Author: Badalian Vardan

International Islamic News Agency
Dec 24 2011

Turkey/France: Turkey says `racist’ bill opens wounds with France

By IINA- December 24, 2011

ANKARA, 28 Muharram/24 Dec (Agencie/IINA)-Turkey’s Prime Minister
Tayyip Erdogan accused France of racism and xenophobia for passing a
bill making it a crime to deny genocide, including the 1915 mass
killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks.

Erdogan called off recently all economic, political and military
meetings with Paris and cancelled permission for French military
planes to land and warships to dock in Turkey, marking a new low in
relations between the NATO partners.

`This is politics based on racism, discrimination and xenophobia. This
is using Turkophobia and Islamophobia to gain votes, and it raises
concerns regarding these issues not only in France but all Europe,’ he
told a news conference, adding Turkey could `not remain silent in the
face of this.’

Erdogan accused French President Nicolas Sarkozy of sacrificing
Turkish-French ties to win the votes of ethnic Armenians in France in
next year’s election, and said the bill limited freedom of speech in
France.

`I am asking now if there is freedom of expression and freedom of
thought in France, and I will reply myself, no, there is not,’ he
said.

The bill was proposed by 40 deputies from Sarkozy’s party and passed
in France’s lower house of parliament.

`Turkish-French ties are not just 50-100 years old. It is a
centuries-old strong relationship, a process that Mr.Sarkozy
sacrifices for the sake of political calculations. This bill will do
more injustice to French people than it does to Turks,’ Erdogan said.

`This bill has removed the free discussion atmosphere (in France). The
principles of liberty, fraternity and equality, which form the basis
of the French revolution, have been trampled on.’

He said the bill was voted on by only 10 percent of the French
lawmakers who attended the vote at the parliament.

`This step will open heavy wounds that will be difficult to heal in
Turkish-French ties,’ he said. `This is the first step, the first
stage of measures, and they will be implemented decisively.’

The French bill, which will next be put to the Senate, or upper house,
for debate in 2012, has triggered outrage in Turkey.

Even though nearly 100 years have passed since the killings that
coincided with World War One, successive Turkish governments and the
vast majority of Turks feel the charge of genocide is a direct insult
to their nation.

The French bill feeds a sense shared by many Turks that they are
unwanted by Europe and it fires up nationalist fervor. However, in a
more self-confident Turkey, popular reaction has been more muted than
in the past.

AH/IINA

No compromise on Nagorno Karabakh in current political situation – Fiona Hill
Sat 24 December 2011 07:11 GMT | 7:11 Local Time

Fiona Hill

News.Az reprints from Vestnik Kavkaza interview with Fiona Hill, an
expert on Russia and the states of the former Soviet Union from
Brookings Institution contemplates on ways of Nagorno Karabakh
conflict settlement.
What is the main reason that there is no resolution of the conflict?

The main reason that there is no resolution of the conflict is that
the cooperation from both sides, both Armenia and Azerbaijan, and
perhaps especially of Azerbaijan are not ready for compromise. Both of
the leaders have not been able to show the idea of a compromise to
their populations. It is the political situation inside of the
countries that is really blocking any kind of settlement at this stage
so it is better for the both presidents that there is no resolution at
this stage.

So there is actually no way for a compromise nowadays, yes?

Not at the current juncture. You know, as Russians say, in principle
there can be a compromise, but under current political situation there
really is not.

In this context is there a possibility for full-scale hostilities to be resumed?

I think it is a real risk of miscalculation, as far as we continue to
see violence, the exchange of fire, sniper cups, regular killings of
soldiers on both sides, there is really a risk of an escalation, a
miscalculation and as a result of this the resumption of violence. It
is helped by the rhetoric, by what the presidents say in the public
contact. So I think most of the experts, most of the people who work
on this issue are very concerned.

Do experts think that there are any changes in the current political
agenda, in Russian foreign policy because of the new elections and
maybe the new government that can change the situation in Nagorno
Karabakh between the two sides?

