AZG Armenian Daily #016, 30/01/2007
ONE MORE VICTIM ADDED TO THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE COUNT
The shocking news came as I sat in the Azg editorial offices in
Yerevan, watching CNN news with the editor. "Breaking News" announced
that outspoken Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was shot as he
left his Agos weekly offices in Istanbul. At that moment I was hoping
against hope that Hrant may only have been wounded and had survived
the assassination attempt, but my hopes were soon dashed as I saw
Hrant’s lifeless body lying on the sidewalk.
The bullets which killed Hrant also pierced my heart, as I had
developed a close friendship with him. I always teased him when we
met, telling him: "Hrant, I am very happy that you are still alive,
after what have you been writing in Agos about the Armenian Genocide
and the liberalization of Turkish society. And he would answer back
that those days are gone and that Turkey was on an irreversible course
of democracy; our voice can be heard and heeded only in a democratic
Turkey. The bullets which put an end to Hrant Dink’s turbulent life
proved that his optimism was premature, to say the least. The weekly
Agos, published mostly in Turkish, was a trendsetter not only in
Armenian news media but Turkish media as well. The use of the Turkish
language – shunned by some conservative circles – proved to be a
convenient vehicle to get the message across to the younger
generations of Armenians, as well as Turkish and Kurdish circles. A
good number of its subscribers were non-Armenians. Also, many
prominent journalists and academics contributed regularly to the
paper. Hrant Dink was a broad thinker. He had set two major missions
for his weekly: First, to help promote the democratization process in
Turkey, because he believed that minority problems could only be
resolved in a democratic society. He was a strong believer in the
Armenian-Turkish dialog. Next, he became a voice to the Armenian
community there, which over many years of suppression, had become a
voiceless minority, with continuously shrinking physical and
intellectual properties. Also, the Armenian community had been
victimized under the whims of an eccentric patriarch there, acting as
a theocrat. Certainly many people believed in those dual missions, yet
few would stick their necks out and try to promote or implement them.
Hrant Dink said, "enough is enough" and assumed that dangerous role at
his own peril. As he set out on his fearless course, he became an
irritant to the Turkish authorities and the Armenian conservative
leadership. The hallmark of Prime Minister Erdogan’s religiously
oriented party policy has been duplicity: on the one hand, he courted
Europe and aspired for membership of the European Union and on the
other hand, he procrastinated in removing medieval laws from the penal
code (Article 301: "insulting Turkishness"). He also refused to end
the illegal occupation of northern Cyprus. Still, the US
administration managed to blame "Greek intransigence" for voting down
the Annan plan at the United Nations, which would have sanctioned the
division of Cyprus indefinitely. Hrant Dink also became an irritant in
the Armenian community for two major reasons: a)The community had the
bitter experience over many decades that every liberalization movement
would end up in a backlash, through the intervention of the military
junta, always waiting in the wings to intervene. Menderes and Erbakan
eras were still vivid in their memories. b)He was also at odds with
Patriarch Mutafian, because he claimed a voice for the people, curbing
the Patriarch’s whimsical actions. Although the Patriarch and the
community leadership have been quick to condemn the killing, it would
not be cynical to believe that they may also have drawn a secret sigh
of relief, because a "rebel" who tried to shake the foundations of the
establishment had been silenced forever. It is true that Prime
Minister Erdogan and Foreign Minister Gul have also condemned the
assassination – Erdogan has stated that "Dink’s assassination was a
blow to the unity of Turkey" – yet government collusion cannot be
ruled out yet. Historically, Turkish authorities have been proven to
be complicit to this kind of murder – this brings to mind Talaat
Pasha’s cordial encounter with Krikor Zohrab on the eve of the signing
the latter’s death warrant. Also, in recent years, the assassination
of the liberal journalist Abdi Ipekji by "extremist fanatics" turned
out to be a more serious plot, since those extremists and mafia
figures were in cahoots with the Interior Ministry, as was revealed
during the Sousourluk scandal later. It is also a fact that many mafia
