protect it, he added.

Bringing back memories of the Islamic Revolution, Khanlari
said Armenian neighborhood in Tehran turned into a center for
revolutionaries, a fact that had made the regime so angry.

In another part of his speech, Khanlari referred to peaceful
co-existence of followers of different religions in Islamic Iran,
saying this co-existence is rooted in the old civilization of Iran
and the Islamic teachings.

Ë~HThese amicable relations have existed in the long history of Iran
while many western countries still have problems in this regard,Ë~H
the lawmaker added.

In the ceremony, Head of Armenian Caliphate Council of Orumieh Paylac
Sahak congratulated the 36th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution,
saying Iranian nation including Muslims, Christians and followers of
other religions will resist against all plots of the enemies such as
military threats and economic sanctions and will foil all of them.

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIAN PROSECUTOR GENERAL ASKS RUSSIA TO PASS PROBE INTO GYUMRI MURDERS TO ARMENIA

Interfax, Russia
Feb 3 2015

YEREVAN. Feb 3

Armenian Prosecutor General Gevorg Kostanian has appealed to Russian
Prosecutor General Yury Chaika to delegate the investigation into the
killing of a family of seven, of which a Russian soldier is suspected,
to Armenian law enforcement agencies.

“Being guided by Article 6 of the agreement between the Russian
Federation and Armenia concerning the jurisdiction and mutual legal
assistance on cases related to the presence of the Russian military
base on the Armenian territory, Armenian Prosecutor General Gevorg
Kostanian has asked Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika to hand
the proceedings into the killing of seven Armenian citizens in Gyumri
on January 12 to Armenian law enforcement agencies,” the Armenian
Prosecutor General’s Office told Interfax.

Six members of the Avetisian family in Gyumri were killed on January
12. The seventh family member, a six-month-old child, died a week
later from knife wounds he suffered in the attack.

The suspect, Pvt. Valery Permyakov, a serviceman from the Russian
military base stationed in Gyumri, has confessed to committing
the crime.

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIAN MP: IRAN SYMBOL OF PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE AMONG DIVINE RELIGIONS

FARS News Agency, Iran
February 3, 2015 Tuesday

TEHRAN (FNA)- Armenian member of the Iranian Parliament Karen Khanlari
underlined that religious minorities are conducting a peaceful life
along with the Shiite Muslims in Iran.

Speaking in a ceremony to commemorate the 36th anniversary of victory
of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Khanlari said that Armenian Iranians,
along with their Muslim, Assyrian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian brothers,
have lived in this glorious land for hundreds of years and have made
great sacrifices to protect it.

Khanlari went on to say that peaceful co-existence of followers of
different religions in Islamic Iran is rooted in the old civilization
of Iran and the Islamic teachings.

Iran’s Constitution has officially recognized Christianity, Judaism and
Zoroastrianism as divine religions alongside Islam and their followers
are having a peaceful life and friendly relationship with each other.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

CROATIA VS SERBIA: GENOCIDE THE HARDEST TO PROVE

Agence France Presse
February 3, 2015 Tuesday 1:34 AM GMT

The Hague, Feb 3 2015

Genocide, of which Croatia and Serbia have accused each other
before the UN’s highest court, is the gravest crime in international
humanitarian law — and also the most difficult to prove.

The International Court of Justice will hand down its judgement in
The Hague on Tuesday in a long-running case between the two former
foes for acts committed during the bitter civil wars that followed
the break-up of the former Yugoslavia in 1991.

Derived from the Greek word “genos”, for race or tribe, and the suffix
“cide” from the Latin for “to kill”; genocide is defined by the United
Nations as an “act committed with intent to destroy in whole or in
part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.”

The word was coined in 1944 by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish Jew who took
refuge in the United States, to describe crimes committed by Nazi
Germany during the Holocaust.

It was used for the first time within a legal framework by an
international military tribunal at Nuremberg to try Nazi leaders for
their crimes in 1945. Those accused were however convicted of crimes
against humanity.

Genocide has been recognised within international law since 1948,
with the advent of the UN Convention, and lists murder among a series
of crimes.

The UN in 1985 recognised the 1915 killing of hundreds of thousands
of Armenians as genocide.

In 1994, the Rwandan genocide in which the UN said some 800,000
Tutsis and moderate Hutus were murdered, led to the creation of the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, based in Arusha, Tanzania.

It has been handing out convictions since 1998 for the crime of
genocide and complicity.

The massacre of almost 8,000 Muslim men and boys by Bosnian Serb forces
at Srebrenica in July 1995 during the Bosnian war, was recognised as
genocide by the ICJ in 2007.

The Balkans war crimes court, the International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), has convicted several accused
of genocide.

Two former leaders of Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge regime from 1975-79
were handed life sentences in Phnom Penh for crimes against humanity
last August and their genocide trial before a UN-sponsored tribunal
continues.

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir is wanted by the International
Criminal Court (ICC) on an arrest warrant for genocide related to
crimes committed against Darfur’s civilian population.

Since its inception in 2002, the Hague-based ICC is the only permanent
independent international court able to try the perpetrators of
genocide on all continents.