Well, it is possible, I would not say that it is probable and we have
to see what happens in the Russian elections and how the new
government is formed , but the fact the president Dmitry Medvedev made
a good effort, it really seems like a very sincere effort to find a
way of resolution and put a lot of time and energy into this but as we
see he did not succeed because the two presidents were not ready.

It is likely that even the president Putin and the new Russian
government would have the same difficulty. Sargsyan and Aliyev are not
ready and not able, they are not just ready but not able in a larger
sense to try to be able to do this and Russia cannot impose the
settlement from outside, and more generally all other international
actors cannot impose the settlement. It is not demanded. It has been
very clear that it is not going to be possible. Russia wants to see
the settlement and Dmitry Medvedev made an effort, it was a very
promising sign, but he still did not succeed. Most problems have
ground in the region. Just from the international prospective.

Do you and other experts think that Azerbaijan and Armenia will face
full-scale warfare in the nearest future, I mean nowadays, not in two
years?

I think it is possible, it is a potential, I am not saying that it is
going to happen for sure, there is a risk of miscalculation. And the
issue of compromise is just about whether the two presidents are ready
to take the steps, it is about the domestic politics in Armenia and
Azerbaijan that it affected by the international environments but
ultimately it is about their politics and their calculation on
whether they can really afford to make a compromise. Does it make
sense to you?

In the case of the attempt to settle the conflict and to stop the
hostility by those two presidents there is a chance to reach a
peaceful conclusion for the conflict?

There is, but they have to make some tough decisions. I think
everybody knows what the basis for compromise is, but the question is
whether the domestic politics of Armenia and Azerbaijan permits it,
whether Sargsyan and Aliyev personally feel that they have enough of
what Americans call a political capital, whether they have enough
legitimacy and enough political strength to be able reach that
compromise. I think it is all really about the decisions that Sargsyan
and Aliyev have to make personally.

The interview was published in Vestnik Kavkaza

News.Az

YEREVAN THANKS PARIS FOR BILL CRIMINALIZING DENIAL OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Interfax
Dec 22 2011
Russia

Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian has thanked the French
leadership and the French people for the passage by the lower chamber
of the French parliament of a bill criminalizing the denial of the
Armenian genocide.

“By passing a bill criminalizing the denial of the [Armenian] genocide
today, France has once again proven its commitment to general human
values,” the Armenian Foreign Ministry quoted Nalbandian as saying.

“In this connection, I would like once again to say words of gratitude
to the top leadership of France, the National Assembly, and the French
people,” he said.

By recognizing the Armenian genocide at the legislative level ten
years ago, the French people confirmed that human rights are the
highest value, he said.

“By passing this bill today, France has reaffirmed that crimes against
humanity have no statute of limitations and their denial must be
unambiguously condemned,” he said.

The French National Assembly on Thursday approved a bill criminalizing
the denial of the 1915 Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire. Now
this bill will be passed to the Senate for approval.

If the bill is made into law, the denial of the Armenian genocide
would carry imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of up to $45,000,
French media reported.

Ankara said it could impose sanctions on Paris in response to the
passage of this bill.

ARMENIAN MINISTER THANKS FRANCE FOR PASSING BILL ON OTTOMAN GENOCIDE

ITAR-TASS
December 22, 2011 Thursday 11:51 PM GMT+4
Russia

Armenia’s Foreign Minister Edward Nanbandian has thanked France’s
top political leadership, the French National Assembly and the entire
French nation for the adoption of a bill on criminal punishment for
the public denial of the genocide of ethnic Armenians in the Ottoman
Empire in 1915.

“By passing the bill, France has reaffirmed its status of a cradle of
human rights and has demonstrated a yet another time its commitment
to general human values,” Nalbandian said.

“The French people, which recognized the fact of the genocides of
Armenians at the level of law ten years ago, showed that human rights
are a superior value,” he said.

“Thursday’s bill confirmed once again that crimes against humanity
don’t have the period of limitations and their denial should be
subjected to an unambiguous condemnation,” Nalbandian said.

TURKEY TO TAKE MORE STEPS AFTER FRANCE ACTS ON GENOCIDE BILL

Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Dec 22 2011
Germany

Dec. 22–ANKARA — Turkey would watch what happens to the Armenian
genocide bill, which still has to be passed by the French Senate and
signed by President Nicolas Sarkozy before it becomes law, Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Thursday.

