If The Case Isn’t Revealed, It Means That The Authorities Stand Behi

IF THE CASE ISN’T REVEALED, IT MEANS THAT THE AUTHORITIES STAND BEHIND IT -SAYS ARTAK KHACHATRYAN’S BROTHER (VIDEO)

12:25 | February 9,2015 | Politics

The kidnapping and beating of Artak Khachatryan, a member of the
opposition Prosperous Armenia Party (BHK), was an organized crime,
Khachatryan’s brother Artyom Khachatryan told reporters in Yerevan
on Monday.

“Artak has nothing to do with the criminal and oligarchic system. He
has been engaged in social activities only in recent years,” said
Artyom Khachatryan.

He believes that the incident that occurred to his brother declared an
outright war against society. “It does not matter whether they targeted
at Artak or someone else, wether it was a BHK member or a member of
some other party, e.g. Armenian National Congress (HAK). The attack
comes to prove that the criminal and oligarchic system is interwoven
with the government,” he said.

Artyom Khachatryan calls on law enforcement agencies to immediately
reveal the details of the incident; their negligence will prove that
the attack was ordered by the authorities.

He also said that new evidence has emerged in connection with the
incident. They already have a footage which fixed the car, its license
plate number and colour and the time of the incident. The video will
be sent to law enforcement agencies and the Investigative Committee.

Artak continues to remain at the intensive care unit. He is in a
critical but stable condition.

Artak Khachatryan was attacked Saturday afternoon in Yerevan by
three masked men who forced him into a car and took him to an unknown
direction. He was later found near his home in an unconscious state.

From: A. Papazian

http://en.a1plus.am/1205626.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ9txPTkILc

"Armenian Standard" Presents The Trailer Of "Taj Mahal: Armenian Wom

“ARMENIAN STANDARD” PRESENTS THE TRAILER OF “TAJ MAHAL: ARMENIAN WOMAN AND SYMBOL OF INDIA”- VIDEO

Lragir.am
Society – 09 February 2015, 11:42

The trailer of the film “Taj Mahal: Armenian Woman and Symbol of
India” has been already presented to the public. The premiere of the
documentary shot by the cinema center “Armenian Standard” will take
place soon.

“Armenian Standard” Production

From: A. Papazian

http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/society/view/33603#sthash.eeUvMsb1.dpuf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzJliT_1gI4

Darchinyan KOs Jimenez (video)

Darchinyan KOs Jimenez (video)

10:52 * 08.02.15

Former world champion Vic “Raging Bull” Darchinyan (40-7-1, 29 KOs)
dropped back down to the super bantamweight division and scored an
entertaining ninth round TKO over Juan “El Penita” Jimenez (19-9, 12
KOs) on Saturday night at the Domo del Palacio Municipal in Chetumal,
Mexico, fightnews.com reports.

The free-swinging Jimenez seemingly dropped Darchinyan in round three
but no count was given. After that, Darchinyan upped the pressure and
began to punish Jimenez. Jimenez was down in round seven from a punch
that was ruled behind the head. Darchinyan then dropped Jimenez again
in round nine to end it.

From: A. Papazian

http://www.tert.am/en/news/2015/02/08/vik/1583298
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy78E2Do0E0

Jhumura maker shoots French film, Homeland, in Paris

The Times of India
February 6, 2015 Friday

Jhumura maker shoots French film, Homeland, in Paris

by Zinia Sen

City filmmaker Anindya Chatterjee, whose debut film Jhumura is
awaiting release, recently came back after the shoot of his first
French film, Homeland (La Patrie), in Euville, Commercy. The indie
movie is about a woman’s search for her roots.

The lead cast comprises French actors Jonathan Dumontier, Ani
Hovhanisiyan and Nicolas Pierson.”Jonathan is a cinematographer who
passed out from a film school. Apart from acting in the movie, he was
of huge help during the shoot.The film is about an Armenian (Ani) of
French origin, who visits a village in France in search of her roots.
She is helped by a Frenchman (Jonathan), who she has befriended on the
net. Towards the end of the film, she – who had a different notion
about the man – realizes that he too is of another origin,” says
Anindya.

The filmmakers had to face several odds while putting the project
together. “To make an indie film is not easy. I remember buying a robe
for a wedding sequence for 60 euros, after which I was left with 94
euros. Since a train ticket cost 98 euros, I had difficulty making my
team understand why I was getting late for the shoot. Yes, I was even
snubbed by them!” says Anindya.

The filmmaker is planning to put his experiences together as a
parallel track in the movie. While Nicolas Vert was the film’s DoP ,
the sound department was helmed by Thibault Turcas. “The film has been
shot in live sound, so there will be no dubbing. It is in
post-production, which should be over in a month or two. Some patch
shoot is left, which I’m trying to coordinate with my team over Skype.
I’ll be able to hand over the film to my producers by September, after
which it is likely to get screened at a festival this year,” adds the
director.

From: A. Papazian

Armenian Small Business Doesn’t Like Tax Law

ARMENIAN SMALL BUSINESS DOESN’T LIKE TAX LAW

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Feb 6 2015

6 February 2015 – 1:04pm

By Vestnik Kavkaza

Protests by several hundred merchants of flea markets took place
in Yerevan. They demanded cancellation of the Law on Turnover Tax
from the government. The authorities didn’t give a clear response,
and the protesters stated that they intend to ignore the new law.

According to amendments which were made in summer 2014, the turnover
tax is decreased for small to medium-sized business (to 58 million
drams, i.e. $110 thousand) from 3.5% to 1%. At the same time,
merchants should present documents on turnover to tax services,
including information on remaining products and commercial invoices.

Otherwise, the law requires fees and a 5% tax to be applied for
abusers.

The law was due to begin its operation on October 1st 2014. However,
because of mass protests, its launch was delayed till February
1st 2015, so that economic entities could be ready to work under
the new conditions. However, the day before February 1st new mass
protests began. Representatives of small and medium-sized business
(SMB) expressed their concern about the prospects of regular checks
by tax services. Businessmen are sure that the new order will lead
to extra expenditures and negatively influence their small incomes;
and the main thing is, it would encourage tax pressure. According to
Mikael Melkumyan, an MP from Prosperous Armenia, following bureaucratic
procedures and regular tax checks will destroy SMB.

Another problem is presenting commercial invoices on supply goods,
i.e. information on major businessmen.

Representatives of the ruling Republican Party say that flea market
merchants are not interesting to the government as tax payers, and
the law is aimed at revealing (by documents on supply goods) major
businessmen who hide their revenues. According to flea market workers,
if the authorities want to take major taxpayers to the tax space,
they shouldn’t do it at the expense of SMB.

Thus, the new law requires a mechanism of taking major businessmen
who don’t pay taxes from the “shadows”. The government believes that
presenting the necessary documents by small business will encourage
legalization of the revenues of major entrepreneurs. At the same time,
the mechanism is unlikely to work under the current management system
in Armenia.

Firstly, major businessmen often present no documents to
representatives of SMB; and after launching the new law, they will
stop doing it at all, as commercial invoices contain information on
their indirect revenues. Secondly, the current authorities of Armenia
support big business and act according to its interests. From this
point of view, their desire to reveal major taxpayers who stay in
the shadows by putting pressure on SMB looks strange.

“Today Armenia has a classic model of the shadow economy: big business
which stays in the shadows uses the patronage of the government. The
authorities are well aware about major businessmen who hide their
revenues, but instead of taking them into the tax space, they suppress
SMB,” said Vaagan Khachatryan, an expert on economic issues.

Moreover, strengthening of pressure on SMB by the tax services
objectively leads to a worsening of SMB working conditions; it may
result in the losses of thousands of jobs.

According to Gagik Makaryan, the head of the Union of Employers
of Armenia, the new law makes representatives of SMB change their
activities; but they will have nothing to do, as the government
doesn’t provide opportunities for this.

Many experts are sure that under the current crisis situation the
government shouldn’t make amendments to the Tax Code, even if the
amendments are aimed at taking business from the shadows. The new law
is unacceptable, as SMB solves the problem of job creation rather than
dealing with budget problems. Moreover, to legalize the revenues of
big business, simpler mechanisms can be used.

