Author: Andres-Papazian

LECTURE ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AT FRESNO STATE

13:04, 27 Feb 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan

Dr. Sergio La Porta, professor in the armenian studies program,
concluded this years’ Fresno State Talks last night in the , with
a lecture on the importance and relevance of the Armenian Genocide
and how it shaped world civilization today, reports The Collegian,
a student-run newspaper that serves the Fresno State Community.

Entitled “Who Cares? Genocide, Historical Memory, and Moral
Responsibility,” La Porta’s lecture emerged from his own personal
history with Armenian studies as a graduate of Harvard University.

Lucy Garayan, a senior psychology student, joked that although La
Porta’s last name did not end in a “ian” representative of the Armenian
heritage, his expertise and love of the field and the people inspired
his students through his lectures and knowledge to learn more about
the culture.

“At the time, I thought Armenian role in history was minute,” Garayan
said. “Armenia today is the size of Maryland, however, it was in Dr.

La Porta’s class that I learned about a rich and powerful history. I
felt it was my duty to learn about my own culture and history, but
in fact it is the duty of all Armenians to study our history and
language. It is through knowledge that we can keep our traditions
alive.”

La Porta began his lecture with an introduction into the history of
the Armenian Genocide, which began on April 24, 1915, when the Young
Turk regime of the Ottoman Empire arrested 250 Armenian intellectuals
who were soon murdered after their seizure.

In the next four months, La Porta said, the regime murdered 800,000
Armenian citizens of the empire, at a rate of 200,000 people a month,
comparable to the Rwandan Genocide. By 1923, approximately 1.5 million
people had been murdered by the Young Turk forces, and over 500,000
people displaced.

“Now, 100 years later, this crime against humanity, this genocide,
remains unrecognized by the Republic of Turkey,” La Porta said. It’s
historical reality is consistently questioned, not only insulting
the memory of millions of people, but also denying them historical
justice and their inherent human dignity.”

La Porta spoke about local events commemorating the Armenian Genocide,
including the memorial currently being built on campus set to be
revealed on April 23 and coordinated with the Republic of Armenia.

Other local events include the Armenian Genocide Centennial Committee,
a philharmonic concert April 25, the current art exhibit at Fresno
Art Museum, and a town hall meeting on March 16.

La Porta noted the similarity of the Armenian Genocide to that of
the Holocaust during World War II. He explained that there was
a specific organization employed for the mass extermination of
Armenians, legalizing and putting into effect laws which authorized
the deportation of Armenians and seizure of their property-millions
of acres of land and possessions, which La Porta said led to part of
the modern economic basis of Turkey today.

“We realize that this is not a random set of killings, but an organized
attempt to eliminate a portion of the population,” La Porta said.

He spoke of the horrors of the genocide, in which modern technology
such as telegraphs and railways were used. Armenians were transported
in packed cars where they often suffocated to death.

“To add insult to injury they were often forced to buy their ticket
first, then packed into these cars, and often the train would stop
in the desert and have them taken out and murdered,” he said.

To this day, La Porta says, the Armenian Genocide fails to be
recognized by the Republic of Turkey.

“The argument that they make was that many Turks died during World
War I, as if this negates the atrocities that occurred,” La Porta said.

“Yes, a lot of Turks did die in World War I, and a lot of Armenians
died as well. The difference was a lot of Turks died fighting in
World War I, a lot of Armenians died because they were executed.”

But La Porta said that from the destruction, there is still an
opportunity to show a better side of human nature through the
internationalization of the Armenian Genocide. Through American
aid and relief, La Porta called this one of the greatest moments in
american history.

“People often say that’s not that important, nobody remembers it,
nobody knew about it. This is completely untrue. People knew about
the Armenian Genocide very well. The New York Times had over 200
articles on the Armenian Genocide between 1915 and 1922.”

According to La Porta, between 1916 and 1930, The American Committee
for Relief in the Near East (today known as the Near Eastern Relief
Fund) raised 116 million dollars in relief aid for Armenians and
others similarly affected, (equivalent to 1.5. billion dollars today.)
La Porta said that this was the largest relief effort ever launched
in the United States.

The effects of the Armenian Genocide, La Porta said, are still very
alive and present today.

“It destroyed a vital sector of Armenia, also caused the Armenian
diaspora, part of the economic basis for the economy of Turkey, and
allowed the Republic of Turkey to form its modern capital. We see that
this process of nationalism and of purity beginning with the Armenian
Genocide. We can chart its progress in the early 20th century.”

He says that remembrance may be crucial in honoring those that
were lost.

“Never again, Armenians will never again allow themselves to be
executed in the way that happened in 1915. The Armenian Genocide
continues to penetrate current political conflicts in the middle east.”

Amongst many stories of the survivors, La Porta says there is no
debate about the reality of the Armenian genocide, and the reality
of who was responsible.

“The genocide is a historical fact,” La Porta said. “It’s important to
remember that they didn’t just disappear. They didn’t just die. They
were killed by an agent, and that agent was the Ottoman Turkish regime
of the Young Turks. This moral distancing is understandable because
it’s uncomfortable to think that people could do this to one another.

Yet we need to be honest about it. We need to say who did it. We
need to be clear about who did it to overcome the trauma of the
genocide itself.”

La Porta concluded his lecture by demonstrating the power of memory.

“Actually remembering is not stopping us from going forward,” he said.

“It’s the catalyst that allows us to engage in acts of humanity.”

