Author: Karakhanian Suren

Human Rights Watch
[Co-chair of Country’s Oldest Rights Group Faces Terrorism Prosecution]
Feb. 21, 2022
(Istanbul) – The prosecution of a human rights defender demonstrates
the Erdoğan government’s policy of bringing baseless criminal charges
against people involved in legitimate and peaceful civil society
activities, Human Rights Watch said today.
Öztürk Türkdoğan, co-chair of the Human Rights Association, Turkey’s
oldest human rights group, is scheduled to stand trial in Ankara on
February 22, 2022, on charges of “membership in a terrorist
organization.” If convicted, he could face a sentence of 5 to 10 years
in prison. Türkdoğan is also being prosecuted in two other trials on
charges of “insulting” the interior minister and “insulting the
Turkish nation, Republic of Turkey, state institutions and bodies,”
each with a possible penalty of up to two years in prison. All
indictments against him were prepared in December 2021.
“The prosecution of Öztürk Türkdoğan, the long-term co-chair of the
Human Rights Association, is an attempt to criminalize legitimate
human rights work and the right to free speech,” said Hugh Williamson,
Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The fact that
Ankara prosecutors prepared three indictments against Türkdoğan in a
single month for speeches and statements that do not advocate violence
and were made over several years, points to a political order from
above behind these criminal proceedings.”
On March 19, 2021, police briefly detained Türkdoğan from his home,
searching his house and confiscating his laptop and phone. He was
later released with a travel ban imposed on him.
The evidence in the indictment charging Türkdoğan with “membership in
a terrorist organization,” the most serious charge he faces, consists
of Türkdoğan’s speeches, statements, and conversations in his capacity
as the co-chair of the Human Rights Association. The indictment cites
nine broadcasts in which the ANF Kurdish media outlet included clips
of Türkdoğan making public statements on various dates between March
2015 to January 2020.
The statements include calls to end the prolonged solitary confinement
of Abdullah Öcalan, the jailed leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party
(PKK), and other prisoners, and relate to hunger strikes by prisoners
supporting the lifting of solitary confinement. Other evidence cited
in the indictment includes seven phone calls on various dates in 2019,
four with media outlets or journalists.
The indictment also cites three photographs found on Türkdoğan’s
laptop showing banners prepared by the Human Rights Association. Two
protest solitary confinement in prisons and the treatment of sick
prisoners and a third calls for the recognition of Saddam Hussein’s
Anfal campaign in Iraqi Kurdistan in the 1980s as a genocide against
Kurds. The indictment also asserts that Türkdoğan transferred money
“to persons subject to legal processes in connection with terrorist
organization membership,” an allegation he denies.
The two other indictments were prepared by different Ankara
prosecutors. One concerns a statement made on April 24, 2017, by the
Human Rights Association on its website calling for an end to Turkey’s
denial of the Armenian genocide. The prosecutor alleges the statement
exceeds the limits of freedom of expression and amounts to the offense
of “insulting the Turkish nation, the state of the Republic of Turkey,
state institutions and bodies” under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal
Code.
The third indictment accuses Türkdoğan of “insulting” Interior
Minister Süleyman Soylu, under article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code
on the basis of a February 18, 2021 statement on the Human Rights
Association website responding to the minister’s harsh criticism of
the association in a parliamentary speech.
“The Turkish authorities should ensure that all charges against Öztürk
Türkdoğan are dropped immediately,” Williamson said. “The government
should stop harassing human rights defenders and ensure that they can
carry out their legitimate activities without fear of reprisals,
arrest, and abusive criminal proceedings.”
 

                                        Thursday, 
Iran Irked By Azeri Claims To Yerevan Mosque
        • Marine Khachatrian
Armenia -- The facade of the 18th century Blue Mosque in Yerevan, February 24, 
2022.
Iranian diplomats and clerics have criticized Azerbaijani lawmakers for claiming 
that a 18th century Shia mosque in Yerevan managed by Iran is an Azerbaijani 
monument.
The two pro-government lawmakers arrived in Armenia earlier this week to attend 
a session of a parliamentary assembly of the European Union and ex-Soviet states 
involved in the EU’s Eastern Partnership program.
While in Yerevan, they also visited the city’s Blue Mosque and later posted on 
social media photographs of themselves sanding at its picturesque courtyard. 
Both men wrote that the Muslim shrine is the “sole Azerbaijani monument” 
preserved in the Armenian capital and expressed confidence that its “real 
masters” will be able to pray there soon.
The Iranian Embassy in Armenia hit back at the Azerbaijani deputies on Wednesday 
in a series of tweets written in Armenian, Persian and English. It also posted 
photographs of Persian-language inscriptions on the walls of the mosque and 
adjacent structures.