THE DESTRUCTION OF SYRIA’S CULTURAL HERITAGE

Counter Punch
Feb 4 2015

by EVA BARTLETT

Much has been written about the destruction and looting of Syria’s
heritage sites. Syria’s Directorate-General of Antiquities & Museums
(DGAM), as well as UNESCO have documented the vast damage and looting
as extensively as possible in this time of proxy-war-manufactured
crisis. In July 2014, the DGAM issued a statement and plea regarding
the critical situation of Syria’s heritage under attack.

“A year has passed since we last sent an international call out to
all those concerned with defending Syria’s heritage. At the time, we
warned against a possible cultural disaster that might be inflicted on
an invaluable part of the human heritage existing in Syria,” the DGAM
statement read. It noted, “Much of what we had feared happened… vast
regions extending along the geography of Syria are now classified as
‘distressed cultural areas’ due to the exacerbation of the clandestine
excavation crimes and deliberate damage to our historic monuments
and cultural landmarks in those regions…”

As for UNESCO, it noted, “Syria’s exceptional archaeological, urban
and architectural heritage has been considerably damaged during the
conflict, and has affected all six World Heritage Sites in Syria and
eleven sites inscribed on UNESCO’s Tentative List.”

The six UNESCO-recognized sites are: The Ancient City of Damascus;
Palmyra; The Ancient City of Aleppo; Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at
Salah al-Din; and The Ancient villages of Northern Syria, many of
which have suffered intense digging and looting, as well as various
acts of intentional destruction.

Yet, in spite of DGAM warnings and UNESCO confirmations, as we
near the start of year five of the war on sovereign Syria, the
Axis-of-Interventionalists continue to arm terrorists within Syria,
and train and funnel still more terrorists into Syria — terrorists
who are not only murdering Syrians and Palestinians, but destroying
Syria’s heritage, as they have been doing since the beginning.

The “moderate” heritage-wreckers

Over the years, many corporate news pieces either outright blame
the Syrian government and Syrian Army (SAA), or pin the blame almost
solely on Da’ish (ISIS/ISIL/IS), obfuscating and/or justifying the
crimes of the other militia factions who have plundered and destroyed
Syrian heritage for the last four years.

Reports noting the thievings of the so-called “moderates” often
follow with claims that it is out of deparate want of funding that
they pillage. One such piece, a September 2012 Time Magazine article,
both inserts the standard MSM talking points about an “uprising,” a
“civil war,” etc. and also notably promotes the line of cash-strapped
“rebels” giving into necessity and looting the country to fund a
“revolution” against a “dictator.” Time Magazine inserts a sectarian
flourish at the end, “Still, says the Sunni Muslim, who has committed
to helping his co-religionists across the border, ‘sometimes you have
to make a sacrifice. How else will we overthrow Bashar?'”

As with numerous other reports, conveniently overlooked is the
amply-documented role of the NATO-Gulf-Zionist-Turkey alliance
arming (and training and enabling the transit of) terrorists, from
the so-called “FSA” to the Nusra Front to the Islamic Front to
Da’ish themselves, including by air-dropping weapons on more than
one occasion.

Rick Sterling’s “U.S. Alliance with FSA and ISIL in Six Photographs”
notes the US alliance with Da’ish. In just six photos, the link
between so-called “moderate rebel” leader ‘Abd al-Jabbar al-Okaidi and
Da’ish and US politicians, is clear. The fourth photo, a still from
a November 2013 video interview with al-Okaidi, quotes the “moderate”
terrorist saying, “My relationship with the brothers of ISIL is good.”

The US politicians include Former US Ambassador to Syria and
Coordinator of the “Friends of Syria”, Robert Ford — shown in
May 2013 with al-Okaidi — and US Congress members–including the
repeatedly-illegally-sneaking-into-Syria, John McCain — shown meeting
with al-Okaidi. [see also “Who is Ambassador Robert Stephen Ford? The
Architect of US Sponsored Terrorism in Syria” and “Washington Admits:
FSA Equals Fictitious Syrian Army” and “FSA Leader Defects to ISIL
and Exposes FSA as a Saudi-Israeli Run Project”].

Maram Susli’s (the “Syrian Girl”) December 27, 2014 article in the
New Eastern Outlook, “US Armed Rebels Gave TOW missiles to al-Qaeda,”
notes, “US supplied TOW anti-tank missiles have ended up in the hands
of Jabhat al-Nusra, Syria’s branch of al-Qaeda. The US provided the
missiles to CIA-vetted Syrian rebel faction Harakat al-Hazm in May. A
video posted by al-Nusra shows the weapons being used to take over
Syrian military bases, Wadi Deif and Hamidiyeh in Idlib province…

Currently Harakat al-Hazm is united with Jabhat al-Nusra, in Handarat
Aleppo, and are jointly fighting the Syrian Army. The militant
employing the TOW missile in the video, shows clear proficiency in its
use, indicating that he has directly or indirectly benefited from US
training. In spite of this revelation, there is evidence to suggest
the US is still arming the FSA with TOW missiles.”

