Author: Kajoyan Gevork

USA Today
Dec 28 2011

Clerics clash in Bethlehem brawl at Jesus’ birthplace

By Douglas Stanglin, USA TODAY

Up to 100 Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic priests and monks
swinging brooms clashed inside the Church of Nativity today in
Bethlehem in a frenzied turf battle, the Associated Press reports.

Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian clerics share the
administration of the church, whick oftens leads to jurisdictional
disputes.

The fighting broke out during cleaning of the West Bank church in
preparation for Orthodox Christmas celebrations in early January, as
each side jealously guards its territory.

Palestinian police, using batons and shields, were called in to break
up the fighting inside the basilica.

“It was a trivial problem that … occurs every year,” police
Lieutenant-Colonel Khaled al-Tamimi tells Reuters. “Everything is all
right and things have returned to normal.

He tells the news agency that there were no arrests “because all those
involved were men of God.”

Reuters
Dec 28 2011

Clerics clash in Church of the Nativity

(Reuters) – A Christmas cleaning of the Church of the Nativity turned
into scuffles on Wednesday between rival Christian clerics zealously
guarding denominational turf at the holy site.

Brooms and fists flew inside the church marking the birthplace of
Jesus as some 100 priests and monks of the Greek Orthodox and Armenian
Apostolic churches brawled.

Palestinian police, bending their heads to squeeze through the
church’s low “door of humility,” rushed in with batons flailing to
restore order.

“It was a trivial problem that … occurs every year,” said police
Lieutenant-Colonel Khaled al-Tamimi. “Everything is all right and
things have returned to normal,” he said. “No one was arrested because
all those involved were men of God.”

Administration of the 6th century Bethlehem church, the oldest in the
Holy Land, is shared by Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian
clerics.

Any perceived encroachment of jurisdictional boundaries within the
church can set off a row, especially during the annual cleaning for
Orthodox Christmas celebrations, which will be held next week.

(Writing by Jeffrey Heller, Additional reporting by Ali Sawafta;
Editing by Alessandra Rizzo)

Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Dec 30 2011

Church asks for return of orphanage

ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Vercihan ZiflioÄ?lu

An Armenian Protestant Church applies to the Foundations General
Directorate for the return of an Armenian orphanage that had been
expropriated in the wake of Turkey’s 1980 military coup. Pasteur
Krikor AÄ?abaloÄ?lu says they will bring the case before the ECHR unless
the state returns the orphans’ camp

The GedikpaÅ?a Armenian Protestant Church has filed a formal
application with the Foundations General Directorate for the return of
an Armenian orphanage in Istanbul’s Tuzla district that had been
expropriated in the wake of Turkey’s 1980 military coup.

`Orphans and the children of destitute families used to reside in the
camp. If the state is truly sincere and means well and if it is really
determined to return what belongs to us, then it ought to hand back to
our children their home,’ Pasteur Krikor AÄ?abaloÄ?lu, the spiritual
head of the GedikpaÅ?a Armenian Protestant Church, told the Hürriyet
Daily News.

They would initiate legal proceedings and even bring the case before
the European Court of Human Rights unless the state returns the
orphans’ camp, AÄ?abaloÄ?lu said.

Hrant Dink, a Turkish-Armenian journalist who was murdered in 2007,
also received education there and contributed to its construction with
his brothers. `The Swallow Nest’ was what Dink, the former
editor-in-chief of weekly Agos, a paper published in both Turkish and
Armenian, used to call the orphanage.

`The state has returned only about 100 from thousands of foundation
properties,’ AÄ?abaloÄ?lu said in relation to the new Foundations Law
enacted by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), adding that
he was skeptical about the government’s sincerity.

No formal reasons were ever provided as to why the orphanage lands had
been expropriated, AÄ?abaloÄ?lu said. `The state wants us to prove the
title deeds of properties it expropriated. The state already knows why
and what it expropriated. All the documents and title deeds are in
their possession,’ he said.

