Author: Kalantarian Kevo

PROSPEROUS ARMENIAN PARTY (PAP) TO ORGANIZE ACTION OF PROTEST OVER ABDUCTION OF PAP MEMBER ON FEBRUARY 9

by Ashot Safaryan

Monday, February 9, 11:34

As unknown men in masks abduct Artak Khachatryan, a member of the
Prosperous Armenian Party (PAP) on February 7, PAP mulls an action of
protest. Vahe Enfiajyan, a parliamentarian (PAP), calls on everyone
who fights for free and democratic public to join the protests that
will be held outside the Government building at 1:00pm on February 9.

Artak Khachatryan, a member of the PAP Political Council, was abducted
by the three unknown in masks on February 7 in the evening. Several
hours later, he was found near his apartment severely beaten up.

PAP has disseminated a statement over the incident, wherein it
strongly condemned the violence against Khachatryan. The Party
blames the political leadership of Armenia for the incident that
happened shortly after Khachatryan took an active part in the protests
against the Law on Turnover Tax. The Party slams the authorities for
restoring to violence against their own citizens instead of settling
the social-economic problems accumulated in the country and recovering
the political atmosphere. The authorities are losing touch with reality
and acting in agony, the PAP says in the statement. The PAP informs
that it has received numerous offers from the regional headquarters
and territorial offices to organize a large-scale rally in Yerevan.

However, the PAP Political Council so far calls for restraint and
suggests its parliamentary faction to boycott the parliament sittings
until those who attacked and beaten up the activist are found and
punished.

AZERBAIJANI PRESIDENT: MY MESSAGE TO ARMENIA: STOP THE OCCUPATION”

APA, Azerbaijan
Feb 8 2015

[ 08 February 2015 03:28 ]

Baku-APA. President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and
his wife Mehriban Aliyeva attended the panel “Outside Ukraine –
unresolved conflicts in Europe” held in the framework of the Munich
Security Conference, APA reports quoting “Vestnik Kavkaza”.

President of Azerbaijan spoke delivered speech at the panel, then
answered questions from participants.

The representative of Armenia addressed to the President of Azerbaijan
Ilham Aliyev, accusing the Azerbaijani army in the shelling of the
Armenian positions and increased tensions on the front line.

President Aliyev said the following: “In principle, this is tactic
of the Armenian side – always throw the blame on us. They invaded our
territory, violated international law, committed genocide in Khojaly,
destroyed our historical and religious monuments, and shift the blame
on us. But the question is that what the Armenian soldier are doing in
the occupied territories? What Armenian soldier is doing in Agdam? If
he does not want to be killed, he shall not go to Agdam. Let him
stay in his Yerevan, Gyumri, in their own country. You have enough
space in own country, there is, in fact, not too many people left,
so what are you doing in Agdam, what are you doing in Fizuli?”

“The year 2014 was generally remarkable in terms of the activity of
intermediaries in the negotiations. President Putin organized a meeting
between President Sargsyan and me in August. Already in September,
Secretary of State [John] Kerry organized a round of negotiations
with the Armenian president and me. Finally, at the end of October,
President Hollande invited us to Paris, where we had, I would say, an
excellent, very constructive meeting. Both parties then stated that
they considered this meeting a great success and will try to reduce
tension on the frontline. What happened then? After less than ten
days, Armenia began military exercises on the occupied territories,
particularly in Agdam, with the participation, according to the
Armenian media, of 47 thousand soldiers. They organized manoeuvres
in occupied territory with the use of military equipment, aircraft
and helicopters. For three days our army remained patient enough not
to respond, but then Armenia with the help of its Mi-24 helicopters
attacked Azerbaijan’s position. Our army had to respond and one of
the helicopters was shot down. For Armenia, it was an occasion to
accuse Azerbaijan. With this provocation, it showed disrespect to
the leaders of France, Russia and the United States that have made
so much effort to reduce tensions. Armenia thinks itcan do anything,
and no one will punish it. This is the main reason behind Armenia’s
behavior. Now they are blaming us, saying, Do not shoot!.

So, my message to Armenia is: end the occupation.” As soon as you stop
the occupation, we will have peace, cooperation and reconciliation.

And the reason why it is not happening is because the Armenian soldier
is still in Agdam and Fizuli”, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said.

WILL MUNICH CONFERENCE 2015 GO DOWN IN HISTORY?

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
Feb 9 2015

9 February 2015 – 4:04pm

Yesterday 51st Security Conference in Munich, during which the
participating countries presented their current positions on the
issues of security in Europe and beyond, has ended. The key topic of
the conference was the Ukrainian crisis, for which the usually single
point of view of the West was divided into two: German Chancellor
Angela Merkel after talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin
has proposed a soft diplomatic solution to the problem, while US
politicians continue to insist on supplies of lethal weapons to Kiev.

This Munich Conference may go down in history as well as Munich-2007,
the chairman of the Federation Council Committee on International
Affairs Konstantin Kosachev said, adding that now it’s necessary that
loud statements be implemented. In general, the conference has showed
the change of Western politicians’ approach to the Russian position.