figures, to absolve their misdeeds, have confessed that during their
activities they had performed their "patriotic duty" by assassinating
ASALA operatives. Even though it will be extremely difficult to prove
any collusion between the authorities and the assassins – barring
another Sousourluk scandal revelation – the Turkish authorities cannot
claim innocence in this atrocious crime. Using the reactionary Article
301 of the Penal Code, they harassed, prosecuted and persecuted Hrant
Dink, along with many prominent writers, including Orhan Pamuk, Elif
Shafak and Taner Akçam. The mob lynch atmosphere, created deliberately
by Turkish judicial system ,could lead nowhere but to this tragic
end. It is most ironic that whatever Hrant could not achieve fully in
his lifetime, is becoming reality through his martyrdom: Spontaneous
demonstrations in his native Malatia, Istanbul and all over Turkey
under the banners claiming, "We are all Hrant Dink, we are all
Armenians," is novel. Until recently, the Armenian label was used as
an insult. Whenever Turkish media looked for derogatory terms to
insult Kurdish leader Oçalan, they used to ascribe his birth to the
"Armenian seed." Next, the Genocide issue came back in a tidal way in
the international news media, shaking the denialist position of the
Turkish government. And last, but not least, a dramatic impetus will
be thrust upon Turkey’s internal debate, long brewing between
reactionary and liberal forces. Of course the Turkish authorities will
make all the proper pronouncements expressing outrage and vowing to
bring the criminals to justice. But deep down, they will be relieved
that a very vocal human rights activist has had been silenced and that
an irritant has been liquidated for good. Hrant’s fate will also prove
to be a warning shot for all fellow human rights activists in Turkey.
Apologists may argue that the political or high profile assassinations
are not particular to Turkey. They occur over Europe, like the plots
against Pope John Paul II and Norway Premier Olaf Palme. The counter
argument is that wherever those crimes may take place, the
perpetrators are the same elements. Therefore, if Turkey has mainly
the culture of murder to offer, the European leaders are rightfully
weary about Turkey’s integration in Europe. The Armenian community
will further recoil in its isolation, wondering what would be the next
shock for the Armenians. Upon learning about the murder, this writer
contacted the veteran journalist Robert Haddajian, editor of daily
Marmara. He stated: "Although we had some differences with Hrant, we
all deplore the killing and we mourn his sad loss. He took a very
courageous stand, whose time has not yet come in Turkey." This means
that no one will dare to take position on the Genocide issue, to
counter the government position. Hrant Dink was also very vocal in
criticizing the French law passed by the Assembly there criminalizing
the denial of the Armenian Genocide. Many people interpreted that
criticism as a principled stand to defend freedom of expression, but
he had privately confided that he had also intended to deflect threats
to his family members, since he believed that he personally was above
any assassination plot. On this very sad occasion, the cynicism of the
international news media, once again, has revealed its ugly
face. Adding insult to injury, and desecrating the cause, which Hrant
Dink had espoused, that media has reassumed its role as Pontus
Pilate. Indeed CNN and Associated Press continue harping the same
Turkish line, when defining Dink’s mission. They state that Hrant Dink
advocated that "several hundred thousand" (mind you, not 1.5 million)
killing of the Armenians in Turkey amounted to genocide, while the
Turkish government insists that during a civil war in 1915 Turks and
Armenians were equally killed. Rather than doing their own research to
find out on their own that there was no civil war at that period, the
members of the press have opted for the convenient method of quoting
the Turkish authorities. One would wonder if those news outlets could
dare to quote Nazi reasoning and numbers in reporting about the Jewish
Holocaust. Hrant Dink’s blood will further smear Turkey’s image in
Europe. The murder was certainly a drawback for the Turkish bid to
join the European Union. After everything is said and done, a voice
for justice has been silenced forever, at the detriment of Turkey’s
humanization and at a monumental loss for the Armenian cause. Hrant
Dink’s mission was to give a voice to 1.5 million martyrs of the
Armenian Genocide, but instead, he traded his voice for their silence,
through Turkish criminal bullets.
By Edmond Y. Azadian, Armenian Mirror Spectator