Author: Chmshkian Vicken

PanARMENIAN.Net

Representatives of unrecognized republics not invited to PACE hearings
on frozen conflicts
20.10.2007 15:10 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The PACE monitoring committee’s hearings on frozen
conflicts will be held in Berlin November 5-6.

Besides the committee members and experts from the U.S., Europe and
Russia, Foreign Ministers of Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan
will take part in the hearings.

However, Secretariat of the Interparliamentary Assembly of the
Commonwealth for Democracy and Peoples’ Rights reported that
representatives from other sides concerned – Transnistria, Abkhazia,
South Ossetia and Nagorno Karabakh.

The Secretariat described this fact as undemocratic and expressed hope
that invitation will still be sent. The issue will be put on the
agenda of the Assembly’s plenary session due October 29 in Moscow, IA
Regnum reports.

Turan, Azerbaijan
Oct 18 2007

Azeri activists protest US Congress draft bill on Armenian massacre

Baku, 18 October: The decision of the US House of Representatives
Committee on Foreign Affairs to recognize the so-called "Armenian
genocide" in Ottoman Turkey revealed Washington’s genuine attitude to
the Turkic world. This was the main topic of today’s roundtable held
by representatives of the Azerbaijani public.

Such a position by the USA casts doubts on America’s impartiality as
a mediator in settling the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict, Tanzila
Rustamxanli, head of the NGO Azeri-Turkic Women, said.

The participants in the gathering adopted an address to Washington in
which they condemned the draft resolution of Congress on the
recognition of the genocide.

After the gathering, its participants laid a wreath at the US embassy
with "American democracy is hostage to Armenian lobby" written on it.
They also handed over the address to embassy officials.

EDITORIAL: THE HOUSE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION: AND THE POINT IS . . . ?

Philadelphia Inquirer, PA
Oct 18 2007

When Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) rose to the highest office
in the U.S. House of Representatives and the third highest in the
land, she was obliged to set priorities that are in the nation’s
best interest.

She can do just that by pulling a very ill-timed resolution from a
full House vote. Former backers are running away from it in droves,
as they should.

The nonbinding resolution would have labeled as genocide the 1915-1923
slaughter of up to 1.5 million Armenians in what is now called
Turkey. Passage last week in the House Foreign Affairs Committee made
a full vote possible – and caused the Turkish government to warn of
ominous consequences for bilateral relations if the House votes to
pass it.

Why did anyone think this resolution was a good idea now? It’s a bad
idea for three reasons: (a) it’s gratuitous, almost a century late,
and will do little or nothing; (b) it could alienate an ally in a
crucial area of the world, i.e., next door to Iraq; and thus (c)
could endanger U.S. troops.

When a state tries to eliminate many or all of an identifiable group
or class of people, that’s genocide. Evidence is strong that the
Young Turks government of the time set out to eliminate Armenians
through a variety of means. The leaders of modern-day Turkey refuse
to acknowledge that history; by Turkish law, it is a crime to "insult"
Turkey by saying that the slaughter of Armenians was a genocide. That
refusal has infuriatied many people.

The community of nations is not supposed to tolerate genocide, the
most extreme form of barbarity. It has a moral obligation and a legal
responsibility under international law to denounce it and to stop it.

But the right time for a nation to make that official designation
is when the crisis is taking place. If a country that has signed the
1948 U.N. genocide convention (as the United States has) designates
an action as genocide, the legal basis is set for nations to intervene.

Denunciation isn’t enough by itself. In 2004, the Bush administration
said the violence in Sudan’s Darfur region was genocide. This week
brought new reports of another massacre there. The world stumbles
in response.

So if an official designation of genocide won’t do much for present
violence, why a denunciation – especially now – of a slaughter of 92
years ago?

A House resolution won’t make Turkey’s leaders slap their foreheads and
acknowledge the truth. Twice before, the House has passed an Armenian
genocide resolution, and neither has led the Turkish government to
own up to this dark period.

One impact of the whole misguided adventure: to antagonize one of
America’s closest Muslim allies. Turkey’s help with neighboring Iraq
is irreplaceable. An angry Turkey could deny the United States access
to an air base in southern Turkey used to deliver military supplies.

That would endanger every U.S. soldier in Iraq.