The article goes on to explain these new revelations are only the
latest in years of documented alliances between Western-sponsored
“moderates” and Da’ish. “In 2012 the Free Syrian Army (FSA),
referred to as the ‘moderate rebels’ by the US State Department,
fought alongside ‘Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham’ (ISIS) in Aleppo
against the Syrian military for control over Menagh Airbase. The FSA
head of Aleppo Military Council ‘Abd al-Jabbar al-Oqaidi, who has met
with US Ambassador Robert Ford, was filmed with ISIS Amir Abu Jandal
praising ISIS for helping take the base using a suicide car bomb. As
late as September 2014, FSA commander Bassel Idriss said that they
had joined forces with ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra in Qalamoun Mountain.”

Anthony Cartalucci’s November 28, 2014 artilce, “Germany’s DW Reports
ISIS Supply Lines Originate in NATO’s Turkey,” further exposes Turkey’s
blatant role in supplying arms to terrorists in Syria.

“Germany’s international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) published a
video report of immense implications — possibly the first national
broadcaster in the West to admit that the so-called “Islamic State”
(ISIS) is supplied not by “black market oil” or “hostage ransoms”
but billions of dollars worth of supplies carried into Syria across
NATO member Turkey’s borders via hundreds of trucks a day. The report
titled, “‘IS’ supply channels through Turkey,” confirms what has been
reported by geopolitical analysts since at least as early as 2011:
that NATO member Turkey has allowed a torrent in supplies, fighters,
and weapons to cross its borders unopposed to resupply ISIS positions
inside of Syria.”

Before she was killed in a highly-suspect car crash (days after
stating the Turkish intelligence had threatened her), journalist Serena
Shim had reported on World Food Organization trucks ferrying Da’ish
terrorists via Turkey into Syria. With the clearly-documented ties
between the US (and its Axis-of-Destruction allies) and the numerous
terrorist groups destroying Syria, the hollow concern that US figures
and media sometimes voice is blatantly hypocritical.

In September 2014, the US Department of State urged “all parties in
Iraq, Syria, and the international community to respect and protect
archaeological, historic, religious, and cultural sites, including
museums and archives. All those who destroy important cultural property
must be held accountable.” American Secretary of State John Kerry
topped this hypocrisy with his statement at a white-washing event
in New York City, “Threats to Cultural Heritage in Iraq and Syria,”
in September, 2014 that, “…no one group has done more to put our
shared cultural heritage in the gun sights than ISIL. How shocking and
historically shameful it would be if we did nothing while the forces
of chaos rob the very cradle of our civilization. We are determined
instead to help Iraqis and Syrians protect and preserve their heritage
in peace.”

The sting of these hypocritical words is that Syrian patriots
are trying to protect their heritage (in many cases give their
lives while doing so), and that Da’ish’s recruiters, trainers, and
enablers continue to supply weapons and open borders while crying
crocodile tears over Syria’s destroyed and pillaged heritage. Had
the Western-Zionist-Gulf alliance not cooked up this plan to attempt
to destroy Syria, Syria’s heritage would not be in peril — period
(see Seymour Hersh’s 2007 investigative report, “The Redirection”
in The New Yorker).

In January, 2015, the US Defense Department said that “as many as 1,000
American troops and trainers would be sent to Turkey, Saudi Arabia and
Qatar to assist in the training of Syrian opposition groups,” Sputnik
News reported. According to the same report, crocodile-tears Kerry
stated that in addition to so-called “moderate” Syrian rebels, “other
nationals will also undergo special training to join the coalition
in their fight against IS militants.” You can bet the newest batch
of terrorists will be just as respectful of Syria’s heritage as all
the terrorists before them.

Gleefully destroying the cradle of civilization

When terrorists — no, not Da’ish, but al-Nusra and the so-called
“FSA” — terrorized the ancient village of Ma’loula for eight months,
they meted out considerable destruction and damage on this heritage
site, as well as looted and burned the town’s monasteries and historic
buildings. They burned the shrine containing the remains of St.

Thekla, stole her bones. They vandalized icons and frescoes in the
church in the Convent of St. Thekla, and burned parts of the church
itself. They shelled and looted icons from the Monastery of Sts.

Sergius and Bacchus (see video report, “Syrian historical treasures
and archeological artifacts destroyed or stolen by terrorist gangs”).

In Homs, it was likewise not Da’ish but al-Nusra and the so-called
“FSA” who not only stole the food and valuables of residents in the Old
City, but also vandalized, blew up, and set afire historic buildings,
like the torched Church of Um al-Zenar (St. Mary’s Church), “built
upon an ancient crypt cave with signs of Christian worship dating
back to 59ce.”

In both cases, it was the SAA, local volunteers in the National Defense
Forces (NDF) and empowered residents who struggled to preserve and
minimize damage to their heritage sites. And in both cases, once
under control of the SAA and government, plans for restorations were
immediately started.

Damascus, which UNESCO describes as “founded in the 3rd millennium BCE,
…one of the oldest cities in the Middle East,” has also suffered
damage to its heritage sites. Terrorists’ car bombs and mortars, which
have terrorized residents of the city, have also hit historic places.

The 11th-century Citadel, the 8th-century Umayyad Masjid, the
13th-century Great Madrasah, al-Adliya, the Greek Orthodox Church of
Antioch in Bab Touma, and the Armenian Orthodox Church in Bab Sharqi,
have all suffered, according to UNESCO’s report. But some of the worst
destruction and damage to cultural heritage thus far documented is in
Aleppo, which UNESCO describes as “one of the (if not the) oldest,
continuously occupied cities in the world with some 7,000 years of
known settlement history.”

