Author: Nahapetian Zhanna

PAMUK’S TASK
Selcuk Gultasli

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 18 2006

First of all, I want to put it on the record that I have followed Orhan
Pamuk with great pleasure and appreciation since the publication of
his "Black Book," and that, asking for the forgiveness of literary
critics, I think he is the greatest author in Turkish literature’s
recent history.

I wholeheartedly congratulate him on winning the Nobel prize for
Literature.

However, the Nobel Prize for Literature having fallen on the same
day as France’s questionable draft law warns us that we have to be
sparing while showing our excitement and joy.

This Nobel award, for which we will always praise our great writer,
couldn’t have come at a worse time.

What should be done now? Can our Nobel author take a role in the
struggle against the injustice made against his own nation this time?

Let whoever wants to boycott do so; but 200l clearly showed that
stupid plans like bringing France to its knees through trade never
work. France has the world’s seventh largest economy, its per capita
income is almost 30 thousand dollars and its economic volume exceeds
2 trillion dollars annually.

Mistakes like trusting that Chirac will call Erdogan and say, "I’m
sorry," expecting him to obstruct the bill, giving compromise after
compromise hoping he will, and buying plenty of Airbuses, shouldn’t
be repeated.

Both of Chirac’s probable successors, right-wing Nicolas Sarkozy and
leftist Segolene Royal have already made recognition of a "genocide"
a condition of Turkey’s EU membership just like the current "friend
of the Turks" president.

OK, let’s say that Chirac doesn’t sign this bill, won’t it be brought
back to life a few years later?

What should be done is to immediately make the bill a law. As soon as
it becomes a law, a serious struggle should be begun on the basis of
freedom of expression. Last week in Europe there were many decisions
indicating that Turkey would win such a struggle started on the basis
of freedom of expression. We can list them as follows:

The EU Commission took a stand against the bill; not only Expansion
Commissioner Olli Rehn, but also at the highest level, Chairman
Barroso.

France’s largest newspapers agreed that the French National Assembly
had acted unreasonably. In general, the European press supported
this stand.

There were official public statements from the European Parliament,
which is constantly giving Turkey a headache regarding the issue of
"genocide," saying, "You’ve made Voltaire turn over in his grave,"
and, "If a law is being made for the Armenian genocide, why aren’t
you doing anything about other injustices?"

Even one of the genocide-accusing members of the EP, French Marie
Anne Isler Beguin, joined in on the protests, "Do you want to throw
Turkey into the lap of Iran and Russia?"

Without losing any time, France’s most expert historians called upon
Chirac to have the bill rescinded if it passes the Senate.

It can be said that an intellectual alliance is emerging throughout
Europe – even though it’s not strong – believing that France has gone
too far this time and exceeded its limits.

If the bill is not buried in France, it is just a matter of time
before it jumps to Belgium, Holland and other countries.

The best thing to do would be to pull the discussion toward a freedom
of expression platform and get the intellectual consensus emerging
in Europe behind us.

Then Orhan Pamuk’s going to Paris with Hrant Dink would be effective.

Pamuk’s going to Paris as a Nobel-winning author from a country that
has abolished or amended article 301 could turn into a visit that
would make France ashamed.

Actually, this is just the right time to amend Article 301!

In an interview with the BBC just after winning the award, Pamuk
did not mention freedom of expression in relation to questions about
France. This does not promise hope.

However, on the day he is to receive the award, if after criticizing
the genocide bill from top to bottom in the speech he makes in Sweden,
if the bill becomes law and he jumps on the first flight to Paris and,
as Hrant Dink promised to do, he proclaims that he doesn’t recognize
the "genocide" (even if he believes it happened), then the coldness
between him and the Turkish people would to a large extent disappear.

THE ARMENIAN ISSUE IN THE NETHERLANDS: THE REMOVAL OF THE THREE TURKISH-ORIGINATED MPS FROM THE CANDIDACY LIST

Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Oct 18 2006

The Armenian issue is nowadays quite popular in Europe. The French
brought legislation to the parliament, placing all the counter
arguments against the so-called Armenian genocide out of bounds. If it
is passed, rejecting the so-called genocide will be penalized either
by casting into prison or imposing substantial fines.

Discussions go on in the Netherlands after the three Turkish
originated MP candidates (Erdin Sacan-labour party, Ayhan Tonca and
Osman Elmaci from Christian democratic party) have been removed from
the candidate list just for not accepting the existence of so-called
Armenian genocide. A similar thing had happened to Derya Bulduk, who
was a candidate from the FDF (Democratic front of the Francophones)
in Belgium.

The two mainstream parties claim that the Netherlands accepted
the so-called Armenian genocide and base their[1][1] claims on the
recommendatory decision on 21 December 2004, recognizing the existence
of the so called genocide.

According to the General Assembly decision of the UN in 1948, genocide
is defined as; killing members of a group, causing serious bodily or
mental harm to members of the group, deliberately inflicting on the
group conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction
in whole or in part, imposing measures intended to prevent births
within the group, and forcibly transferring children of the group to
another group.