The camp bears great spiritual significance for us, AÄ?abaloÄ?lu said,
adding that Hrant Dink had also fought tooth and nail for the
orphanage to be returned during the concluding years of his life.
Simon Ä°Å?, a lawyer who represents minority foundations, told the Daily
News, however, he thought the whole process of returning the property
would be an agonizing one.

The camp currently lies in ruins, according to AÄ?abaloÄ?lu, but it
would undergo repairs if returned to the church, and its gates would
then be opened once more to orphans and children of the destitute.
In August 2011, the Turkish government signed a historic decree to
return property taken away from minority foundations 75 years ago.

Some of the property set to be returned to Armenian, Greek and Syriac
foundations include schools, churches, stores, hundreds of houses,
buildings and apartments, cemeteries, factories and even nightclubs.
December/30/2011

Today’s Zaman
Dec 29 2011

Turkey’s Armenians speak out in ‘Sounds of Silence’

30 December 2011 / YONCA POYRAZ DOÐAN, ÝSTANBUL

Armenians who live in Turkey have related their personal stories in a
book as part of an oral history project by the Hrant Dink Foundation:
“Sounds of Silence, Armenians of Turkey Speak” (Sessizliðin Sesi,
Türkiyeli Ermeniler Konuþuyor).
Introducing the book on Thursday, writer Ali Bayramoðlu said it is
about the people who were killed and who live in this land.

“This is the story of a group who have been silent, who will not tell
us about themselves, who consider remembering and passing on their
stories to be dangerous. … Even though they knew, they did not
remember; even though they remembered, they did not want to tell. They
tried to protect future generations by hiding,” he said, pointing out
that the Armenians of Turkey were not even able to talk about what it
is like being an Armenian.

“They are few in numbers. Most of them who had first-hand information
about 1915 from their mothers and fathers, from their uncles and aunts
left this world,” he added, saying that their memories are going to
disappear as they also leave this world soon.

“This work is a result of a desire to capture what is becoming a
void,” he said. What he referred to by saying “1915” was the killing
of Armenians in 1915 in Ottoman lands.

Ferda Balancar, who directed the group that conducted interviews with
40 people in Ýstanbul and other provinces in Anatolia, said that this
is a first of a kind study because it concentrated solely on the
Armenians of Turkey.

He added that the Armenians of Turkey are not a homogenous group of
people as believed by a majority of people in Turkish society, and
Turkey’s Armenians include those who are born and raised as Armenians,
who are either Muslims or have had to be Muslims or who live secretly
as Armenians as reflected in the identities of the interviewees.

The book included stories of eight females and seven males aged 19-70.

Balancar also pointed out that Jan. 19, 2007, the date that Armenian
journalist Hrant Dink was assassinated by an ultranationalist teenager
in front of the office of his weekly Agos in Ýstanbul, seems to have
been the breaking point for Turkey’s Armenians.

“After that, there were some who said they had a desire to leave
Turkey, and there were some others who said they had a desire to stay
and resist all odds,” he said.

When it comes to their feelings about Armenia, most of them said that
their language and culture have a chance to live there, but they don’t
feel like they belong there.

Sociologist Arus Yumul, who evaluated the interviews and wrote
concluding remarks for the book, said that the Armenians of Turkey
preferred to either stay silent or use the language of the “sovereign”
because of their fears of being stigmatized and targeted in society
for being “the other.”

“They had fears, and being silent was their survival strategy,” she
said. “The reason for not talking about 1915 with younger generations
is to protect them. But even if nothing is being talked about it in
the family, an Armenian identity is produced.”

BOX: People share their most personal recollections

“When talking about Tehcir [forced emigration], [my grandmother]
always would say ‘Leave; never stay here. … She would always tell us
‘Be careful, do not obtain much property, do not attract attention’.”

“When I heard that Hrant Dink was killed, I started to cry. … At
first, I was shocked; I was very afraid. I thought ‘They can kill us,
too’. But then the opposite happened. My courage increased; ‘I started
thinking ‘I am an Armenian, too. If somebody has a problem with that,
s/he should behave accordingly.”

