Author: Badalian Vardan

SABAN KARDAS: “TURKEY HAS TO DEVELOP LARGE FIRMS IN ORDER TO BECOME AN ACTIVE PLAYER IN ENERGY SECTOR”

Journal of Turkish Weekly

Jan 24 2012

Journal of Turkish Weekly (JTW) conducted an exclusive interview with
Saban Kardas. Saban Kardas is assistant professor at TOBB University
of Economics and Tecnology in Ankara. He is also assistant editor
of Insight Turkey, a quarterly journal in circulation since 1999,
which is published by SETA Foundation.

Q: Would Turkey not be successful if it pursued its energy policy
through TPAO, equipped with specific power and well-designed by
the state, rather than extending state aid? In this context, is
the Azerbaijan SOCAR (State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic)
a successful model? Is it possible for Turkey’s energy policy to be
changed substantially?

A: To start with, Turkey and Azerbaijan’s energy policies are
different, and will be misleading to start analysis of Turkey’s energy
policies with a comparison between them. While as an energy rich
producing country Azerbaijan envisions a different set of priorities
in its energy policies, Turkey’s energy policy is driven by first
and foremost a concern to meet its own needs. Beyond that, Turkey
works to assume a role in energy policies as a transit country. The
shaping of energy policies in the countries of origin on the one hand
and transit countries, i.e., countries that host the transportation
routes, on the other, as well as specific institutional structures
they devise take place in different settings.

Going back to the core issue raised in your question: whether Turkey
should develop its energy policies by moving to a private-sector driven
model or a model based on some form of state control or intervention
in the market. Alongside TPAO, BOTAS needs to be mentioned in the
context of transit projects. There are market pressures on BOTAS to
reduce its market share. There is also a similar expectation from
external players, especially the EU. Turkey is responding to these
expectations and reducing state involvement but it is difficult
to say that it has progressed to an extent that it can satisfy the
demands coming from outside. There are different arguments made in
support of the opposing models, referring back to your question. As
it is sometimes underlined in the ongoing discussions in Turkey, it
makes sense to reduce the element of state intervention to the extent
possible. From a liberal logic, one can make the argument that a more
effective and efficient system can be developed by this approach.

However, as a counter line of thought argues, in markets regulating
strategic commodities, energy being one of them, there are some reasons
to adopt some degree of state-control. The key concern in Turkey is
that if such a strategic commodity is left to market forces alone,
it is hard to develop competitive national players. Such concerns on
Turkey’s part have been underlined in the debate taking place in the
energy markets. It is widely believed that as it seeks to assert its
importance in energy geopolitics, Turkey has to develop large firms
in order to become an active player in this field. Firms with big
capital need to emerge for global competition. It is not unlikely to
occur in free market conditions, but it will be difficult.

The best way to do so would be to develop an energy giant with state
support. For this reason, Turkey, as in the case of BOTAS, was for some
time resisting the pressures to move to a free market-oriented model
and retain it as a major player, despite the pressures coming from
outside. Recently, as it has been brought to the public’s attention
in the context of gas purchase contracts from Russia, Turkey in fact
has started to reduce the monopoly over natural gas imports.

Similarly, the domestic distribution grid has been privatized to
a large extent. Granted, overall, Turkey is heading to a more
market-oriented model. Yet, as stated by Energy Minister Taner
Yıldız on several occasions, despite a market-oriented model,
Turkey wants to retain a decisive capacity for the state to make
critical interventions in the operation of market. This appears to
be the official prognosis for the future of the state in energy market.