The Aleppo section of UNESCO’s latest “Damage Assessment Overview”
is lengthy. Some of the assessment includes:

* “At least 121 historical buildings have been damaged or destroyed —
equal to 30-40% of the World Heritage property area — in addition
to the destruction of more than 1,500 shops of the Suq.

* “The 11th century Minaret, the prayer hall, and the main gate of
the Omayyad Masjid have been destroyed. The masjid’s courtyard and
all of its decorative elements have also suffered severe damage,
as did the surrounding neighbourhood.

* “The wooden minbar has been dismantled and transferred to an
unknown location.

* “Damage to the gates of the city wall has occurred… to some of
the most important Islamic architecture buildings… and to most
historic houses of the Jdeideh quarter…

* “The Waqifiyya Library has been damaged due to a fire.”

YouTube videos and online images showed terrorists from the Islamic
Front (Robert Ford’s “moderates”) gleefully exploding the 150-year-old
Carlton Citadel Hotel in Aleppo’s Old City in May 2014, the destruction
and damage extending to the 13th-century Citadel facing the hotel. A
report in the Independent cited the Islamic Front’s Twitter account
as claiming responsibility for destroying the Carlton.

A video posted online shows the takfiris in a tunnel beneath the Old
City, repeatedly stating their intent to blow up the hotel. Clearly,
with over 23 tons of explosives, these Western-sponsored terrorists
knew the detonation would mean extensive destruction to Aleppo’s
historic sites surrounding the hotel.

Yet, the corporate media noted the destruction with little-to-no
condemnation. The Los Angeles Times reported blithely, “The explosion
ripped through the Carlton Citadel Hotel, near the landmark medieval
Citadel and Aleppo’s walled Old City, both deemed United Nations
World Heritage sites,” carefully choosing their words to abstain from
condemnation of the terrorist act. The Los Angeles Times additionally
took the opportunity to plug the so-called “revolution,” “‘The attack
came as a way to raise the morale of the people after the deal that
happened yesterday,’ said the pro-opposition activist…” Other
headlines justified, rather than condemned, the calculated
destruction. Reuters reported, “Syrian rebels blow up Aleppo hotel
used by army.” The Guardian said, “Syria rebels blow up Aleppo hotel
used as barracks by government forces.”

Conversely, the DGAM stated, “This criminal act is part of a series
of similar acts targeting historic and unique buildings and landmarks
in Aleppo, such as the incidents of the Police Headquarters and the
Justice Court… This targeting has resulted in great loss in the
components of Syria’s archaeological heritage, which can be added to
a long list of painful losses that cannot be replaced.”

In early December, Islamic Front militants bombed a historic masjid
in Aleppo’s Old City. Al-Masdar News noted, “The militants from the
Islamic Front (Jabhat al-Islamiyah) bombarded multiple historical
sites in the Old City of Aleppo this weekend, destroying residential
buildings and the 900-year old al-Sultaniyah Masjid. According
to a military source in Aleppo, the Islamic Front has destroyed
numerous sites in the Old City, including the outer walls of the
Aleppo Citadel.” Video footage shows terrorists bombing the Citadel
area at the end of November.

On December 30, the DGAM reported further tunnel explosions in the
Old City near the Citadel. “The Armed groups have detonated bombs in
tunnels under the Aleppo old city, the bombs were reportedly placed in
two tunnels running under historic parts of the city. The explosions
caused severe damage to the market and the historical buildings in
the area…” Other examples of the terrorists’ deliberate destruction
of Syrian heritage include:

March, 2013: al-Nusra terrorists destroyed a Muslim shrine in Raqqa.

PressTV reported, “Videos posted online show foreign-backed militants
blew up the tomb of ‘Ammar ibn Yasir, who was one of the companions
of Islam’s Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)… Anti-government militants have
attacked and destroyed several holy sites, including Shia mosques,
since the beginning of unrest in Syria.”

May 2, 2013: Syria News reported, “[Terrorists] destroyed one more
grave in Syria, the Prophet’s (pbuh) companion Hijr ibn ‘Adi al-Kindi
in Adra, Damascus Countryside. They took out his dead body, he died
some 1,400 years ago and buried it in an unmarked place…”

November, 2014: The Independent reported that al-Nusra blew up an
Armenian church in Deir al-Zor dating to 1846. “All of the church
archives, dating back to 1841 and containing thousands of documents
on the Armenian Holocaust, were burned to ashes, while the bones of
hundreds of genocide victims, packed into the church’s crypt in memory
of the mass killings 99 years ago, were thrown into the street beside
the ruins,” the report noted.

January 8, 2015: Business Insider reported that al-Nusra blew up a
13th-century tomb near the Jordanian border.

January 17, 2015: DGAM reported that terrorists destroyed “the shrine
of Shaykh Muhammad Nabhan in The Kiltawiye Masjid at Bab al-Hadid,
the historical gates of the Ancient City of Aleppo, despite the
appeals from residents and dignitaries of the region.”