On February 2nd at a meeting with Premier Ovik Abramyan,
representatives of the parliamentary opposition presented a package
of corrections to the law. It is based on a free-will principle which
requires business activity either within 3.5% of turnover tax or 1%
of turnover tax. The government intends to consider the opposition’s
proposals. What the result of the process will be is not clear, but
it is obvious that the problem needs to be solved finally rather than
postponed for a while.

From: A. Papazian

http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/society/65889.html

Jews in Turkey: Unending Discrimination

Gatestone Institute
Feb 7 2015

Jews in Turkey: Unending Discrimination

by Uzay Bulut
February 7, 2015 at 5:00 am

The Jewish homes in Israel are not an obstacle to peace. The only
obstacle to peace is the hatred of Israel’s neighbors.

Many of us in other countries in the Middle East see Israel as the
only light of freedom and democracy in the midst of darkness,
terrorism and hatred in the region.

The concept of real freedom and democracy seems foreign to
anti-Semites. From here, it looks as if many of these self-proclaimed
liberals have a self-congratulatory concept of what is right and wrong
as closed-minded, un-free and un-democratic as that of the most rigid
tyrant.

When people show solidarity with the Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas, or
with those who jail, try or flog people for free speech, it just
further proves Israel’s rightfulness and legitimacy.

You would defend yourself against incoming rockets; why shouldn’t
they? Israel has nothing to apologize for.

It is really hard to please the Jew-haters.

When Jews cannot protect themselves because they do not have a
military, they are “cowards” and are persecuted in Turkey and
worldwide. When they do protect themselves, thanks to their military,
they are “oppressors.”

To anti-Semitic or anti-Israel people, Israel is the problem.

Many of us in other countries in the Middle East, on the contrary, see
Israel as the only light of freedom and democracy in the midst of
darkness, terrorism and hatred in the region.

Just recently, on January 12, Mahmoud Abbas, a Holocaust denier and
terrorism glorifier, met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
in Ankara.

Before that, on December 29, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal spoke to the
congress of the ruling AKP and said “Inshallah we will liberate
Palestine and Jerusalem again in the future.”

The crowd in the congress shouted slogans “Mujahid Mashaal,” “Hamas, I
[am ready to] lay down my life for you” and “Down with Israel!”

The problem is: the concept of real freedom and democracy seems
foreign to anti-Semites. From here, it looks as if many of these
self-proclaimed liberals have a self-congratulatory concept of what is
right and wrong as closed-minded, un-free and un-democratic as that of
the most rigid tyrant. When people refer to Israel as “the problem,”
they imply that the existence of Jews is the problem.

When people show solidarity with the Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas, or
with those jail, try or flog people for free speech, it just further
proves Israel’s rightfulness and legitimacy.

When people in this region say, “Down with Israel” it really means: We
do not want democracy; we do not want equality. We want our own state
to be supreme and we want Jews to be stateless and defenseless. We do
not want the wisdom or knowledge of Jews. We just need more darkness,
arrogance and enmity. We are as ignorant as can be and we are happy
this way. And if possible, we want another Holocaust, just as Hamas
calls for it. At the same time, we definitely want peace. And this is
our understanding of peace.

Israel is where the ancestors of the Jews lived, learned and toiled.
Jews need to be there not only to be safe from further massacres but
also to learn in the light of their ancestors — who brought what are
among the first laws of social justice to the word after Hammurabi. It
is right there, all you have to do is read it. Pay the day-laborer by
sunset. Do not cook the lamb in the milk of its mother. Do not steal.
Do not murder. There are books more of them. These are the genuine
messages of freedom.

Jews are Israel’s indigenous people and they have extended their hand
in peace to both Palestinians and others many times — and been
rejected. You would defend yourself against incoming rockets; why
shouldn’t they? Israel has nothing to apologize for.

There is a popular belief that anti-Semitism had not been promoted in
Turkey until the current Islamist Justice and Development Party [AKP]
took power in 2002. However, taking a closer look at the lives of Jews
in modern Turkey makes it clear that this was just a myth. The truth
is that to be a Jew in Turkey seems to mean having been exposed to
more than 90 years of systematic discrimination including pogroms,
forced assimilation, and prohibitions against the use of their native
language.

On November 21, 2014, MEMRI [Middle East Media Research Institute]
published a must-read special dispatch entitled, “Anti-Semitism Hits
New High In Turkey: Threats Against Turkish Jews, Expressions Of
Admiration For Hitler, Calls For Jews To Be Sent To Concentration
Camps; Jews Should Pay A ‘Special Tax’.”

“At the same time that President Erdogan was denying, in his September
22, 2014 speech at the Council of Foreign Relations, that he or his
government were in any way anti-Semitic,” the dispatch read, “members
of his party back home were tweeting praise for Hitler, and shops in
Istanbul were displaying signs reading “No Admittance To Jewish Dogs.”

As MEMRI points out, it is obvious that under the AKP government,
anti-Semitism in Turkey has been hitting new high. But these gruesome
realities are not the product only of the Islamist AKP, nor are they
first in Turkey’s history.

Jews in Turkey were already sent to forced-labor battalions in
1941-1942, required to pay a special tax in 1942-1944, and exposed to
forced assimilation in Turkey. They were systematically subjected to
hate speech in the Turkish press, which also played a role in the 1934
anti-Jewish pogrom in Eastern Thrace. With the enforcement of the
surname law, Jewish children had to change their names and surnames
and adopt Turkish sounding names. Ladino, the language of Turkey’s
Jews, was also banned by the Turkish regime. Since 1923, when the
Turkish Republic was established, Jews have systematically been
discriminated against (as well as all other non-Muslim communities),
and Jews have been deprived of their freedom of movement at least
three times: in 1923, 1925 and 1927.

The Turkish republic had been founded by the so-called “secular”
Republican People’s Party [CHP], now the main opposition party in
Turkey’s parliament.

Although anti-Semitism during the AKP’s rule has been widely reported
by the media, anti-Semitism during and after the establishment period
of the Turkish Republic has been largely overlooked.

In Turkey, anti-Semitism has a long history among state authorities,
opinion shapers, political circles (both right- and left-wing),
Islamist and non-Islamist groups, and particularly in the media. Not a
single Turkish university has a Jewish- or Holocaust-studies
department. The reestablishment of the Jewish state in 1948 just
turned anti-Semitism into anti-Zionism, which seems to be an implicit,
disingenuous kind of anti-Semitism.

>From the time of the founded of the Republic of Turkey in 1923, until
1950, when the first national elections took place, these practices
were carried out by the non-Islamist governments of the Republican
People’s Party [CHP], which established the Turkish state.

It is impossible to mention all the anti-Semitic incidents in Turkey
in one article, but a short chronology of the most important
developments relating to Jews would help one realize what kind of a
life Jews were forced to live in Turkey for decades.

Traditional Anti-Semitism in Turkish Media

The historian Ayse Hur, based on the comprehensive writings of
independent scholar Rifat Bali, recounted some of the anti-Semitic
campaigns of the Turkish press during the first decades of the Turkish
Republic.[1]

In January 1923, the Turkish Voice (Türk Sesi) and Burnt Land (Yanık
Yurt) newspapers, published in the province of Izmir, called on
Turkish traders to struggle against “the immoral and sordid Jewish
threat.” The pieces claimed that the Jews were the breeding ground for
germs in Turkey and especially in Izmir. Then Akbaba, a satirical
magazine, joined the chorus, publishing a series of pieces which
featured titles such as “haven’t you heard that you should not do
business with the Jews,” and “Shall we allow these germs to live with
us?”

In December 1925, after the rumors were spread that at least 300 Jews
sent a telegram to the celebrations of the 435th anniversary of
Columbus’ discovering America, an anti-Semitic campaign was started in
mainstream newspapers. The published pieces referred to Jews as
“ungrateful” and as “leeches who cling on the back of the country,”
and suggested that they be exiled as a solution. Some people provoked
by those writings killed a young Jew and attacked the synagogue in the
town of Kuzguncuk.[2] Whether such a telegram was ever sent remains
unknown.