Going back to the question on the SOCAR (State Oil Company of
Azerbaijan Republic) model, it is early to answer this question,
in the sense that the process of SOCAR’s consolidation in the
market has yet to be finalized. In this context, what SOCAR is
trying to do is in essence to replicate GAZPROM model of Russia,
i.e., using its position as a major producer to develop projects
aiming to penetrate into downstream markets and gain control over
transportation and distribution networks, so that it can maximize
profits. The Trans-Anatolia agreement is the most obvious example
for SOCAR’s quest to play such a prominent role. Seen from that
perspective, this model is not applicable to Turkey, given that Turkey
does not stand a chance to become a player in the chain running from
the source or producing nations to the distribution networks. So,
it is hard to compare Turkey’s energy sector to SOCAR model, given
the structural differences.

Since the SOCAR model is still in the making, one has to wait and see
how it will come into full fruition and whether it will accomplish
its objectives. It is early to make a realistic assessment. But so
far, Azerbaijan is exporting oil and gas and in addition to that it
has undertaken major investments in Turkey’s energy sector. So, one
can safely say that it has accomplished some progress in downstream
markets as well. To sum up, in Azerbaijan, one might expect the
emergence of a structure similar to the one in Russia and it has
recorded some progress in that regards.

At this point, one has to note some problems with the GAZPROM model,
assuming that SOCAR also pursues a similar approach. In this model,
there are debates as to the fusion of the state and business interests;
i.e., political authorities shaping the economic decisions or economics
dominating political decisions, all the while GAZPROM and other energy
giants being at the center of these intermingling relations. If
SOCAR follows a similar route to the Russian model, in the mid- to
long-term, how the relationship between politics and economics will be
forged and whether interest groups formed around energy industry may
eventually hinder democratization and good governance are issues that
beg closer inspection. If Azerbaijan might be opting for this model,
such questions also need to be discussed more candidly.

Finally, Turkey will unlikely to follow these models. As underlined,
while moving toward a market-oriented model, Turkey will develop a
structure that enables effective state interventions into the market,
through the control of a critical share by the state.

Q: The signing of the agreement regarding the Trans-Anatolian pipeline,
which included Azerbaijan and Turkey, can be considered a blow to
Nabucco on the one hand, and giving permission to South Stream might
make Europe more dependent on Russia on the other. Was it a reaction
against France because of the political air in recent months?

A: Personally, I do not think the recent developments regarding
pipeline projects are directly related to the Armenian allegations.

For instance, France has not been particularly supportive of Nabucco.

On the contrary, the French are somehow involved in South Stream,
having overtaken some of the shares in the project. So, it is difficult
to argue that Turkey wanted to hurt France by thwarting Nabucco. There
is no such direct connection, and Turkey’s decision(s) are not
intended to convey a message to Europe. Both the Trans-Anatolian
and the South Stream pipelines should be assessed based on their
particular conditions, as well as from Turkey’s own perspective, and
how Turkey sees them in line with its priorities in energy policies.

I don’t think Trans-Anatolia is a blow to Nabucco. Turkey is a country
that has always supported the Nabucco as a strategic project and
clearly has expressed its commitment. Nabucco continues to play a
key role in Turkey’s objectives to become an energy hub. But there
are certain structural problems in the Nabucco project itself, and
unfortunately, they have not been clearly resolved so far. As is
well known, uncertainty over dedicated supplies, lack of financing
and lack of unequivocal purchase commitments are other major hurdles.

Previously, there used to be uncertainty over the transit regime
which occasionally led to crises between Turkey and the EU. Through an
understanding Turkey reached with the Europeans earlier, it eliminated
those problems.

One of the drivers of the Trans-Anatolian pipeline is Azerbaijan’s
quest for an independent role in energy markets, which I underlined
earlier. Turkey has taken a step in support of Azerbaijan’s role. But
while providing this support, Turkey also reiterated the fundamental
rationale of the Nabucco, i.e., giving approval to a direct corridor
from the Caspian basin to European markets traversing Turkey. Turkey
hereby sent a signal and reiterated its earlier position that it will
not be an obstacle to the so-called Southern corridor. There were some
uncertainties regarding the future of the Nabucco project as originally
envisaged, which obviously delayed its realization. There had been
concerns that the original design might be overambitious and aim at
unrealistically high capacity. The joint Azerbaijani-Turkish initiative
now enables a reconfiguration of Nabucco in more manageable scales. It
is difficult to say that this route is altogether dead, as the
rationale underpinning it also is at the core of the Trans-Anatolia.