From: A. Papazian

JEWS OF ARMENIA URGE ISRAELI POLITICIANS NOT TO GIVE IN TO AZERBAIJANI-TURKISH PROPAGANDA

11:25, 27 February, 2015

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 27, ARMENPRESS. World history is not full of examples
of fortitude, rigor and steadiness of peoples’ spirit, which endured
infinite number of sufferings and deprivations. An example of manhood
in this worthy line is the co-existence of two old nations – Jews and
Armenians, who, despite all the difficulties and ordeal, miraculously
summoned the strength not only to survive, but also, on the path of
their struggle for life, to enrich the world spiritual heritage with
achievements in culture and science. As reports “Armenpress”, William
Weiner, President of the “Menora” Jewish Cultural Center in Armenia,
an Honored Worker of Art of the Republic of Armenia and a Member of
the Composers’ League of Israel, stated this in his recent article
published in The Times of Israel, which particularly runs as follows:

“The imposed reality in the depth of historic identity of these two
old, and by the will of tragic fate diasporal peoples, explains the
peculiarly mutual understanding and respect towards each other. There
is no Armenian or Jew in the world, who is or will be indifferent to
the sufferings and death of innocent victims, to the fact of the two
horrendous crimes against humanities committed in the 20th century.

My parents and their families endured all the horrors of evacuation,
exile and concentration camps. Fortune brought them to Armenia,
where I was born and live for 60 years. I am doubly grieved, but,
at the same time, I clearly understand, why shameful efforts are
exerted in some circles, through false “documents”, analysis,
that do not fit any logic, to spread enmity among the world Jewry
towards Armenia and the Armenian people. An article by a blogger,
calling himself “Israel Barouk” in Times of Israel is yet another
naïve attempt. I suppose that Mr. Barouk, who lives in Los-Angeles,
and publishes peremptory statements in the forms of articles, has
never visited Armenia and has no clue about the history of Armenian
people and about more than 2000-years-old history of the Jews in this
country. However, with a striking perseverance he demonstrates an
“in-depth” knowledge on preferences of the Armenian people and Armenia.

Taking a group of Armenian students at the University of California
in LA, he attempts to propagate an overt hatred against Armenians
and Armenia in the Jewish milieu. Some articles have been published
recently with exactly similar statements, penned by well-known Turkish
and Azerbaijani analysts, and amongst them is an article by “Israel
Barouk” which looks like part of pro-Azerbaijani advertisement. It
is beyond any doubt that the latter “analysis’ is yet another
failed attempt of Turkish-Azerbaijani propaganda machine, which is
disseminated in the US and Israeli media in the recent months, on
the eve of Centenary of the Armenian Genocide which is being marked
in 2015. This strategy has been unfortunately aimed at deflecting the
Armenians from the Genocide Centenary and spending their resources on
countering the genocide deniers and massive anti-Armenian campaigns
launched and supported by the Azerbaijani oil revenues. It is
unfortunate that even some politicians in Israel have given in to
these propaganda manipulations, consciously or unconsciously becoming
victims themselves and sacrificing the Israeli public opinion and
Israel’s long-term interests to such cheap Turkish-Azerbaijani joint
propaganda projects.

Returning to the above-mentioned articles, one should use the word
“failed” in its widest and most overwhelming sense, as the analysis
contains all the known criteria of an inferior media outlet, i.e.

false information, concealment of the truth and bottom lines of
this type – that “All cats are mortal, Socrates is mortal, therefore
Socrates is a cat.” Here he “craftily” does not ever contrast Armenia
with Azerbaijan, which he had advertised previously, in order to
“hide” the customers’ tracks.

Whatever stance a couple of Armenians take – young students at the
University of California – that do not constitute any percentage of
the Armenian population of the USA, there is no excuse to present it
as if it were the opinion of all Armenian Diaspora of America. In
the same way, one should not appeal to the activity by some Jewish
lobbyists, pushing the interests of Azerbaijan, as if it is the Jews’
and Israel’s stance towards the Armenian people.”

“Thus, here is the question; who benefits from pushing forward
these false theses? The answer, to me, is apparent. Thus, I call
upon journalists, experts, as well as some politicians, time and
again presenting only pro-Azerbaijani and anti-Armenian articles and
views to refrain from further attempts to speak on behalf of Jews and
impose yet another non-existent conflict on the world Jewry. As to
the Jewish media outlets, I ask them not to provide an opportunity
to spread such one-sided analytical articles. As to specialists,
calling themselves “experts”, as a Jew – to the Jews, I invite them
in person to visit Armenia to enrich their professional experience
and take more unbiased stance,” William Weiner concludes.

From: A. Papazian

ZHOGHOVURD: PROSPEROUS ARMENIA CONGRESS TO BE CLOSED-DOOR

11:46 27/02/2015 >> DAILY PRESS

The upcoming special congress of Prosperous Armenia Party, due on
March 5, will be held behind closed doors, Zhoghovurd writes.

“The reason behind this decision is that the party’s elite fears that
the situation may become uncontrollable because after the latest
events, the party’s activists are very upset and they will try to
get an explanation from Gagik Tsarukyan,” the newspaper says.

From: A. Papazian

LEVON ZURABYAN: MUCH DEPENDS ON MARCH 1 RALLY

13:22 | February 27,2015 | Politics

The future cooperation between the Armenian National Congress (HAK) and
Prosperous Armenia Party (BHK) mainly depends on the BHK, Head of the
HAK faction Levon Zurabyan said during today’s parliamentary briefings.