He warned: “We will gradually take more steps according to how France
acts on the bill.”

Erdogan thanked the French legislators who voted against the bill. He
accused the “yes”-voting deputies of promoting enmity towards Turks and
Muslims. The bill is a case of “the politics of racism, discrimination
and xenophobia,” Erdogan said.

“More than to Turkey, this bill is an injustice to France, to French
people and to French principles,” he said.

He said if the deputies had been sincere in their concern for what
happened in 1915-18, they would have backed Ankara’s idea of setting up
a historical commission, which would have access to Turkey’s archives.

TURKEY SLAMS FRANCE OVER GENOCIDE DEBATE
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA

Sacramento Bee

Dec 23 2011
CA

ISTANBUL — Turkey responded to French genocide allegations with
a charge of its own Friday, accusing France of committing genocide
during its colonial occupation of Algeria.

French lawmakers passed a bill Thursday making it a crime to deny that
the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks constitute genocide.

The deepening acrimony between two strategic allies and trading
partners could have repercussions far beyond the settling of accounts
over some of the bloodiest episodes of the past century.

Turkey was already frustrated by French opposition to its stalled
European Union bid, and hopes for Western-backed rapprochement between
Turkey and Armenia seem ever more distant ahead of 2015, the 100th
anniversary of the Armenian killings.

The bill strikes at the heart of national honor in Turkey, which
maintains there was no systematic campaign to kill Armenians and
that many Turks also died during the chaotic disintegration of the
Ottoman Empire.

The French bill still needs Senate approval, but after it passed
the lower house, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
halted bilateral political and economic contacts, suspended
military cooperation and ordered his country’s ambassador home for
consultations.

Turkey and France worked closely together during NATO’s operation
against Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, and had been coordinating
policy on Syria and Afghanistan.

“What the French did in Algeria was genocide,” Erdogan said Friday in
a heavily personal speech, laced with criticism of French President
Nicolas Sarkozy.

He alleged that beginning in 1945, about 15 percent of the population
of Algeria was massacred by the French. He also said Algerians were
burned in ovens.

“They were mercilessly martyred,” he said.

Erdogan appeared to be referring to allegations that the French burned
the dead in ovens after a 1945 uprising that began in the Algerian
town of Setif. Algerians say some 45,000 people may have died. French
figures say up to 20,000.

The French bill’s passage “is a clear example of how racism,
discrimination and anti-Muslim sentiment have reached new heights
in France and in Europe,” Erdogan said. “French President Sarkozy’s
ambition is to win an election based on promoting animosity against
Turks and Muslims.”

France holds presidential elections in April.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the French vote was
comparable to attempts by Mideast rulers to stifle free speech.

“Europe has philosophically and ideologically reverted to the Middle
Ages,” Davutoglu said at a conference of Turkish ambassadors in Ankara,
the capital.

The French Foreign Ministry said the statements from Turkey were
unhelpful and below the belt.

“We deplore the recourse to excess and to personal attacks which are
not at the level of the stakes or the mutual interest of our ties,”
a ministry statement said.

Paris “assumes with lucidity and transparency its duty of memory in
the face of tragedies which marked its history,” the statement said,
an allusion to France’s admission that the state had a role in the
deportation of Jews to Nazi death camps, and apparently a veiled nod
to its past in Algeria, which gained independence in 1962 after a
brutal seven-year war.

France formally recognized the Armenian killings as genocide in 2001,
but had previously provided no penalty for anyone refuting that. The
bill sets a punishment of up to one year in prison and a fine of
euro45,000 ($59,000) for those who deny or “outrageously minimize”
the killings, putting such action on par with denial of the Holocaust.

France is committed to human rights and respect for “historical
memory,” Sarkozy said in Prague, where he was attending the funeral of
Vaclav Havel, the dissident who became president of the Czech Republic.