Turkey’s support for South Stream is a separate debate, because there
is a direct competition with Nabucco there. Turkey has taken similar
complementary steps in the past as well. After supporting Nabucco,
Turkey demonstrated that it would not be the country that prevents
South Stream. In that regards, we can say Turkey has not adopted a
new position. The recent moves towards Trans-Anatolia and South Stream
is a continuation of the previous position in the recent context.

Q: The energy agreement signed by Turkey in recent weeks further
brought Azerbaijan and Turkey together. In the coming years, will
Ankara develop an Azerbaijan-oriented policy despite Yerevan, or
create its own policy regarding energy?

A: Based on the previous discussions, it is worth emphasizing a few
points. Firstly, it is difficult for Turkey to develop independent
energy policies under the current conditions. If we are talking about
supply security in this context, it has different implications. If
we are discussing this question in the context of Turkey’s goal
of becoming an energy transit corridor, it needs to be handled
differently.

If we try to answer your question in this second dimension, i.e.,
energy transportation, it is difficult for Turkey to develop energy
policies independent of Azerbaijan in the short to medium term. For
Turkey to emerge a transit corridor and develop major transit routes,
the producers of oil and gas have to give their approval. Azerbaijan
is the first and only viable option at this point. In this sense,
the Trans-Anatolian agreement signed with Azerbaijan, and the earlier
agreements signed at the High Level Strategic Cooperation Council
summit between Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President
Ilham Aliyev, finalized Turkey’s first real transit agreement in
natural gas markets. Although we have been proud of becoming a hub
country, so far it remained at the rhetorical level and has yet to
be realized. The compromise reached subsequent to the treaty signed
with Azerbaijan allows Turkey to become a natural gas transit route
for the first time. In this context, it is difficult for Turkey to
develop a policy completely independent of Azerbaijan.

Apart from this, which alternative players are there? Exporting natural
gas reserves in northern Iraq through Turkey has been on the agenda of
the northern Iraqi leaders. However, there are problems between Baghdad
and provinces as to how to use the natural resources of Iraq. The
other option is obviously Iran. Tehran’s strained relations with
America, among other factors, limit the ability of Iran to emerge
as a major alternative for Turkey’s ambitious to become a transit
hub. On the other hand, Russia does not want to market its natural
gas through Turkey.

However, it can be said that Turkey has a growing role at present
regarding the oil transportation. The Yumurtalik-Kirkuk pipeline, the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipelines or tankers through the sea lanes play
an important role in the transportation corridors controlled by Turkey.

Beyond these developments, Turkey also has achieved limited progress in
terms of reaching its ambitions. Especially, concerning the transport
of Kazakh and Russian oil through Turkey, major issues remain. In
short, as of now, talking about a role independent of Azerbaijan
is difficult.

Going back to the other issues raised in the question, yes, there
has been a rapprochement between Turkey and Azerbaijan. Particularly,
the current government’s policy is in favor of close relations with
Azerbaijan and we might expect the continuation of this policy. There
is no reason for Turkey to give up its Azerbaijan-oriented policy
in the upcoming years, especially if the economic partnership
continues to deepen between them, as is the case currently. These
ties between Turkey and Azerbaijan, in a sense, create disincentives
for a possible rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey. For Turkey
to be drawn into normalization process, the Armenian side, in its
approach towards Turkey, has to understand that there is not only
an emotional dimension in the Turkish-Azerbaijani relationship,
or a strategic dimension, but there is also a very strong economic
dimension. It would be advisable for Armenia to consider its position
on Turkey by taking into account these various angles.