“We are doing our job. We shall continue our struggle and we are ready
to continue cooperation with the BHK if the latter is ready,” he said.

Zurabyan also said a lot depends on their rally scheduled for March 1.

“Either the regime will eventually understand that people will not
reconcile with them or they [authorities] will openly continue to
oppress people.”

In conclusion, Zurabyan said the rally will be attended by first
president [Levon Ter-Petrosyan] who has a lot to say to people.

From: A. Papazian

NOT EXPOSING MARCH 1ST MAKES ARMENIA VULNERABLE IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA

02.27.2015 15:35 epress.am

The March 1st case has been revealed a long time ago and only needs to
be made public, however in that case it might turn out that some people
in the ruling authorities had played their part in the criminal act,
said coordinator of the “March 1st” NGO Arakel Semirjyan at a Media
Center discussion today, February 27.

“The killers have been identified, those who gave the command have
been identified, all the murders have been discovered. In world
history there has been no case where a murder occurs with thousands
of witnesses, and is left, let’s say, unexposed,” said Semirjyan. He
added that in addition to the thousands of eyewitnesses to the
incidents, there are hundreds of photos and videos, based on which
an investigation should have been launched a long time ago.

The speaker noted that testimonies have also been given by 500 injured
people, who claimed that they had seen who shot at them, however an
investigation has not not been launched.

According to Semirjyan, today the prosecutors are attempting to assort
the crime accordiong to the types of guns the people were killed with.

Gor Kloyan, Armen Farmanyan, and Tigran Khachatryan were killed by a
“Cheryomukha 7â~@³ riot gun, which was only held by police officers,
therefore there is no issue in exposing or investigating this
particular incident, said the NGO coordinator.

“We have 4 people, who have shot from a “Cheryomukha” and what’s left
is to expose who made the killing shots,” said Semirjyan, adding
that a judicial process must begin in order to expose the murders,
where the 4 people (potential shooters) should testify and it would
subsequently become clear who the murderer or murderers are.

Semirjyan stated that the Armenian ruling authorities need to
understand that exposing March 1st is beneficial, firstly for
them, because the way they behave toward March 1st is the same
way international community behaves toward Armenia. “If Armenia is
raising an issue of violations by Azerbaijan, then the international
community can say ‘you can’t even find your murderers, how can we find
Azerbaijani murderers’. The March 1st issue makes Armenia vulnerable
in the international arena,” concluded Semirjyan.

Recall, that on March 1st, 2008, early in the morning, police
violently dispersed an opposition camp site in Freedom Square. After
the Presidential elections on February 19, 2008, there were 10 days of
peaceful protests at Freedom Square. On March 1st, protesters gathered
on Grigor Lusavorich St. for many hours. During the evening hours, the
protesters were shot at. 10 people were murdered: 2 police officers
and 8 citizens. Until this day, no one has been accused or tried for
the March 1st deaths. Photos and videos have been released of the
March 1st incident which clearly proves that the actions against the
opposition was by the armed forces.

From: A. Papazian

POLITICAL CRISIS AWAITING ADEQUATE EVALUATION IN ARMENIA – OPPOSITION MP

12:38 * 27.02.15

An Armenian opposition lawmaker on Friday expressed his concerns of
a political crisis, which he said needs an adequate evaluation by
the authorities.

“The political arena has become a kind of barren today, so in that
respect, I don’t think [such a situation] will be long-lasting. What
we observe is a seeming silence where, as a matter of fact, there
is a scream and noise lying behind. So one day it will push its way
to Liberty Square to raise its voice,” the leader of the Heritage
parliamentary facction, Ruben Hakobyan, told journalists at the
National Assembly.

But he ruled out the possibility of such a public protest on March 1,
the anniversary of the 2008 tragic post-electoral turmoil in Yerevan
(the opposition Armenian National Congress traditionally conducts
a rally on that day to remember those killed in the violent clashes
and call for a fair probe for resolving all the circumstances behind
the deadly events). The opposition MP said they will be heading to
the eastern regions on March 1 to meet with the residents of the
towns and villages situated close to the border. “We’ll be on the
border on March 1 and conduct meetings in Vanadzor (Lori region),
Shamshadin and Berd (Tavush),” he said .

Hakobyan added that the day was not intentionally timed to coincide
with the tragic anniversary. “We had our working schedule,” he
explained.

Asked whether Heritage has been invited to attend the Prosperous
Armenia party’s special congress, Hakobyan answered in the negative.

“I don’t know whether or not there will be invitations or the political
forces will have any participation at all,” he said.

Hakobyan said he doesn’t think that despite the wide public discontent
with the authorities, those in the upper hierarchy of government see
or realize that most of the population is against their policies.

He said the authorities have to learn a lesson to evaluate the
situation adequately. “What we need in that case are negotiations
and consultations. We need the authorities’ initiative to sit and
talk everything over, but I do not think they realize that,” he added.

Hakobyan further stressed the importance of developing a common agenda
to address very different actual issues, including President Serzh
Sargsyan’s statement voiced at a recent congress (particularly his
call for distinguishing business from politics).

“I think it is important to develop a joint agenda to find a way out.

Today we reap the fruits sown by the authorities over the past 20-25
years. We all have our share of guilt, so if there is a collective
understanding, they [the authorities] can, with rapid efforts, bring
the state out of this situation,” he added.