In January 1937, the fascistic and national-socialistic waves of
Europe arrived in Turkey: A German Information Office was opened in
Istanbul. Türkische Post and Cumhuriyet (The Republic) newspapers
started to repeat Nazi propaganda.

In August 1938, the government issued decree No.# 2/9498, which read:
“The Jews who are exposed to pressures in terms of living conditions
and travelling in the states of which they are nationals are forbidden
to enter and live in Turkey regardless of their current religion.”
Twenty six Jewish employees of the Anatolian News Agency, then the
only official news agency of Turkey, were dismissed. There was a
massive increase in the number of articles and cartoons in newspapers
and magazines that held minorities, especially Jews, responsible for
the problems that Turkey was going through.

On December 28,1939, a powerful earthquake hit the province of
Erzincan in Turkey, killing tens of thousands of people. Upon hearing
that, Jewish communities in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Buenos Aries, New York,
Geneva, Cairo and Alexandria collected money and clothes among
themselves and sent them to Turkey. Instead of appreciating this act,
articles and cartoons ridiculed it and suggested bad intentions.

In 1948, when Jews wanted to go to the newly-founded State of Israel,
Turkey’s state and state-directed media, which had done everything in
their power to make the Jews flee Turkey, now referred to those
wanting to emigrate as “traitors.”

Ancestry Codes of Armenians, Greeks and Jews

Research by the daily newspaper Radikal and interviews with officials
has revealed a century-long saga of discrimination in Turkey.
According to Radikal’s findings, Turkey has been secretly assigning
codes its Armenian, Greek, Jewish, Syriac and other non-Muslim
minorities ever since the establishment of the Turkish Republic. The
Population Directorate of Turkey codes Greeks using the number 1,
Armenians 2 and Jews 3.

“This is obviously a scandal that should shake Turkey to its core, but
the country is so busy with its own agenda,” wrote Orhan Kemal Cengiz,
a human rights lawyer and columnist in his column on Al Monitor.

“Given Turkey’s history, which is full of unfair practices toward
non-Muslims, perhaps the significance of this scandal can best be
understood through comparison. For a moment, imagine that Jews in
Germany today were secretly being identified through coding by the
German government and that this was exposed. It would register as a
political earthquake big enough to shake the German political system
down to its roots. In contrast, the scandal in Turkey remained in the
news only for a few days in a few newspapers.”

Laws that excluded Jews and other non-?Muslims from certain professions

Even in the beginning of 1923 and 1924, foreign companies and banks
were required to employ only Turkish-Muslim citizens and to dismiss
non-Muslims. Greeks, Jews and Armenians were dismissed in groups
without being paid.

On January 24, 1924, “being Turkish” became the requirement for
working as a pharmacist in accordance with a new law relating to
pharmacists.[3]

On April 3, 1924, in accordance with the law of lawyers, 960 lawyers
were evaluated as to whether they had good morals. As a result of the
evaluation, work permits of 460 lawyers were cancelled. Thus, 57% of
Jewish lawyers, and three out of four Greek and Armenian lawyers, lost
their jobs.[4]

In the 4th article of the 1926 law on civil servants, it was stated
that only “Turks” could work at public institutions. The law included
all employees in public institutions, from tramway drivers to harbor
workers. Due to this law, thousands of non-Muslims lost their jobs.

During 1928, new laws about requirements for carrying out certain jobs
were enacted. According to these laws, only “Turkish” citizens could
be doctors, dentists, midwives, nurses and so on.

The “Turkish citizens” in these laws referred only to “ethnic Turks.”
So to carry out these jobs, one had to be not only Muslim but an
“ethnic Turk.”

On April 22, 1926, after a law was enacted that made Turkish the only
language of commercial correspondence, non-Muslims who were working in
administrative bodies and did not have a full command of written
Turkish, were dismissed.

On June 11, 1932, the Turkish parliament enacted law #2007, which
prohibited foreigners from many jobs. The law read[5]:

The jobs and services mentioned below can be carried out by Turkish
citizens alone. It is prohibited for those who are not Turkish
citizens to carry out these jobs and services:

A.) being a peddler; musician; photographer; hairdresser; compositor;
estate agent; dress, hat and shoe manufacturer; stock trader; seller
of products which are under state monopoly; translator; guide; working
in construction, iron and wooden works; working permanently or
temporarily on public vehicles; working in the fields of water,
lighting, central heating, mailing and telecommunication sectors;
loading and commissioning [in ships];working as a driver and turnboy;
doing assistant works in general; being a watchman, janitor or
headwaiter at all kinds of companies, businesses, hotels and firms;
working at hotels, motels, public baths, cafes; being a waiter at
clubs, dance halls, or pubs, dancer or singer at pubs.

b.) Being a veterinarian and chemist.

This “law of occupations” was the most extreme law of the Kemalist
government after the proclamation of the new Republic in 1923.

Employment bans were also big obstacle for refugees exiled from
Germany. They were trying to find jobs that had not been banned, or to
make use of legal loopholes. Some of them — particularly women —
received residence permits for marriages with Turkish men. If Turkish
authorities learned that the marriages were “fake,” women were faced
with the danger of being deported.[6]

“Citizen, Speak Turkish!” Campaign, Prohibitions against Ladino and
Forced Assimilation

On January 13, 1928, the student union at the Law School in the
Ottoman University (today’s Istanbul University) launched a campaign
to prohibit the use in public of all languages other than Turkish.

The campaigners placed posters in many cities across Turkey with the
slogan “Citizen, speak Turkish!” Some other signs proclaimed, “We
cannot call a Turk those who do not speak Turkish” or “Speak Turkish
or leave the country!” Hundreds of people were harassed in public,
given fines or arrested, with full support of the government.[7]

Isil Demirel, a Turkish anthropologist, examined the process by which
Turkish replaced Ladino as the mother tongue of Sephardic Jews in
Turkey.[8] “The Jews were exposed to great pressures during the
attempts of spreading Turkish in 1920s,” Demirel wrote. “Since Turkish
was starting to be used among Jews instead of Ladino, cultural
differences emerged between the old generation, who used Ladino as
their mother tongue, and the young generation who were raised with
Turkish. Ladino, which is a dying language in Turkey today, is used
only by Jews older than 50, and embodies a rooted and long-running
culture.”

Demirel quoted a Sephardic Jew who experienced the “Citizen, Speak
Turkish!” campaign: “When you spoke two words of Spanish (Ladino) back
then, they immediately raised their hands. ‘Heeeeyyy Madame, Monsieur!
Citizen, speak Turkish!,’ they shouted or they had sticks behind them
and shook them at you.”

In another forced-assimilation campaign, in November 1932, every Jew
in the province of Izmir was made to sign an agreement in which they
promised “to embrace the Turkish culture and speak the Turkish
language.” This was followed by the Jews in the provinces of Bursa,
Kiklareli, Edirne, Adana, Diyarbakir and Ankara. Newspapers were
filled with reports of Jewish (and Armenian) girls who were converting
to Islam in groups.

1934 Anti-Jewish Pogroms in Eastern Thrace

The pogroms, in June 21- July 4, 1934, occurred in the provinces of
Tekirdag, Edirne, Kirklareli, and Canakkale in Eastern Thrace, and
were initiated by articles written by Pan-Turkic authors Cevat Rıfat
Atilhan and Nihal Atsız. The pogroms began with a boycott of Jewish
businesses, and were followed by physical attacks on Jewish-owned
buildings, which were first looted, then set on fire. Jews were
beaten, attacked and some Jewish women were reportedly raped.

In terror, more than 15,000 Jews fled the region. Anti-Semitic
pressures on the Jewish communities at schools, markets and state
institutions, even after the pogroms, lingered on. A “confidential”
circular sent by the headquarters of the ruling CHP to its local
branches in Eastern Thrace also revealed that the government had at
least condoned the pogroms.