Tuesday, 24 January 2012

Journal of Turkish Weekly

AZERBAIJAN MAY REFUSE FRANCE IN PARTICIPATION IN GARABAGH CONFLICT SETTLEMENT BECAUSE OF PRO-ARMENIAN LAW

Azerbaijan Business Center
Jan 24 2012

Baku, Fineko/abc.az. The Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs has
issued a formal statement on the occasion of French Senate~Rs decision
to adopt a bill providing for criminal penalties for denying the
“genocide” of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.

According to the Ministry, Azerbaijan believes that the one-sided
steps of the French Senate contradicting to the principles of
democracy, human rights, freedom of speech and thought can cause
serious damage to France~Rs participation in regional processes and
lead to undesirable results.

The decision of French parliamentarians, not noticing for the sake of
their own political ends the occupation of Azerbaijani lands by 20%
and violation of human rights of 1 million Azerbaijanis as a result
of the Armenian terror in the late XX century, puts under doubt the
objectivity of France as a whole.

The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry does not approve such an approach
of the French Senate and calls on France to take a hard look at the
history and not to turn this issue into a political game.

France is still one of the three countries co-chairing the OSCE Minsk
Group to resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Garabagh
conflict.

FRENCH PRESIDENCY RATIFIES “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE” BILL IN 15 DAYS

Kuwait News Agency
Jan 23 2012

PARIS, Jan 24 (KUNA) — The French presidency said a newly-passed
law on rejecting the questioning of alleged “Armenian genocide”
of 1915 would take effect in 15 days.

“The President of the Republic” will ratify the law, passed by the
Senate yesterday and enforce stiff penalties on anyone questioning
reality of the alleged genocide, during 15 days, the presidency said
in a statement.

The Senate passed the bill, backed by the ruling Union for a Popular
Movement (UMP) Party, in a 127-86 vote last night.

The law states that anyone who casts doubt on the “Armenian genocide”
could face a year in jail and a close to USD 60,000 fine.

A law recognizing the “genocide” was passed here in 2001, but 10
years later lawmakers, inspired by President Nicolas Sarkozy, have
gone one step further and criminalised negation of the event, which
Turkey disputes.

Ankara says that around 300,000-500,000 Armenians indeed perished
during the World War I period, but Turks maintain they either died
from famine or in combat against Turkish military forces.

Turkey withdrew its ambassador to Paris in December and brought an
abrupt halt to bilateral visits and military cooperation. French naval
vessels are also forbidden to call at Turkish ports, even though the
two nations are in the NATO organisation and are also fighting on
the same side in the war in Afghanistan. (end) amm.bs KUNA 250027
Jan 12NNNN

TURKEY SLAMS FRANCE OVER “ARMENIAN GENECIDE” BILL APPROVAL

Press TV
Jan 24 2012
Iran

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has strongly criticized
France over its senators’ move to pass a bill that criminalizes the
denial of the alleged “Armenian genocide” about a century ago.

Erdogan stated the move taken by French lawmakers is reminiscent of
the mentality of the Middle Ages and against the European values. He
said Turkey is still waiting patiently to see how the situation will
develop in France and will declare its new measures against France
if in the case it becomes necessary.

The prime minister said Turkey is still hopeful that the French
parliament’s legislation would be reversed through legal channels.

The bill, which has been also passed by the Lower House of the French
parliament, would punish those who deny the alleged “Armenian genocide”
by a 45,000-euro fine and a year in prison. It now needs to be signed
by President Nicolas Sarkozy to become a law.

The French senators’ move to approve the legislation came despite
Turkey’s threats to impose new sanctions on France.

Turkey halted diplomatic consultations and military dealings with
France, just after the Lower House in the French parliament had passed
the bill last month and had warned that it will not let France go
unpunished if the bill became a law.

The move by the French lawmakers to pass the bill is expected to
open up a critical chapter in relations between France and Turkey,
as it seems that Ankara has flexed its muscles to retaliate by taking
all necessary measures.