“The Blue Mosque, a symbol of Iranian art, has been active again in the last 3 
decades as the praying and congregation place of Muslims residing in Armenia and 
a touristic attraction,” wrote the embassy.
“A great pleasure that its centuries-old Persian epigraphy has been preserved! 
Who can read them?” it said in English.
Mahmoud Movahedifar, an Iranian clergyman serving there, made the same point as 
he showed RFE/RL journalists around the mosque on Thursday. He insisted that it 
has distinctive features of Iran’s traditional Islamic architecture.
“What language is this: Persian or Azeri?” he asked. “Even if there was a single 
tile here with an Azerbaijani inscription we would recognize that fact.”
“If those gentlemen claim that this is an Azerbaijani mosque then let them show 
one trace of Azerbaijani history here,” he said.
Armenia -- Mahmoud Movahedifar speaks at Yerevan's Blue Mosque, February 24, 
2022.
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has repeatedly described Yerevan and other 
parts of Armenia as “historical Azerbaijani lands.”
Movahedifar complained that neither he nor other people working in the mosque 
were informed about the Azerbaijanis’ visit beforehand.
“Had I known about their visit, I would have immediately come here and shown 
them all this evidence and said: ‘If you say it’s Azeri, show me a single piece 
of evidence,’” he said.
The Blue Mosque was built in 1766 at a time when most of the territory of 
modern-day Armenia was part of the Persian Empire. It was shut down by Soviet 
Armenian authorities in the mid-1920s. Its buildings and courtyard were used for 
mostly secular purposes in the following decades, up until the collapse of the 
Soviet Union.
The mosque complex was reopened as a religious institution in 1996 after being 
thoroughly renovated by the Iranian government in line with an agreement with 
Yerevan’s municipal administration. It now also houses an Iranian library and 
cultural center.
Top Armenian Generals Sacked
        • Artak Khulian
Armenian - Lieutenant-General Artak Davtian (second from right), the chief of 
the Armenian army's General Staff, and other officers conclude "staff 
negotiations" with a visiting Russian military delegation, Yerevan, July 17, 
2021.
The chief of the Armenian army’s General Staff, Lieutenant-General Artak 
Davtian, and four other generals were dismissed on Thursday through presidential 
decrees initiated by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian.
The Armenian government gave no reasons for the sacking of Davtian, one of his 
deputies, Lieutenant-General Andranik Makarian, as well as the commanders of the 
army’s artillery and engineer units and the head of a General Staff division 
dealing with army morale.
All of the generals except Davtian were replaced later in the day. The 
government did not immediately name a new army chief.
In what appears to be a related development, the chiefs of Armenia’s military 
intelligence and rear services were relieved of their duties last week.
Pashinian installed Davtian as chief of the General Staff in March 2021. The 
previous holder of the top military position, Colonel-General Onik Gasparian, 
was fired after he and four dozen other high-ranking officers accused 
Pashinian’s government of incompetence and misrule and demanded its resignation.
Davtian was widely expected to be sacked after being indicted last fall in a 
criminal investigation into supplies of allegedly faulty ammunition to the 
country’s armed forces.
Two other generals as well as former Defense Minister Davit Tonoyan and a 
private arms dealer were arrested as part of the same criminal case in 
September. They and Davtian were charged with fraud and embezzlement that cost 
the state almost 2.3 billion drams ($4.7 million).
As they went on trial on January 19 the suspects denied the accusations stemming 
from the purchase of allegedly outdated air-to-surface rockets for the Armenian 
Air Force.
The latest sackings coincided with Armenian Defense Minister Suren Papikian’s 
first visit to Moscow that began on Thursday. The Armenian Defense Ministry said 
Papikian will meet with his Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu and “other 
high-ranking officials.”
Turkish, Armenian Officials Hold More Talks
Armenia - Armenian deputy parliament speaker Ruben Rubinian (left) and Turkish 
diplomat Serdar Kilic,January 14, 2022
Special envoys of Turkey and Armenia met in Vienna on Thursday for the second 
round of negotiations on normalizing relations between the two neighboring 
states.
In virtually identical statements, the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministries 
gave few details of the talks held by veteran Turkish diplomat Serdar Kilic and 
Ruben Rubinian, a deputy speaker of the Armenian parliament.
“The Special Representatives confirmed that the ultimate goal of the 
negotiations is to achieve full normalization between Turkey and Armenia, as 
agreed during their first meeting in Moscow [on January 14,]” read the 
statements. “They exchanged views on possible concrete steps that can be 
mutually taken to that end and reiterated their agreement to continue the 
process without preconditions.”