Turkey during the Holocaust

During the Holocaust, Turkey opened its doors to very few Jewish and
political refugees. The attempts of many famous people or Jewish
organizations to make Turkey accept more Jewish refugees bore no
result. That is the reason Turkey is not in the statistics of
countries to which Jewish refugees fled.[9]

In 1937, Turkey took measures to prevent Jewish immigration. When the
number of Jewish refugees increased rapidly in 1938, Turkey enacted
two laws that prohibited people with no passport or citizenship
documents from entering and settling in Turkey. These laws were not
openly related to Jews. But behind them was the reality that Germany
and other countries had stripped Jews of their citizenship rights. On
29 August 1938, the Turkish government issued a policy letter
preventing “Jews whose rights had been limited in their countries”
from entering Turkey.[10]

Tragedies of Jewish Refugees

The historians Corry Guttstadt and Rifat Bali reported the tragedies
of Jewish refugees who were trying to escape Nazi persecution and
reach Israel, their historic homeland, during the Holocaust.[11]

On August 8, 1939, the ship, Parita, had to dock in the province of
Izmir, due to some problems it had experienced while carrying 800
Jewish refugees from Germany, Poland and Czechoslovakia to the land of
Israel (then, under the British mandate, called Palestine). The Jewish
refugees sat for a week off the coast of Izmir with no coal, water or
food. The ship was denied a berth in the port and the captain was
finally forced, after threats from the Turkish police, to sail on.

Turkish satirical magazines such as Karikatür and Akbaba ridiculed the
Jewish refugees who sought refuge throughout the world in vain. The
caricature on the cover of the Akbaba from August 24, 1939, referred
to the Jewish refugees on the Parita. The caption had one of the Jews
saying: “We are hungry and out of money. For God’s sake, allow us to
disembark for five minutes to get rich.” After the ship had left the
coast of Izmir, the semi-official daily Ulus wrote, “The Jews who have
been roaming around here have finally left.”

On December 6, 1940, a ship named Salvador, traveling to the land of
Israel from Varna, in Bulgaria, arrived in Istanbul with 327 Czech and
Bulgarian Jews aboard it. The Salvador was forced out to sea on
December 12, despite bad weather, only to sink same day during a heavy
storm off the coast of Silivri, on the Sea of Marmara. As a
consequence, 204 people drowned, at least 70 of them children.

On December 15, 1941, the Struma ship, in an effort to save 769
Romanian Jews from the German extermination, had left Constanza harbor
to carry them to the land of Israel, and tried to dock in Istanbul.
Not only was the ship completely overloaded but it was also not
seaworthy because of a defective engine. A banner which read “Save Us”
was fastened to the ship. For 70 days during the winter months of
1941-1942, Turkey did not allow it to dock; those on the ship
struggled against disease and deaths off the coast of Istanbul, near
Sarayburnu. The ship’s anchor finally was cut, and the ship fastened
to a pilot boat, to be drawn away to the Black Sea.

With no motor, fuel, food, water or medicine, the Struma was abandoned
to its fate and was towed into the open sea. On February 24, 1942, it
was torpedoed by a Soviet submarine at 2:00 a.m. Only one person
survived. After the incident, then Prime Minister Refik Saydam said:
“Turkey cannot become the home of those who are not wanted by anyone
else.”

Labor Battalions of Non-Muslims (1941-1942)

On April 22, 1941, 12,000 non-Muslims, including Jewish men between
the ages of 27 and 40, were sent in extreme hot weather as soldiers to
camps with no infrastructure and a shortage of water, which were
infested with mosquitoes, dampness, mud — all of which spread
malaria. Those soldiers, also known as “the Twenty Classes,” were not
given guns. They were forced to wear the clothes of garbagemen and to
work endless hours, and were insulted and ridiculed as “infidel
soldiers.” Even blind and physically disabled persons were
conscripted. They were made to work under terrible conditions at
places such as tunnel constructions in Zonguldak and in the
construction of the Youth Park in Ankara. There was hard labor, such
as rock crushing and road construction in the provinces of Afyon,
Karabuk, Konya, and Kutahya. The “Twenty Classes” were discharged on
June 27,1942.[12]

“Due to the poor conditions during the service there were deaths and
diseases among the conscripts,” reported the Turkologist Ruben H.
Melkonyan.

The prevailing and widespread point of view on the matter was that,
wishing to participate in World War II, Turkey gathered in advance all
unreliable non-Turkish men regarded as a potential “fifth column”,
wrote Melkonyan.

The Law of Wealth Tax (1942-1944)

On November 11, 1942, the government, led by then PM Sukru Saracoglu,
enacted a Wealth Tax law, with the stated aim of overcoming the
economic problems that had emerged during World War II. 87% of tax
payers, however, were non-Muslims.

“The real reason for the Wealth Tax was the elimination of non-Muslims
from the economy, wrote Basak Ince, an Assistant Professor of
political science.[13]

Taxpayers were divided into four separate groups according to their
religious background:

M, for Muslims,
G, for non-Muslims,
E, for foreigners,
D, for converts.

The amount of taxes to be paid by Armenian traders was 232%, by Jewish
traders was 179%, by Greek traders was 156%. Only 4.94% of Turkish
Muslims had to pay the wealth tax. So those who suffered most severely
were non-Muslims such as the Jews, Greeks, Armenians, and Levantines;
it was the Armenians who were most heavily taxed.

The Turkish researcher Ridvan Akar refers to the wealth tax as an
economic genocide against minorities. [14]

The law was also imposed on poor non-Muslims, such as drivers, workers
and even beggars, whereas their Muslim counterparts were not required
to pay anything. Non-Muslims had to pay their taxes within 15 days, in
cash. People unable to pay were sent to forced labor camps in eastern
Anatolia.

“And those unable to pay were packed off to a camp at Askale, near
Erzerum — an area cooler than Moscow in the winter — where they were
put to work breaking stones,” reported the author Sidney Nowill.[15]

The historian Corry Guttstadt, in her book Turkey, the Jews, and the
Holocaust, wrote that “Although the law stipulated that people over 55
years old were exempt from labor service, 75 and 80 year old men and
even sick people were dragged to the train station and deported.”

These taxes ruined the lives and finances of many non-Muslim families;
there were a number of suicides of non-Muslims in Istanbul. “Some
people committed suicide in despair,” Guttstadt wrote.

Of the people who were sent to the labor camps, 21 died there; the
Turkish government confiscated their assets and sold them to Turkish
Muslims at low prices.[16] “The Wealth Tax was withdrawn in March
1944, under the pressure of criticism from Britain and the United
States,” Ince reported.

Murders and Unjust Trials

On August 17, 1927, Elza Niyego, a 22-year-old Jewish woman, was
stabbed to death by Osman Ratip Bey, a married man, age 42, who had
proposed her but was rejected. The dead body of the young woman was
left out for three hours in the street. Elza’s mother was not allowed
to cover her daughter’s dead body, an order that aroused a great
reaction among the Jewish community. Masses who joined the funeral on
18 August shouted, “We want justice!”. After the funeral, attended by
crowd whose number was estimated to range between 10 to 25 thousand,
the Cumhuriyet (Republic) newspaper started an intense anti-Semitic
campaign. The Cumhuriyet and other newspapers featured headlines which
referred to Jews as “the ungrateful” or “the arrogant.”

At the end of the trial, the murderer Osman Ratip Bey was sent to a
mental asylum, but not to prison. Nine Jews and a Russian witness of
the murder, however, were brought to court for “insulting
Turkishness,” and four were imprisoned. And once again, the freedom of
movement of Jews across Anatolia was denied by the government, as of
29 August 1927.

On January 30, 1947, all members of a Jewish family, which consisted
of seven people, were found dead in the Kendirli neighborhood of the
province of Urfa. The Jewish community of Urfa was held responsible
for the murder, and all Jewish men in the city were arrested.
Throughout the trials, the people of Urfa boycotted Jews. The Jews who
were arrested were released after three years but the Jews of Urfa had
to leave the city.