More: Turkey is considering a cross-border military operation into
northern Iraq against Kurdish rebel groups that have been attacking
the Turks. A hostile Ankara (which recalled its ambassador to the
United States last week) would be less likely to heed Washington’s
calls not to launch the operation.

Turkey has every right to defend itself against assault, as the Turkish
parliament declared yesterday in a vote authorizing an offensive. The
question is how to quell rebel attacks without inflaming the situation
in Iraq and causing even greater havoc in the region. The answer
requires a calm deliberation that the controversy in the House is
helping to make impossible.

Pelosi and other U.S. officials have said the Armenian slaughter of
the early 20th century was genocide. For now, that ought to be enough.

071018_Editorial___The_House_Genocide_Resolution.h tml

Belgium late show finishes Armenia
Wednesday 17 October 2007-

Three second-half goals earned Belgium victory against
Armenia, but their UEFA EURO 2008′ qualification hopes
were ended by results elsewhere in Group A.

Triple strike
Substitute Wesley Sonck put Belgium ahead on 63
minutes before Moussa Dembélé doubled the advantage
six minutes later. Karel Geraerts added a third on 76
minutes to secure Belgium’s fourth win in qualifying
but they are now unable to overhaul second-placed
Portugal after their 2-1 success in Kazakhstan.

Armenia bright
Armenia had started promisingly, with Artavazd
Karamyan drawing a save from Belgium goalkeeper Stijn
Stijnen from the edge of the area. Belgium too had
chances and Gevorg Kasparov spread himself to stop
Kevin Mirallas’s effort when the 20-year-old striker
was played through one-on-one with the goalkeeper.
Artur Voskanyan was next to test Stijnen, who turned
the ball behind for a corner.

Inspired substitution
Belgium coach René Vandereycken replaced Mirallas with
Sonck at the interval as he looked for more from his
side, but it was Armenia that pressed. Samvel
Melkonyan and Levon Pachajyan each came close before
Melkonyan cut in from the left and shot into the
side-netting. The breakthrough, though, went to
Belgium on 63 minutes. Nicolas Lombaerts’s left-wing
cross found Bart Goor who hit the crossbar on the
volley. The ball looped into the air and Sonck beat
Kasparov to the rebound to nod in.

Further goals
Belgium were soon 2-0 up after Dembélé burst into the
penalty box before firing into the top corner. The
third goal followed 14 minutes from time when another
Lombaerts centre reached Geraerts on the penalty spot
and he headed the ball down and beyond Kasparov to
ensure a comfortable finish for the hosts.

©uefa.com 1998-2007. All rights reserved.

TEN YEARS LATER ARMENIA FUND WILL OPEN OFFICE IN KARABAKH

KarabakhOpen
16-10-2007 12:06:55

Yesterday President Bako Sahakyan met with Vahe Aghabekyan, CEO of
Armenia Fund, in Stepanakert, the NKR President’s General Information
Office reported. The programs implemented in Artsakh by the Fund
were discussed.

The interlocutors also discussed the upcoming telethon in November
in the United States.

During the meeting agreement was reached on setting up an office of
Armenia Fund in Karabakh.

HEAVY DIPLOMATIC TRAFFIC AS ANKARA ANTICIPATES ARMENIAN BILL VOTE

Hurriyet, Turkey
Oct 16 2007

With the US House of Representatives expected soon to vote on the
Armenian bill, President Abdullah Gul is meeting today in Ankara with
authorities from the Foreign Ministry to firm up possible reactions
from Turkey in the event that the US House passes the resolution With
Assistant US Defense Secretary Eric Edelman and Assistant Secretary of
State Dan Fried in Ankara for talks on the matter, the Turkish Foreign
Ministry yesterday saw long meetings on the Armenian allegations,
and possible Turkish reactions to US passage of the resolution. In
the meantime, Turkish Ambassador to Washington, DC, Nabi Sensoy,
is also in Ankara, having been called back to Turkey by the Foreign
Ministry for meetings on the Armenian bill.

President Gul will meet today at Cankaya with Foreign Minister Ali
Babacan, Minister Undersecretary Ertugrul Apakan, and Ambassador
Sensoy. The final strategy will reportedly be presented to Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan for approval. A decision on when
Ambassador Sensoy should return to the US capital will reportedly be
made at the end of "administration evaluations" in Ankara.