There was no word on the date and venue of the next round of the talks between 
Kilic and Rubinian.
Ankara and Yerevan had described their January 14 meeting as “positive and 
constructive.” Armenia’s Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan afterwards voiced 
cautious optimism over the success of the dialogue welcomed by Russia, the 
United States and the European Union.
Ankara has for decades linked the establishment of diplomatic relations with 
Yerevan and the opening of the Turkish-Armenian border to a resolution of the 
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict acceptable to Azerbaijan.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on February 10 that his 
government will continue to coordinate the Turkish-Armenian normalization talks 
with Baku.
For his part, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reportedly said earlier 
this week that he is ready to improve relations if Armenia if the latter is 
“determined to continue the process that has started with the special 
representatives.”
“We are pleased with the will of Armenia to normalize [relations] with us,” he 
said, according to Turkish media.
Armenia In No Rush To Evacuate Citizens From Ukraine
        • Naira Bulghadarian
UKRAINE -- Smoke rise from an air defense base in the aftermath of an apparent 
Russian strike in Mariupol, .
Armenia did not move to evacuate its citizens from Ukraine or tell them to leave 
the country on Thursday hours after a large-scale military attack launched by 
Russia.
The Armenian Embassy in Kyiv instead urged them to contact the mission and 
inform it about their whereabouts. It publicized emergency phone numbers on its 
website and social media accounts.
The Armenian Foreign Ministry indicated last week that despite the looming 
threat of a Russian invasion it has no plans to evacuate the embassy or the 
Armenian consulate general in the Ukrainian city of Odessa.
The ministry said on Wednesday that Yerevan regards both Russia and Ukraine as 
“friendly countries” and hopes that they will resolve their standoff through 
“diplomatic dialogue.” It did not immediately react to what Russian President 
Vladimir Putin called "a special military operation" against Ukraine launched 
the following morning.
In a nationally televised speech early on Thursday, Putin sought to justify the 
offensive operation by claiming that he has to stop Ukraine from acquiring 
nuclear weapons and attacking two breakaway region in the eastern Donbass region 
which Moscow recognized as independent republics earlier this week.
UKRAINE -- CRIMEA -- A Russian armoured vehicle moves across the town of 
Armyansk, northern Crimea, early on February 24.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said that Moscow has launched a 
full-scale attack on his country, with missile attacks targeting “our military 
infrastructure” and border guards in several cities.
There was immediate and widespread condemnation from the West, with vows of new, 
tougher sanctions to be slapped on Moscow.
U.S. President Joe Biden called the action an “unprovoked and unjustified" 
attack on Ukraine and said the world would “hold Russia accountable.” The 
European Union likewise accused Moscow of “grossly violating international law 
and undermining European and global security and stability.”
UKRAINE - Cars drive towards the exit of Kyiv after Russian President Vladimir 
Putin authorized a military operation in eastern Ukraine, .
Ukraine is officially home to some 120,000 ethnic Armenians. According to the 
Union of Armenians of Ukraine, their actual number is much larger and only half 
of them are Ukrainian nationals.
Ruben Makarian, a representative of the union, spoke of a “first wave of panic” 
among Armenians living in the Ukrainian-controlled parts of the Donetsk and 
Luhansk regions making up Donbass.
“In the Lugansk region, local authorities announced an evacuation [of the 
population,]” Makarian told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service from Kyiv. “But there is 
no specific evacuation of local Armenians yet. I am in constant touch with the 
leaders of the [Armenian] community there.”
Regular flights between Yerevan and Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities were 
cancelled on Thursday after Ukraine closed its airspace to commercial aircraft.
Reprinted on ANN/Armenian News with permission from RFE/RL
Copyright (c) 2022 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Inc.
1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036.
 

South China Morning Post
By Gyorgy Busztin
Feb. 7, 2022
[As Russia seeks to re-establish its Soviet-era sphere of influence
and Turkey turns towards Central Asia, their opposing interests might
soon collide
For China, Russo-Turkish tensions would destabilise Central Asia. For
South and Southeast Asia, Turkey’s neo-Ottoman drive has bigger
repercussions]
Current events have provided two instances of history repeating
itself. The first, and indisputably more dangerous, instance is the
drive by President Vladimir Putin to restore Russia to the superpower
status it enjoyed in Soviet times.
What is happening on Ukraine’s border is not about Russia feeling
threatened but about Moscow seeking to re-establish its Soviet-era
sphere of influence. What does Russia have to fear from its neighbours
in Nato, a defensive alliance of countries that are preoccupied with
their own concerns?
To those who have followed Russian history across the centuries, this
pressure campaign is neither new nor surprising. Historically, Russia
has been obsessed with seeking access to warm seas. It succeeded in
reaching the Black Sea at the time of Catherine the Great, clinching
Crimea from its nominal suzerain, the Ottoman sultan.