From: A. Papazian

UN LIBRO DELLA NEMAPRESS PER LA GIORNATA DELLA CULTURA ARMENA

BuongiornoAlghero. Italia
25 feb 2015

L’Agenzia per il Patrimonio Culturale Euromediterraneo di Lecce,
presieduta dalla Sen. Adriana Poli Bortone si fa promotrice, in
collaborazione con l’Ambasciata della Repubblica Armena in Italia,
della seconda “GIORNATA dell’AMICIZIA & CULTURA ARMENA”.

L’incontro, organizzato nell’ambito delle iniziative celebrative del
Centenario del Genocidio degli Armeni, si terra a Lecce il prossimo
28 febbraio, a partire dalle ore 18, nei suggestivi spazi dell’ex
Conservatorio S.Anna, in Via Libertini, 1, sede dell’Agenzia per
il Patrimonio Culturale Euromediterraneo. Momento clou dell’evento,
la presentazione del volume “Le parole per raccontare.

Gli Armeni, storia, cultura, letteratura” (Ed. Nemapress),
di Pierfranco Bruni e Neria De Giovanni, con la prefazione di
S.E. Sargis Ghazaryan, Ambasciatore della Repubblica d’Armenia in
Italia, che presenziera all’incontro insieme agli Autori del volume
e ad osservatori del mondo Istituzionale, Culturale, Economico,
Associativo e dei Media.

Modera il dibattito il Dott. Gianluca Borgia, componente
Consiglio di Amministrazione Agenzia per il Patrimonio Culturale
Euromediterraneo. Padrona di casa la Sen. Adriana Poli Portone,
Presidente dell’Agenzia per il Patrimonio Culturale Euromediterraneo,
che ha fortemente voluto questo momento di confronto, e riflessione per
promuovere la conoscenza di una della pagine più cupe della storia del
XX secolo: il Genocidio Armeno. Conosciuto anche con il nome di Medz
Yeghern, il “Grande Male”, il genocidio armeno è stato il primo del
‘900, nonche uno dei più dimenticati: Hitler lo prendeva a canone del
massacro che serbava in mente: “chi parla ancora oggi del genocidio
degli armeni?”.

I responsabili sono rimasti pressoche impuniti, i manuali di storia
hanno esitato a raccontare ed il governo turco lo nega esplicitamente
ancor’oggi. Questo processo sistematico di sterminio della componente
etnica minoritaria armena fu avviato dall’Impero Ottomano all’interno
del territorio attualmente facente parte della Turchia. Il Genocidio,
la cui data di inizio viene convenzionalmente indicata con il 24 aprile
1915, ha causato la morte di un numero di vittime pari ad 1-1,5 milioni
di persone, tra cui circa 250 intellettuali e leader della comunita
armena di Costantinopoli. Le pagine dell’opera di Neria De Giovanni
e Pierfranco Bruni sono un viaggio a ritroso nella travagliata storia
del popolo armeno di cui raccontano non solo la tragica odissea umana,
ma anche la gloria e la ricchezza di una grande cultura millenaria,
che è l’essenza più intima di un popolo.

“La peculiarita di questo volume – sottolinea nella prefazione al
libro S.E. Sargis Ghazaryan, Ambasciatore della Repubblica d’Armenia
in Italia – è di guardare all’Armenia da due prospettive. Una più
profonda, che fruga incessantemente nella storia millenaria del popolo
armeno, nelle sue radici, nelle sue tradizioni. Un’altra più vicina,
che guarda agli Armeni – lontani dalla terra dell’Ararat – che hanno
stretto, nei secoli, un forte nesso di partecipazione e contaminazione
nelle terre e con le genti di approdo (…) Pierfranco Bruni e Neria
De Giovanni hanno compiuto questo viaggio senza temere le difficolta
del non conosciuto e senza accusare segni di stanchezza, riuscendo
nell’intento di approfondire la conoscenza di cosa si celasse dietro
i termini “armeno” e “Armenia”.

Il risultato è un volume denso e ricco di spunti. Ancora più
significativo perche esce a pochi giorni dal 24 aprile, quando si
commemorera il Centenario del Genocidio degli Armeni”. “… Da quel
giorno del 1915, – conclude l’Ambasciatore – i miei antenati, la mia
gente, sono diventati vittime o profughi, nel migliore dei casi. Sono
stati costretti cioè a fuggire in avanti e a non guardarsi indietro.

Oggi, invece, si vuole e si deve guardare indietro. Per non dimenticare
un crimine, a cui troppi hanno assistito silenti e impassibili”. Questa
seconda “GIORNATA dell’AMICIZIA & CULTURA ARMENA” è solo l’ultima
delle tante attivita di alto profilo promosse dall’Agenzia per il
Patrimonio Culturale Euromediterraneo, che suggella con forza la
volonta di valorizzare i rapporti con la comunita armena e rappresenta
un’occasione di scambio, socializzazione e condivisione di ideali,
cultura e storia.

From: A. Papazian

PHILLIPS: EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY WILL UNFETTER ERDOGAN’S AMBITIONS

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Feb 25 2015

February 25, 2015, Wednesday/ 17:59:07/ AYDOÄ~^AN VATANDAÅ~^ / NEW YORK

If the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) succeeds in
securing enough votes to change the Constitution in the upcoming
general election slated for June, it will lead to the unfettering
of the ambitions of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, according to
Professor David L. Phillips, who underlined that it is crucial for
opposition parties to pass the election threshold if Turkey is to
see genuine political reform.