IRAQI VICE PRESIDENT IN TURKEY
By Selcan Hacaoglu

The Associated Press
Oct 16 2007

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) – Iraq’s Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi arrived
in Ankara on Tuesday in an apparent attempt to convince Turkey not
to stage a cross-border offensive to fight separatist Kurdish rebels
based in Iraq.

Al-Hashemi, a Sunni Arab, was scheduled to meet with Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan and other senior officials. The Turkish Parliament
was expected to approve a motion Wednesday allowing the government
to order a cross-border attack over the next year.

"The passage of the motion in Parliament does not mean that an
operation will be carried out at once," Erdogan said Tuesday. "Turkey
would act with common sense and determination when necessary and when
the time is ripe."

Erdogan called on Iraq and Iraqi Kurds to crack down on separatist
rebels. He said the regional administration in northern Iraq should
"build a thick wall between itself and terrorist organizations."

Erdogan said any action would only target the rebels and Turkey would
respect Iraq’s territorial integrity.

Washington has urged NATO-ally Turkey not to enter Iraq, fearing that
unilateral Turkish military action could destabilize the autonomous
Kurdish region in the north which is one of the country’s few
relatively stable areas. The Kurds are a longtime U.S. ally.

An offensive could also undermine Turkey’s relations with the European
Union, which has pushed Turkey to treat its minority Kurds better.

But Turkey says some European countries tolerate the activities of PKK
sympathizers and is frustrated with the perceived lack of U.S. support
in the fight against the PKK.

"We have serious expectations from the U.S. administration on the
issue," Egemen Bagis, a foreign policy adviser to Erdogan said Tuesday.

Turkey’s frustration with the perceived lack of U.S. support in
the fight against the PKK, branded as terrorists by Washington, has
intensified because of another sensitive issue: the killing of up to
1.5 million Armenians in the final years of the Ottoman Empire.

A U.S. House panel approved a resolution last week labeling the
killings as genocide, an affront to Turks who deny any systematic
campaign to eliminate Armenians at that time. U.S. officials now
fear Turkey, a cargo hub for U.S. forces in Iraq, could retaliate by
curbing the flow of fuel and other supplies to American bases.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she will schedule a vote soon on
the resolution.

On Tuesday, however, a top Turkish official said the country should
not punish the U.S. administration over the resolution, but instead
should impose sanctions against Armenia for supporting the measure.

"Bush and his team should not be punished," Egemen Bagis, a foreign
policy adviser to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said
on CNN-Turk television. "The reaction should be against Pelosi and
her team."

Bagis noted that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense
Secretary Robert Gates had lobbied against the measure.

In a televised speech on Tuesday, Erdogan compared the resolution to a
"summary execution."

"Nobody has the right to judge Turkey like this," Erdogan said.

"Those who dare confront an important country like Turkey will pay
the price."

Bagis said Turkey should impose sanctions against Armenia because it
supported the resolution.

"Turkey must impose sanctions against Armenia," Bagis said. "Turkey
has already done a list of what and when it will do, and the prime
minister has already given necessary orders."

On Tuesday, however, a top Turkish official said the country should not
punish the U.S. administration over a resolution in the U.S. Congress
that calls the World War I-era killings of Armenians a genocide,
but instead should impose sanctions against Armenia for supporting
the measure, a top Turkish official said Tuesday.

A U.S. House of Representatives panel approved a resolution last week
labeling the killings as genocide, an affront to Turks who deny any
systematic campaign to eliminate Armenians at that time.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would schedule a vote soon
on the resolution. U.S. President George W. Bush opposed it.

"Bush and his team should not be punished," Egemen Bagis, a foreign
policy adviser to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said
on CNN-Turk television. "The reaction should be against Pelosi and
her team."

Bagis noted that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense
Secretary Robert Gates had lobbied against the measure.

In a televised speech on Tuesday, Erdogan compared the resolution to a
"summary execution."

"Nobody has the right to judge Turkey like this," Erdogan said.

"Those who dare confront an important country like Turkey will pay
the price."

Bagis said Turkey should impose sanctions against Armenia because it
supported the resolution.

"Turkey must impose sanctions against Armenia," Bagis said. "Turkey
has already done a list of what and when it will do, and the prime
minister has already given necessary orders."