“Hrant would talk about what was covered up. Nobody would say anything
from our community; they were intimidated. Hrant tore apart that
intimidation.”

“I don’t care who did what in 1915. We know who did what because there
is a result out in the open: One-third of a population vanished. I am
interested in who did not do what was necessary to do. Why didn’t you
do something when your neighbors were killed? How did you allow it? I
always think about this.”

Anadolu Agency (AA), Turkey
December 27, 2011 Tuesday

Turkey will only speak with documents

LENG

Turkey’s prime minister underlined on Tuesday necessity of finding
permanent solutions to problems.

Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan said instant reactions and temporary
solutions would not bear any result.

“We have to think multi-dimensionally and with a long-term perspective
and find robust, effective and permanent solutions,” Erdogan said
during a meeting in Ankara’s Golbasi town.

Erdogan’s remarks came after the lower house of the French parliament
adopted a resolution last week that criminalized denial of Armenian
allegations regarding the incidents of 1915.

“We have to make use of history and science to deal with these
allegations that are tried to be turned in an anti-Turkey campaign by
some countries, instead of populist and argumentative discourses and
instant reactions,” Erdogan said.

Erdogan said Turkey would only speak with documents, information and
with the help of archives and science against unjust, ill-minded,
racist and discriminative campaigns.

“I request our scientists, scholars, researches and universities to
give priority to studies on our near future,” Erdogan said.

Erdogan also said Turkey was reading its history well and re-building
today and future with the strength, courage and self-esteem it got
from its history.

The lower house of the French parliament adopted on Thursday a
resolution that criminalizes rejection of Armenian allegations
pertaining to the incidents of 1915. Only 70 out of 577
parliamentarians joined the voting of the resolution which was adopted
with majority of votes.

The resolution envisages “one-year prison term and 45,000 Euro fine
for those who deny genocide recognized by French laws.” French
Parliament had recognized so-called Armenian genocide in 1915 on
January 29, 2001.

The draft criminalizing the rejection of Armenian allegations had
first been approved in 2006, but it could not become a law as French
President Nicolas Sarkozy Enhanced Coverage LinkingNicolas Sarkozy
-Search using:Biographies Plus NewsNews, Most Recent 60 Daysprevented
its presentation to Senate.

Now, the senate’s approval is necessary to make the resolution a law.

Turkey strongly opposes the issue of the incidents of 1915 being used
as a tool in French politics. Many believe that French President
Sarkozy supports the Armenian resolution in order to garner support
from France’s Armenian population that number around 500,000.

France will hold the first round of next year’s presidential election
on April 22 and the second round run-off on May 6. Sarkozy is running
for a second term.

If the resolution is not adopted at the senate till February 22, 2012
when the parliament and senate will recess for presidential elections,
it will be invalid.

The Jewish Daily Forward
Dec 30 2011

When History Is Closed for Debate

French Avoid Guilt by Banning Armenian Genocide Denial

By Robert Zaretsky
Published December 30, 2011, issue of January 06, 2012

The spirit of the holiday season has just swept across the French
National Assembly. On December 22, the nation’s representatives – or,
more accurately, the handful in attendance – passed a bill that would
criminalize the denial of the Turkish massacre of the Armenians in
1915.

It was as much a gift to the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who
will surely use it to bolster the great swell of Turkish nationalism
he has been riding, as it was to the French-Armenian community, whose
votes Nicolas Sarkozy’s government has been desperately courting.
Though the bill must pass several more hurdles before it becomes law,
there has already been less damage to Franco-Turkish relations – they
hardly could have gotten worse – than to our relation with history.

Historical revisionism has a long history in France; it also has a
different name: negationism. Historian Henry Rousso coined the term
nearly two decades ago in his book `The Vichy Syndrome,’ while Alain
Finkielkraut had anticipated it with his essay `The Future of a
Negation.’ It was, as well, the preferred term for ancient historian
Pierre Vidal-Naquet, who, in his 1993 book, `Assassins of Memory,’
made a simple but critical distinction. Revisionism is what historians
do every day – namely, examine and reconstruct the past in light of
new discoveries or insights. Negationists, on the other hand, simply
deny the existence of certain past events.