“Firstly, last year’s logic ‘we don’t agree with Russia and refuse
to talk’ changed to at least ‘we don’t agree, but we must talk’.

Secondly, the EU, unlike the US, rules out the possibility of supplying
weapons to Ukraine. Consequently, if we ignore the public rhetoric,
the Europeans in fact back Moscow’s political settlement plan rather
than Kiev’s military scenario,” the senator said.

Experts’ opinions on the results of the Munich Conference-2015 are
divided. So, the President of the National Strategy Institute, Mikhail
Remizov, drew attention to the fact that the event itself is the only
possibility for the parties to express and to hear their points of
view, rather than substantive negotiations to take any decision.

“Therefore, the conference was of an intermediate nature, because
it took place waiting for the results of the negotiations of the
‘Normandy Quartet’,” he said.

“Perhaps the most significant aspect was the very unpleasant
welcome speech of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who quite
correctly and clearly voiced Russia’s position and didn’t go beyond
it. This was demonstrated by Lavrov’s personal rejection and biased
perception of the Russian position, the desire for a certain moral
ostracism in relation to Russia. The accurate, more restrained than
earlier, rhetoric of Chancellor Angela Merkel stood out against this
background. It was clear that caution is given simply by the presence
of the negotiating process, which was initiated in Kiev, and that the
conference has once again confirmed that, regardless of the outcome
of these negotiations, the isolation policy of Western countries,
the US and its allies against Russia will continue,” the expert said.

The political scientist Rovshan Ibragimov, in his turn, praised the
Munich conference as an important platform for discussions and meetings
of statesmen. “It is necessary to re-examine together any problems
or issues which the country and the region are facing now. It is no
coincidence that in parallel with the Munich conference a meeting
on Ukraine was held in Moscow of the leaders of France, Germany and
Russia. So it is rather a structural platform that addresses the
security problems,” he said.

Ibragimov spoke about the presence of Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev at the conference. “He had a meeting on security issues as well
as on geo-economic expectations, with the presidents of Macedonia and
Serbia. Also the issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was discussed.

It is very significant that, even before his visit to Davos,
during Ilham Aliyev’s visit to Germany, Angela Merkel said that the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has some parallels with the security issues
in the post-Soviet space, which is like a mirror image of events in
Ukraine. I think it’s like just a new perception of the problem. So
on the basis of Munich, the expectation came that issues of permits of
perennial conflicts in the former Soviet Union will now be seen through
the prism of problems of integrity in Ukraine,” the analyst said.

“Perhaps the most significant aspect was the very unpleasant
welcome speech of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who quite
correctly and clearly voiced Russia’s position and didn’t go beyond
it. This was demonstrated by Lavrov’s personal rejection and biased
perception of the Russian position, the desire for a certain moral
ostracism in relation to Russia. The accurate, more restrained than
earlier, rhetoric of Chancellor Angela Merkel stood out against this
background. It was clear that caution is given simply by the presence
of the negotiating process, which was initiated in Kiev, and that the
conference has once again confirmed that, regardless of the outcome
of these negotiations, the isolation policy of Western countries,
the US and its allies against Russia will continue,” the expert said.

The political scientist Rovshan Ibragimov, in his turn, praised the
Munich conference as an important platform for discussions and meetings
of statesmen. “It is necessary to re-examine together any problems
or issues which the country and the region are facing now. It is no
coincidence that in parallel with the Munich conference a meeting
on Ukraine was held in Moscow of the leaders of France, Germany and
Russia. So it is rather a structural platform that addresses the
security problems,” he said.

Ibragimov spoke about the presence of Azerbaijani President Ilham
Aliyev at the conference. “He had a meeting on security issues as well
as on geo-economic expectations, with the presidents of Macedonia and
Serbia. Also the issue of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was discussed.

It is very significant that, even before his visit to Davos,
during Ilham Aliyev’s visit to Germany, Angela Merkel said that the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has some parallels with the security issues
in the post-Soviet space, which is like a mirror image of events in
Ukraine. I think it’s like just a new perception of the problem. So
on the basis of Munich, the expectation came that issues of permits of
perennial conflicts in the former Soviet Union will now be seen through
the prism of problems of integrity in Ukraine,” the analyst said.

Political analyst Ramaz Sakvarelidze also drew attention to a
parallel, which had already been drawn by Prime Minister of Georgia
Irakli Garibashvili, between the problems of Ukraine and Georgia. “He
stressed that, leaving events in Georgia without reaction, the West
has a more extensive and more dramatic situation in Ukraine. How
it will be perceived by Western countries, which have not yet been
able to find the key to solving not only the Georgian, but also the
Ukrainian hot topic, is difficult to say,” he noted.