Eva Bartlett is a Canadian freelance journalist and activist who has
lived in and written from the Gaza Strip, Syria, and Lebanon.

This essay originally ran in The Crescent.

TURKEY-US RELATIONS: EMBEDDED DISPUTES – ANALYSIS

Eurasia Review
Feb 4 2015

February 4, 2015
By Mehmet Yegin

A year ago, I discussed in my Analist Magazine column how Turkey’s
relations with the U.S. changed dramatically in 2013 as an abrupt
political divergence between the two countries made itself visibly
apparent especially after the May of that year. Today, at the end of
2014, we see a picture in which divergences are embedded, and mistrust
has become profound. It may be expected that this image will endure
in 2015 unless a dramatic change occurs.

Turkey’s damaged image in the U.S.

Political polarization in Turkey created a negative image of the
country in the eyes of the U.S. While those familiar with Turkish
politics were fairly disappointed, those who do not know much about the
country came to adopt a negative perspective based on the reflections
of mainstream media. The roots of this negative image can be traced
back to 2013 when Turkey banned access to popular social media
networks, therewith unfortunately causing some to associate Turkey
with countries like North Korea and China. In addition, Turkey’s
attitude towards journalists in the country and ISIS precipitated
the deepening of this negative perception.

Articles and editorials published by prominent U.S. newspapers such as
the New York Times and the Washington Post shaped the perceptions of
those who are not familiar with the dynamics of Turkey. Additionally,
Armenian lobbies active in the U.S. are fueling the fire by inflating
recent developments. Amidst the Kobani crisis, the Kurdish lobbies
endeavored to depict Turkey as supportive of ISIS militants. Within
this context, it has become more and more challenging to speak out
in favor of Turkey.

Enduring divergences on Syria and ISIS

The gap between Turkish and U.S. positions on Syria was not closed
in 2014. The U.S.’s policy toward Syria has revolved around the fight
against ISIS and the anti-ISIS coalition. Turkey, on the other hand,
built its policy on defeating Bashar al-Assad and, to this end,
has sought the establishment of a no-fly zone, buffer zone or a
safe corridor. Based on these approaches, the two parties strove
to convince one another of their cases to no true avail, with the
exception of a slight consensus on the coalition issue.

The NATO Wales Summit from September 4-5 was a crucial step for the
establishment of the anti-ISIS coalition. While Turkey was included
as one of the core states joining the coalition, it nonetheless
did not put its signature on the Declaration in Jeddah. In the end,
Turkey agreed to increase measures that would strengthen its border
security and agreed to train moderate Syrian opposition forces, yet
it did not become an active member of the coalition and it did not
grant access to Incirlik airbase for the coalition forces. It can be
said that Turkey deliberately adopted this ambiguous attitude. This
policy seems to be working in terms of preventing a major crisis. On
the one hand, Turkey has been able to avoid becoming a target of ISIS,
which is likely to maintain its presence along the Turkish border
for some time, and on the other hand, it has more or less reassured
its place within the Western alliance.

However, the process has not gone very smoothly. Particularly, the
U.S.’s provision of direct assistance to the PYD despite Turkey’s
opposition, which was explicitly articulated by President Erdogan,
and its sending of arms to fighters in Kobani created a rift between
the two countries. The U.S.’s cooperation with the PYD, whatever
the motives may be, has generated deep mistrust on the Turkish side
because of its profound sensitivity to the Kurdish dimension of the
conflict. Prior to the U.S.’s engagement with the PKK/PYD, Washington
had already developed a unique relationship with Iraqi Kurds subsequent
to 2003. And in general these developments have heightened Turkey’s
anxieties as to its own territorial unity and the fidelity of the
Americans as a trustworthy ally.

Turkey wants the ISIS and Assad issues to be considered as one but
the U.S. has not conceded to these demands. Although Washington stated
that Turkey’s insistence on pointed actions such as the implementation
of a no-fly zone would be evaluated, each of its following statements
have hinted at its rejection thereof. When Vice President Joe Biden
visited Ankara, we expected the issue to be decisively addressed,
nonetheless, the parties could not agree on a no-fly zone. In fact,
even though Biden’s visit was thought to be crucial for determining
the future trajectory of the anti-ISIS coalition, the only substantial
outcome of talks was the agreement on training the Syrian opposition.

Both the Turkish and the American parties put forward their best
efforts to convince the other of their case, but in the end neither
showed any sign of budging.

The impact of mid-term elections and expectations for 2015

A very dramatic shift occurred in the balance of power in Washington
with the mid-term elections of November 2014. The Republicans
reassured their dominance in the House of Representatives and gained
a majority in the Senate. Thus, the Republicans now have control of
the legislative branch. The effect of this change in Washington on
Turkey-US relations is twofold. The two countries can open a bright
new page if they can meet a joint decision regarding Syria. In
the opposite scenario, however, the Republicans might adopt a more
critical and pushy attitude towards Turkey. Additionally, the fact
that Turkey will be undergoing its own elections in the near future
might even complicate things further.

One of the hottest topics on the agenda between Turkey and the U.S. is
the 100th anniversary of the 1915 events in the Ottoman Empire and the
Armenian claims with reference thereto. The Republican Party do not
ideologically favor the Armenian claims. Furthermore, the Republican
Party’s grassroots does not contain a considerable Armenian population,
which therefore limits Armenian influence on the issue.