“Democracy needs checks and balances. The AK Party and Mr. Erdogan
have systematically degraded the system of checks and balances in
Turkey. If he wins enough votes in the national elections to change
the Constitution and establish an executive presidency, then Erdogan’s
ambitions will be unfettered,” said Phillips, the director of the
Program on Peace-building and Human Rights at Columbia University’s
Institute for the Study of Human Rights, adding, “It is important that
opposition parties pass the threshold, so they are seated in Parliament
and can participate in the process of genuine political reform.”

Elected as president in August by popular vote after years in power
as prime minister, Erdogan has been voicing his desire for a switch
to a presidential system in Turkey ahead of the general election and
indicated that he wants the ruling AK Party to obtain the parliamentary
majority necessary to amend the Constitution and clear the way to
replace the current system with a presidential one.

The president supports the formation of a “Turkish-style” presidential
system — a strong unicameral system rather than a bicameral one,
which he says will help the country’s development by eliminating
“multi-headedness” in state governance and thus pave the way for a
more effective decision-making system. However, debates over the
presidential system have fanned growing concerns over Erdogan’s
monopoly on power and Turkey’s slide toward authoritarianism.

After the rise of the AK Party in 2002, many scholars in the United
States believed Turkey was on the path to democratization, which
they considered an important indicator of the compatibility of Islam
and democracy. Many also believed that with its commitment to the
European Union process and booming economy, Turkey could be a model
for the Middle East and play a historic role in connecting the East
and the West.

Phillips is one of those scholars, who now feel disappointed about
recent developments in Turkey.

“I am among the scholars who count themselves as a friend of Turks
and of Turkey but who were deeply disappointed in the AK Party,”
the professor said, stressing the AK Party has adopted policies that
are not in the interests of Turkey, Turks or its allies, like the
United States.

On Turkey’s cross-border operation to Syria last weekend to rescue
troops at an Ottoman tomb, Professor Phillips believes that the
recent removal of the remains of Suleyman Ã…~^ah from the tomb in
Syria by the Turkish government was carried out in cooperation with
the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

“They seem to have done that in cooperation with ISIS [another acronym
to refer to ISIL], whose forces surround the tomb. There was no combat,
no live-fire exchanges. There was obviously a negotiation about the
deployment of Turkish troops and the removal of corporeal remains,”
Phillips said.

Phillips also believes Erdogan’s government chose to support radical
jihadist groups in Syria, including ISIL, when it misjudged the extent
of US commitment to regime change in Syria.

“When the US rejected military action, when it refused to enforce
its red lines, Mr. Erdogan became increasingly frustrated with the US
policy and he expanded support to Islamist and jihadist groups. This
was an expression of his frustration with the West. That support
backfired. Jihadi groups are fundamentally unfriendly to Turkey.

Ultimately they will attack Turkey, just as they did in Reyhanlı in
2012,” he said, adding that the decision in 2012 to provide logistical
support to jihadists transiting through Turkey to Syria was based on
a goal to get rid of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad but it was a
strategic blunder by Turkey.

On the AK Party government’s seizure of the management of Islamic
lender Bank Asya — known to be close to the Gulen movement, which
the AK Party government has vowed to destroy — Phillips said the
move is contrary to the principles of democracy and undermines a
free-market system in a country whose economy is already a bubble.

Professor Phillips is the author of a number of important books,
including “From Bullets to Ballots: Violent Muslim Movements in
Transition” (Transaction Press, 2008), “Losing Iraq: Inside the
Postwar Reconstruction Fiasco” (Perseus Books, 2005) and “Unsilencing
the Past: Track Two Diplomacy and Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation”
(Berghahn Books, 2005).

In Phillips’ new book, titled “The Kurdish Spring: A New Map of the
Middle East,” he argues that US strategic and security interests are
advanced through cooperation with Kurds as a bulwark against ISIL
and Islamic extremism.

Today’s Zaman spoke with Professor Phillips about the recent
developments in Turkey and the region as well as his new book.

After the rise of the AK Party, many scholars in the US thought
Turkey would be a good model for the Muslim world in terms of
the compatibility of Islam and democracy. However, in the last
several years, some scholars have become disappointed. Are you also
disappointed about the authoritarian tendencies of Erdogan? Where do
you think they failed?

I want to acknowledge the positive contribution the AK Party made.

When it came to power in 2002 Turkey’s economy was in a free fall.

Inflation was brought under control, the economy was stabilized, and
foreign direct investment was increased. The initial contribution
of the AK Party was very positive. US-Turkish relations started to
deteriorate in 2003 as a result of the invasion and occupation of
Iraq. Relations have worsened steadily since then. I am among the
scholars who count themselves as a friend of Turks and of Turkey but
who were deeply disappointed in the AK Party. It has taken actions
which are not in the interests of Turkey, Turks, or its allies like
the US.

After 2007, do you think the AK Party started to remove itself from
the European Union process and to turn into a more authoritarian state?

After the elections of July 22, 2007, the AK Party had a historic
opportunity to consolidate progress and to improve human rights
conditions in Turkey. Instead of focusing on minority rights and
human rights, it focused on the headscarf issue. That was a clear
statement of AK Party’s Islamist tendencies.