Jews in Turkey Today

Jews in Turkey, even under Kemalist, non-Islamic governments, were
exposed to severe and systematic discrimination for decades. Today,
under an Islamist government, they are feeling unsafe and threatened
again. Many people from Turkey’s Jewish community are leaving the
country or planning to, a prominent businessman from the community
wrote in a December 2014 article for the Istanbul-based Jewish
newspaper, Salom. Mois Gabay, a professional in the tourism industry,
wrote, referring to the murder of Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant
Dink in 2007: “We face threats, attacks and harassment every day. Hope
is fading. Is it necessary for a ‘Hrant among us’ to be shot in order
for the government, the opposition, civil society, our neighbors and
jurists to see this?”

Gabay added that increasing numbers of Turkish Jews are making plans
to move abroad with their families: “Around 37 percent of high school
graduates from the Jewish community in Turkey prefer to go abroad for
higher education … This number doubled this year compared to the
previous years.”

It is not only students who have begun to think about building a life
abroad for their families and children, Gabay wrote, but also young
business people: “Last week, when I was talking to two of my friends
on separate occasions, the conversation turned to our search for
another country to move to. That is to say, my generation is also
thinking more about leaving this country.”

When anti-Semitism turns into anti-Zionism

If there had been a Jewish state while all this persecution had been
taking place, Jews could have gone there in time of need.

Had there been such a state before the Holocaust, European Jews could
have sought refuge. Had they had a military, they could have defended
themselves from the Nazis.

After all this persecution and discrimination against Jews, the
anti-Semitic tradition of Turkey still continues. In 2005, Mein Kampf,
by Adolf Hitler, became a best seller in Turkey after it was published
by 13 publishing houses.

Jewish homes being built in Israel are not an obstacle to peace. The
only obstacle to peace is the hatred from Israel’s neighbors.

Uzay Bulut, born a Muslim, is a Turkish journalist based in Ankara.

________________________________

[1] Hur, Ayse , 8 February 2009, “Isolated (!) Incidents of
Anti-Semitism.” Taraf Newspaper.
Bali, Rifat (1999). Turkish Jews in the Republican Years – An
Adventure of Turkification (1923-1945). Iletisim Publishing House.
Bali, Rifat (2001). The Children of Moses, The Citizens of the
Republic. Iletisim.
Bali, Rifat (2004). The Jews of the State and the “Other” Jew. Iletisim.

[2] Ibid

[3] Hur, Ayse, 22 January 2012, “The ‘minority report’ of the
Republic.” Taraf Newspaper.

[4] Ibid

[5] Yabancılara ÇalıÅ?ma YasaÄ?ı

[6] Ibid

[7] Bali, Rifat (1999). Turkish Jews in the Republican Years – An
Adventure of Turkification (1923-1945). Iletisim Publishing House.
Ince, Basak (2012). Citizenship and Identity in Turkey: From Atatürk’s
Republic to the Present Day. I. B. Tauris.

[8] Demirel, Isil (2011). “Ladino: Turkey is Forgetting a Language.”
Atlas Magazine.

[9] Türkiye’de Sürgün

[10] Ibid

[11] Guttstadt, Corry (2013). Turkey, the Jews, and the Holocaust.
Cambridge University Press. Bali, Rifat (2004). The Jews of the State
and the “Other” Jew. Iletisim.

[12] Bali, Rifat (2008). The Twenty Classes: The Episode of Military
Service of Non-Muslims during the Second World War. Kitabevi
Publishing House.

[13] Ince, Basak (2012). Citizenship and Identity in Turkey: From
Atatürk’s Republic to the Present Day. I. B. Tauris.

[14] “Report: The law that coveted the ‘wealth’ of minorities,” by
Zeynep Ozakat, Milliyet newspaper, 15/12/2009.

[15] Nowill, Sidney E. P. (2011). Constantinople and Istanbul: 72
Years of Life in Turkey. Matador.

[16] Ince, Basak (2012). Citizenship and Identity in Turkey: From
Atatürk’s Republic to the Present Day. I. B. Tauris.

From: A. Papazian

http://www.annefrank.de/mensch/tr/dorothea-brander/schwerpunktthemen/exil-in-der-tuerkei/
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5175/jews-turkey-discrimination

Toronto: Exhibition: Kefi Combines Greek, Jewish And Armenian Art

KEFI COMBINES GREEK, JEWISH AND ARMENIAN ART

The Eyeopener, Canada
Feb 5 2015

By Stephanie Hughes

The word “Kefi,” meaning “fun” or “joy” in Greek, Armenian, and Hebrew
inspired three Ryerson student culture groups to host an ethnic art
presentation Thursday.

Kefi is a collaboration between the Hellenic Students Association
(HSA), the Armenian Students Association (ASA), and Hillel, a
Jewish organization operating at York, U of T, and Ryerson. Students
Supporting Israel is another Ryerson-based initiative backing the
project.

Presenters like Kalman Weiser, a U of T humanities professor, described
the common art history between the cultures. Music producer Leigh
Cline and Nurhan Arman – music director of Canada’s Sinfonia Toronto –
spoke about their culture’s folk music origins starting from ancient
roots to modern day.

Campus relations director Ani Dergalstanian stressed the importance
of unity and diversity in this event and others like it. “The focus
of this was the music, so we chose experts.”

Each presenter spoke of their respective culture in the trifecta:
Weiser talked about his Jewish grandmother’s cooking, Cline provided
musical history of various cultures, and Arman told the story of an
Armenian musician.

“This event is essentially a collaboration of different ethnic
backgrounds,” said Ruchie Shainhouse, president of Hillel Ryerson,
“It’s rich in art and tonight we’re exploring the academic portion.”

Shainhouse, like Dergalstanian and HSA president Fotis Karantonis
were enthusiastic about the collaboration.

“It was a long time in the planning process. We’re already on great
terms with other associations… We think everyone will walk away
from this more educated,” said Karantonis.

From: A. Papazian

http://theeyeopener.com/2015/02/kefi-combines-greek-jewish-and-armenian-art/

Armenia Will Be Among 50 Countries Competing At European Games, Hick

ARMENIA WILL BE AMONG 50 COUNTRIES COMPETING AT EUROPEAN GAMES, HICKEY PROMISES AGAIN

Insidethegames.biz
Feb 6 2015

Friday, 06 February 2015
by Duncan Mackay at the Fairmont Hotel in Baku

Armenia will compete in the first-ever European Games here later this
year, despite the continuing conflict between them and Azerbaijan,
it was claimed here today.

Patrick Hickey, President of the European Olympic Committees (EOC),
revealed that he expected all the countries eligible to compete in
the Games, due to take place between June 12 and 28, would travel to
the Azerbaijani capital.

“We will have 50 NOCs (National Olympic Committees) competing in
the European Games,” he said at the end of the fifth and final EOC
Coordination Commission.

“No-one will be excluded and we are very happy with that situation.”

Hickey has always claimed he is confident Armenia will take part
in the Games but once again had to offer reassurances against the
backdrop of the on-going conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over
the Nagorno-Karabakh region, which both countries claim ownership over.

The mountainous region is inhabited almost mainly by ethnic Armenians
but is located within Azerbaijan’s internationally recognised borders.

Armenian armed forces have broken the ceasefire with Azerbaijan 85
times in numerous positions in the last 24 hours, the Azerbaijani
Defence Ministry claimed yesterday, leading to the Russian Government
to urge both countries to find a solution to the problem.

A dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh had left Armenia’s participation
at the first-ever European Games in doubt but both they and the EOC
claim they will take part ©Getty Images

Last week it was announced that Azerbaijan planned to stay away from
the World Chess Team Championships due to be held in Armenian city
Tsakhkadzor in April.

But Armenia does not have any plans to retaliate by staying away from
the European Games after the safety of its athletes was guaranteed,
the country’s Sports Minister Gabriel Ghazaryan has claimed.

Azad Rahimov, Azerbaijan’s Minister of Youth and Sport and chief
executive of Baku 2015, is also keen for the event not to be
overshadowed by any disputes.

“We will spare no effort in ensuring that the first European Games are
an inspirational celebration and friendship for the whole continent,”
he said.