Speaker of the House John Boehner, during his visit to Turkey last
April, stated that the Armenian claims should be investigated
by historians. This indicates that the Republicans could play a
conciliatory role in preempting a potential crisis in Turkey-U.S.

relations.

Nevertheless, if a consensus on the Syrian issue remains absent and
Turkey’s poor democracy rankings persist, the Republicans might
attempt to punish Turkey by passing bills in both chambers. The
election atmosphere in Turkey might also complicate these matters. The
‘exceptional’ case of anti-Americanism in Turkey, which has been
adopted by a surprisingly large portion of the Turkish society,
rests on solid foundations. If the Armenian claims receive support
from the U.S. government, both the ruling and opposition parties
in Turkey might strive to augment their electoral gains by taking
advantage of these tensions.

Finally, a new topic has emerged recently in Turkey-U.S. relations with
the December 14th investigation. Here, debates on freedom of press,
on the one hand, and the extradition of Fethullah Gulen on the other
will continue to be a major topic for the two countries in 2015.

In particular, Turkey’s request that Gulen be extradited might create
new tensions in the two countries’ bilateral relations in the long run.

To conclude, 2014 ended with tensions that borrowed from the preceding
year. We can expect that these divergences will endure in 2015 unless
a major breakthrough changes the course of events.

LOOKING AT ARMENIAN-IRANIAN RELATIONS THROUGH A RUSSIAN LENS

EurasiaNet.org
Feb 4 2015

February 4, 2015 – 1:29pm, by Alex Vatanka

The late January visit to Armenia by Iranian Foreign Minister Javad
Zarif got little media attention, but it could have significant
ramifications for geopolitics in Eurasia. Specifically, the trip
could help Russia gain a trade outlet that softens the blow of
Western sanctions.

Zarif’s two-day stay in Armenia had all the usual diplomatic pomp
and promises. It came on the back of an October visit to Tehran by a
high-ranking delegation led by Prime Minister Hovik Abrahamyan. In
Yerevan, Zarif met his counterpart Eduard Nalbandian and President
Serzh Sargsyan. The statements that followed those meetings included
plenty of the usual diplomatic rhetoric. But they also contained
hints that the trip was more than mere diplomatic reciprocity.

Most significantly, Zarif said Iran has “no restrictions” in
developing ties with Armenia, highlighting two areas in particular —
transportation and trade. On both fronts, the role of Russia looms
large. First, both Tehran and Yerevan have emphasized the need to
make progress on the construction of the Southern Armenia Railway,
a project that would better link the two countries. On the issue of
trade, Zarif praised Armenia’s accession to the Russia-dominated
Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and pointed to it as a potentially
important development for Iran.

According to Russia’s Interfax news agency, Zarif touted the EEU as
providing “broader cooperation options to Iran, Armenia and Russia.”

Iran’s ambassador to Moscow, Mehdi Sanai, earlier had said Tehran would
look into signing a memorandum of understanding in 2015 on trade with
the EEU. Such an agreement could spur an increase in Iranian exports to
Russia. Sanai has been on record as saying Iranian-Russian trade should
jump from the present $3-5 billion annually to $70 billion per year.

While Sanai’s suggested trade volume target may be far from realistic,
a desire to achieve even an incremental increase in Iranian-Russian
trade requires the two countries to significantly expand transportation
links. At the moment, there is not even regular air cargo service
between Iran and Russia.

This is where a Russian angle to the construction of the Southern
Armenia Railway is apparent. As Prime Minister Abrahamyan put it,
“Iran and Armenia can jointly produce agricultural products and export
them to Eurasia” via the proposed rail project. However, both Moscow
and Tehran evidently have much greater ambitions than just providing an
outlet to and from the small Armenian market. Iran’s trade with Armenia
is only about $300 million per year, a tiny share of its overall trade.

The 470-km rail project, which was first proposed in 2010 and has
remained largely on the drawing board since then, is seen as a
missing link in a North-South Eurasian trade corridor connecting
the Persian Gulf to the Black Sea. Its construction would give both
Iran and also Russia an important alternative outlet for trade. The
significance of the project is also reflected in President Vladimir
Putin’s announcement back in September 2013 to contribute $429 million
in financing for the multi-billion-dollar rail project. Given its
current economic woes, there’s no longer a guarantee that Russia
could follow through on Putin’s pledge. Still, Russian diplomatic
and economic interests in Iran are intensifying.

The statements made during Zarif’s trip to Yerevan are better
understood when Russia’s regional role is taken into account. Since
Armenia regained independence in 1991, Russia has served as a
geopolitical protector for Yerevan. And thanks to the EEU and to
Russia’s acquisition of strategic economic assets in Armenia over the
past decade, the Kremlin is in position to play economic kingmaker
for the South Caucasus country.

Meanwhile, Iran has played a complimentary role to that of Russia
as far as Armenia is concerned. Tehran has served as Armenia’s
most reliable trade outlet to the world since 1994, when Turkey and
Azerbaijan imposed a blockade. In addition, Iran has tended to favor
Armenia, and not fellow Shia Azerbaijan, in the search for a lasting
political settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Two factors are driving Iran’s desire for closer ties to Armenia.