Instead of revising the past, they bury it. Since, as Vidal-Naquet
observed, dialogue requires a common ground based on truth, historians
share as much with negationists as firefighters do with arsonists.

Negationism came of age in postwar France as the nation wrestled with
the legacy of Vichy and the Final Solution. With every empirical
advance made by a generation of historians like Robert Paxton and
Michael Marrus that deepened our understanding of France under Vichy,
there appeared the works of `revisionists’ like Robert Faurisson or
Maurice Bardèche, who, rather than reinterpreting the past, reinvented
it. Perhaps not coincidentally, both men taught French literature, not
history, thus freeing them from the usual constraints of material
evidence and historical methodology.

Perhaps inevitably, the struggle over the past in France spilled
beyond the academy into the courts. The succession of trials, ranging
from Paul Touvier and René Bousquet to Maurice Papon, all of whom were
accused of committing crimes against humanity during the Occupation,
led to the passage in 2006 of the Gayssot Law, which criminalized the
denial of the Holocaust. It also turned professional historians into
professional trial witnesses. At Papon’s trial, in 1997, several
eminent historians, including Paxton, were called to give historical
evidence during the hearings. By the end of the trial, the line
between the `judgment of history’ and the actual judgment by a jury
had blurred irreparably, discomfiting both the legal and historical
professions.

One of the few historians who refused to testify was Rousso, who
worries over our age’s growing fascination with a `juridical reading
of history.’ Such a reading, Rousso claims – and which explains his
refusal to testify at the Papon trial – necessarily undermines the
integrity of history. As he argues in his book `The Haunting Past,’
the historian’s presence on the witness stand forces him to speak
ultimately to one thing and one thing only: the culpability of the
defendant. When it comes to reflecting on the complexity of the past,
however, the courts are as intolerant as are the negationists they are
bringing to trial.

The irony is clear: The effort to protect the past from negationists
who seek to destroy it has instead placed it in the embrace of
politicians who, in codifying it, wish to remove it from the realm of
public debate. It is for this reason that several prominent
historians, led by Pierre Nora, have criticized the new law. By
`freezing’ this historical event – in other words, removing it from
the realm of professional and public discourse – the law prevents
historians from doing their job. `History is above all else a source
for debate and for the sake of democracy must remain so,’ wrote the
historian Christian Delporte in a blog post for Le Monde.

There is no doubt that if Vidal-Naquet were still alive (he died in
2006) – this new law would have outraged him. Born into a Sephardic
Jewish family, as was Nora, Vidal-Naquet signed a petition shortly
before his death that demanded the abrogation of the Gayssot Law.
Seventeen of France’s most prominent historians joined him, including
Nora. While France’s government is busy playing with history for
political ends, we should recall the concluding words of the petition:
`In a free society, it belongs neither to parliament nor the courts to
define historical truth.’

Robert Zaretsky is a professor of history in the Honors College at the
University of Houston. His most recent book is `Albert Camus: Elements
of a Life’ (Cornell University Press, 2010).

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Dec 30 2011

Azerbaijani Parliament passes letter to French Senate

The Azerbaijani Parliament has passed a letter to the French Senate,
expressing fairness of France as a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group
due to the recently passed bill on persecution of denial of the
Armenian Genocide, News Azerbaijan reports.

The bill was passed on December 22. Public denial of the Armenian
Genocide by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 is punished with 45,000 euro or
a sentence.

Azerbaijani MPs say that such bill violates European values. They also
pointed out that Armenian historians had refused to study the Genocide
together with Turkish specialists.

Armenians killed hundreds of thousands of Turks throughout history.
Armenians in Hojaly killed hundreds of Azerbaijanis in 1992 and there
was no international reaction, the letter says.

The Azerbaijani Parliament believes that passing of the bill casts
doubts on fairness of France as a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group.