There was praise for the Baku 2015 preparations from the EOC
Coordination Commission at the end of its fifth and final visit
©Baku 2015

The Armenia question is seemingly the only thing overshadowing final
preparations for an event due to feature more than 6,000 athletes
competing in 31 disciplines in 20 sports.

“This EOC visit to Baku ahead of the first European Games has confirmed
that the city is fully prepared to host an unforgettable event,”
said Hickey.

“To have achieved so much in two years is a testament to Azerbaijan’s
dedication to hosting the Games, and Europe’s athletes and sports
fans will be delighted with the high-standard of venues and facilities
which await them.

“We are very happy with all the facilities that we have seen, and I
know it well, because I have been here regularly.

“But for my colleagues who have not been here in two-three months –
they were quite astounded.”

“Baku 2015 will be the perfect launch-pad for the European Games.

“The baby is doing well and waiting to be baptized on June 12.”

From: A. Papazian

http://www.insidethegames.biz/major-games/european-games/baku-2015/1025389-armenia-will-be-among-50-countries-competing-at-european-games-hickey-promises-again

Azerologist links Azerbaijan’s provocations to the country’s domesti

Azerologist links Azerbaijan’s provocations to the country’s domestic issues

12:42, 7 February, 2015

YEREVAN, 7 FEBRUARY, ARMENPRESS. Azerologist Sargis Asatryan links
Azerbaijan’s attempts to intensify the situation to the current
serious problems facing the country. During a February 7 press
conference, he noted that recently Azerbaijan has been making more
attempts to destabilize the situation on the border and that this is
linked to the country’s domestic political issues. “There are many
things that might not appear on the outside, but they are serious
matters of concern for the Azerbaijani authorities. First, the fall of
oil prices has had a great impact on Azerbaijan’s economy, and this
can be seen in the speech by the President of Azerbaijan in which he
mentioned that Azerbaijan needs to reduce expenditures and tighten its
belt. Recently there have also been many extreme Islamists who now
have an ideological basis. The extremists have a strong network in
Azerbaijan, and that helps them engage new people. This is definitely
a matter of concern for the Azerbaijani authorities since those
extremists can join ISIS,” the Azerologist mentioned, according to
“Armenpress”.

According to him, the representatives of ethnic minorities,
particularly the Talishs and the Tats have become active in
Azerbaijan. “I believe Azerbaijan’s attempts to create tension on the
Armenian-Azerbaijani border and at the Karabakh-Azerbaijan Line of
Contact, the shootings and the diversions are aimed at uniting the
Azerbaijani society around at least one idea and distracting the
people’s attention from the situation that has been created. With such
actions, Azerbaijan is also trying to test the Armenian army’s
potential,” the Azerologist underscored.

From: A. Papazian

http://armenpress.am/eng/news/793150/azerologist-links-azerbaijans-provocations-to-the-countrys-domestic-issues.html

Nagorno-karabakh: Is a solution visible?

Nagorno-karabakh: Is a solution visible?

07/02/2015 14:56:00Oratert News Portal
Eduard Nalbandyan

It’s the history of a people who exercised their legitimate right to
self-determination. A people who freely expressed their determination
and who, for almost a century, have faced the hostility of those who
have pretended to be their lords. These are the people of
NagornoKarabakh.

It’s the history of a people who exercised their legitimate right to
self-determination. A people who freely expressed their determination
and who, for almost a century, have faced the hostility of those who
have pretended to be their lords. These are the people of
NagornoKarabakh.

History

Karabakh (which was called #Artsakh for several centuries) was an
integral part of the Armenian kingdoms, as proven by the works of
authors from antiquity (Strabo, Pliny the Elder, Claudius Ptolemy,
Plutarch, Dion Cassius), as well as the many cultural and historical
testimonials of Armenian presence (monuments, churches, cemeteries,
etc.).

In 1918, after the collapse of the Russian Empire, Armenia, Georgia
and Azerbaijan declared their independence. Populated mostly by
Armenians, about 95%, Nagorno-Karabakh had de facto sovereignty from
1918 to 1920 (1). From that time, Azerbaijan started to claim this
territory and tried to annex it by force. From May 1918 to April 1920,
Azerbaijan carried out several massacres against the Armenian
population. In March 1920 alone, about 20,000 Armenians were killed
and another 20,000 were deported from the then Karabakh capital of
Shushi. The illegality of the Azerbaijani actions was underscored by
the League of Nations which also turned down Azerbaijan’s appeal for
the membership on the grounds that it was impossible to define its
borders (2).

With the Sovietization of the Caucasian republics, Azerbaijani leaders
received a green light to annex Artsakh.

On July 5, 1921 the Caucasian Bureau of the Russian Communist Party,
under pressure from Joseph Stalin, decided to give Karabakh to
Azerbaijan. It is noteworthy that this bureau had no authority to make
decisions on territorial disputes between the third parties,
especially because at the time the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
had not been created yet and Armenia and Azerbaijan were de jure
independent republics.

After the end of its occupational program, Baku went even further.
While the Caucasian Bureau of the Communist Party planned to create an
autonomous region across all of Nagorno-Karabakh, only part of that
territory was included in the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast
(NKAO). As a consequence, it became an enclave and was deprived of a
common border with Armenia.

During the Soviet era the Azerbaijan authorities tried to impede the
social-economic development of the region, by carrying out a veritable
ethnic cleansing and destroying or appropriating Armenian monuments
and cultural heritage. The former President of Azerbaijan, Heydar
Aliyev, confessed in one of his interviews (3) that he did everything
possible to change the demographics of Nagorno-Karabakh, in favor of
Azerbaijanis. In fact, the Armenians, who accounted for 94.4 percent
of the population in 1921, were no more than 76.9% in 1989.

The people of Artsakh never accepted Azerbaijani authorities’ policy
of depriving them of their right to choose their own destiny. Several
times, they brought their case before the Soviet

central authorities. Several applications and petitions were sent
asking Moscow to reconsider the decision of 1921 and reunite them with
Armenia.

The policy of Perestroika launched by Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985
provided an opportunity to reopen the issue. The popular movement for
reuniting Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia (conducted by the “Karabakh”
and “Krunk” committees) expanded its scope in 1988, struggling for the
end of Azerbaijani oversight and for the right of self-determination.
This was one of the engines of the process of liberalization,
democratization, the defense of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

On February 20, 1988 the Karabakh Council of People’s Representatives,
the local parliament, adopted a resolution asking the Soviet
authorities to reunite the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh with
Armenia.

The reaction of Soviet Azerbaijan was swift. A new wave of ethnic
cleansing against Armenians was launched both in Artsakh and in
Armenian-populated parts of Azerbaijan. In February 1988, Sumgait saw
a massacre claiming dozens of victims. The violence quickly spread to
Baku, Kirovabad and other cities and villages. Hundreds of Armenians
were killed during these pogroms, with nearly 400,000 forced to flee,
taking refuge in Armenia, Russia and other Soviet Republics.

Legal aspects

On April 3, 1990 a new law was adopted by the USSR, which authorized
autonomous entities and compact ethnic groups within a Soviet Republic
to freely and independently decide their own legal status in case the
Republic secedes from the USSR. Following Soviet Azerbaijan’s
declaration of independence on August 30, 1991, Nagorno-Karabakh
initiated the same legal procedure by adopting its own declaration of
independence. In the referendum of December 10, 1991, organized in the
presence of international observers, the people of Nagorno-Karabakh
voted for independence with an overwhelming majority (over 99% of
votes).

This referendum, which was held at a time when Nagorno-Karabakh was
part of the USSR, was fully in line with Soviet law. Logically, the
day after the collapse of the Soviet Union two states were created on
the territory of the former Azerbaijani Soviet Socialist Republic:
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Over the years, the European Parliament had adopted numerous
resolutions in support of Nagorno-Karabakh’s strife for
selfdetermination. In its resolution of June 21, 1999 on
Nagorno-Karabakh, the European Parliament stated that “the autonomous
region of Nagorno-Karabakh declared its independence following similar
declarations by former Soviet Socialist Republics after the collapse
of the USSR in September 1991.”

Peoples’ right to self-determination is a fundamental right enshrined
in the Charter of the United Nations and reaffirmed by several other
core international documents.