But this was not enough. After occupying the entire Eurasian land mass
adjacent to its realm east of the Urals, swallowing up Turkish and
Persian vassal states and reaching the Pacific, Russia still dreamed
of ejecting the British from India, in a push to the Indian Ocean.
(Thus prompting the Great Game, the British Empire’s desperate
19th-century attempt to block Russian progress south in Afghanistan).
To keep Russia at arm’s length from the Mediterranean, England, France
and Turkey fought the bloody Crimean war.
Then came the Russian expansion into the Balkans, which pitted St.
Petersburg against two great powers of the age, the Austro-Hungarian
empire and Ottoman Turkey. The first of the two conflicts was
temporarily defused by the Congress of Berlin, which delineated the
spheres of influence of both empires.
But Russia found it difficult to abide by these arrangements and
stoked pan-Slav nationalism to grab more influence, leading eventually
to the pistol shots in Sarajevo, and the first world war.
Meanwhile, Russia’s conflict with Turkey kept brewing. It had
successfully pushed the Ottomans from their Balkan dependencies by the
last quarter of the 19th century. That the nations freed from Ottoman
rule were soon at each other’s throats (in the first and second Balkan
wars) mattered little.
What mattered was Russia’s drive to end the Turkish presence in the
Balkans altogether, by aiming to take hold of Istanbul, which it
referred to as Constantinople. Thus emerged the antagonism that
eventually pushed Turkey into the arms of Germany and Austria-Hungary
in the first world war, with catastrophic consequences for the Ottoman
Empire.
The second development, related to the first, is Turkey’s loud support
of Ukraine. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan travelled to Kyiv on
February 3 to announce a deal to send its highly-regarded drones to
the beleaguered nation.
For good measure, he used a phrase loaded with symbolism since
Ukraine’s troubles with Russia began in 2014: “Glory to Ukraine!” That
Turkey, a Nato member that has cosied up to Russia in recent years –
despite the anger this has aroused in its other ally, the United
States – has made clear which side it is on might surprise some.
But for those who remember the past, the reasons are clear. Both
Russia and Turkey are embarking on relentless drives to be great again
on the world stage. In the case of Russia, the driving force is what
Lenin condemned as “Great Russian chauvinism”, bolstered by military
might and hydrocarbon resources.
For Turkey, the European Union’s refusal to admit it to what Ankara
sees as a “Christian club” has motivated Erdogan to go it alone and
swap a European identity for one rooted in its glorious past. This has
seen it make a decisive turn towards the Turkic nations of Central
Asia and a claim to kinship.
All would be well if these ambitions have been playing out in opposite
corners of the world. But Russia and Turkey are neighbours, and the
risks of them colliding are increasing. They have opposing interests
in the Caucasus. Their spheres of influence overlap and breed
contradictions in Central Asia.
Their differences are manifest with respect to the GUAM countries
(Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova), independent states
threatened by Russian expansion, but which Turkey resolutely stands
by.
The short but bloody war between Azerbaijan and Armenia in
Nagorno-Karabakh last year brought Russo-Turkish tensions to the
surface, as both backed opposing sides – a situation similar to that
in Syria and Libya, and now Ukraine.
For us in Asia, the Russian push for rejuvenation seems remote.
Turkey’s drive, on the other hand, is taking place in our backyard.
The history that binds them, however, should interest even the casual
observer.
The world is rife with inherited tensions that can easily be
channelled to feed new conflicts. Conflicting nationalisms – Russian
Orthodox neo-imperialism here, Turkish neo-Ottomanism there – fall
into this category, even if the risk of tensions spilling over remain
remote.
For China, protracted Russo-Turkish tensions would destabilise Central
Asia. For those further south, Turkey’s neo-Ottoman drive has bigger
repercussions.
For many South and Southeast Asian countries with Muslim populations –
Malaysia foremost among them – Turkey remains a beacon and a model for
how Islam can fuse with modernity. It is no secret that it is vying
with the other Muslim axes – chiefly those led by Saudi Arabia, and
Iran – for leadership of the Islamic world.
A Muslim nation standing up to a European power will no doubt be
applauded in this region, giving the political Islam which Ankara
champions a fillip, and boosting the neo-Ottoman drive.
The 64,000-dollar question for those watching history repeating itself
is this: have the lessons of their bloody pasts been learned by Moscow
and Ankara?
*
Dr Gyorgy Busztin is a visiting research professor at the Middle East
Institute of the National University of Singapore. A career diplomat,
he served as Hungary’s Ambassador to Indonesia and Iran, among other
postings