Turkish people in Paris had held a demonstration to call on France
to avoid passing the bill which has angered them by touching on one
of the most sensitive issues in their country’s history.

A rival demonstration was also held in the city by Armenians who hailed
the French parliament’s decision to vote on the bill. Turkish experts
say the legislation shows France’s disrespect for freedom of speech.

Turkey’s Foreign Ministry, in a statement, has condemned passing the
bill in the French parliament as an irresponsible move and vowed that
it would react to it in all platforms.

The statement said the bill will damage the freedom of speech and
scholarly research in France.

Relations between France and Turkey have become sour from time to time
over the past years, as France, which is one of the main countries of
the European Union has traditionally played a major role in preventing
Turkey from joining the union, but it seems that the bill can decrease
the level of relations between the two countries to unprecedented lows.

LIBERALS IN EP CRITICISE FRENCH ARMENIAN GENOCIDE LAW

Kuwait News Agency

Jan 24 2012

BRUSSELS, Jan 24 (KUNA) — The adoption yesterday by the French senate
of a law which makes the denial of an alleged genocide of Armenians
by Turkey a punishable offence was strongly criticised Tuesday by
the Liberals, Group, ALDE, in the Europdean Parliament.

Alexander Graf Lanbsdorf responsible for EU-Turkey affairs for the
group said: “Yesterday’s decision by the French Senate is an additional
burden on already strained Turkish-European relations”.

Apart from a few, narrowly defined and politically justified
exceptions, assertions of historical facts should be left to historians
and should certainly not be made a crime. The vote in the Senate is
all the more incomprehensible because the alleged Turkish genocide
of Armenians in 1915 is an event in which France was not involved in
any way he said in a statement.

Andrew Duff ALDE member of EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee
added: “The French parliament is wrong to play the role of a court.

The definition of genocide is properly a judicial matter and should
not be reduced to the banality of party politics”.

ALDE is the third biggest political group in the EP. (end) nk.mt KUNA
242046 Jan 12NNNN

AZERBAIJANIS CALL FOR FRANCE TO LEAVE KARABAKH TALKS

EurasiaNet.org
Jan 24 2012
NY

France’s approval of a bill making it a crime to deny that Ottoman
Turks committed genocide against ethnic Armenians during World War
I has not only enraged Turkey, but also proven de trop for Turkey’s
regional cousin, Azerbaijan. As a result, an Azerbaijani campaign is
now building for the French to stop mediating Azerbaijan’s conflict
with Armenia over the breakaway region of Nagorno Karabakh.

Baku, which has long maintained if-you-love-me-you-must-love-Turkey
stance, believes that France has undermined its status as an impartial
negotiator in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict by passing the bill.

France, along with the US and Russia, has long led the effort to
resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over the territory through
a negotiations mechanism called the Minsk Group.

“The most dignified way would be for France to step aside from the
mediation as it lost the moral right to fulfill this mission,” said
Ali Ahmedov, deputy chairperson of the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party,
headed by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.

As of yet, no public sign that President Aliyev also expressed such
views during his recent peace pow-wow in Sochi with Russian President
Dmitry Medvedev and Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, but the remarks
no doubt occurred with Aliyev’s sanction.

“Lately, French leaders act as an Armenia lobbyist,” Ahmedov went on
saying. (A similar charge has been leveled at the US Senate by some
Azerbaijanis over the scuttled confirmation of former Ambassador
Matthew Bryza.) “The fact that the French President [Nicolas]
Sarkozy… called Armenia a sister to France and called on the European
Union to adopt this absurd law… is clear proof of this.” The bill
is just a presidential signature away from being signed into law.

Azerbaijan’s foreign ministry slammed French lawmakers for passing
the bill while ignoring the 1992 Khojaly massacre of ethnic Azeris
in Nagorno Karabakh, and the rights of the thousands of ethnic
Azeris displaced by the 1988-1994 war over Karabakh and surrounding
Azerbaijani territory.