Do you think the AK Party miscalculated the geopolitical realities
regarding the Arab Spring when it claimed a leadership role in the
region through its alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood?

The “zero problems with neighbors” policy was based on a belief that
Turkey could become a leader of the Muslim world. In order to achieve
that goal, it needed to establish better relations with its neighbors.

The shared values between the AK Party and the Muslim Brotherhood are
apparent. From the West, however, Turkey looks like a Middle Eastern
country. But from the Middle East, Turkey looks decidedly Western.

There was never a realistic prospect for Turkey to become a leader
of the Sunni-Arab Muslim world.

Do you also think they miscalculated the situation in Syria?

Turkey was correct in pursuing a policy of regime change in Syria. The
US also adopted a policy of regime change. President Barack Obama
clearly stated that the US wanted Assad to leave power and vacate the
presidency in Syria. Turkey didn’t miscalculate. It just misunderstood
the depth of America’s commitment to regime change in Syria. When
the US rejected military action, when it refused to enforce its red
lines, Mr. Erdogan became increasingly frustrated with the US policy
and he expanded support to Islamist and jihadist groups. This was an
expression of his frustration with the West. That support backfired.

Jihadi groups are fundamentally unfriendly to Turkey. Ultimately they
will attack Turkey, just as they did in Reyhanlı in 2012.

Is this why Erdogan’s government went a little bit soft about ISIL?

They didn’t go a little bit soft. They supported jihadists who were
fighting in Syria.

Including ISIL?

ISIS is one of many jihadi groups. It is now the strongest and the
most prevalent. The 2012 decision to provide logistical support to
jihadists transiting through Turkey to Syria was based on a goal to
get rid of Assad.

Has that been a problem between the US and Erdogan’s government?

Of course it is. The US is leading a multinational coalition. Turkey
signed up for the multinational coalition but it has done very little
to seal its border. It has failed to allow the use of Ä°ncirlik air
force base for air strikes. It delayed agreement on a train-and-equip
program assisting the moderate Syrian opposition. Last week’s
agreement to train 1,200 fighters was overdue. Given the urgency of
the situation, Turkey should have moved faster.

What are your thoughts on the recent developments on the removal of
the remains of Suleyman Ã…~^ah from Syria?

They [Turkey] seem to have done that in cooperation with ISIL, which
controls that territory. There was no combat, no live fire exchanges.

There appears to have been a negotiation about the deployment of
Turkish troops and the removal of corporeal remains.

Do you think the UN will do anything about the allegations suggesting
that Erdogan’s government sent arms to ISIL?

No, I don’t think the United Nations would do anything about that. But
it is illegal to provide weapons to terrorist organizations.

Do you think Turkey will be challenged for that?

If there was a credible international body to challenge Turkey, then
Turkey deserves to be challenged. The UN doesn’t have the capacity
or credibility to challenge Turkey and the US would prefer to work
out its disagreements with Turkey quietly.

Do you think Americans are adequately discussing how best to target
ISIL’s financial resources rather than whether or not ISIL promotes
Islam?

I use the term “Islamic extremism” even though the Obama administration
is reluctant to use the term. Using the term Islamic extremism does
not imply that Islam condones violence. Nor does it mean that countries
whose population majority is Islamic are violent.

But it is a fact that violent extremism in Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria and
Somalia are perpetrated by groups whose members are Muslim. Muslims
face a choice. Do they support the peace-loving tenets of Islam or
do they subscribe to violent extremism of jihadi groups?

Why do you think the United States is reluctant to challenge Turkey
about it sending arms or supporting ISIL?

The US has demanded that Turkey seal its border. There are plenty
of media reports about Turkey purchasing oil from facilities in
Raqqa and elsewhere with proceeds supporting ISIL. The US has asked
Turkey to discontinue its oil business with ISIL. At the same time,
the coalition has launched air strikes against oil facilities and
refineries. I understand that 14 out of 18 oil-producing facilities
under ISIL control have now been rendered inoperable as result of
the air strikes. Turkey has been halfhearted in its efforts to cut
off the revenue streams to ISIL. It has been very weak in sealing its
border and depriving ISIL of the logistical support and manpower it
needs to sustain its operations.

Do you think ISIL and the AK Party leadership have anything in common
ideologically?

The deputy prime minister of Turkey [Bulent Arınc] had said women
shouldn’t laugh or smile in public because it draws attention to them.

That’s the kind of comment you would expect to come from someone like
[ISIL leader] Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Baghdadi just claimed leadership in the Islamic world by announcing
a caliphate. Why do you think he did that? Do you think a caliphate
is very central in the Islamic tradition?

Declaring a caliphate serves recruitment goals and political
objectives. Baghdadi has succeeded in establishing himself and ISIL
as the leading jihadi group. He differs from al-Qaeda because of
his declaration of a caliphate. ISIL is determined to destroy the
boundaries that were agreed to in the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916
and institutionalized in the post-Paris peace conference treaties
and mandates.

Now Erdogan wants to be the executive president of Turkey. Do
you believe he can achieve that and that Turkey can turn into a
dictatorship?

Democracy needs checks and balances. The AK Party and Mr. Erdogan have
systematically degraded the system of checks and balances in Turkey.

If he wins enough votes in the national elections to change the
Constitution and establish an executive presidency, then Erdogan’s
ambitions will be unfettered. It is important that opposition parties
pass the threshold so they are seated in Parliament and can participate
in the process of genuine political reform.