Not having any legal argument against the independence of
Nagorno-Karabakh, Baku tried to represent the problem as a territorial
dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The conflict and the peace process

In Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding areas populated by Armenians,
the ethnic cleansing by Azerbaijani authorities quickly turned into
large-scale military actions resulting in tens of thousands losses and
causing considerable destruction. Azerbaijan used mercenaries in this
war, mainly Afghans and Chechens, closely linked to the notorious
terrorist organizations.

Such serious violations of international law did not avoid from the
attention of the international community. In 1988-1991 the U.S.
Congress on several occasions condemned the aggression of Azerbaijan
against Armenian civilians. Moreover, in 1992 it approved Section 907
of the Freedom Support Act, restricting the U.S. aid to Azerbaijan
because of Azerbaijan’s aggressive policy and the blockade against
Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Security Council of the United Nations adopted four resolutions in
1993 urging immediate cessation of hostilities, opening of
communications and the resumption of peace talks with all parties
concerned, including Nagorno-Karabakh. In response, Azerbaijan just
intensified its military offensives. But on the ground the balance of
strength turned to its disadvantage, and it soon had no other option
but to request a cease-fire from Nagorno-Karabakh.

In May 1994, the cease-fire agreement between Nagorno-Karabakh and
Azerbaijan was signed, also joined by Armenia. A new trilateral
agreement on the consolidation of the cease-fire was signed in
February 1995. Both agreements are continuously violated by
Azerbaijan.

Starting from the mid-1990s the peace talks have been mediated by the
Co-Chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, comprising France, Russia and the
United States. In the first phase, the peace negotiations involved
three parties — Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh. However, in
the late 1990s Azerbaijan broke off all talks with Nagorno-Karabakh.
In order to preserve the peace process, Armenia continued
negotiations, believing that Nagorno-Karabakh would eventually have to
be involved. In fact, it will be impossible to reach a lasting
settlement without its participation; and this view is fully shared by
the Co-Chairs.

The Minsk Group Co-Chairs spared no efforts, organizing regular
high-level talks and shuttling between Baku, Stepanakert and Yerevan.
But their efforts were in vain, since all peace efforts were
undermined by Azerbaijan. In 2001 the parties met in Paris and came
close to a settlement. Unfortunately, Heydar Aliyev, the President of
Azerbaijan at the time, and the father of the current president,
backtracked from the agreements reached in the French capital.

Basic Principles

In November 2007, during the OSCE Ministerial Council in Madrid, the
Co-Chairs presented the basic principles of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict settlement, which later became known

as the “Madrid Principles”.

Azerbaijan at first publicly refused to accept the very existence of
the Madrid proposals. Subsequently, Baku sought to falsify the essence
of the document and misinterpret the content of the peace process.

The Co-Chair countries were obliged to make public the main principles
of the Madrid Document, which drew on three fundamental principles of
international law: non use of force or the threat of force; peoples’
right to self-determination; and territorial integrity.

The main elements of the proposals were also revealed: determination
of the final legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh through a legally
binding expression of the will of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh;
an interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh until the organization of the
free expression of the will; multilayer security guarantees, including
a peacekeeping operation around Nagorno-Karabakh; return of the
territories surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh; a corridor linking
Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia; the right of all refugees and internally
displaced persons to return to their former places of residence.

Azerbaijan rejected each of these points. Not only did it attempt to
change the essence of the negotiating process, but also to distort the
nature of the conflict within various international bodies, not
hesitating to mislead the international community by presenting the
consequences of the conflict as its causes.

The Minsk Group Co-Chairs stated at the OSCE 2010 Astana summit that
“These proposed elements were conceived as an integrated whole, and
any attempt to select some elements over others would make it
impossible to achieve a solution.”

>From 2008 to 2011, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev
considerably contributed to the peace process. He organized a number
of trilateral talks with the participation of the Presidents of
Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, where the parties adopted four
declarations (4).

To support the efforts for a peaceful settlement, the presidents of
the three Co-Chair countries adopted five statements (5). Statements
on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict were also adopted within the
framework of the OSCE Ministerial Conferences and OSCE Summit (6).

Armenia welcomed all these statements and expressed its readiness to
settle the conflict on the basis of the proposals contained therein.

However, Azerbaijan not only failed to endorse these statements, it
rejected all versions of the Basic Principles of the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict settlement proposed by the Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group,
including the latest proposals submitted at the Saint-Petersburg (June
2010), Astrakhan (October 2010), Sochi (March 2011) and Kazan (June
2011) summits.

We went to the Kazan meeting, initiated by then President Medvedev and
supported by Presidents Obama and Sarkozy, with a positive outlook and
feeling that we could reach an agreement on the Basic Principles. The
American and French presidents used all their weight. Armenian
President Serzh Sargsyan, during his speech in the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg just before the
meeting, stated that it would be possible to expect positive results
if Azerbaijan did not propose new amendments. But, once again, the
Kazan Summit did not reach a breakthrough, despite everybody’s raised
hopes. Azerbaijan did an about-face at the last moment, suggesting ten
amendments to the text which had already been agreed. It was a
repetition of the scenario at the previous meetings.

The aftermath of the Kazan Summit

The Kazan Summit was followed by almost two years of stagnation in the
peace process. Azerbaijan’s negative attitude not only undermined the
negotiations, but also destabilized the situation on the ground.
During this period Azerbaijan multiplied its ceasefire violations and
provocative actions along the line of contact between Nagorno-Karabakh
and Azerbaijan and along the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Co-Chairs are internationally mandated to facilitate the peace
process, as well as to help preserve and strengthen the existing
ceasefire. They proposed a number of Confidence and Security-Building
Measures (CSBM) — consolidation of the ceasefire, withdrawal of
snipers from the line of contact, creation of a mechanism to
investigate incidents and violations of the cease-fire agreement.
These proposals were endorsed by a number of major international
organizations, as well as the UN Secretary General. They were equally
welcomed by Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. But all of them were
rejected by Baku.

Azerbaijan also refused implement what has been agreed by President
Aliyev on creation of investigation mechanism (Sochi declarations of
March 5, 2011 and January 23, 2012). It even threatened to veto the
entire OSCE budget for 2012 if any funding was allocated to the
creation of this type of investigation mechanism.

Armenia has always supported the implementation of the Confidence and
Security Building Measures (CSBMs). We believe that these measures
will help create favorable conditions for negotiations. Azerbaijan
takes the opposite point of view and only considers the implementation
of these measures once progress on the settlement has been achieved.
Which makes no sense, because it is obvious that if we manage to reach
a solution, there would be less need for the measures! It is also
obvious that without mutual confidence between the parties, no
solution is possible.

Armenophobia in Azerbaijan

Baku is blatantly encouraging anti-Armenian xenophobia. Azerbaijani
President Aliyev declared Armenians all over the world are the “Number
1 enemy” of Azerbaijan.

This anti-Armenian propaganda reached its apogee with the Safarov
affair. In 2004 this young Azerbaijani serviceman, who was attending a
NATO training session in Hungary, killed a sleeping Armenian officer,
with an axe, solely because he was Armenian. Convicted in Hungary,
where he was jailed, he was finally extradited in 2012 to Azerbaijan,
where he was immediately pardoned and glorified. The Azerbaijani
leadership made him a symbol of national pride and an example for
youth, earning the disapproval of the whole world. The Council of
Europe’s Commissioner of Human Rights warned that “to glorify and
reward such a person flies in the face of all accepted standards for
human rights protection and rule of law.” The European Parliament
President and Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
President also expressed their concern. The United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights said that “ethnically motivated hate
crimes of this gravity should be deplored and properly punished – not
publicly glorified.” However, despite these warnings, Baku still
maintains that what it did “is very good and right” and dares to
criticize the stance of the international community.

A top level meeting between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan
resumed in Vienna in November 2013, thanks to the efforts of the
Co-Chairs, some time after the notorious “Safarov case”, and there was
some hope that the negotiations could move forward. Once more, those
expectations were not met, as Azerbaijan did everything to destabilize
the situation in the conflict zone.