The Toronto Star, Canada
December 29, 2011 Thursday

The creative renaissance of Alain Mikli

Eyeglasses guru launches a new collaboration with friend Jean Paul Gaultier

Although Alain Mikli has been called a guru and hailed as the
godfather of modern eyewear, he’d happily settle for being known
simply as “artisan.” He has no use for weighty descriptors. He
unburdened himself of the title “boss” in 2009 when he completed a
deal with an investment fund for a 47-per-cent stake in his business.

Today he is content to concentrate on life and doing what he does well
– which is designing some of the world’s most distinctive optical
frames and sunglasses.

“I wanted to have my freedom again, not to worry anymore about the
management and the life of the company,” said Mikli, in Toronto last
week for the launch of his latest collection, crafted in collaboration
with his old friend Jean Paul Gaultier and available in Canada
exclusively at Karir.

While the Mikli company continues an aggressive expansion that saw the
recent opening of stores in Tokyo, Taipei, Hong Kong, San Francisco
and Los Angeles (and plans for three new shops a year for the next
five years), Mikli, who lives in Paris, is sticking to a more personal
expansionist agenda.

In North America for a four-city tour (including a party in New York
to mark the 20th anniversary of his first retail outlet in that city),
Mikli, 56, is accompanied by Florence, with whom he is starting a new
family, their first child due in April.

He already has two sons, one of whom, Jérémy Tarian, has already
impressed his father and the rest of the optical world as a promising
talent. But Mikli says he is leaving Tarian “to grow by himself, and
to make his own mistakes,” while Pop applies himself with renewed
vigour to the sort of creativity that he became famous for in the
1980s.

Back then, Mikli designed eyeglasses for a runway show by the hottest
names in French fashion – Claude Montana and Gaultier. In fact, he had
a licensing arrangement with Montana, and Gaultier wanted one, too.
But, says Mikli, “I didn’t want too many. Licensing is not really my
thing.”

Instead, Gaultier went into production with MURAI, a Japanese company,
and enjoyed huge success with industrial-style metal frames
identifiable by their screws and coils. After Murai went out of
business, Gaultier found other partners; he also found out licensing
deals don’t always let a designer be identifiable.

“So he called me,” says Mikli. “It was the same people, same attitude,
same dress code, same way to talk. And I say, ‘My God, what am I doing
here!'”

Mikli is as impatient with the pretense of fashion as he is with the
bullroar of show business, which he got a taste of a few years back
when he supplied the shutter shades that became a signature of Kanye
West.

“He’s a nice guy when he’s alone,” Mikli says of the musician. “As
soon as there are two or three of his people around him, he becomes a
star.”

Whatever misgivings Mikli had about the world of fashion, he finds
Gaultier “very easy to work with, because he has so many ideas.” They
were able to come up with a collection that met their standards.

The distinguishing feature of the frames in the Jean Paul Gaultier by
Mikli collection (which cost from $325 to $460) are the temples, which
have multiple ribs, reminiscent of the corset, a Gaultier icon. The
sides of some frames have two prongs that act as a comb, turning
eyeglasses into hair bands. Others are like three temples in one,
spread in a fan formation and seemingly less practical and more like
an amusing exercise in Dadaist absurdity.

Still, Mikli has imagination left over for other endeavours. Working
with LG, the Korean electronics giant, he has developed 3-D glasses to
go with 3-D televisions. Also, he’s busy deciding what to do with
Vuarnet, a French eyewear brand that the Mikli company acquired a
couple of years ago. He continues to design a Starck collection in
collaboration with industrial designer Philippe Starck, another
friend.

And, of course, there is his own signature collection, the latest of
which is called Prince of Sassoun. Of Armenian origin, Mikli was
inspired by a hero from Armenian folklore, reimagined by illustrator
Alban Guillemois. Fanciful and rich in detail, the collection mixes
layers and colours that owe much to the legend of Alain Mikli.