Why do you think Erdogan wants to terminate the Hizmet movement? Do
you think he is doing that to consolidate his power?

The Hizmet movement represents a challenge to Mr. Erdogan. The
independent posture of the judiciary, police and prosecutors threatens
the AK Party. Erdogan has systematically targeted the Hizmet movement
and persons he believes are loyal to it as a way of consolidating his
power. Even more than [the Kurdistan Workers’ Party] PKK, the Hizmet
movement is now labeled as the primary adversary of the Turkish state.

Do you think the military is totally sidelined in Turkish politics?

Erdogan has systematically taken steps to sideline the Turkish
military. Many of them were in jail. Many of the old guard have been
silenced. In the past, the Turkish military may have been a reliable
partner of the United States, but it was not a reliable partner of
democracy. Subordinating the security structures to civilian control is
a necessary part of Turkey’s path towards the European Union. But doing
so without the promotion of human rights undermines democratization
and further removes Turkey from realizing EU aspirations.

Many believe that Erdogan had the opportunity to solve the Kurdish
issue in Turkey because they had the majority in Parliament but they
didn’t do many things that they could have. Do you think Erdogan used
the PKK leadership for a short-term political gain?

It is too soon to tell. We do know, however, that Erdogan announced
a democracy opening and pledged reforms but he did not deliver on
his promises. After the events in Kobani, the Kurds in Turkey were
incensed and launched demonstrations against the Turkish government.

If Erdogan doesn’t implement greater political and cultural rights
for Kurds, there is a real risk that the Kurds in Turkey could be
radicalized, leading to a resurgence of violence similar to what we
saw in the 1980s and the 1990s.

Do you think this is likely in the near future?

It is for Mr. Erdogan to decide whether he is serious about a
democracy opening and a peace process or if he’s using it for
short-term political gain. It is in Turkey’s interest to uphold the
rights of all Turkish citizens, including those of Kurdish origin.

Erdogan can still establish his legacy through a peace agreement
with the PKK that culminates in the disarmament, demobilization and
reintegration of PKK fighters.

Do you think Kurdish autonomy is likely in the near future?

The Kurds have proposed a democratic autonomy. Decentralization is
always a good remedy to aggrieved minority groups. However, Turkey
is deeply concerned about its disintegration. It views democratic
autonomy as a step on the path towards fragmentation. Turkey can
provide rights and remain a unitary state but it cannot ignore the
legitimate grievances of 20 million Kurds for greater political and
cultural autonomy. Denying the legitimate democratic aspirations of
Kurds in Turkey risks increased violence.

What do you think about Turkey’s approach to Kobani?

Turkey’s approach to Kobani was a strategic and public relations
disaster. Parking the tanks on the hill overlooking Kobani and
watching the Kurdish defenders of Kobani face off against ISIS actually
discredited Turkey. Equating ISIS and the People’s Protection Units
of the PYD was also a mistake. The world rallied behind the Kurdish
defenders of Kobani. ISIS succeeded in bringing the PYD, the PKK, PJAK
and the peshmerga together. There is now a discussion about whether
Kurds are better allies of the United States than the Turkish state
under Erdogan.

Tell us about your upcoming book titled “The Kurdish Spring.

My new book, “The Kurdish Spring,” is a diplomatic history of the
betrayal and abuse of the Kurds during the 20th century. It describes
historical injustice and division of Kurds in four countries and
assesses current conditions, concluding that Iraq and Syria are failed
states. Iraq will fragment and fall apart. In this event, Iraqi
Kurdistan will emerge as the world’s next newest country. Instead
of resisting those developments, Turkey should embrace them and
consolidate its strategic partnership with Iraqi Kurds so that
Iraqi Kurdistan and Turkey can continue to work closely together in
commercial fields.

Are you also discussing the British Empire’s responsibility for the
displacement of Kurds in the region?

Sure. When I speak of betrayal I’m thinking of betrayal by great
powers, not only the betrayal of Kurds but also the betrayal of other
peoples in the region after World War I.

What is noteworthy is the promise made to Kurds in the Treaty of
Sèvres. They were told a referendum could be held on their political
status and that this status could be determined by Kurdistan as a
whole. However, the War of Independence undermined the Treaty of
Sèvres and led to the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923. There was no
mention of Kurds or use of the term “Kurdish” in the Lausanne Treaty.

Great powers were tired of fighting after World War I and they wanted
to establish an alliance with Turkey rather than act as its adversary.

As a result, Kurds and Armenians were denied their national
aspirations.

Do you think an independent Kurdish state is possible in today’s
geopolitical climate?

Iraqi Kurdistan is already a de facto independent state. There is no
contiguous border between Iraqi Kurdistan and Iraq, only a border
between Iraqi Kurdistan and lands held ISIL. Iraqi Kurdistan has
proven to be progressive, pro-democratic and fundamentally secular. It
has 45 billion barrels of oil and an increasing ability to provide
security to its citizens. Those are the elements necessary for state
building. Instead of undermining this progress, Turkey should embrace
it. Ultimately stability and democracy in the region will be enhanced
by the creation of an independent Iraqi Kurdistan.

How do you think the American government, this year, will position
itself on the Armenian resolution issue?

Let’s define “genocide.” It has four elements: more than one person
must have died and these people must have been members of the same
ethnic, religious or racial group. The perpetrator must have intended
them to die and their killing must have been systemic. What happened to
the Armenians clearly meets these criteria. The United States should
recognize the events in Armenia as genocide. President Obama has made
his personal views well known. When you become the president of the
United States you don’t have personal views — your views are those
of the US government. It would be helpful if he was to use the term
“Armenian genocide” and then the US and Turkey can move on and set this
issue aside. The Genocide Convention cannot be applied retroactively
for reparations or territorial claims.

Erdogan has tried to seize Bank Asya and is now trying to seize Ä°Å~_
Bankası, in which the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP)
holds shares. Do you have any remarks about how these political
manipulations of the banking system can affect the Turkish economy?

You can’t seize assets simply because you oppose the asset holders.

This is contrary to the principles of democracy and undermines a
free-market system. Turkey’s economy is already a bubble which is
highly leveraged. Foreign direct investment (FDI) is greatly reduced.

If you remove real state investments the FDI will be way down from
where it was a few years ago. Erdogan should be careful not to further
erode confidence among Turks and among foreign investors.

What about the nuclear talks between the United States and Iran?

They are at a crucial stage. It is important to work towards a deal
that is verifiable. If those talks fail, other states in the region
are likely to enter into an arms race by seeking nuclear weapons. If
Turkey becomes a nuclear arms state and continues on its current path
of Islamicization, that would represent a serious threat to the US,
NATO and other countries in the region.

Profile

David L. Phillips is currently director of the Program on
Peace-building and Human Rights at Columbia University’s Institute
for the Study of Human Rights. Phillips has worked as a senior
advisor to the United Nations Secretariat and as a foreign affairs
expert and senior adviser to the US Department of State. He has
held positions as a visiting scholar at Harvard University’s Center
for Middle East Studies, executive director of Columbia University’s
International Conflict Resolution Program, director of the Program on
Conflict Prevention and Peace-building at American University and as
a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna. He has also been a
senior fellow and deputy director of the Council on Foreign Relations’
Center for Preventive Action, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council
of the United States, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies, director of the European Centre for Common
Ground, project director at the International Peace Research Institute
of Oslo, president of the Congressional Human Rights Foundation and
executive director of the Elie Wiesel Foundation. Mr. Phillips is
author of “Liberating Kosovo: Coercive Diplomacy and US Intervention”
(Harvard’s Kennedy School 2012), “From Bullets to Ballots: Violent
Muslim Movements in Transition” (Transaction Press, 2008), “Losing
Iraq: Inside the Postwar Reconstruction Fiasco” (Perseus Books, 2005),
“Unsilencing the Past: Track Two Diplomacy and Turkish-Armenian
Reconciliation” (Berghahn Books, 2005). He has also authored
many policy reports, as well as more than 100 articles in leading
publications such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal,
Financial Times, International Herald Tribune and Foreign Affairs.

From: A. Papazian

EN COMPETITION CLARA NALAN ET ISABELLE NOHAIN-RAIMU – VIDEO

Prix Charles Aznavour – Prix Alain Terzian 2015

Clara Nalan (a gauche) pour son livre La Valse de sa vie

L’emission de Richard Findykian > est consacree a la 5ème edition du Festival National du Livre
Franco-Armenien Prix CHARLES AZNAVOUR et Prix ALAIN TERZIAN 2015 qui
se deroulera le Samedi 25 Avril dans le Grand Hall du Palais de la
Bourse sur La Canebière. Invitees dans ” Le Journal du Festival ” :
Isabelle Nohain-Raimu, petite-fille de Raimu et de Jean Nohain pour
son livre > edite au Cherche-Midi,
ouvrage en competition pour le Prix ALAIN TERZIAN 2015 et Clara Nalan
pour > publie chez L’Harmattan, en competition,
pour le Prix CHARLES AZNAVOUR 2015. Assistant : Alexis Findykian.

Realisation radio : Frederic Banegas.

Isabelle Nohain-Raimu pour son livre Raimu un grand enfant de genie

jeudi 26 fevrier 2015, Jean Eckian (c)armenews.com

From: A. Papazian

INDIA TO NEGOTIATE FREE TRADE ZONE WITH RUSSIA-LED CUSTOMS UNION

Published time: February 26, 2015 11:30
Edited time: February 26, 2015 12:09

Reuters/Ahmad Masood

India is to start negotiating a free trade agreement with the Customs
Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan within the next six months,
Indian Deputy Minister of Commerce and Industry Rajeev Kher has said.

A Russian-Indian working group which was established in November 2014
will consider the negotiating of a comprehensive free trade agreement
between India and the Customs Union.

Kher said the working group would put forward proposals within the
next six months and the negotiating process would start after that,
TASS reports.

As most of the developed world in the West is suffering an economic
downturn, the developing world has been stepping up efforts to bring
their economies closer.

Russia ratifies $100bn BRICS New Development Bank

Most recently, China said it could establish a free trade zone with
a broader Russia-led economic bloc that also includes Armenia and is
expected to include Kyrgyzstan soon.

READ MORE: China and Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union may set up
free trade zone

The Eurasian customs union is a regional bloc that includes Russia,
Belarus and Kazakhstan aimed at creating a single economic space with
common tariffs. The group has a population of 168 million people and
a GDP of more than $2 trillion.

The BRICS countries which include Brazil, Russia, India, China and
South Africa will also have established by the end of the year the $100
billion New Development Bank, as a rival to the IMF and the World Bank.

From: A. Papazian