The ministry, which last week summoned French Ambassador Gabriel
Keller for an official dressing-down, called on France to “take an
unbiased look at . . . history without turning such questions into . .
. fodder for political gambling.”

TURKEY SLAMS FRANCE OVER ‘GENOCIDE’ BILL
By JOE PARKINSON and NADYA MASIDLOVER

Wall Street Journal

Jan 24 2012
NY

ISTANBUL-Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday
denounced French lawmakers as racist and vowed to retaliate after
they approved a bill making it a crime to deny that the 1915 massacre
of Armenians was genocide, marking the latest salvo in an escalating
diplomatic rift between Ankara and Paris.

Protesters in Paris Monday oppose a bill making it illegal to deny
the 1915 killing of Armenians was genocide.

In a speech to lawmakers from his governing AK Party in Ankara, Mr.
Erdogan did not spell out what retaliatory measures his government
would take, stressing that Turkey would remain patient and release
details based on developments.

“This is a racist decision. This is killing freedom of thought… We
won’t let France gain credibility through this because their decision
means nothing to us. Our sanctions will be disclosed step by step.”

Mr. Erdogan said, to rapturous applause from his party’s lawmakers.

The comments are likely to add further strain to fast-fraying
diplomatic relations between France and Turkey, and raise the prospect
of a significant diplomatic rift between the two North Atlantic Treaty
Organization allies. In a sign that some senior French policy makers
are becoming nervous the spat is getting out of hand, France’s Foreign
Minister Alain Juppe earlier on Tuesday downplayed the importance of
the vote and urged the Turkish government to remain calm.

The bill, which France’s lower house of Parliament overwhelmingly
approved in December, was passed late Monday by a vote of 127 to 86.

It will require President Nicolas Sarkozy’s signature in the next 15
days to become law.

The French move is set to make the denial of genocide, crimes against
humanity and war crimes that are recognized by French law punishable
by up to a year in prison and a ~@45,000 ($58,143) fine. The only two
mass killings recognized by French law as genocide are the killing of
Armenians during World War I and the Holocaust. Denying the Holocaust
is already illegal in France.

Attention now turns to what measures Ankara will impose against Paris,
and to what degree they will further escalate diplomatic tensions.

Turkey’s government has remained tight lipped on details but Turkish
media on Tuesday reported that Ankara could permanently recall its
ambassador, stop French companies bidding for government contracts
and close Turkish waters and airspace to French ships and planes.

EU-candidate country Turkey can’t impose economic sanctions on
France, because of its membership in the World Trade Organization and
customs-union agreement with Europe. But the row could cost France
profitable bilateral business contracts and would fuel diplomatic
tension as Turkey takes an increasingly influential role in the
Middle East.

Ankara reacted furiously when the lower house passed the bill last
month, withdrawing its ambassador from Paris and freezing political
and military relations.

Armenia praised the move, stressing that the day would “be written
in gold in the history of friendship between the Armenian and French
peoples, but also in the annals of the history of the protection of
human rights world-wide.”

While many countries recognize the killing of as many as 1.5 million
Armenians in 1915 as genocide, Turkey contests the scale of the
losses and says they were casualties of war. It argues the genocide
issue should be left to historians to decide, rather than legislated
by governments.

Relations between the two countries were already frosty, in large
part because of Mr. Sarkozy’s vocal opposition to Turkey’s bid to
join the European Union.

Turkey’s government has repeatedly insisted that the bill is
politically motivated, alleging Mr. Sarkozy was trying to win the
votes of 500,000 ethnic Armenians in France ahead of presidential
elections in three months.

Before Mr. Sarkozy signs the bill into law, it can still be challenged
if lawmakers request a review by the country’s constitutional council.

French Interior Minister Claude Gueant said on Tuesday that Mr.

Sarkozy was likely to sign the bill into law and stressed that France
wanted “to remain friends” with Turkey.