“France doesn’t give lessons to anyone, but France also doesn’t
plan on taking them,” Sarkozy said in a clip shown on France’s LCI
television. “I respect the convictions of our Turkish friends – it’s a
grand country, a grand civilization – and they must respect ours. To
cede on one’s convictions is always cowardice, and one always ends
up by paying for cowardice.”

Most historians contend the Ottoman killings of up to 1.5 million
Armenians constituted the first genocide of the 20th century. But
the issue is dicey for any government that wants a strong alliance
with Turkey, a rising power. In Washington, President Barack Obama
has stopped short of calling the killings genocide.

The Armenian National Committee of America said the French vote
“reinforces the growing international consensus – and the mounting
pressure on Turkey – for a truthful and just resolution of the
Armenian Genocide.”

WHERE ARE THE YOUNG PEOPLE?
HAKOB BADALYAN

Story from Lragir.am News:

Published: 19:02:41 – 23/12/2011

A lot of people are now speaking about the need for a change of
generation in the government of Armenia, even the government speaks
about it. A lot of people wrote about it, giving examples, noting that
the change of generation is underway, simply the public is not aware.

In fact, there are a lot of young officials in public administration
and young members of parliament. In fact, there are enough young
heads of departments, deputy ministers, members of parliament, even
young ministers, chiefs of staff, prosecutor, mayor.

However, the problem needs certain clarification. What do we
understand by saying a young official and what do we understand by
change of generation? If we want a change of age, this notion acquires
a mathematical or arithmetic meaning, then the change of generation
in Armenia moves fast, and at present there are as many young people
in government as elderly.

Is the problem the number? Were this the problem, the problems of
Armenia would have been solved. However, the notion of change of
generation must have another meaning. In Armenia, the government
and the political system undergo change of generation with different
thinking, different system of values, a generation with a new outlook.

In this sense, the ruling system of Armenia is dominated by “oldness”.

The young officials, the majority of ministers, deputy ministers,
other officials, members of parliament, just entering the ruling system
or occupying leading positions there, are not distinguished by new
thinking and new values. They do not change the existing rules and
relationships. They get used to it, with excuses, open or indirect,
that the system is too fossilized, and they do not act against it
openly not to be annihilated. Instead, they try to change it from
the inside.

In fact, the idea or scenario of changing it from the inside was
defamed before the youth by the most aged ones, our traditional ARD
Dashnaktsutyun Party, who explained its presence in the coalition
several years ago by referring to change of the system from the
inside. This example showed that this approach is either ineffective
or simply funny because the only option of appearing inside the
system is to be devoured by the system. As soon as it devours you,
you will be digested.

Dashnaktsutyun, like the Orinats Yerkir Party, have presented the
emptiness of the option of the “inside” so figuratively that the
so-called young officials’ excuses that they try to change it from
the inside are more than meaningless.

In this situation, the inside and the outside are intellectual
categories rather than physical. The system must be changed from the
outside, with a mentality which cannot get adjusted to the present
system, fit inside, become part of the system.

The youth must fight against this system and the fight must be visible,
and the youth must offer proposals to the society to expect support
because the so-called new generation can change the system only with
the support of the society.

Armenia lacks this, so it would be an exaggeration to consider the
presence of young people as a change of generation. Moreover, the
public speeches of the representatives of the new generation make
think of abuse of generation rather than change, and old vices appear
in a young body.

In Armenia, the fossilized system is in crisis, material, political,
mental and of values, so the change of generation will succeed only
in a revolutionary way, in other words, young people will appear in
the system who will rebel against their “fathers”.

The government of Armenia lacks it but even if there is struggle,
it is not viewed as struggle of thinking and values. It is struggle
for power.

ERDOGAN “DISCOVERS” THAT “FRANCE HAS COMMITTED GENOCIDE AGAINST ALGERIANS”

ARMENPRESS
DECEMBER 23, 201
ISTANBUL

Turkish Prime Minister Receb Tayyip Erdogan, who has lost his common
sense after the French MPs passed the Bill Criminalizing the Armenian
Genocide Denial, said in response to Nicolas Sarkozy’s call of
respecting the believes of France addressed to the Turkish authority,
that “France has committed genocide in Algeria” and “if Sarkozy does
not know about that let him ask his father”.