Turkey staged several incursions in the 1990s but they failed to
stamp out rebel hideouts.

A Turkish soldier was killed Tuesday when he stepped on a mine,
believed to have been planted by Kurdish rebels, near the southeastern
city of Bingol, local authorities said.

PKK rebels have demanded autonomy in Turkey’s Kurdish-dominated
southeast since 1984 in a conflict that has claimed tens of thousands
of lives.

MUTAFIAN: RESOLUTION TURNS INTO TOOL FOR US DOMESTIC POLITICS

The New Anatolian, Turkey
Oct 16 2007

Mesrob Mutafian, patriarch of Turkish Armenians, said they opposed
to the resolution regarding Armenian allegations on the incidents of
1915 which was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee
on Foreign Affairs.

Patriarch Mutafian visited the Santa Clause Church in Demre town of
the southern city of Antalya.

He told reporters during the visit that the resolution became a tool of
domestic policy in the United States, and called on people to exclude
Turkish citizens of Armenian origin from discussions over the issue.

He said that they will do everything in their power to prevent passage
of the resolution by the full House.

Recalling that Prime Minister Erdogan earlier proposed Armenia to set
up a joint commission of historians to deal with the issue, Mutafian
added that it was a significant offer.

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION CAUSES OUTRAGE IN TURKEY

News Hour Extra (PBS)
Oct 16 2007

Despite opposition by Turkish leaders and President Bush, the
U.S. House of Representatives is moving forward on a resolution calling
the 1915 mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks a "genocide."

The House Foreign Affairs Committee approved the resolution on October
10. It will be voted on by the entire House of Representatives by
mid-November.

Turkey’s Reaction

The subject of the Armenian killings in the early 1900s is highly
political and heated in Turkey.

Citizens staged protests against the U.S. measure in the streets of
Turkey’s major cities and the country’s leaders have publicly rejected
the House panel vote.

After recalling its ambassador from the United States, the government
of Turkey issued a statement of protest.

"The United States of America legitimized the Armenian genocide
claim, which has swung over Turkey’s head like a stick," said Turkish
Vice-President Erkan Onsel.

Reading and Discussion Questions "The U.S. has made it clear once
again that it targets Turkey."

The Turkish armed forces chief went one step further, telling the
newspaper Milliyet that "we could not explain this to our public. The
U.S., in that respect, has shot itself in the foot."

The debate over ‘genocide’

The resolution refers to a period of time from 1915 to 1917 when as
many as 1.5 million Armenians were massacred in the final years of
the Turkish- run Ottoman Empire.

The overwhelming majority of historians call the event as a genocide,
which is defined as "violent crimes committed against groups with
the intent to destroy the existence of the group."

However, Turkey only acknowledges a smaller number of deaths occurred,
and denies that they constitute genocide because they occurred during a
time of unrest and fighting between populations of the Ottoman Empire.

The Turkish government has spent millions of dollars on a public
relations campaign portraying the Armenian genocide as false, including
full page ads in major U.S. newspapers saying the resolution is a
biased interpretation of the tragic events.

But according to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who represents
a district with a large number of Armenian Americans, a resolution
declaring the killings genocide is 90 years overdue.

"While that may have been a long time ago, genocide is taking place
now in Darfur, it did within recent memory in Rwanda, so as long as
there is genocide there is need to speak out against it," Pelosi said.

History of the killings

Starting in the fifteenth century, most of modern Armenia was part
of the vast Ottoman Empire ruled by Muslim Turks.

In 1908, a group called the Young Turks took over government of the
Ottoman Empire in a revolution supported by the Armenian population.

The Young Turk government initially promised improvements in the
treatment of ethnic minorities, but after gaining power the group
turned on the Armenians.

In 1915, during the early stages of World War I, Turkey was facing the
threat of attack by both Russia and England. Claiming the Armenian
population might instigate an internal rebellion, the government
began to round up, kill, torture and deport Armenians, according to
a U.S. Library of Congress study.

After the attacks, many of the survivors fled the area and migrated
to other countries, particularly eastward to Russia.

The Ottoman government was defeated in World War I. But by 1917,
fewer than 200,000 of the roughly three million Armenians living in
Turkey before the war remained, the study found.

Relations with the U.S.