“In a republic like ours, when parliament votes a bill, it is signed
into law,” Mr. Gueant said in an interview with local cable TV news
channel iTele.

Some lawmakers have argued that the text could be regarded as
unconstitutional, as the Armenian genocide has never been recognized
by an international or French court. That means the French law on
the Armenian genocide could be considered tantamount to legislating
on history, possibly impeding on historical research, critics said.

In 2001, the French Parliament voted to officially recognize the
Armenian genocide of 1915. Since then, French lawmakers have made
two unsuccessful attempts to pass bills making denial of the genocide
illegal. The most recent text was deemed unconstitutional and rejected
by the country’s Senate last May.

Armenians say as many as 1.5 million Armenians were systematically
killed during World War I in today’s eastern Turkey, which was then
part of the Ottoman Empire. Turkey denies the allegations and says
hundreds of thousands died in warfare and famine, and that many Turks
were also killed by Armenians.

SARKOZY IS SATAN: TURKS RESPOND ANGRILY AFTER FRANCE APPROVES GENOCIDE LAW ON ARMENIA

Daily Mail

Jan 24 2012
UK

Turkish Prime Minister calls the law ‘discriminatory and racist’

Turkey refutes Armenian claims that 1.5 million Armenians were killed
in 1915 as the Ottoman Empire broke up

Law would mean anyone who denies or ‘outrageously minimize’ the
killings faces up to a year in prison and a fine of ~@45k Riot police
guard French consulate in Turkey as tensions mount

By Daily Mail Reporter

Turkey threatened the France with retaliation after a controversial
bill to make it a crime to deny the mass murder of Armenians by the
Ottoman Turks moved a step closer to becoming law.

Turkey sees the allegations of genocide in 1915 as the Ottoman Empire
imploded as a threat to its national honour, insisting estimates of
the scale of the killing is exaggerated.

And the country reacted furiously when France’s parliament approved
the legislation on Monday.

Sarkozy, whose party supported the bill, is now expected to sign the
bill into law by February.

Turkish press headlines slammed Sarkozy: ‘(He) massacred democracy,’
read the banner headline of the leading Hurriyet newspaper while the
Sozcu daily blasted ‘Sarkozy the Satan.’

The law has also risked more sanctions from Turkey and is complicating
an already delicate relationship with the rising power.

Turkey has already suspended military, economic and political ties,
and briefly recalled its ambassador last month when the lower house
of parliament approved the same bill.

Turkey’s Foreign Ministry strongly condemned the decision, saying the
law should not be finalized to ‘avoid this being recorded as part
of France’s political, legal and moral mistakes.’ If the law is
signed, ‘we will not hesitate to implement, as we deem appropriate,
the measures that we have considered in advance,’ Turkey’s Foreign
Ministry said. It did not elaborate on the measures.

Armenians believe about 1.5 million Christian Armenians were killed
in what is now eastern Turkey during the First World War and this
was part of a deliberate policy of genocide ordered by the Ottoman
Turk government.

The majority of Turks argue that there was a heavy loss of life on
both sides during the fighting in the area, and that mass killing
was inevitable result of newly industrialised warfare.

The debate surrounding the measure comes in the highly charged run-up
to France’s presidential elections this spring, and critics have
called the move a ploy by Sarkozy to garner the votes of the some
500,000 Armenians who live in France.

‘It is further unfortunate that the historical … relations
between the Republic of Turkey and France have been sacrificed to
considerations of political agenda,’ Turkey said. ‘It is quite clear
where the responsibility for this lies.’

Officials in Sarkozy’s conservative government were in damage-control
mode on Tuesday, appealing to Turkey’s government to keep its calm.

‘As foreign minister, I think this initiative was a bit inopportune.

But the parliament has thus decided. What I’d like to do today is
call on our Turkish friends to keep their composure,’ Foreign Minister
Alain Juppe said on Canal Plus TV.