Erdogan said that beginning from 1915 the French have “massacred”
the 15% of the Algerians, Armenpress reports, citing CnnTurk. “It was
genocide, and if the French President does not know about that, let
him ask his father. During those years his father served in Algeria,”
said the Turkish Prime Minister.

The Turkish PM, lost his senses from excitement, made an excursion
to the period of the Ottoman Empire and presenting the Turks as “the
kindest” people of the world, stated that Turkey has not committed
genocide throughout its history, but has helped and gave asylum to
thousands of Jews escaped from the French inquisition, whose inheritors
live today in Thessalonika City, Greece.

Erdogan has also not forgotten to threat France with the 5 million
Turks living in Europe.

ARMENIA’S FIRST WORLD CHAMPION IN BOXING DIES

Tert.am
23.12.11

Armenia’s first world champion in boxing, Norayr Musheghyan, passed
away on December 23 at the age of 76, according to the website of
the Armenian National Olympic Committee.

Musheghyan was born in Yerevan and graduated from Yerevan State
Institute of Physical Education and had the titles of honored master
of sports, coach of Soviet Armenia.

He also had the title of honored master of sports of the republic
of Armenia.

Norayr Musheghyan also worked as the coach of national boxing teams
of the Soviet Union and Afghanistan.

Thanks to his victories the leadership of Soviet Armenia built in
1961 a school specialized on boxing where thousands of young boxers
and dozens of champions were taught boxing and courage skills.

The dirge ceremony will take place at Saint Hovhannes Church in Yerevan
from 5:30pm to 20:00 on December 25, and the burial is scheduled at
1:30 on December 26 from the same church.

AgoraVox, France
23 dec 2011

Histoire, traumatismes historiques et manipulations géopolitiques

Les peuples étaient manipulés à l’époque, ils continuent à l’être
aujourd’hui. C’est ainsi que l’on peut résumer cette énième «
judiciarisation » de l’Histoire avec ce texte proposé à l’assemblée
nationale et qui punirait sévèrement toute négation d’un génocide «
juridiquement reconnu ». Dont celui des Arméniens (1915 – 1916) par «
l’empire ottoman ». En fait par le régime des « Jeunes Turcs ». Une
première constatation : la reconnaissance du génocide arménien en
France est très récente (2001) et le texte se refuse d’identifier
l’auteur du génocide. On pourrait faire l’Histoire de cette longue
marche pour la reconnaissance, qui commence à avoir des effets vers
les années 1980 chez les alors pays de l’est pour aboutir aux textes
plus récents, votés après la chute du mur de Berlin (1990 – 2000).
Certains pays, comme la Grande-Bretagne – un précédent qui pourrait
mettre à mal les agissements de son propre empire -, se refusent
toujours cette reconnaissance, tout comme Israël qui voulait sans
doute garder le monopole du terme pour la shoah. On pourrait aussi
écrire l’histoire de deux obsessions celle des Arméniens qui
ressentent cette reconnaissance comme un des actes fondateurs de leur
identité nationale et celle des Turcs qui refusent une telle
reconnaissance envers et contre tout et surtout contre une partie de
leur propre histoire, celle qui décline la rupture permettant le
passage de l’Empire Ottoman à la Turquie Kémaliste. On oublie ainsi de
faire l’Histoire de l’élimination des populations non turques vivant
en Turquie, on oublie d’étudier les résultats de la politique « une
nation une frontière » qui concerne, entre 1915 et 1924, l’ensemble de
l’espace balkanique et de l’Asie Mineure. On oublie enfin la
géopolitique spécifique de la région prise en tenaille entre trois
empires (Ottoman, Austro-Hongrois et Russe) d’une part, et les visées
britanniques et marginalement françaises, de l’autre.

La terreur comme arme de persuasion des milices et, durant les guerres
balkaniques (1912-1913), des armées plus ou moins régulières, le rôle
des consulats, les faux recensements, la course en avant des uns et
des autres pour « purifier » et uniformiser des espaces avant les
décisions de la communauté internationale concernant la délimitation
des frontières et en prévision de la chute des empires Austo –
Hongrois et Ottoman (1917-1918) n’ont épargné aucun pays existant ou
en formation.

La « révolution » des jeunes Turks qui entérinait cette nouvelle donne
et qui se proposait (aux dires même de Kemal Atatürk) d’échanger un
empire infini et polyethnique contre une Etat national et homogène
moderne derrière des frontières naturelles et sans ennemis intérieurs,
eut comme conséquence la purification de l’espace turc de ses
minorités (grecs, arméniens, juifs et arabes) et l’utilisation
systématique des supplétifs kurdes (considérés comme Turks) pour
l’accomplissement de la « sale besogne » comme cela avait déjà été le
cas durant l’élimination des populations arméniennes (1915-1916). La
défaite de l’Axe (Allemagne, Autriche-Hongrie, Turquie) consacra la
défaite des « jeunes Turks », l’effondrement de l’empire ottoman et la
victoire de Kemal Atatürk sur les corps expéditionnaires qui ont dû
quitter l’espace turcs (troupes alliés à Istanbul) ou défaits (à Eski
Sehir en ce qui concerne le corps expéditionnaire grec). Pour cela
Atatürk s’est appuyé sur une armée certes vaincue mais dont les
officiers, ultranationalistes, avaient perpétré le génocide arménien.
La construction de l’Etat moderne turc s’est fait sur cette base : on
efface tout et on recommence. D’autant plus que le crime contre les
arméniens s’articulait sur celui des autres minorités sur la base d’un
projet politique qui exigeait la « purification ethnique » de l’Etat
turc. La marche forcée vers la « modernité kémalienne » fit bien
d’autres victimes : tous ceux qui contestaient cette marche (mollahs,
féodaux, hommes politiques, etc.), au point que l’on parle en Turquie
du « syndrome de la corde » : de manière périodique les opposants
(même ceux choisis par Atatürk pour jouer ce rôle) étaient pendus dès
lors qu’ils prenaient leur rôle au sérieux. Et cela a continué jusqu’à
l’aube du 21e siècle. On comprend mieux pourquoi il existe une volonté
farouche, mue d’un côté par un nationalisme métaphysique se référant à
la genèse de l’Etat turc, et d’autre par une peur, difficile à
dépasser, d’être non conforme à cette marche kémaliste. L’armée,
dépositaire institutionnel de cette tradition, voudrait la perpétuer
en perpétuant les peurs des ennemis intérieurs et extérieurs. Le
gouvernement actuel voudrait prouver l’aspect obsolète de cette
tradition en menant une politique basée sur le principe ouvertement
déclaré : pas d’ennemis à nos frontières, d’où une politique de la
main tendue (souvent boycotté par l’armée) vis à vis de l’Arménie, de
la Grèce et des pays arabes (en sacrifiant l’alliance historique avec
Israël).

Au moment même où la Turquie apparaît comme la puissance régionale la
plus en état de faire des pressions sur la Syrie et de jouer un rôle
d’intermédiaire entre l’Occident et l’Iran, voilà que l’on renforce
les éléments les plus nationalistes de ce pays, qu’on redonne la main
à l’armée, que l’on pousse le gouvernement actuel à surenchérir (pour
ne pas périr). Si on le fait juste pour faire plaisir à des députés
marseillais ou lyonnais qui cherchent la reconnaissance de la minorité
arménienne on est simplement ignares. Mais si on le fait pour
paralyser la Turquie dans son rôle moyen oriental (il suffit par
exemple à Ankara de fermer les barrages pour assoiffer le régime
syrien), alors, quoi que l’on affirme officiellement, on voudrait
préserver, dans leur rôle de chien de Fayence, les amis – ennemis
héréditaires (Israël, Syrie, Iran), les de gardiens de l’immobilité,
face aux chamboulements des printemps arabes, qui reste le pire
cauchemar d’Israël.

Tous ceux qui ont trouvé le moment opportun pour punir la négation
d’un génocide perpétré en 1915 sont-ils conscients qu’ils perpétuent
un autre, qui se déroule aujourd’hui, sous leurs propres yeux, en
Syrie ?