The expert added that Garibashvili would like to emphasize the fact
that “if the international community will be directed only to suspend
the process in Ukraine, and even if it will achieve this, it is
unlikely to save the world community from new surprises.” “When the
bloodshed in Georgia was suspended, the international community was
calm, but now it has received new bloodshed in Ukraine. So a local
task to stop the conflict can be solved, but it is too simplistic
and does not correspond to reality,” the political scientist says.

GERAGOS & GERAGOS’ MARK GERAGOS

The Recorder
Feb 9 2015

Marisa Kendall, The Recorder

Los Angeles attorney Mark Geragos, perhaps best known for defending
celebrities including Michael Jackson and Chris Brown, recently
set his sights on the online real estate site Zillow Inc. His firm,
Geragos & Geragos, filed six employment suits in less than a month,
accusing the company of “shocking” sexual harassment and other labor
violations. Zillow has denied the claims. Geragos said he’s been
shifting his practice to include more civil litigation on behalf of
individuals fighting powerful interests. Among his new civil clients:
singer Kesha in a suit accusing her former producer of abuse and rape.

Q: What sparked the Zillow lawsuits?

A: We often receive cold calls from a variety of prospective clients.

In this case there was a rash of Zillow employees who called
complaining about a really disturbing corporate culture. We were
presented with compelling evidence of serious corporate wrongdoing. I
credit [co-counsel] Bobby Samini at Samini Scheinberg for flagging
much of this outrageous conduct.

Q: How did the subsequent allegations come to light?

A: Once we filed the initial class action complaint and whistleblower
action, we received dozens of calls from other current and former
employees who were making the identical complaints.

Q: What was going through your mind as the cases piled up?

A: It really brought home in stark relief the reasons why I shifted
my practice to doing more plaintiffs’ work instead of solely criminal
defense. Criminal defense lawyers are used to holding the government
accountable for systemic violations of the liberties of the accused
who have a disproportionate amount of power. Here you have individuals
who are taken advantage of by corporations in the worst ways possible
and they deserve a passionate voice.

Q: What is the legal strategy behind hitting Zillow with multiple
suits in such a short amount of time?

A: Our firm handles class and mass actions against corporate
defendants, so these types of actions are fairly common for the firm.

Q: How many more Zillow suits can we expect?

A: We received dozens of phone calls from individuals who shared
horrific claims of discrimination, labor law abuses and other corporate
cover-ups. Stay tuned.

Q: How much of your work is representing plaintiffs in class actions,
rather than criminal defense work?

A: Over the last couple of years we have tried more civil than criminal
cases. However, we are pretty even balanced in our casel oad between
civil and criminal clients.

We represent consumers in class actions, we handle multi-district
litigation cases and individual as well as corporate plaintiffs. We
have represented nonprofits against “Big Pharma” and had eight-figure
jury verdicts.

Q: What are some of the differences between representing everyday
plaintiffs, such as Zillow employees, and celebrity clients?

A: Ironically, the celebrity cases we spend more time fending off the
media and trying to damp down the coverage, where just the opposite
may be true in a case that cries out for public scrutiny.

Q: Were you expecting the Zillow suits to generate this much publicity?

A:The wrongs committed against the Zillow plaintiffs resonated
throughout the country–not just among those employed there, but
in other workplaces. One article on the case highlighted how the
tech world started off with such lofty ambitions as the workplace
environment, but that in many cases they ended up being worse than a
traditional corporate workplace. The attention brought to the case
was organic and developed mostly through blogs and others sharing
similar work place abuses.

Q: Publicity can be a double-edged sword, as evidenced by the
defamation lawsuit music producer Dr. Luke recently filed, claiming you
accused him of sexually assaulting Lady Gaga. What was your reaction
to that suit?

A:It doesn’t surprise me. The defendant and his lawyers have
retaliated against Kesha by suing her, her mother, her manager and
now her lawyer. To paraphrase former Clinton-era Attorney General
Webb Hubbell during the Whitewater case, they can sue her cat but
that won’t detract from what we are going to do. Which in this case
is hold him accountable.

Q: What do you do when you’re not litigating?

A: I have very few hobbies but enjoy working out every morning. I
am passionate about the Armenian Cause and most of my free time is
devoted to that.

ASTARJIAN: A QUADRUPLE HISTORIC BYPASS

By Dr. Henry Astarjian on February 2, 2015

Special for the Armenian Weekly

Major occurrences have studded the globe and civilizations– events,
some good (such as the three monotheistic religions, though some argue
to the contrary), and some evil (like the Great Flood which engulfed
land, sparing the peaks, thus creating the Mediterranean islands like
Santorini). These events have impacted mankind, and stored them in
its collective memory.

History has not bypassed them; they are embedded there and will stay
there till time immemorial.

In the past century, four distinct events have also impacted peoples
and nations. They have extended in time to the present, and therefore
become subjects of scrutiny.

A glance would show that despite their initial impact, they are
transient, they could not endure. History is in the process of
bypassing them as we speak.

It is imperative to look back in order to ascertain the present,
and anticipate the future.

Map of the Sykes-Picot Agreement between the British and the French.