International Relations & Security Network, Zurich
Dec 28 2011

Azerbaijan: The Government Campaign Against Dissent

While 2011 saw activists and the opposition challenging the government
in Azerbaijan, public response was muted and unrest kept in check. The
number of political prisoners increased, and looks set to rise into
2012.

By Karl Rahder for ISN Insights

Azerbaijan’s Arab Spring Moment

It was the Arab Spring that never happened: A series of demonstrations
early this year in Azerbaijan that were meant to trigger new elections
and the resignation of President Ilham Aliyev, son and successor to
former President Heydar Aliyev. As the movement gained a small measure
of momentum, one opposition leader warned in January that if the
Azerbaijani government did not agree to new, democratic elections,
`the people will rise up.’

`By then,’ he said, `it will be too late for the authorities, and
events will develop in accordance with the Tunisian and Egyptian
scenarios.’

Rise up they did not. After a series of demonstrations that lasted
into June -some hastily organized by opposition parties and others
arranged via Facebook – political life in Azerbaijan was much as it
had been prior to 2011’s revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere
in the Muslim world.

The authorities’ response to the unrest, revealed much about the
government’s fears and its strategy. As in neighboring Armenia,
opponents of the ruling elite sought to ignite widespread protest,
modeling themselves after the Arab Spring. But unlike the
demonstrations in Armenia (where something approximating democratic
pluralism is much more in evidence than in Azerbaijan), the rallies
were relatively small and the government response was swift and harsh.
The `Great People’s Day’ of 11 March – organized on Facebook by a
small group of Azeri activists – saw a meager turnout, a quick roundup
of protesters by police and a number of arrests. More rallies followed
in March and April, with hundreds of arrests and in some cases,
criminal prosecution.

Despite claims by one respected analyst that there are `no credible
reports or video material that would document excessive force being
used by police,’ widely available video shows police roughing up
demonstrators and in one instance even shattering a bus window with a
baton in order to douse protesters (who had been herded into the bus
by police) with pepper spray.

Those charged and convicted with `creating public disorder’ and
similar criminal offenses connected to protests in April include
prominent Musavat Party figure Arif Hajili and nine others, all of
whom are now serving time in prison. In May, Harvard alumnus and
Facebook activist Bakhtiyar Hajiyev was sentenced to two years for
evading military service, a charge that he and many human rights
organizations labeled as politically motivated. Also convicted – on
drug possession charges – was Facebook activist Jabbar Savalan; he is
now serving a prison sentence of two years and six months.

The response from the international community has been that of
indignation, with the EU expressing concern over the convictions of
Savalan and Hajiyev as well as the bulldozing of the Institute for
Peace and Democracy in August. Amnesty International issued a
statement calling the charges against Savalan `trumped up .’

A Two-tier Strategy

The authorities’ response implies a carefully constructed program of
`general harassment and targeted prosecution’ in which opposition
parties and their leaders are undermined and marginalized through use
of the legal system, occasional police violence, and `black
propaganda’ campaigns.

Harassment of political opponents

The `harassment’ component is designed in part to demoralize the two
major opposition parties – continuing a long-term project that has
intensified since the death of Heydar Aliyev in late 2003 – and to
undercut any latent public support that might emerge for a revitalized
opposition.

Arastun Orujlu, chairman of the Baku-based East-West Center, told ISN
earlier this year that the government had begun a shift from
informally dismantling the opposition to something more concrete.

`Now their goal is to destroy the opposition formally,’ he said.

In this, they have all but succeeded. Efforts in the past year or two
have included branding the Musavat Party `Armenian collaborators’ (a
theme during last year’s parliamentary elections) and adding
`jihadist’ to the list of other sins that Popular Front Party chairman
Ali Kerimli is routinely charged with.

In late March, for instance, young demonstrators at a rally sanctioned
by the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party (YAP) gleefully displayed
photo-shopped posters of Kerimli wearing a keffiyeh and clutching an
AK-47. This was a new and typically crude tactic, complementing two
other favorite accusations that have been hurled like a cudgel at
Kerimli over the years: He colludes with Armenia and he is gay – a
deliberately explosive charge designed to alienate more conservative
elements of Azerbaijani society.