First, Tehran has from early on resented Azerbaijan’s relatively
strong relationship with the United States and European Union, and is
particularly alarmed by Baku’s growing contacts with Israel. While
Iranian-Azerbaijani relations have improved in recent months,Tehran
remains wary of Baku’s intentions.

Second, Tehran has made a strategic decision not to challenge or upset
Russian interests in Moscow’s self-defined “near abroad.” For Iran,
Russian goodwill is important in light of Tehran’s troubled relations
with the Western world.

Ultimately, when it comes to Armenia, Iran has pursued a policy that is
deferential to Russian interests. In cases where Russians interests
have been at stake – when, for example, Iran and Armenia pursued
joint energy projects that would circumvent Moscow – the Iranians
have been quick to back down in the face of Kremlin opposition.

These days when it comes to Iranian-Armenian ties, Russian calculations
are straightforward: given the rising tension between Moscow and the
West over Ukraine, the Kremlin wants to secure alternative trade
partners. As long as Russia believes closer Armenian-Iranian ties
serve its interests, the momentum that Zarif and his hosts in Yerevan
spoke about stands a good chance of building.

Editor’s note: Alex Vatanka is a Senior Fellow at Middle East Institute
and The Jamestown Foundation in Washington DC.

AZERBAIJAN – UTOPIAN RHETORIC, DYSTOPIAN REALITY

The Hill, DC
Feb 4 2015

By Anna Astvatsaturian Turcotte

If one lived within the confines of the Azerbaijani president’s
official Twitter account, one might think Azerbaijan is situated
within Utopia.

“Azerbaijan is a country that successfully goes down the path of
democracy, freedom, independence, progress and development,” President
Aliyev declared on January 7, 2015.

ADVERTISEMENT If you follow his tweets, you will find these daily
exaggerations thrown around lightly. What appears to be a discrepancy
with reality in Aliyev’s universe-through-Twitter exclamations,
are the independent reports of rigged elections and human rights
violations against journalists, civil societies and activists. Spanning
decades, they recently appeared on the international radar, thanks to
Azerbaijan’s emergence on the world stage, financed by its healthy,
albeit declining, oil and gas production.

What Aliyev forgets to include in his Twitter monologues are
the recently raised concerns by U.S. Secretary of State Kerry of
Azerbaijan’s human rights abuses. Once these concerns were raised,
Azerbaijani authorities raided and closed Radio Free Europe – Radio
Liberty’s Baku bureau, interrogated its employees while denying them
access to legal representation. According to RFE/RL, the bureau, funded
by the U.S. government, was taken over by Azerbaijani prosecutor’s
office, which confiscated documents and equipment before sealing
off the premises. The criticism that triggered such a response
focused on treatment of journalists, specifically the imprisonment
of investigative journalists and rights activists Leyla Yunus, her
husband Arif, and Khadija Ismayilova.

In his op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, David J. Kramer of Human
Rights and Democracy at the McCain Institute, called the raid “a direct
challenge to the U.S.,” and called for U.S. to “impose consequences
on” Aliyev’s “thuggish” regime. Kramer correctly pointed out that
some responded to the dictator’s capricious actions, as did the
Council of Europe’s human-rights chief, Nils Muiznieks, and several
U.N. envoys. The war of words erupted when the U.S.

Ambassador to OSCE, Daniel Baer, tweeted that the raid was a “behavior
of weak, insecure corrupt governments and leaders.” Words are not
enough.

“Why does the Aliyev regime think it can get away with its abuses?”

Kramer asks, before answering, “Because so far it has.”

With the unfolding of the tragic events in Paris, the Azerbaijani
crackdown is alarming to the observers. But this reality always
simmered under the glittery disguise of Baku’s downtown, with promises
of a progressive nation, eager to receive its investors.

Azerbaijan’s abuses have been swept under the rug not only with its
internal crackdowns on freedom, but also with its blatant disregard
to international law over the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) conflict.

Specifically, the 2014 downing of the NKR military helicopter did
not trigger any strong OSCE, or world, reactions. Three Armenian
crew members died performing a training flight over their territory,
shot down by Azerbaijan. This was the first such incident since a
ceasefire was agreed upon in 1994, yet nothing happened.

“Armenia does not want peace, while the Minsk Group, unfortunately
can’t achieve any result in this matter,” Aliyev tweets this January
Yet this Universe-through-Twitter logic does not jive with reality.

As far as NKR and Armenia are concerned, peace is the only thing that
is advantageous for the continued development of the two Armenian
nations. Since 1994 NKR enjoyed rebuilding of its nation, free of
Azerbaijani aggression. Why, then, would NKR disturb the peace it has
won, and the roads and buildings it has built in the last 21 years, by
agitating a war-mongering neighbor next door that threatens war daily?

It wouldn’t.

Aliyev is right that OSCE cannot achieve anything, but only if it
sits on the sidelines of hundreds of deliberate violations (from
the helicopter, to murder of Armenian civilians, to illegal border
infiltrations) with meek expressions of “concern.”