(Royal Geographical Society, 1910-15. Signed by Mark Sykes and Francois
Georges-Picot, 8 May 1916.)

To do that one is to start from the end of World War I, when Paris of
1919 was the epicenter of political activity. Together with Great
Britain and the victorious Allies, the defeated Ottoman Empire
(“The Sick Man of Europe”) was on the dissection table, and the
sections were defined by Mark Sykes of Britain and George Picot of
France, two bureaucrats of their foreign ministries. They had begun
their work some two years before, apportioning what did not belong
to France to France, and what did not belong to Britain to Britain,
thus mandating Syria to France, and Palestine, Mesopotamia, and Cyprus
to Great Britain. Lebanon, which administratively was part of Syria,
became a separate entity under France.

A treaty signed on Aug. 10, 1920 in Sèvres, France, was labeled the
“Treaty of Peace with Turkey.” It legitimized the Sykes-Picot plan.

The thrust of this treaty was to divide the eastern Mediterranean land,
and so it happened.

This division of land created more problems than anticipated. Borders
between Syria and Iraq were arbitrarily drawn with an ordinary ruler
into straight lines, thus dividing Shammar (a major Arab tribe; Syrians
call them Muhjimms) into Syrian and Iraqi portions. The Hashimite King
Faisal, who was crowned King of Syria, was victimized in a power and
land duel between Britain and France; he was deposed by the French
after six months of monarchy. In lieu of his family’s contribution
(with Lawrence of Arabia) to the war on the side of the Allies,
the British had to find a throne for him. After lengthy bargaining
and arm twisting, they found a throne for him in newly formed Iraq,
which included the disputed oil rich Mosul. He was crowned as King
Faisal I of Iraq. His brother Emir Abdullah, later King of Jordan,
was enthroned in East Jordan while Israel was being created to realize
the Sykes-Picot treaty and the Balfour Declaration.

Through some British arrangements, Abdullah Bin Hussein Al-Hashimi
became King of Jordan, which was carved out of Palestine.

All this mess created by the Sykes-Picot treaty lasted for about a
century, and the wars being waged now in the eastern Mediterranean,
in one form or another, indicate the dismantling of what the
Sèvres Treaty had proscribed. It is the death of the Sykes-Picot
arrangements. History has bypassed Sykes-Picot.

***

The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire also dismantled the caliphate
system of governance. The Arab Islamic world, which was an unwilling
part of the Ottoman Caliphate, felt liberated of the oppression the
system had brought. They had participated in the war against the
Ottomans, with the help of Lawrence of Arabia.

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

In Turkey, events gave birth to an army officer named Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk. He launched a military campaign (some say instigated
by European powers) to establish a modern, secular republic. He
was successful in conqueringvilayet after vilayet, through mass
executions, beheadingMullahs, and subjugating the peoples of Turkey
to his regime. The most memorable are his massacres of the people of
Dersim (now Tunceli), and setting fire to the city of Smyrna with its
majority Greek population. Eyewitnesses have told the story of Smyrna
in horrific terms. According to them, the people jumped en masse into
the sea to escape being burned alive. That was their only choice,
since the city was being besieged from the east, the north, and the
south by Mustafa Kemal’s forces. There were no routes of escape,
but the hope of being rescued by the British Navy which was moored
at harbor. They got no help, since it was 4 o’clock tea time for the
officers, who were being serenaded by the British Navy violinists.

Thousands of men, women, and children drowned. The British Navy could
have helped, but did not.

Kurds also bore the brunt of the massacres, since they were not
considered a “minority” to be protected by the Lausanne Treaty of
1923-24. This treaty, coined by Ismet Inonu, representing Kemal and
the newly established Turkish Republic, and Lord George Curzon of
Britain, countered the Sèvres Treaty, and did not recognize Kurds
as a minority akin to the Christians and the Jews whose protection
became mandatory by the same treaty.

Mustafa Kemal changed the Arabic letters, including that of the Koran,
to the Latin alphabet. He passed revolutionary laws, some cosmetic, the
most laughable being “Shapka Kanunu” (The Law of Hats), which mandated
the change of the traditional Turkish fez with a European-style fedora
hat, or a cap with a visor.

Mustafa Kemal established some degree of democracy by instituting
a one-man, one-vote system for the first time. He established the
Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (CHP; the Republican People’s Party) which
dominated the political life of the country for over a half century.

Ulus, the official party organ, advanced their revolution by advocating
the ideals of the new republic.

Two decades or so later, in an inner struggle, the CHP managed to
convict the president of the country, Calal Bayar, and the prime
minister, Adnan Menderes, to death; the life of the first was spared
because of age, but the second was hanged in public. They were
convicted for corruption. Additionally, they character-assassinated
Prime Minister Menderes by claiming to have found a female garment
in his safe.

The Republic of Turkey was part of the Baghdad Pact, an alliance
between Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Pakistan. The U.S. participated as an
observer. The strategy was to contain the southern border of the Soviet
Union. The pact had followed the Portsmouth Treaty of 1948, which
had had the same gall and which had dissolved after a short existence.

Turkey then joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The
senior partners of NATO accepted it into their organization because
of its geographical location.

Turkey could now boast of being a secular, democratic, and sovereign
country. Sovereign it was; democratic it was, up to a point; but
secular it was not. Its democracy extended to one-man, one-vote
elections; however, it was terribly short on human rights, women’s
rights, freedom of speech rights, and civil rights. Journalists were
incarcerated for allegedly defaming Turkey, or some such excuse,
as were novelists and writers. Carrying all this baggage, they had
the chutzpah to apply for membership of the European Union. All these
shortcomings and brutality continues as we speak.

Shapka Kanunu changed the headgear of the Turks, but could not change
what was underneath it–the mentality.

Time, events, and fanatic religiosity gave birth to the most recent
political setup, which in an attempt to institute a modern-era
reactionary Islamic Caliphate, propelled fanatic political fervor into
the overwhelming Turkish majority of the country. Turkish President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan did not have to push hard. People were ready.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan greeted Azeri President Ilham
Aliyev on Jan. 15, in the presence of 16 soldiers dressed in ceremonial
costumes representing various Turkic people in history.

(Photo: Official website of the President of Turkey)

The newly formed Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi (AKP; Justice and
Development Party) was briefly headed by Abdullah Gul, who became
president of Turkey. He was followed by a shrewder politician, Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, who served as prime minister, and now president,
elected by democratic, transparent elections. This election–with its
impressive majority, and of a person who has the Islamic Caliphate as
his raison d’etre–reflects the reactionary mentality, orientation,
and psychology of the electorate.

Erdogan has pursued policies that are designed to bury Kemalism, and
establish an Ottoman-style Caliphate. Now, he has invited presidents of
all countries, including the Armenian president, to attend celebrations
of the Turkish military victory over Great Britain in the Battle of
Gallipoli (Canakkale) on April 24, 2015, the very day that Armenians
commemorate the start of the Armenian Genocide. This is more proof
of his desire to advance the ideas of an Ottoman Caliphate. He has
succeeded. Kemalism is dead. History has bypassed it.

Erdogan has pursued policies that are designed to bury Kemalism, and
establish an Ottoman-style Caliphate…. He has succeeded. Kemalism
is dead. History has bypassed it.

***

While this is going on in Turkey, other events are disrupting the
region. Characterized as the Arab Spring, the events started with
revolutionary fervor from Tunis, when an ordinary man, a street
vendor, set himself on fire and died in protest of the corrupt and
oppressive government of Tunis. This was the kindling that started an
uncontainable fire which engulfed the super-flammable Arab countries.

Sparks soon started major fires in Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Yemen.

Iraq was in a state of disarray since Saddam Hussein’s demise in 2003.

Sunni-Shia enmity and armed conflicts continue. These two sects have
not been able to solve their differences since Hussein’s (Prophet
Muhammad’s grandson) murder around one and a half millennia ago. War
between them was waged by proxy, Iran promoting its geopolitical
interests in the Arab countries through the Shia communities in
Lebanon, Syria, and of course Iraq; and Saudi Arabia financing
Sunni causes.

The ever-opportunist Erdogan, advancing his plans for a misogynist
caliphate, acted as the champion of the Arab world by promoting his
stance as the defender of Palestine. He accused Israel of killing
civilians in Gaza, and pointed out their inhumane treatment of the
Palestinians, while continuing to deny the Armenian Genocide, which
his predecessors had committed. He unconditionally supported the
Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and their leader, now deposed Mohamed
Morsi. Egypt, with its newest administration, retaliated by bringing
up the Armenian Genocide as proof of Turkey’s criminality, and inhuman
treatment of its minorities.

Erdogan dashed out of an international conference in Davos in 2009,
protesting the unequal allotment of his time in favor of Israel. In an
attempt to provoke Israel by breaking its embargo of Gaza, he sent the
Mavi Marmara ship loaded with so-far-unknown cargo, which was blocked
by the Israeli Navy, resulting in the deaths of nine Turkish sailors.

Looking at the Arab world today, it is certain that the Arab Spring
is dead. History has bypassed it.

***

In my study hangs a framed, full-paged interview conducted by a
journalist for the newspaper Ozgur Politica, dated April 30, 1996. He
had titled it, “The Armenian and Kurdish Causes Are Interrelated.” He
was echoing my speech in the Kurdish Parliament in Exile, in Brussels,
where I had emphasized our rights to Western Armenia according to
the provisions of Section VI, Article 88-93 of the Sèvres Treaty and
President Woodrow Wilson’s map.

The speech was timely because of the behind-the-scenes political
activities advanced by Germany, Turkish President Turgut Ozal, and
Professor Dogu Ergil to formulate some sort of autonomy within the
boundaries of Turkey, for the Kurds. That meant incorporating Western
Armenia–the sixvilayets as specified by the Sèvres Treaty–into the
proposed Kurdish territories. This was unacceptable, and I was there
to say so.