Increasingly, these campaigns utilize the Internet, and sometimes take
place via the same social media channels that were used to organize
the anti-government protests earlier this year.

In early March as the protests threatened to mushroom in Baku, the
website, qaynar.info, perceived by many to be run by pro-government
youth, posted a page identifying prominent Azeris who had Armenian
Facebook friends. Anti-Armenian feelings still run deep in Azerbaijan
since Armenia gained control of the Nagorno-Karabakh region after a
bitter war in 1994. The page is still active as of mid-December 2011.

Some of the comments on the page were particularly vindictive, such as
those of one reader who ranted that the Azeris who were singled out
`should be killed, they should be hanged in the center of the city.’

Thankfully, these comments were somewhat balanced by readers who said
things like, `may god protect us from `patriots’ like you. [J]ust try
to do what Adnan Hajizada has done for this country, then maybe you
can discuss the [A]rmenians on his friends list. [Y]ou are not doing
anything for your country with this `patriotism.”

The Armenian theme was also served up by Baku State University rector
Abel Maherremov, who claimed on ANS TV (formerly the only bastion of
editorial independence on Azerbaijani television) that `Armenians’
were behind the March 11th protests.

In a similar vein, pro-government blogger Rauf Mardiyev was
appropriately shocked after his discovery that six Armenians were
listed as early supporters of the Great People’s Day on Facebook,
tainting the event beyond redemption.

This ‘Armenian connection’ was apparently an agreed-upon talking
point: YAP Deputy Executive Secretary Mubariz Gurbanli was
subsequently quoted in a piece alleging that many Armenians had joined
the 11 March Facebook page, some posing as Azeris.

Hedging their bets in case the `anything on social media that we
disagree with is tainted’ message wasn’t quite clear enough,
pro-government television stations in Azerbaijan ran a series of
programs during the spring on the alleged causal link between the use
of Facebook and mental illness.

Targeted prosecutions: Setting an example

`Targeted prosecutions’ consist of the prosecutor’s office bringing
charges against a small number of significant figures – opposition
political figure X, independent journalist Y or activist Z – who have
taken very public stands against the government or written about
corruption or other controversial topics. The charges and convictions
of the few serve as a cautionary example for others who may then think
twice before challenging the legitimacy of the government.

Favorite criminal charges include drug possession, hooliganism or, in
one ironic case a parliamentary candidate accused of ‘interfering with
election officials’. Suspects are then detained prior to trial while
an `investigation’ takes place. Family members find that they are
suddenly fired from their jobs: Facebook activist Elnum Majidli,
currently residing in France, informed ISN Insights that his father
was fired, and according to an article from the Index on Censorship
his mother has been told by her supervisors at work that they are
under pressure to fire her. The authorities, he told ISN, are
`listening to our telephone conversations and watching our home in
Baku.’

The next step is to disbar defense counsel – thus sabotaging the
defendants’ cases. Among those disbarred this year while involved in
politically sensitive cases were Osman Kazimov, Khalid Bagirov, and
Elchin Namazov. Finally, the defendants are convicted, an outcry from
the international community ensues, and eventually the cases reach the
Azerbaijani Supreme Court, which invariably rules in favor of the
prosecution.

On November 29th of this year, the Azerbaijani Supreme Court upheld a
lower court’s conviction of Savalan; on December 6th, it upheld the
conviction of Bakhtiyar Hajiyev.

Most of those convicted can look forward to serving a substantial
portion of their sentences, though the president has a habit of
commuting the sentences of political prisoners, as happened when Adnan
Hajizade and Emin Milli – the `donkey bloggers ‘ – were released
earlier this year.

It’s possible – even likely – that President Aliyev may grant similar
commutations prior to the 2012 Eurovision Song Contest, to be held in
Baku in late May. Azerbaijan’s 2011 Eurovision victory may well be a
blessing for Azerbaijan’s political prisoners, as the government may
find it embarrassing to have to explain its penchant for locking up
Facebook activists.