Both President Bush and the U.S. secretary of defense made public
statements encouraging Congress not to pass the resolution because
of potential damage to diplomatic relations.

The U.S. military uses Turkey as a key supply route for troops in Iraq,
and Turkey has remained America’s strongest Muslim ally, causing the
country to lose face within the rest of the Muslim world.

At the same time, Turkey has been threatening to invade the relatively
stable northern region of Iraq, known as Kurdistan, to fight Kurdish
terrorists who have crossed into Turkey and have planned sporadic
terrorist attacks.

With emotions running high, diplomats worry that action in the
U.S. House could jeopardize American efforts to keep Turkey out of Iraq

"I don’t think that anybody who’s ever visited Turkey can be in any
doubt that Turks, at all levels, of all levels of education and all
parts of the country, view this kind of a resolution as criticism,"
Mark Parris, former U.S. ambassador to Turkey told the NewsHour.

"All of them believe this will be a major setback, because it is
perceived as a major insult to Turkish credibility, honor by a
long-standing ally."

In 1915, during the early stages of World War I, Turkey was facing the
threat of attack by both Russia and England. Claiming the Armenian
population might instigate an internal rebellion, the government
began to round up, kill, torture and deport Armenians, according to
a U.S. Library of Congress study.

After the attacks, many of the survivors fled the area and migrated
to other countries, particularly eastward to Russia.

The Ottoman government was defeated in World War I. But by 1917,
fewer than 200,000 of the roughly three million Armenians living in
Turkey before the war remained, the study found.

— Compiled by Talea Miller for NewsHour Extra

july-dec07/turkey_10-15.html

THE ARMENIAN RESOLUTION: PURE GRANDSTANDING
By Timothy R. Furnish

History News Network, WA
Oct 15 2007

Mr. Furnish, Ph.D (Islamic History), is Assistant Professor, History,
Georgia Perimeter College, Dunwoody, GA 30338. Mr. Furnish is the
author of Holiest Wars: Islamic Mahdis, Their Jihads and Osama bin
Laden (Praeger, 2005). He is the proprietor of

House Resolution 106, first proposed when the Democrats took over
control of Congress back in January 2007, was just voted out of the
Foreign Affairs Committee last week and, according to Majority Leader
Steny Hoyer (D-MD), will pass before Congress adjourns next month.

H.R. 106 puts the government of the United States on record
as affirming that the Ottoman Empire pepetrated "genocide" on its
Armenian subjects, killing at least 1.5 million of them between
1915 and 1923; furthermore, it "calls upon the President to ensure
that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate
understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human
rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide…."1

The Republic of Turkey recalled its ambassador, Nabi Sensoy, and
"warned the vote threatens its strategic partnership with the U.S." 2
A senior Turkish general officer said that passage of this resolution
could permanently harm U.S.-Turkish military relations.3 Yet the
Democrats are plunging ahead with this legislation, willing to risk
further alienating our major ally in the Islamic world at a time when
our list of allies there has grown quite thin and just when we need
them most. Why?

For one thing, the bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Adam Schiff
(D-CA), represents the district with the highest concentration of
Armenian-Americans in the country (California’s 29th, which includes
Glendale, with the largest Armenian-American population of any city in
America: 85,000, or about 40% of the urban headcount4 ). The Speaker
of the House, Nancy Pelosi, of course hails from California herself
and knows full well the political power of the Armenian-American
lobby. (And over in the Senate, Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
(D-NY) has co-sposored the resolution,5 despite the fact her own
husband, while in office, opposed it.)

No doubt the resolution, in no small measure, is aimed at further
embarrassing the Bush Administration ("See, the same folks who
brought you Gitmo and Abu Ghrayb support what the Sultan did to the
Armenians!"), even as the Democrats claims that it has primarily an
apolitical, utilitarian cast. According to Rep. Schiff, "How can we
take effective action against the genocide in Darfur if we lack the
will to condemn genocide whenever and wherever it occurs?"

This logic is really quite unconvincing. Must Congress pass a
resolution retroactively condemning slavery in the Old Confederacy
before we are morally justified in opposing modern human trafficking?

But even giving Mr. Schiff and the Democratic leadership the
benefit of the doubt and not chalking up their fervent support for
H.R. 106 to anything as crass as making political hay, or raking in
Armenian-American campaign contributions, we are still left with a
major problem.