So it will continue. And every time Aliyev gets bored, expect a tweet
from him describing his fictitious Utopia.

“Armenia does not want peace,” he states, yet on the 25th anniversary
of Baku pogroms when innocent Armenian population of Azerbaijan was
killed, violated and exiled from their homes, one of his 43 tweets
that day declares: “Armenia is a powerless and poor country.”

It really is time for the Obama administration to enforce consequences
on Azerbaijan’s disregard for human rights and international agreements
by which it must abide.

Turcotte, the a uthor of “Nowhere, a Story of Exile,” is a lecturer
and a refugee from Baku, Azerbaijan.

KRISTOF: GLOBAL EFFORTS NEEDED TO END ‘MASS ATROCITIES’

Chron.com
Feb 4 2015

Nicholas Kristof notes importance of remembering lives lost in genocide
but determines that the events paralyze the world into tolerance.

By Nicholas Kristof

One of the great heroes of the 20th century was Auschwitz prisoner No.

4859, who volunteered to be there.

Witold Pilecki, an officer in the Polish resistance to the Nazi regime,
deliberately let himself be captured by the Germans in 1940 so that
he could gather information about Hitler’s concentration camps.

Inside Auschwitz, he set up resistance cells – even as he almost died
of starvation, torture and disease.

Then Pilecki helped build a radio transmitter, and, in 1942,
he broadcast to the outside world accounts of atrocities inside
Auschwitz – as the Nazis frantically searched the camp looking for
the transmitter. He worked to expose the Nazi gas chambers, brutal
sexual experiments and savage camp punishments, in hopes that the
world would act.

Finally, in April 1943, he escaped from Auschwitz, bullets flying
after him, and wrote an eyewitness report laying out the horror of
the extermination camps. He then campaigned unsuccessfully for an
attack on Auschwitz.

Eventually, he was brutally tortured and executed – not by the Nazis,
but after the war, in 1947, by the Communists. They then suppressed
the story of Pilecki’s heroism for decades (a book about his work,
“The Auschwitz Volunteer,” was published in 2012).

I was thinking of Pilecki last week on the 70th anniversary of the
liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camps. I had relatives
killed in Auschwitz (they were Poles spying on the Nazis for the
resistance), and these camps are emblems of the Holocaust and symbols
of the human capacity for evil.

In the coming months, the world will also commemorate the 100th
anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide – which, despite the
outrage of Turkish officials at the time, was, of course, a genocide.

There, too, I feel a connection because my ancestors were Armenian.

Then, in the summer, we’ll observe the 70th anniversary of the end of
World War II – an occasion for recalling Japanese atrocities in China,
Korea, the Philippines and elsewhere. All this is likely to fuel
more debates focused on the past. Should we honor Armenian genocide
victims with a special day? Should Japan apologize for enslaving
“comfort women”?

But, to me, the lesson of history is that the best way to honor
past victims of atrocities is to stand up to slaughter today. The
most respectful way to honor Jewish, Armenian or Rwandan victims of
genocide is not with a ceremony or a day, but with efforts to reduce
mass atrocities currently underway.

The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington is a shining example
of that approach, channeling outrage at past horrors to mitigate
today’s – from Syria to Central African Republic. But, in general, the
world is typically less galvanized by mass atrocities than paralyzed
by them.

Even during the Holocaust, despite the heroism of Pilecki and others
like Jan Karski, who tried desperately to shake sense into world
leaders, no one was very interested in industrial slaughter. Over
and over since then, world leaders have excelled at giving eloquent
“never again” speeches but rarely offered much beyond lip service.

This year, I’m afraid something similar will happen. We’ll hear
flowery rhetoric about Auschwitz, Armenia and World War II, and then
we’ll go on shrugging at crimes against humanity in Syria, Central
African Republic, Sudan and South Sudan, Myanmar and elsewhere.

Darfur symbolizes our fickleness. It has disappeared from headlines,
and Sudan makes it almost impossible for journalists to get there,
but Human Rights Watch reported that the human rights situation in
Sudan actually deteriorated in 2014.

Indeed, the Sudanese regime is now engaging in mass atrocities not
only in Darfur but also in the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile regions.

Sudan bombed an aid hospital in January in the Nuba Mountains, and
the Belgian branch of Doctors Without Borders has just announced the
closure of operations in Sudan because of government obstructionism.

A decade ago, one of the most outspoken politicians on Darfur – harshly
scolding President George W. Bush for not doing more – was an Illinois
senator, Barack Obama. Today, as president of the United States,
he is quiet. The United Nations force in Darfur has been impotent.

Granted, humanitarian crises rarely offer good policy choices, but
there’s no need to embrace the worse option, which is paralysis. We’ve
seen in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Kurdistan and, lately, Yazidi areas
of Iraq and eastern Congo that outside efforts sometimes can make
a difference.

So, sure, let’s commemorate the liberation of Auschwitz, the horror
of the Holocaust and the brutality of the Armenian genocide by trying
to mitigate mass atrocities today. The basic lesson of these episodes
is not just that humans are capable of astonishing evil, or that some
individuals like Witold Pilecki respond with mesmerizing heroism –
but that, sadly, it’s just too easy to acquiesce.

Kristof is a New York Times columnist.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress