Month: February 2015

Las Vegas Sun, NV
Feb 1 2015

Genocide monument breaks new ground for Clark County

February 1, 2015
by Conor Shine

A tragedy that began a century ago in the Middle East is being
memorialized in what may seem like an unlikely place — Sunset Park.

Thanks to the dedication of Las Vegas’ Armenian-American community, an
estimated 1 million to 1.5 million victims of World War I-era genocide
of Armenians will be honored with a monument in the park.

“The genocide is a part of our history, it’s part of our identity,”
said Andy Armenian, who helped lead the monument planning effort. “The
monument will be a healing process for the community. For the broader
(Las Vegas) community, we hope this monument will serve as a history
reminder and with that be a deterrent to future genocides.”

The monument is a major accomplishment for Las Vegas’ Armenian
community, which has been working for five years to raise money and
get permission to put the sculpture in one of the region’s biggest
parks.

It’s also opening the door for other public monuments to be placed
around the valley. During a yearlong debate about whether to allow the
Armenian Genocide monument, Clark County commissioners realized they
had no rules in place for deciding whether to green light requests for
proposed monuments. The result was a new policy, passed in December,
that lays out guidelines for how to get monuments approved for display
in public spaces.

Monuments must address historic events, groups or people, have
relevance to the broader community and be meaningful to future
generations. They can’t include religious speech and can be denied if
they’re considered objectionable to the general community. Other
guidelines cover the look and location, and bar monuments from parks
smaller than 25 acres.

Commissioner Mary Beth Scow, whose district includes Sunset Park, said
the rules ensure anyone requesting permission to build a monument in a
park would receive a fair chance at approval. It also gives the county
flexibility to deny proposals that don’t meet the requirements.

“I think (the Armenian genocide monument) hits the criteria,” she
said. “It’s timeless. It has a lot of community significance. I don’t
think a lot of people are aware of that genocide. It’s important for
people to see, so we don’t forget something like that and don’t repeat
it.”

Monuments also must be privately funded, something the Armenian
American Cultural Society of Las Vegas accomplished by raising more
than $100,000 to pay for construction and long-term maintenance.

Andy Armenian said Sunset Park was chosen because of its proximity to
the Armenian community’s largest church, at Eastern Avenue and Desert
Inn Road.

“It’s centrally located in Las Vegas,” he said. “It’s one of the
largest and most visited parks. At the same time, many Armenian
families live within five to 10 minutes of Sunset Park.”

Las Vegas’ monument is modeled after a similar sculpture in Armenia,
with 12 decorative concrete pillars representing the 12 provinces
where Armenians were killed during the genocide. Construction is
expected to begin in the next three months and finish in about a year.

BOX:
What is the Armenian Genocide?

The Armenian Genocide began April 24, 1915, when the Ottoman
government in what today is Turkey arrested about 200 Armenian
community leaders. Systematic killing of Armenian men followed, and
women, children and the elderly were forced out of their homeland on
death marches to the Syrian desert.

Between 1 million and 1.5 million Armenians were killed in what is
considered one of the first modern genocides. The remaining Armenian
community was scattered in a diaspora, eventually settling around the
world, including in the United States.

Controversially, the Turkish government, which succeeded the Ottoman
Empire, still disputes the use of the term genocide to describe the
mass killings.

Think Progress
Feb 1 2015

Why Did Amal Clooney Get Asked About Versace While Taking On Armenian Genocide?

by Beenish Ahmed Posted on February 1, 2015 at 9:35

When a reporter jokingly told Amal Clooney that she was expected to
wear Versace to a hearing at the European Court of Human Rights on
Friday, she made a quick retort.

“I’m wearing Ede & Ravenscroft,” she said referring to a company that
has been making the formal legal wear required of many judges and
lawyers in European for more than 300 years.

Clooney was at the court to challenge the appeal of a Turkish
politician who denied that Turkey carried out a genocide against
Armenians starting in 1915. Most historians, however, agree that some
1.5 million of Turkey’s Armenians were either killed or forced out of
the country.

The wife of the Hollywood heartthrob has drawn attention to the
genocide which is still vehemently contested by Turkey even though a
full century ago.

A quick listen to her argument before the judges makes the case for
how absurd it was to ask her — an international human rights attorney
— about her fashion preferences.

“There are images of beheadings, burnt bodies, railway cars of
Armenians being herded into the desert. There are descriptions of the
Euphrates River filled with blood,” she said.

But even as Clooney contends with such weighty issues, the questions
keep coming back to the superficial stuff. And that’s not because of
her envious place as the wife of one George Clooney.

Women have been questioned on the utterly beside-the-point topic of
their appearances even as they, quite literally, change the world.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has topped Forbes’ list of the most
powerful women in the world no less than eight times and yet, the news
outlet still had the gall to call her out on her “frumpy style.”

And the media can’t seem to get over the fact that she’s worn the same
tunic (intermittently, of course) for 18 years.

German fashion designer Karl Lagerferld said, “Everything is wrong,”
about her look, by which he meant: “Too long pants, too tight jackets,
awful colors.”

But doing everything right seems to be a problem, too.

That’s something that a former foreign minister from Pakistan found
out when she accessorized with oversized Roberto Cavalli sunglasses
and a pricey — and hard to get — Hermes Birkin bag.

Her look grabbed headlines around the world and drew scorn at home.

“Hina Rabbani Khar story confirms belief women are great foreign
ministers & reporting on female politicians is terrible,” Stephanie
Carvin, a London-based lecturer in international relations tweeted at
the time.

That’s something that former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton would
likely agree with. She famously slammed a pair of interviewers from
Kyrgyztan in 2010 when they asked her, what they had cautioned, would
be a silly question.

Here’s the exchange:

MODERATOR 1: Okay. Which designers do you prefer?

SECRETARY CLINTON: What designers of clothes?

MODERATOR 1: Yes.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Would you ever ask a man that question?

MODERATOR 1: Probably not. Probably not.

Male political leaders do, on occasion, get called out for their
fashion choices — but it seems to be more rare — and perhaps more
worthy of comment. One recent example is Prime Minister Narendra Modi
wore a suit that spelled his name in thin pinstripes when he hosted
President Barack Obama in India last week, or when a senior official
from Ghana unabashedly donned his wife’s coat on a trip to Germany.

What women wear, however, seems to come up even if what they wear is
rather banal — like say a pantsuit or required legal attire. But why?

Doug Sweet, media relations director for McGill, has one possible
explanation. He wrote back in 2008, “Male politicians, by donning the
uniform and largely taking away the issue of fashion judgments, can
then be evaluated more according to their performance and positions.
Women, who have yet to escape the fashion-judgment issue, continue to
be evaluated on those choices as well as on their platforms (not the
shoes) and comportment.”

But maybe it’s something more insidious than that — a persistent
tendency to judge women — first and foremost — for their appearances
instead of their skills or accomplishments.

As ThinkProgress recently reported, debate heated up in another field
just this week when the bestselling author was described in an
obituary as “Plain of feature, and certainly overweight, she was,
nevertheless a woman of wit and warmth.”

That didn’t keep her from selling 30 million books, certainly, but
female politician’s looks can be more damning.

Last year, study by the Women’s Media Center found that no matter what
is said about a female candidate’s appearance — positive or negative —
it has a negative impact on what voters think of her.

How does that play out for international human rights lawyers working
to foster accountability for a genocide that took place a century ago?
Let’s just say it might be for the best that Amal Clooney has to stick
to the requisite black robes and white collars.

Especially because, as she said in her statement in court last week,
“The stakes could not be higher for the Armenian people.”

Arutz Sheva, Israel
Feb 1 2015

Erdogan: I Want to be Like Queen Elizabeth

Turkey’s president explains he doesn’t want to be a sultan, but rather
more like the British Queen.

By Ben Ariel

Turkey’s president has big aspirations. He doesn’t want to be a
sultan, but he does want to be like Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II.

The comments by Recep Tayyip Erdogan were made on the state-run TRT
channel on Thursday, and were quoted by AFP.

Erdogan explained that his desire for an expanded presidential role
would not undermine democracy, pointing to the UK as an example.

“In my opinion, even the UK is a semi-presidency. And the dominant
element is the Queen,” he said.

The UK is a constitutional monarchy, governed by a parliamentary
system, but its hereditary monarch wields only symbolic power.

Erdogan’s comments came after fresh criticism from the opposition that
he would act like an “Ottoman sultan” once his presidential role has
been boosted, noted AFP.

Erdogan said that leaders of presidential systems in the United
States, Brazil, South Korea, Mexico are not accused of acting like
monarchs.

“I mean, why is it only a monarchy when an idea like this is floated
in Turkey?” he asked, adding, “We need to speed up to close the gap in
this race. The biggest advantage… would be in abolishing
policy-making through multiple channels.”

Erdogan became president in August after more than a decade as prime
minister, but the opposition accuses him of transforming the state by
imposing a gradual Islamization and riding roughshod over democracy.

Throughout his time in power there have been more signs of Turkey
turning more extremist. In 2013, the Turkish Parliament tightened
restrictions on the sale and advertising of alcoholic beverages.

A year earlier, a Turkish court formally charged internationally known
pianist and composer Fazil Say with insulting Islamic religious
values, in comments he made on Twitter.

Previously, Turkey’s Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk was prosecuted for his
comments about the mass killings of Armenians, under a law that made
it a crime to insult the Turkish identity. The government eased that
law in an amendment in 2008.

In December, Erdogan vowed to make lessons in the Arabic-alphabet
Ottoman language compulsory in high schools, despite objections from
secularists.

The August elections were the first time a Turkish president,
traditionally a ceremonial role, was directly elected by the people.
In the wake of his victory, Erdogan insisted he now has a popular
mandate to be an active and powerful leader.

From: A. Papazian

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Feb 1 2015

Turkey condemns Armenia president’s ‘invitation’ remarks

1 February 2015

Turkish presidential spokesperson calls Armenian president’s remarks
on Turkey’s invitation for Battle of Canakkale commemoration
‘unacceptable’

Turkey’s presidential spokesman has said Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan’s statement in regards to Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan’s invitation for the commemoration of the Battle of Canakkale
is contrary to diplomatic practices and is ‘unacceptable.’

Spokesman Ibrahim Kalin told AA correspondent on Saturday that it was
known that the Armenian government was trying to turn the year 2015
into an international campaign against Turkey and Turks, and to this
end Yerevan was ready to make statements that contained insults and
hate speech and violated diplomatic practices.

Kalin said that Armenian President Sargsyan’s remarks on January 29,
2015 at the “State Commission for the Coordination of 100th
Anniversary Events” in Yerevan about Erdogan’s invitation earlier in
January was “a new manifestation of this unfortunate attitude.”

“It is impossible for us to accept these expressions that target the
president’s invitation to Armenia and that are in contravention of
diplomatic practices. We return these remarks that are unbecoming of a
statesman to Mr. Sargsyan,” Kalin said.

President Sargsyan reportedly denounced President Erdogan’s invitation
as a “short-sighted” attempt to overshadow the hundredth anniversary
of the events of 1915, according to ArmeniaNow.com.

The spokesman further said: “Turkey will continue to stand against all
attempts to manipulate a one-sided view of history through
exploitative politicking. Our President called on historians for the
establishment of a “Common History Commission” in 2005 to examine
Turkey and Armenia’s common history and ensured the signing of 2009
protocols that paved the way for the normalization of Turkey-Armenia
relations. As a continuation of this peaceful and constructive
attitude, he issued a condolence message addressing all Armenians on
April 23, 2014.

“With these brave and extraordinary steps, a clear position has been
established against policies based on exploiting the pain of 1915. But
on every occasion, Armenia gave no response to these moves by Turkey.”

Kalin also added that the Armenian government was welcoming towards
neither having a fair discussion for the events of 1915 nor ending the
occupation in Nagorno-Karabakh to normalize its relations with Turkey
and Azerbaijan and to establish peace and stability in the region.

“This attitude is particularly damaging to Armenia and Armenians,” he said.

Emphasizing that irrespective of what happened Turkey had been taking
many steps for the benefit of both its Armenian citizens and the state
of Armenia, Kalin said: “The long-established Turkish-Armenian
friendship will continue to survive despite the provocations of
radical groups.”

He said that it appeared unrealistic to expect Turkey’s sincere steps
to be appreciated by President Sargsyan and his administration.

“The Armenian government’s shallow and hateful discourse seems
incapable of grasping the meaning of the Battle of Canakkale,” Kalin
said.

He added that the 100th anniversary of the battle — which stands as
an epic victory by the Anatolian people — and the memory of the
martyrs would be marked with an international ceremony.

Stressing that Canakkale land and see battles have been commemorated
on March 18 and April 24-25 for years, Kalin said that this year the
centennial ceremony would be conducted with the highest participation
at the national and international level, and it would issue a message
of peace and brotherhood to the world.

1 February 2015
AA

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Feb 1 2015

Turkey ministry denounces Armenia president remarks

1 February 2015

Foreign ministry expresses ‘surprise’ at president’s ‘unbecoming’
style, calls Armenian authorities to pursue common sense.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry condemned Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan’s statement in regards to Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan’s invitation for the commemoration of the Battle of Canakkale.

In mid-Jan, the Turkish President sent invitation letters to more than
100 leaders, including the Armenian President Sargsyan, to participate
the commemoration of the Battle of Canakkale on April 24.

President Sargsyan reportedly denounced President Erdogan’s invitation
as a “short-sighted” attempt to overshadow the hundredth anniversary
of the events of 1915 to be held on the same date, according to
ArmeniaNow.com.

“We condemn this style, which is unbecoming of a neighboring country
leader or the representative of the ancient Armenian nation,” the
Turkish Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

The ministry said that it is not surprising that radical Armenian
circles referred to this historical issue with outdated rhetoric.
“What is surprising is the similar attitude taken by those who are
responsible for managing the state,” the ministry said.

The ministry said that in the Battle of Canakkale all the people
composing the Ottoman Empire, including Armenians, experienced deep
anguish and that the Turkish president’s invitation to his counterpart
was also to commemorate the Armenians who died in that battle.

The statement recalled the historical “condolence message” that Turkey
sent to Armenia on April. 23, 2014, and said that Turkey knows and
shares the sorrow of Armenian people.

The foreign ministry invited Armenian authorities to pursue common
sense, and shove aside any attempts to turn 2015 into a year of hatred
against Turkey and Turks.

During the First World War, the Ottoman Empire approved a deportation
law for Armenians, amid their uprising with the help of the invading
Russian army. As a result, an unknown number of people died in civil
strife.

Armenian diaspora and state of Armenia term the incidents as
“genocide” and ask for compensation, whereas Ankara says while
Armenians died during deportation many Turks also died due to the
attacks by Armenian gangs all around Anatolia.

1 February 2015

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Feb 1 2015

ErdoÄ?an spokesman slams Sarksyan for `unstatesmanlike’ remarks

Presidential Spokesman Ä°brahim Kalın. (Photo: Today’s Zaman, Mustafa Kirazlı)

January 31, 2015, Saturday/ 18:14:49/ TODAY’S ZAMAN / ISTANBUL

A spokesman for Turkish President Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an condemned
Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan for recent comments accusing Ankara
of sending an `indecent invitation’ to an event commemorating the
Çanakkale (Gallipoli) battle of World War I on Apr. 24.

Sarksyan readily dismissed the Turkish invitation for the event,
saying instead that ErdoÄ?an should respond to his that was invitation
extended a few months ago to join Armenians in the commemoration of
the victims of the Armenian `genocide’ in Yerevan on April 24.

On Jan. 29, Sarksyan repeated his criticism of the Turkish initiative,
calling it a `cynical and short-sighted invitation.’

`They say that in politics all means will do, but in this particular
case Ankara has harmed its own self. Once I received that indecent
invitation, I hurried to publicly respond to it so as to prevent any
improper comments from the international mass media. I think my
response and the reaction of the Turkish society have proved that it
was an injudicious initiative,’ Sarksyan was quoted in the Armenian
media as saying during a meeting of a state committee for the
commemoration of the centennial of the alleged Armenian genocide.

In remarks published by state news agency Anadolu on its website,
presidential spokesman Ä°brahim Kalın denounced Sarksyan’s comments as
`undiplomatic’ and `unstatesmanlike.’

`We return the expressions he used back to him,’ he told the agency.

Kalın accused the Armenian administration of not responding to
Turkey’s good will gestures, including the invitation to join the
Çanakkale commemoration. `It is observed that it is not realistic to
expect the Sarksyan administration, which remains stuck in distorted
pages of history, to appreciate these sincere steps [for
reconciliation],” Kalın said.

`The Armenian administration’s shallow and hateful rhetoric seems to
be unable to comprehend the true meaning of the Çanakkala battle as
well,’ he said.

Turkey sent invitations to the leaders of 102 states to attend the
commemorative event that is scheduled to take place on April 23-24.
Armenia, on the other hand, is preparing for the commemoration of the
centennial of what it calls a genocide of Anatolian Armenians during
the final years of the Ottoman Empire.

On Jan. 29, Sarksyan said a number of countries have already accepted
Armenia’s invitation to attend the commemoration in Yerevan.

In an open letter to ErdoÄ?an on Jan. 16, Sargsyan declined the Turkish
invitation, saying it indicates Turkey’s “traditional policy of
denialism.”

“Year by year, improving its tools of history distortion, this time
Turkey marks the anniversary of the Battle of Gallipoli on April 24
for the first time, while it began on March 18, 1915, and lasted till
late January 1916. Furthermore, the Allies’ land campaign — [the]
Gallipoli land battle — took place on April 25, 1915,’ said Sarksyan
in his letter. `What purpose does it serve if not a simpleminded goal
to distract the attention of the international community from the
events dedicated to the centennial of the Armenian Genocide? Whereas,
before organizing a commemorative event, Turkey has a much more
important obligation toward its own people and the entirety of
humanity — namely the recognition and condemnation of the Armenian
Genocide,’ he added.

Ankara denies claims that the events of 1915 amounted to genocide,
arguing that both Turks and Armenians were killed when Armenians
revolted against the Ottoman Empire during World War I in
collaboration with the Russian army, which was then invading Eastern
Anatolia. Every year on April 24, Armenians around the world
commemorate the Armenian victims who died at the end of World War I in
Ottoman Turkey. Armenians are preparing for the centennial
commemoration events this year in April.

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Feb 1 2015

New Agos Editor-in-Chief Danzikyan discusses Dink legacy

Yetvart Danzikyan (2nd row, center-right) has taken over as the new
editor-in-chief of the Agos weekly, after Rober KoptaÃ…? (2nd row,
center-left) (Photo: Cihan)

February 01, 2015, Sunday/ 18:11:31/ ZEYNEP KARATAÃ…? / ISTANBUL

Yetvart Danzikyan, the new editor-in-chief of Agos, an Armenian weekly
based in Ä°stanbul, spoke on Saturday during a panel discussion held at
the Getronagan Armenian High School Alumni Association in Ä°stanbul on
the legacy of slain journalist Hrant Dink, who was the newspaper’s
founding editor-in-chief, in addition to other unresolved murders in
the country.

`We all began to speak and discover ourselves [as Armenians in Turkey]
with Hrant. And for this, Hrant was a revolutionary. When he was
killed, it was a huge trauma for the Armenian community because for
the first time you [we] begin to speak, but the leader is killed,’
explained Danzikyan.

The journalist also shared his respect for Dink, saying, `Hrant was
able to recognize that there were things that needed to be discussed
and he was able to give them a tone and balance [that was
accessible].’ Danzikyan further explained that because Dink was an
accessible leader who was creating real change, he posed a huge threat
to Turkish nationalists.

During the panel discussion, those assembled, who included journalists
Ahmet Ã…?ık and Ä°smail Saymaz, also shared their opinions on Hrant’s
legacy. Å?ık, Saymaz and Danzikyan all shared the fact that since
Dink’s murder many people have come to them to say if Hrant was alive,
he would do this, or that. But the three believe these are the wrong
types of remarks to make because no one can know what would have
transpired if he hadn’t been killed.

With Danzikyan in his new position as head of Agos, the discussion
also touched on Etyen Mahçupyan, a Turkish-Armenian journalist and
senior adviser to Prime Minister Ahmet DavutoÄ?lu since October 2014.
Much controversy has existed over the past year concerning Mahçupyan’s
professional decisions. Mahçupyan took over the position of
editor-in-chief of Agos in the wake of Dink’s assassination; he also
previously contributed to columns in the Zaman and Taraf dailies. The
Turkish-Armenian intellectual now writes columns for the
pro-government Daily Sabah and AkÃ…?am daily.

Mahçupyan has been faced with much criticism from many members of the
Armenian and liberal communities for betrayal and selling himself out
to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party). Danzikyan,
however, argued: `We must recognize one thing, Hrant was a leftist and
Etyen is a right-winger. I remember the night Hrant was killed and no
one knew what to do. We weren’t sure if the paper was going to
continue or if it was going to close. [¦] I remember thinking to
myself that it was a good thing, thinking here is this intellectual,
and an experienced journalist was able to continue its publication. At
that moment, we were in that state of mind.’

Finding justice for murders

While the legacy of Hrant Dink was a large part of the discussion held
on Saturday, the objectives of the panels were to examine the murders
of various minorities within Turkey whose trials have stalled.

The Balıkçı family spoke about the ongoing trials of their deceased
son’s murder. Sevag Balıkçı was 25 years old when he was shot, in what
official reports from military commanders claim to be an accident,
when he was performing his mandatory military service in 2011. The
young man’s family, who are of Armenian descent, believes their son’s
killing was deliberate. Balıkçı’s murder occurred on April 24, 2011,
the remembrance day of the mass killings of Armenians of 1915, and it
was later learned that the man responsible for his death was an
ultranationalist. Now, four years on, a trial for the killing
continues and the family shared that they will continue to seek
justice but are facing much difficulty concerning evidence and
witnesses in the process. They shared that evidence has been tampered
with and the crime scene was also altered, in addition to the fact
that eyewitnesses have changed their statements.

When asked whether they had ever felt oppression in Turkey before the
incident, Sevag’s mother, Ari Balıkçı, said: `No. We never felt any
pressure, but they forced us to feel it.’

Also present to share their stories at Saturday’s meeting were Baydzar
Midilli, the daughter of Maritzsa Küçük, an elderly Armenian woman who
was murdered in Ä°stanbul’s Samatya neighborhood, and Maside Ocak, the
sister of Hasan Ocak, who was tortured to death when he was arrested
in 1995. Other than the Dink case, no one has been convicted for the
murders shared by the relatives during the discussion panel.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Daily Sabah, Turkey
Feb 1 2015

Turkish people’s nature is inclined to a presidential system

ALI Ã`NAL
ANKARA

Deputy PM Arınç, in an exclusive interview with Daily Sabah, said the
AK Party’s aim is to have enough seats in the June election to form a
new constitution and later to change the current political structure
to a presidential or semi-presidential system

Deputy prime minister and government spokesman, Bülent Arınç, is an
important figure in Turkish politics who has been a deputy for 20
years and in politics for 50 years in total. He was the head of
Turkey’s delegation at last week’s U.N. meetings in Geneva regarding
the assessment of human rights in Turkey. Daily Sabah spoke with Arınç
on different topics ranging from the Geneva meetings to domestic
politics.

President Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an has claimed that a presidential system
would consolidate Turkey’s power. Do you agree with this position?

We can think that in our people’s nature and thought process, they are
more inclined to strong leaders in the political system. If the people
support a presidential system of government, I think that it would be
more successful.

The first aim of the June elections is to have a count of sufficient
seats to make a new constitution. Without a new constitution, it is
impossible to have a presidential or semi-presidential system. The
Constitution and the structure of governance should be in accord with
each other, however, there is none at the moment. There is a popularly
elected president who uses the authority granted by Parliament. This
is a discordant. This may not cause major issues, but may result in
two-headed governance. If there is to be a presidential or
semi-presidential system, all of its elements should take place in a
new constitution, and if the people accept this new system, it should
be implemented. We can see this through a referendum. If the people do
not want this change, the Constitution should be regulated
accordingly, or this two-headed government may cause tensions between
the president and government or institutions.

Last week the U.N. Commission of Human Rights has finished a second
term review on Turkey in its Universal Periodic Review Mechanism and
you were the head of our delegation. How do you evaluate your contacts
at this meeting?

The first review on Turkey was done in 2010 and it will continue to
happen once every four years. I attended this meeting due to being
responsible for human rights. There are two years of work behind these
meetings. We met with many representatives of different ministries
such as Foreign Affairs, Internal Affairs, Family and Social Policies
and Justice, and discussed our latest situation on the topics that
were directed as questions by the other countries.

Our work was a success. During the existence of the Universal Periodic
Review Mechanism, no one has faced as many questions as Turkey.
Representatives of 122 countries asked 278 questions or gave advice.
After the meeting 20 representatives came and congratulated us. Even,
the trio of Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Gabon expressed that our
presentation was very successful.

On the second day all of the topics that Turkey has solved or is on
its way to solving were put aside and we answered some questions and
faced criticism we disagreed extensively with.

Except for a couple of countries that asked accusatory questions, all
of the countries’ speeches were encouraging. I can say in comfort that
this meeting was a source of pride for us. As a result, we have
accepted 199 pieces of advice and questions out of a total of 278,
because we were already carrying these out. We accepted 52 more on
condition that we will inspect them and will have a precise result
later. We denied the remaining 27 questions or advice.

The reason behind denying this is there were some countries that
directed questions accusing Turkey instead of giving advice or asking
honest questions. These countries were Greek Cyprus, Greece and Egypt.
We denied Greek Cypriot’s questions on the basis of not recognizing
them diplomatically. We told them that we will have their questions
and advice on record, but we will not evaluate them.

In this meeting, Armenia’s question’s content was a matter of
curiosity. However, they did not use the word “genocide” and asked a
question referring to international agreements. Since 2015 is 100
years since the alleged genocide, can this “positive” message be seen
as a step toward improving Armenia-Turkey relations?

The Armenian spokesman used “genocide” as a general expression, not
intending to accuse Turkey. They mentioned the removal of some
blockades regarding humanitarian situations. We told them that they
are able to reach other countries through Turkey. Also, there are
flights to Armenia from Turkey. We have also aided them with
humanitarian aims. We expressed that our vision is to be a good
neighbor and friend with Armenia.

Of course, April 24, 2015 is an important date for them and their
diaspora. We know that the allegations of genocide mostly originate
from the diaspora and are not fully supported by the Armenian
government and people. I do not expect improved relations with Armenia
until April; this is against the nature of the situation. It cannot be
expected that a country owing its existence to these allegations take
a sharp turn such as this, not in its centennial year. However, I know
that there will be positive developments in the future.

Five years ago, we signed some agreements with Armenia in Switzerland.
While seeming unwilling to Armenia, we said that we could open our
borders and establish diplomatic relations with some conditions. One
of the conditions was its dispute with our friend and neighbor
Azerbaijan. With the improvement of that relationship, we were going
to take some steps simultaneously. Maybe knowingly, Armenia disrupted
this. However, I know that the Armenian people and government want to
consolidate their relations with Turkey. They need it and we also have
a common history with both its tragedies and happiness. Known as the
“Loyal People” in the Ottoman Empire, we have to put the Armenian
uprisings in the last decades of the empire aside and need to continue
our historical togetherness.

This togetherness is not exclusive to Armenians, but also for Jews and
Greeks. We come from a multicultural society. We are talking about a
Turkey where everyone has internalized the culture of coexistence.
This feature sets an example for the world. Actually, the EU should
have let Turkey join solely due to this feature.

You have said that you are expecting positive developments regarding
relations with Armenia. Are there any preparations for this?

No, this is already our traditional foreign policy. We always seek a
zero-problem policy with our neighbors. In this context, we are
currently not in a new project with Armenia. However, the conditions
may bring us to a point to establish diplomatic relations, even to
friendship. While it is Armenia who should take steps, we do not
expect them to show any inclination until April is over. If in April
they do not show rash behavior, we may think this as a positive
development and try to conclude this affair in friendship.

In the past weeks you made a statement regarding the improvement of
relations with Egypt and Gulf countries. Is it possible to interpret
these statements as an effort to regulate relations?

Many other politicians, including myself, would express that Egypt and
Turkey have a common ground in history and that regarding our roles in
the Middle East, there was always a friendly relation between the
countries. However, since the last change of regime in Egypt, our
president and government’s principal attitude toward Egypt is obvious.
In the short term, I find these sustained relations would harm both
Egypt and Turkey, leaving both countries indifferent to the regional
developments, which is dangerous because Egypt is an important country
in the Middle East, as is Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Even Qatar who
stood with us has revised its relations and agreed with Egypt. At the
moment, there are not any countries other than Turkey that disagrees
with the change of regime in Egypt. We can always express our
disagreement regarding the change of regime in Egypt, however,
realpolitik shows us that Turkey and Egypt are dependent on each
other. There must be cooperation among these countries to calm all the
conflicts happening and achieve peace in the region. Because of this,
I find our president’s attendance at the funeral of the Saudi king
correct. I think there will be a visit to Saudi Arabia by the
president or prime minister in the near future due to King Salman
assuming the throne. Saudi Arabia is an important country, if you
think that President Barack Obama attended the funeral with his wife.
Saudi Arabia is our traditional friend. I still see it that way. If
there is distance between us, the elimination of it is a duty that
falls on all of us.

If we return to our subject, Egypt should give a date for
transitioning to democracy if they want to take a step towards Turkey.
They should permit to some political parties’ activities. Still held
unjustly in prison, Mohammed Morsi could be freed, as well as the
1,000 political prisoners. These are political prisoners and nowhere
in the world would they be allowed to be executed.

Therefore, they have to give a sign that they are taking a step toward
democratization that shows that they are giving up rigidity in
relations with Turkey. It is easier said than done. I know it is a
hard thing to do for Egypt. Thus, there may be a need for “catalyst”
countries to ease the attitude of Egypt. Both the region and the world
need this.

As you are the deputy prime minister responsible of minorities, do you
think we will see more candidates for parliament from minorities?

There are very valuable people among minorities representing their
community in the field of science, arts, etc. In the June elections,
there should be more candidates from minorities as well as women and
young deputies. In the foundation Parliament, according to laws, there
is a member that is from the minority foundations. We are benefiting
very much from their existence. As I get to know them, I think that
they would serve very well in Parliament. I will talk about this with
the prime minister personally. We should work for the improvement of
this unity as it was in the past. The prime minister has commissioned
Etyen Mahcupyan as his advisor, which was a very positive development.
I am expecting steps to be taken on this issue during the election
process.

From: Baghdasarian

SDA – Suisse
mercredi 28 janvier 2015 10:22 AM CET

La Cour de Strasbourg réexamine le cas Perinçek contre la Suisse

Strasbourg (F)

La Grande Chambre de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH) à
Strasbourg réexamine mercredi à la demande de la Suisse l’affaire qui
oppose Berne à Dogu Perinçek. Le nationaliste turc a été condamné par
la justice vaudoise pour discrimination raciale après avoir qualifié
le génocide arménien de “mensonge international”.

Prendront la parole dès 09h15: la partie requérante, à savoir le
gouvernement suisse représenté par son agent à Strasbourg Frank
Schürmann, ainsi que les gouvernements turc et arménien qui
s’expriment en qualité de tiers-intervenants. La décision de la Cour
composée de 17 juges, qui sera définitive, tombera ultérieurement, à
une date non précisée.

Norme antiraciste

Président du Parti des travailleurs de Turquie (extrême gauche), Dogu
Perinçek (né en juin 1942) a nié l’existence du génocide arménien de
1915 lors de conférences en Suisse en 2005. En mars 2007, le Tribunal
de police de Lausanne l’a condamné pour violation de la norme
antiraciste, article 261 bis, alinéa 4, du Code pénal.

En décembre 2013, la CEDH a cependant donné raison à Dogu Perinçek en
affirmant que la Suisse avait violé la liberté d’expression (article
10). Sans se prononcer sur la qualification juridique du génocide
arménien et doutant du consensus général sur ces événements, elle a
affirmé qu’une société démocratique doit pouvoir débattre des
questions sensibles, même si cela déplaît.

Marge de manoeuvre

Pour la Suisse, l’enjeu est de taille. “Le réexamen du cas Perinçek
vise à préciser la marge de manoeuvre dont disposent les autorités
helvétiques dans l’application prudente de la norme antiraciste tout
en respectant la liberté d’expression”, a indiqué à l’ats l’Office
fédéral de la justice (OFJ).

L’audience se tient dans un contexte particulièrement tendu. Non
seulement les Arméniens commémorent cette année le centenaire du
génocide, mais la question générale de la liberté d’expression et de
ses limites est plus que jamais d’actualité après les attentats de
Paris contre “Charlie Hebdo” et ses suites meurtrières.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

SDA – Suisse
mercredi 28 janvier 2015 12:40 PM CET

La norme suisse protège la paix publique, pas la vérité historique

Strasbourg

La Suisse a défendu son point de vue mercredi à Strasbourg dans
l’affaire Perinçek. Elle a souligné que la norme antiraciste utilisée
contre le Turc Dogu Perinçek vise à protéger la paix publique et non
pas la vérité historique.

Aux propos de Dogu Perinçek, qui a qualifié en 2005 en Suisse le
génocide arménien de “mensonge international”, il faut ajouter
“l’intention haineuse”, a relevé la délégation helvétique en rappelant
l’arrêt du Tribunal fédéral.

Si la marge de manoeuvre de la Suisse est “étroite” dans l’application
de l’article 261 bis du Code pénal, le cas de Dogu Perinçek est
approprié. Il y avait bien atteinte à la dignité dans les paroles
tenues lors de ses conférences.

“Aucun des propos (de Dogu Perinçek) n’a étayé le débat juridique”, a
plaidé Frank Schürmann, l’agent de la Confédération à la Cour
européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH). Il a invité à relire certains
passages “pertinents” des déclarations du nationaliste turc. Surtout
quand il a dit: “Le génocide c’est une chose, le massacre de quelques
Arméniens, c’en est une autre”.

Ou lorsque Dogu Perinçek a affirmé que le peuple arménien était “le
véritable agresseur”, a poursuivi Frank Schürmann. Il a souligné la
gravité de l’accusation envers les Arméniens qui falsifieraient
l’histoire avec ce “mensonge” La volonté du nationaliste n’a jamais
été faire avancer la recherche historique, a martelé le responsable
suisse.