Abdullah Ocalan

The Kurdish cause had turned into a liberation struggle through
military operations in 1984, headed by Abdullah Ocalan. His party, a
Marxist-oriented party, was called the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

The war had claimed some 35,000 casualties from both sides, and
was a major destabilizing situation for Turkey as a country, and
its chauvinist Turkic regime. After all, Mustafa Kemal and his new
republic had denied the national identity of the Kurds, labeling them
“Mountain Turks.”

The Kurdish struggle for self-rule had started in the mid-19th
century by Prince Badrkhan, who had waged a war against the central
Ottoman Caliphate by recruiting some 40,000 Armenians and Kurds. He
had failed. Successive rebellions by some sheikhs and chieftains like
Sheikh Sa’id and Sheikh Obeidullah were crushed. In the first decades
of the 20th century, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk committed genocide against
the Kurds, especially the people of Dersim. He literally snatched
children from the bosom of their mothers, and placed them in remote
places to be raised as Turks. His regime made it illegal to speak
or sing in Kurdish. He made it illegal to celebrate the most popular
celebrations of Newroz.

Some 3,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed. Three million Kurds were
displaced and became refugees, most settling in shanty towns around
Istanbul.

Failing in the battlefield, Turkey brought the fight to the villages
and communities. The government formed the Village Guards (Korucu)
from loyal Kurdish tribes, to brutalize their fellow Kurds. They
killed and raped, and brutalized the men, women, and children. In
one incident they snatched a bride, made her strip bare, and raped
her in front of her parents and the villagers.

The Erdogan regime, having failed to defeat the PKK, turned to the
“Ver Kurtul” (Pay and be free) policy. They negotiated with Ocalan,
who was captured in Kenya, and imprisoned in the Island of Imrali.

They allowed the celebration of Newroz last year, and gave the Kurds
a radio station. They allowed the formation of a legal political
party, the Halkin Democratic Partisi (HDP; Peoples’ Democratic Party),
which opened offices in Washington. The head of the party, Selahattin
Demirtas, ran for the office of Turkey’s presidency against Erdogan.

He scored 10 percent of the vote. Kurds did not vote for him, and
Erdogan won with the help of the Kurdish politician Masoud Barzani,
who had shared the podium with him in Diyarbakir.

Abdullah Ocalan is praising Kurdish participation in the Battle of
Gallipoli as proof of Kurdish loyalty to the very government that has
caused his people so much death and destruction. From all indications,
it is evident that the Kurdish Revolution is dead…

Meanwhile Abdullah Ocalan is praising Kurdish participation in the
Battle of Gallipoli as proof of Kurdish loyalty to the very government
that has caused his people so much death and destruction.

>From all indications, it is evident that the Kurdish Revolution is
dead, and may be replaced by evolution. It becomes the fourth bypass
in the history of the past century.

Are the Armenian and Kurdish causes tied together? That is for the
future to tell!

ALIYEV CONFIRMED HE HAS DECLARED WAR

Naira Hayrumyan, Political Commentator
Comments – 09 February 2015, 21:12

At Beyond Ukraine: Unresolved Conflicts in Europe session of Munich
Security Conference 2015 the Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev made
several confessions.

First, he confessed that Azerbaijan creates tension at the border
of Armenia. As a premise for ceasing military actions, he pointed
out handing of “territories surrounding Karabakh” after which,
according to him, there will be a ceasefire. This indicates that
Azerbaijan is causing escalation at the border to achieve return
of at least one territory. However, this approach is acceptable to
nobody except Turkey.

Aliyev also said that he is ready to open its territory for the
Armenia-Russia railway in response to “handing” and “allow” Turkey to
lift the blockade on the Armenian-Turkish border. And he offered only
autonomy for Karabakh (within the borders of the Autonomous District
of Nagorno-Karabakh).

In his speech at Munich Conference Aliyev actually refused the
principles of settlement of Karabakh proposed by the co-chairs
which envisage recognition of the right of the people of Karabakh
to self-determination.

However, what should be the settlement be based on? Change of the
balance of forces, Aliyev thinks. Applying the “drip” tactics of
striking the borders Azerbaijan is trying to force Armenia to make
concessions. Or rather not Armenia but the countries which benefit
from the status quo. It is not ruled out that Azerbaijan is trying
to force Armenia to seek defense assistance from the countries which
Baku would like to appear in Karabakh.

However, Azerbaijan does not have allies. At least, there were no such
in Munich, especially that the Turkish minister of foreign affairs
has left Munich because the Israeli delegation was there. Aliyev
in Munich tried to persuade other countries to support Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity but Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity has not
been perceived within the borders Aliyev implies.

How about Armenia? While the representatives of the Armenian delegation
to Munich were fighting off Aliyev’s strikes, Nalbandyan was having
interesting meetings. He met with the president of Iraqi Kurdistan
Masoud Barzani and agreed on strengthening relations between Armenia
and Iraqi Kurdistan.