The whole basis of the bill-the "genocide" alleged-is historically
unverifiable as such.

Of course, questioning the Armenian "genocide" is a
politically-incorrect sin today, on a par with questioning global
warming. After all, we are continually told that the "consensus" of
experts-historians or scientists, respectively-supports each claim,
er, unvarnished truth. H.R. 106 has no fewer than 14 points alleging
to corroborate historically the genocidal nature of the very real
Ottoman massacres of Armenians around, and after, World War I.

But in fact there are a number of problems with the received "truth"
about what happened to Armenians in the late Ottoman Empire. There
is a scholarly consensus of about 1.2 million Armenian deaths
(although the Armenian groups claim more, and the Turks considerably
fewer). But just how and why that many Armenians were killed-and
whether it constitutes "genocide"-is still being hotly debated by
historians, contrary to what the House Democrats think. Genocide is
"the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political or
cultural group." To prove that the Ottoman Turks committed genocide,
one must adduce evidence of just those points. The three legs upon
which the genocide claim usually rests are: 1) the post-WWI Ottoman
courts which tried some government officials for the massacres; 2)
the alleged depredations of the Teskilat-i Mahsusa (Ottoman "Special
Forces"); and 3) the memoirs of one Naim Bey. 6 However: the original
Ottoman legal documents no longer exist; no one has ever proved the
involvement of the Ottoman Special Forces in the killings; and the
"memoirs" of Naim Bey-who allegedly provided evidence that Ottoman
officials ordered the "genocide"-are suspect at best and may have
even been forged.

No one can deny that hundreds of thousands of Armenians were killed:
Western sources, and Armenian eyewitness survivors, attest to that
fact. But to this day no one has found the Ottoman "smoking gun" that
proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt-and don’t we want a rather high
bar of proof for something as serious as genocide?-that the authorities
in Istanbul ordered the "deliberate and systematic destruction" of the
Armenians in the eastern part of the Empire.7 Perhaps those records are
tucked away in some dark corner of the Basbakanlik, waiting to see the
light of day. But the few Western scholars who can read Ottoman Turkish
tend to shy away from this topic; and those who do study the Armenian
question either cannot work in Ottoman, or are not given access-all
of which tends to back up what Zbiginew Brzezenski said recently:
"I never realized the House of Representatives was some sort of
academy of learning that passes judgment on historical events….;"
and whether what happened to the Armenians "should be classified as
genocide or a huge massacre is, I don’t think, any of its business."8

Steny Hoyer tried to reassure the Turks by telling them that this
resolution is "not about your government." The Majority Leader,
unlike some in the press,9 seems to realize that it was not the
Turkish government that killed Armenians-it was the old Ottoman
imperial one. And one might reasonably wonder why the modern Turks
are so paranoid about claims of genocide being perpetrated by their
predecessor regime. However, that scimitar cuts both ways: one
might also ask why the Democrats in Congress are so eager to pass a
meaningless, toothless resolution condemning a government that hasn’t
existed for 85 years- in the process estranging us even further from
one of our few close allies in the Muslim world-when the historical
record fails to support their opportunistic legislation?

Related Links

HNN Hot Topics: Armenian Genocide 1
.106:

2
601087&sid=adlDF_4HRfqw&refer=home

3
http :// amp;categ_id=2&article_id=85961

4 ,_California

5
on/la-na-genocide3oct03,1,7196693.story?coll=la-ne ws-a_section

6 See Guenter Lewy, "Revisiting the Armenian Genocide," Middle
East Quarterly (Fall 2005), ; also
Edward Erickson, "Armenian Massacres: New Records Undercut Old Blame,"
Middle East Quarterly (Summer 2006),

7 Although Armenian researcher Ara Sarafian would disagree;
see "The Ottoman Archives Debate and the Armenian Genocide,"
ves.pdf

8
20601087&sid=adlDF_4HRfqw&refer=home

9 For example: Matt Welch, in an editorial in the "L.A. Times" this
past spring, wrongly opined that "the genocide is taboo…[because]
it occurred at the time of the founding of modern Turkey under Kemal
Ataturk…."

ws/opinion/la-op-welch22apr22,0,4862327.story?coll =la-opinion-center

tml