The Azerbaijani side made several incursions, resulting in many
deaths, and drastically raising tension on the ground. An Armenian
villager who had mistakenly strayed into Azerbaijan territory was
arrested, humiliated in front of the TV cameras — a tactic used by
notorious terrorist organizations — and executed the following day.

In Azerbaijan, journalists, activists and the intelligentsia are all
persecuted as “Armenian spies” and “enemies of the nation”, just
because they are advocating peace and reconciliation. The writer Akram
Aylisli was ostracized for publishing a novel (7), where he talks
about the pogroms against Armenians in Baku and Sumgait. His books
were publicly burned and the writer had to leave the country because
of threats on his life.

Armenophobia is becoming a constant of political discourse in
Azerbaijan. Those who are courageous enough not to blindly follow the
propaganda of the authorities of Azerbaijan are rapidly disappearing
from the stage. The distortion of history and propaganda have reached
such an extent that Armenia, and even the several millennia-old city
of Yerevan, are being declared ancient territories of Azerbaijan.

At a time when the protection and promotion of human rights are
considered to be fundamental concepts, intolerance towards the values
of foreign civilizations, and the degradation or systematic
destruction of cultural or religious heritage must be condemned with
the same resolve and determination as violence against people.

The systematic destruction by the Azerbaijanis of many Armenian
architectural masterpieces and sacred sites, including the destruction
between 1998 and 2005 in Nakhichevan (8) of thousands of delicately
carved cross stones by Armenian masters dating from the 9th to the
16th centuries, is vivid proof of these crimes.

Thousands of these giant medieval sculptures were bulldozed under the
Azerbaijani government’s watchful eyes and this area was turned into a
military zone in a government sanctioned operation. The 16th
International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) General Assembly
resolution condemned this vandalism in no uncertain words: “This
heritage that once enjoyed its worthy place among the treasures of the
world’s heritage can no longer be transmitted today to future
generations.”

Many international organizations also warned about flagrant cases of
racism, intolerance and violations of human rights in Azerbaijan and
the policy of hatred against Armenians. The European Commission
against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), in its report on Azerbaijan,
noted with deep concern the “constant and negative official and media
discourse concerning the Republic of Armenia” and recommended that
Azerbaijani authorities “adopt an appropriate response to all cases of
discrimination and hate speech against Armenians”. In response, Baku
merely organizes fake conferences on tolerance and freedom, in an
attempt to impose its own distorted perception of human rights on
others.

Azerbaijan, a threat to regional security

With its long experience in domestic corruption, Azerbaijan is
attempting to transfer this “expertise” to foreign relations. In
foreign capitals and international organizations, lobbying teams seek
to justify Baku’s aggressive policies.

The Minsk Group Co-Chairs — the Russian President in Sochi (August
2014), the American Secretary of State in Newport (September 2014),
and the President of France in Paris (October 2014) — organized summit
meetings with participation of the Heads of States of Armenia and
Azerbaijan to reduce tensions and avoid further escalation. Azerbaijan
once again refused François Hollande’s proposals on Confidence
Building Measures at the Paris summit.

Immediately after those meetings the Azerbaijani authorities’ raised
another wave of anti-Armenian rhetoric. The Defense Minister of that
country claimed again that his country would solve the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue through military means and bragged about a 27%
increase in Azerbaijan’s military budget! The budget will reach $4.8
billion in 2015, a 30-fold increase since 2003, when Ilham Aliyev
succeeded his father as Head of State.

The latest provocation: in November 2014, a Nagorno-Karabakh Defense
Army helicopter was shot down during a training flight by Azerbaijani
forces. Three young servicemen were killed. The Azerbaijani army kept
the area under continuous fire for almost ten days, hindering rescue
teams and preventing OSCE and International Committee of the Red Cross
representatives from approaching the site. A request by the OSCE Minsk
Group Co-Chairs to open a humanitarian corridor to evacuate the bodies
of the crew members was refused as well. Facing yet another gross
violation of international humanitarian law by Azerbaijan, the
Nagorno-Karabakh Defense Army had to undertake a special operation to
recover the bodies.

Baku continues to oppose the Minsk Group and the international
community. It is not only ignoring calls to implement
confidence-building measures, but is even pouring oil on the fire,
making them fully responsible for escalating the conflict.

For the last twenty years, Azerbaijan has done everything in its power
to undermine the cease-fire agreements. Military actions along the
line of contact and on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border have resulted
in significant loss of life and greatly raised tensions on the ground.
All the statements and decisions by Baku’s authorities prove that
Azerbaijan has become a serious threat to security and stability in
the South Caucasus. This country has lost its sense of reality and is
doing its utmost to undermine the peace talks. That is why, despite
the intensive efforts of the three Co-Chair countries during the last
six years (twenty summits, several dozen ministerial-level meetings,
visits by the three Co-Chairs to the region), it has not been possible
to achieve a breakthrough in negotiations.

Azerbaijan is undertaking a relentless campaign of denigration against
the Minsk Group Co-Chairs. It also continuously attacks the Personal
Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office (who is trying to
prevent the escalation of the situation, along with his team).
Azerbaijani officials are trying to shift the settlement process to
different format from the OSCE Minsk-Group Co-Chairmanship.

In fact, Baku is not interested in anything but its own advantage.
That explains why they deliberately undermined recent Summits
(Saint-Petersburg in June 2010, Astrakhan in October 2010, Sochi in
March 2011, and Kazan in June 2011). Armenia deplores this attitude.
It considers, along with the Co-Chairs, that any maneuver to delay the
negotiations on achieving a balanced agreement on the basic principles
is unacceptable.

Is settlement possible?

We continue to believe that the principles and elements outlined in
the statements of the heads of the Co-Chair countries over the last
six years can be the foundations for reaching a fair and lasting
settlement of the conflict.

We absolutely agree that peoples should be prepared for peace, not
war. Unfortunately, until now the Azerbaijani leadership is doing just
the opposite. Unlike Azerbaijan, Armenia, in response to the call by
Presidents of the Co-Chair countries, has reiterated and once again
reaffirms its commitment to the principles of international law.

We fully agree with the heads of the Co-Chair countries that the use
of force will not resolve the conflict, and that only a negotiated
settlement can lead to stability and peace, which will open new
opportunities for regional cooperation and development. The sooner the
Azerbaijani leadership understands this reality, the faster the
conflict can be settled.

The day that Azerbaijan gets rid of its illusions, the day that it
realizes that it’s not by pouring its oil revenues into its strategy
of endlessly increasing military tension that it can achieve a
solution in its favor, on that day, I repeat, we can hope for tangible
progress in the peace process. Armenia will spare no efforts to
achieve the settlement of the conflict exclusively by peaceful means.

(1) During the years 1918-1920, the power in Nagorno-Karabakh was held
by the Assembly of Armenians of Karabakh, which declared, on July 22,
1918, that Nagorno-Karabakh is an independent political entity. It
elected a National Council, or Parliament and a democratic government.

(2) Decision of the 5th Commission of the Assembly of the League of
Nations, December 1, 1920.

(3) Zerkalo, Azerbaijan, July 23, 2002.

(4) In Mayendorf (November 2, 2008), Astrakhan (October 27, 2010) and
Sochi (March 5, 2011 and January 23, 2012).

(5) In L’Aquila (2009), Muskoka (2010), Deauville (2011), Los Cabos
(2012), Eniskilen (2013).

(6) In Helsinki (2008), Athens (2009), Almaty (2010), Vilnius (2011),
Dublin (2012), Kiev (2013), Basel (2014), and during the OSCE Summit
in Astana (2010).

(7) “Stone Dreams”, Druzhba Narodov, 2012.

(8) – Stephen Castle “Azerbaijan ‘flattened’ sacred Armenian site”,
The Independent, 30 May 2006;

– Sarah Pickman “Tragedy on the Araxes”, archaeology.org, 30 June 2006;

– “U.S. Envoy barred from Armenian cemetery in Azerbaijan”, RFE/RL, 22
April 2011.

From: A. Papazian

http://www.oratert.com/news/armenia/80294.html