Implied Fear

The desired outcome behind the government’s strategy is the stamping
out of any emerging opposition movement that could garner public
support and lead to the sort of instability that brought an end to the
rule of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, unlikely as that may be: A
2010 opinion poll administered by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and
another commissioned by the Caspian Information Centre in 2011
indicated strong support for the president, although opponents of the
Aliyev government claim that the methodology of the polling was
invalid.

The fear implied by the government’s actions is curious, since violent
police tactics at demonstrations, a shrill propaganda campaign against
the formal opposition as well as Facebookers, and convictions in court
on phony charges suggest that the government actually agrees with the
major charge leveled against it by the Musavat and Popular Front
parties: Azerbaijan is an authoritarian state where divergent
political voices are not tolerated. As Musavat Party chairman Isa
Gambar told a US embassy official in 2007, “If the opposition is so
genuinely weak, what is the government afraid of? Why can’t we be
shown on TV? Why can’t we meet? Why are they arresting journalists?”

More trials and convictions are in the offing: Journalist Avaz
Zeynalli is still being held prior to trial while police investigate
allegations of extortion brought against him by a pro-government
member of parliament. (Her chief advisor has ignored repeated requests
for comment from ISN.) If the pattern holds, his attorney will soon be
disbarred, Zeynalli will be found guilty and given a stiff sentence:
Sentencing guidelines for extortion range from seven to ten years.

An essentially sultanistic petro-state, Azerbaijan sees little
incentive to introduce meaningful democratic reforms. The country’s
rulers, presiding over government-approved `opposition’ parties in
parliament and an authentic opposition that has now been virtually
eliminated, will continue the pattern of harassment and targeted
prosecution simply because it works. Social media tools such as
Facebook and Youtube may be marshaled against the government by
liberal activists, but the authorities and their allies have shown
they can use these very tools, albeit in a somewhat clumsy fashion, to
wage their own war against the opposition.

——————————————————————————–

Karl Rahder was the South Caucasus correspondent for ISN Security
Watch and currently writes the Caucasus Blog for the Foreign Policy
Association. Aside from his work as a journalist, he also teaches
International Relations at universities in the US and the former
Soviet Union.

Editor’s note:
Just before publication, ISN learned that Jabbar Savalan, mentioned in
this article, was released from prison in a general amnesty. He was
the only political prisoner among the 92 convicts to be granted
clemency.

Publisher
International Relations and Security Network (ISN)

,0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233

Times.am, Armenia
Dec 28 2011

Valerie Boyer explained the motivations of her step

Valérie Boyer, French deputy, who worked out bill on criminalization
of Armenian Genocide denial and which was approved by French NA on
December 22, presented the motivation of her action in her Facebook
page.
`Here I have some things to explain my work and my motivations!

French people of Armenian origin living in France have the right, to
protect the memory of their ancestors slaughtered in 1915.

This law is intended to punish those who argue the fact of genocide in
French territory.

In this case, the Turkish authorities do not respect the sovereignty
of the France and tries to be involved in French domestic affairs.

The Armenian genocide is recognized in Russia, the Canada, in
Argentina, in Italy, Sweden and even in the Germany! His denial is
penalized in Switzerland and Slovakia and will be soon in many other
States. Yet, none of these States is being threatened in its
diplomatic relations or business by Turkey!

Then, there is always more important to legislate that other topics,
but if the approach of the elections in France to a left-right
Republican consensus on this issue. Why not take advantage?

Is the France not the country of human rights?’

Remind that French National Assembly voted for the approval of the
bill on criminalization of Armenian Genocide denial on December 22.

So, according to the new law everyone who denies Armenian Genocide in
France will be sentenced with a year and will be fined with 45.000
Euros.

After this approval Turkish Ambassador left Paris and Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced Turkey would cancel all types
of relations with Turkey. French President asked Turkish side to
respect their decision.