Armenia may act as detonator of change of the state of affairs relating
to future Kurdistan and not only in the Near East. As to what place
will be foreseen for Azerbaijan in the future world order is inferred
from the reaction to Aliyev’s speech in Munich Conference.

Azerbaijan has lost its role and importance in global politics.

DAGDIGIAN EXPOSES ARMENIA’S SELDOM SEEN PHOTOGRAPHY

By Tom Vartabedian on February 9, 2015

LOWELL, Mass.–In his quest to unveil Armenia’s hidden treasures with
his camera and text, Joe Dagdigian is his very own GPS guide.

More than once or twice, he has passed the village of Bash Aparan
en route to another destination. He’ll often stop and pay tribute to
General Dro Kanayan, who is buried there. A huge memorial is visible
from the highway, catching your eye.

Armenians gather on May 28 to celebrate Independence Day at the Bash
Aparan memorial where General Dro Kanayan directed Armenia’s defense
forces. (Joe Dagdigian Photo)

There’s something very intimate here, especially with General Kanayan’s
son Mardik. The two spent their younger days as AYF members, attended
conventions together, and gathered at many a social interlude. The
respect they had for one another goes without saying.

Last May 28, Dagdigian had his camera in overdrive as he captured
reflective scenes of an Independence Day celebration taking place at
the monument, marking the site when General Kanayan led the defense
of Bash Aparan.

“The celebration started in the town of Aparan with a parade to the
memorial,” reflected Dagdigian. “The music, dancing, and homage paid
that day left an indelible imprint.”

Dagdigian will share his images and commentary in a program on Sat.,
Feb. 21, titled “Seldom Visited Armenia,” beginning at 6 p.m. at the
Armenian Relief Society (ARS) Community Center, at 142 Liberty St.,
Lowell.

The program is being sponsored by the Lowell “Aharonian” Gomideh in
conjunction with the 94th anniversary of the Feb. 18 Revolt against
the Soviets in 1921.

In this illustrated presentation, Dagdigian will take viewers along
the remote areas of Armenia, including ancient Bronze Age ruins and
monasteries–places quite difficult to access.

You will visit the gravesite of “Khent,” the character of Raffi’s
famous novel by the same name, who happens to be buried near
Etchmiadzin.

“Although Khent was fiction, the character was not,” Dagdigian
explains. “The country is full of amazing places that only have to
be seen to be appreciated. Not a year goes by when I don’t embark
upon a new trail to be shared through pictures and stories.”

Included in his talk are interactions with visitors and encounters
in the homes of total strangers ready to serve up their hospitality
for a smile. Accompanying him on many of these junkets is his wife
Lisa. The two share a home in Yerevan.

Much of it also has to do with their charity work with orphanages
and hospitals. Dagdigian’s work with the Cosmic Ray Division over
the years remains exemplary, resulting in thousands of dollars raised
for that cause.

He’s been honored for his work as a 50-year member of the ARF
and served as past chairman of the Armenian National Committee of
Merrimack Valley.

Dinner begins at 6 p.m., followed by the program. Admission is $20
for adults and $10 for students.

JULIAN COPE REVIEW – FROM RIPPING YARNS TO RAGGED POP

4/5stars

Brudenell Social Club, Leeds

Drug-fuelled epiphanies and enduring melodies abound in the psychedelic
raconteur’s career retrospective

Acid-fried biker … Julian Cope on stage. Photograph: Andrew
Benge/Redferns via Getty Images

Dave Simpson

Monday 9 February 2015 12.17 GMT

Julian Cope has been a pop star, an antiquary and a novelist, but this
two-hour set finds him in the favoured role of psychedelic raconteur.

With his wild hair, wilder beard, military cap and leather jacket
making him look like a acid-fried biker, highlights from his long
music career intersperse with entertaining gags and yarns. He explains
that he can happily strum his old Teardrop Explodes songs, such
as The Culture Bunker “now that Kate Bush has reformed”. He recalls
psychedelic epiphany arriving in Liverpool city centre in 1980, when a
£2 LSD tab got him “out of my mind for 16 hours”. After subsequently
quitting drinking for 21 years, he has returned to the sauce after a
strange encounter in an Armenian cave: “Seven mulberry vodkas later,
I was back!”

He’d make a decent stand-up, but behind the shades and self-styled
“Arch Drude” persona lurks a great British pop tunesmith. Delivered
with just a guitar and his (surprisingly unravaged) voice, new songs
and old classics such as Sunspots, Treason and The Greatness and
Perfection of Love demonstrate his enduring gift for melody. Perhaps
had Cope not taken so much acid, or posed naked except for a turtle
shell on the cover of the Fried album, he wouldn’t have alienated
so many record companies or bade a seemingly permanent farewell to
the charts.