‘After this wave that has been a little bit excessive, I have to
say I’m convinced that we will return to constructive relations –
I extend my hand, I hope it will be taken one day.’

France’s relations with Turkey are already strained, in large part
because Sarkozy opposes Turkey’s entry into the European Union.

The law is likely to further sour relations with a NATO member that is
playing an increasingly important role in the international community’s
response to the violence in Syria, the standoff over Iran’s nuclear
program and peace negotiations in the Middle East.

The Senate voted 127 to 86 to pass the bill late Monday. Twenty-four
abstained. The measure sets a punishment of up to one year in prison
and a fine of ~@45,000 for those who deny or ‘outrageously minimize’
the killings

For some in France, the bill is part of a tradition of legislation
in some European countries, born of the agonies of the Holocaust,
that criminalizes the denial of genocides. Denying the Holocaust is
already a punishable crime in France.

Most historians contend that the 1915 killings of 1.5 million Armenians
as the Ottoman Empire broke up was the 20th century’s first genocide,
and several European countries recognize the massacres as such.

Switzerland has convicted people of racism for denying the genocide.

But Turkey says that there was no systematic campaign to kill Armenians
and that many Turks also died during the chaotic disintegration of
the empire. It also says that death toll is inflated.

Some Turks said Turkey should retaliate in kind. Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has accused the French of ‘genocide’
during France’s 132-year colonial rule in Algeria.

‘I think our country should have retaliated in the same way after the
French Bill has passed,’ Yilmaz Sesen, a chemist, told AP television
in Ankara. ‘They have committed genocide in North Africa, and not
too long ago either.’

AZERBAIJAN CONDEMNS FRENCH VOTE ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE LAW
By Zulfugar Agayev

Business Week

Jan 24 2012

Jan. 24 (Bloomberg) — Azerbaijan condemned the French Senate’s
approval of legislation making it a crime to deny that the mass
killing of Armenians early last century was genocide.

The move may “undermine France’s participation in some developments
in the region,” the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry said in an emailed
statement today. The ruling Yeni Azerbaijan party called on France
to withdraw from co-chairmanship of the so-called Minsk Group,
which mediates in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and
Azerbaijan, because it has lost its credibility as an honest broker,
the APA news agency reported.

French oil company Total SA has a 10 percent stake in the BP Plc-led
Shah Deniz natural-gas development. Total is also developing the
Absheron field, which holds some 350 billion cubic meters of gas.

Azerbaijan has close ethnic and political ties with neighboring Turkey,
which vowed to fight the French measure, risking a further round of
Turkish sanctions and deterioration in relations.

Top Turkey news: TOP TR Turkey politics news: TNI TURKEY POL
Turkish economic snapshot: ESNP TU Bloomberg News in Turkish:
NH TBN

–With assistance from Henry Meyer in Moscow. Editor: Hellmuth Tromm.

SERGEI LAVROV: AZERBAIJANI AND ARMENIAN PRESIDENTS STATED THAT MAXIMALIST POSITION MUST BE GIVEN UP IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE PROGRESS

Milaz.info
Jan 23 2012
Azerbaijan

“At the Sochi meeting held with participation of Russian President,
Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents admitted the necessity of giving
up hardline position and stated that they are ready to continue the
efforts to bring the positions closer,” Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov told journalists, APA reports.

“Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents stated that maximalist position
must be given up in order to achieve progress. The uncoordinated
issues on the basic principles of the resolution of Nagorno Karabakh
conflict were discussed at the trilateral meeting of the presidents.

The parties exchanged views on concrete complicated issues and came to
the conclusion that the work should be continued. The participants of
the meeting reached an agreement to continue working on the general
principles and further to switch to the preparation of the legal
document on the peace agreement,” he said.

Lavrov said Russia as a mediator and co-chair of OSCE Minsk Group
will continue making efforts to bring the parties closer.