Still, he seems happy enough in his unique niche, bashing out tunes
that marry personal concerns (the environmental cost of motoring;
substance use among ancient civilisations) with eyebrow-raising titles
(Autogeddon Blues; They Were All on Hard Drugs; Out of My Mind on Dope
and Speed). He is particularly proud of his latest state-of-the-world
address, which has a melody “so sweet Brotherhood of Man would reject
it” and a “Christmas ending”. It’s called Cunts Can Fuck Off.

AZERBAIJAN’S DESTRUCTIVE POSITION HINDERS NEGOTIATION PROCESS PROGRESS

12:50, 9 February, 2015

YEREVAN, FEBRUARY 9, ARMENPRESS: The Minister of Foreign Affairs of
the Republic of Armenia Edward Nalbandian hosted on February 9 the
EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus and the crisis in
Georgia Herbert Salber. The press service of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Armenia told Armenpress that Edward Nalbandian drew the
attention of the EU Special Representative to the drastic increase of
the provocative actions, carried out by the Azerbaijani Armed Forces
on the line of contact with Karabakh and on the Armenian border.

“In the end of the last week, at the Munich Security Council, the
refuse of the Azerbaijani president to commit to the well-known three
principles of the international rights, proposed by the mediators, as a
conflict settlement basis, his stated positions prove the continuation
of the disregard and maximalistic line towards the international
community’s calls,” – said Edward Nalbandian, Armenpress reports.

Prince Charles says radicalisation of young people ‘alarming’

8 February 2015 Last updated at 11:34

Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue.

Prince Charles said he was frightened by the way people can be
radicalised online

The Prince of Wales has described the extent to which young people are
becoming radicalised as “alarming” and one of the “greatest worries”.

In an interview with Radio 2’s The Sunday Hour, Prince Charles spoke
of his hopes to “build bridges” between different faiths.

He also spoke of his “deep concern” for the suffering of Christian
churches in the Middle East.

He is currently in Jordan on a six-day tour of the region.

The prince arrived in the capital Amman on Saturday night and is due
to hold talks with King Abdullah II later.

On the radicalisation of young people, Prince Charles says: “Well, of
course, this is one of the greatest worries, I think, and the extent
to which this is happening is the alarming part.

“And particularly in a country like ours where you know the values we hold dear.

The prince is in Jordan at the start of his Middle East tour

“You think that the people who have come here, [are] born here, go to
school here, would imbibe those values and outlooks.”

“The frightening part is that people can be so radicalised either
through contact with somebody else or through the internet, and the
extraordinary amount of crazy stuff which is on the internet.”

He told the BBC programme he believed part of the reason some young
people are radicalised is a “search for adventure and excitement at a
particular age”.

‘Constructive paths’

The prince also discussed the work of his charity The Prince’s Trust
in combating radicalisation.

He said: “What I have been trying to do all these years with the
Prince’s Trust is to find alternatives for adolescents and people at a
young age, for constructive paths for them to channel their
enthusiasm, their energy, that sense of wanting to take risks and
adventure and aggression and all these things.

“But you have to channel them into constructive paths.”

The Radio 2 programme covers visits by the prince to Armenian, Roman
Catholic Chaldean and Syrian Orthodox churches in the UK, and contains
accounts from members of these denominations who have had to flee
persecution in Syria and Iraq.

He said: “I particularly wanted to show solidarity really, deep
concern for what so many of the Eastern Christian churches are going
through in the Middle East.

‘Protector of faiths’

“Christianity was founded in the Middle East which we often forget.
>From a morale point I hope it showed they were not forgotten. I wish I
could do more. Many of us do wish we could do more.

“I think what doesn’t bear thinking about is people of one faith, a
believer, could kill another believer. That’s the totally bewildering
aspect in our day and age.”

The prince has an “extraordinary relationship in the Gulf”, his biographer said

He suggested that when he becomes king, he may still be sworn in as
Defender of the (Christian) Faith. There had been speculation that the
title could be changed to encompass all faiths.

However, he said he believed an important part of the role was to be a
“protector of faiths”, defending every religion in multicultural
Britain.

During the interview, the prince also considered how different
communities could live alongside each other.

He told the programme: “I think the secret is that we have to work
harder to build bridges and we have to remember that our Lord taught
us to love our neighbour, to do to others as you would do to you and
just to go on despite the setbacks and despite the discouragement to
try and build bridges and to show justice and kindness to people.”

‘Activist prince’

The broadcast comes after a new book claiming the prince wants to
redefine the monarchy was published.

The book’s author, Catherine Mayer, said he has an “extraordinary
relationship in the Gulf.”

She added: “It’s partly just because he’s a prince. Also he gave a
speech on Islam in 1993 in which he talked about Islam not having a
monopoly on extremism and he talked about the Christian crusades, and
he talked about the good things in Islam.”

But anti-monarchy group Republic said the prince’s views must be
subject to scrutiny.

Graham Smith, Republic’s CEO, said: “MPs in particular need to face up
to the new reality of an activist prince and must be free to openly
challenge what Charles says.”

* The Sunday Hour was broadcast on BBC Radio 2 on 8 February.