The chair of ISRO, Sedat Laciner (Laciner, 2005) defines genocide
as "the worst crime a human being can ever do", which I completely
agree with. Nevertheless, the ugliness of the case does not give the
right to accuse people without substantiating such arguments on valid
evidences. We need to post a clear difference between widely confused
themes. Being against genocide is one thing, using genocide for some
political ends is another thing. Sometimes we put critical thinking
completely aside and defend democratic values and norms so blindly
that this adherence itself becomes a deficit to democracy.

We have evidences of the Holocaust and see it as among the worst, maybe
the worst case in humanity. But do we really have such proofs regarding
the Armenian issue? What if, the Armenians were not tortured?!

Thousands of people die in Sudan right now, Israel killed thousands
of other just two months before. People died in Rwanda, former
Yugoslavia and many other places for just being a member of a
particular group. Why do we turn blind eyes to all these and are so
much insistent on punishing people denying an unproven case?

The Turkish side has opened all its archives and is very much eager to
form common committees for searching the issue. Turkish PM Erdogan
has underlined the willingness of searching this topic in many
occasions. Despite all these, keeping away from all scientific
enquiries and imposing such a heavy accusation leads to many
suspicions.

The Armenian state does not recognize the Lausanne treaty, on which the
Turkish Republic is grounded. In other words, Armenia does not accept
the current borders of Turkey. The country names the North East part
of Turkey as the West Armenia and makes claims on these territories
in its constitution. Robert Kocaryan, the PM of Armenia, states that
these territorial gains can be done in peaceful manners (Ibid).

Are all these done for the sake of democracy or is the democratic
sensitiveness used for further aims?! It is highly confusing; why
do not we talk about what the Dutch did in Indonesia and Surinam,
French did in Algeria, Spain did in South America if we are so eager
to account for our faults in past ?

Apart from these, the migration policy of the Ottoman Empire is very
irrelevant to the genocide claims. Ottomans failed in providing healthy
conditions during this depart but why should a send all the members
of an ethnicity away if it really aims a genocide? The Nazi rule did
not send the Jews away, but brought the Jewish to its concentration
camps from all around the world.

The Netherlands

A very critical approach is on rise in the Netherlands in particular
and Europe in general. Although it is not very acceptable to
discriminate openly, discrimination becomes legalized when it is
made by reference to "democratic values". For instance, if someone
criticizes Moroccans in some way under the general classification of
Moroccans, s/he will probably be strictly criticized. Nevertheless,
when Fortuyn said that gays were under threat due to the Moroccan gangs
he was very much backed. Similarly, opposing Islam itself will be not
so much welcomed. But people get credit if they manage to hinder such
points of view under the democratic doctrine.

Specifically, the argument of the repression of women under the
Islamic doctrine is in many times welcomed without a slightest
degree of critical thinking. The same thing is valid for the expel
of the Turkish originated candidates. The party leaders are really
appreciated as the guardians of democratic principles!!!

With regard to the decisions of the CDA and the PvdA; has a party
have the right to ask its members to share a common vision on this
topic? Party members have more or less similar positions and it is
quite natural to demand from these people to share a common vision.

For instance, there is no point in defending capitalism in a
highly communist party. Or members of a highly natioanlistic party
will probably not be welcomed if they act against the nationalism
doctrine. The so-called Armenian genocide is just a very slight
issue in those two parties and it is quite natural that their members
can have different opinions on that. All in all, we need different
opinions in democratic systems, also within the party.

The party position can not legitimize removing candidates from a party
list just because they have a point of view on a particular topic;
which is not a central in the party doctrine, open to debate, and
apparently not against the party doctrine. In the EP report, Turkey
is criticized due to the 301th article, which limits the freedom of
expression. It is true, Turkey has to improve its conditions in such
aspects just as the other European states have to.

However, people can be sent to jail or removed from candidacy lists
in the founding member states. This is a shame indeed.

The Armenian lobby is certainly quite effective in the international
field. But I personally do not believe the high influence of an
Armenian lobby in the Dutch society. The so-called Armenian genocide
has become quite trendy (!) in European politics.

Nevertheless some interior political aspects take place, as well.

People still talk the rise of Pim Fortuyn in 2002. Even the most
liberal parties have shifted to an anti immigration perspective
afterwards.

The Dutch Christian Appeal and labour party make some miscalculations
at this point. According to the official givens, 300 thousand Turkish
people live in this country, and many have the Dutch citizenship. A
substantial number of Turkish originated people has the right to vote
in this country. Expelling Turkish candidates will evidently not give
way to support by the Turkish society in this country. It is not a
very well advised stance to annoy such a big proportion just before
the elections.

No doubt however, the Turkish minority in Europe is very less
interested in politics and away from defending their interests in
discussions. The Turkish MPs carry great importance for both their
ethnicities and their residual countries at this point. These people
need to be represented on the parliamentary level as well as many
other aspects of life. Integration of these people and a peaceful
co-existence in this country cannot only be provided by sociological
researches, no matter how successful they are. We need successful
Dutch-Turkish people in politics, academic field, business, sport,
arts, etc.

At this point, it is worth bringing into attention that while cars
were put into fire in France and several other neighbor countries,
the Netherlands was quite still. This was not a coincidence. All
in all, the minority groups in the Dutch society are much better
integrated to the major society in many aspects. However, we do not
have a guarantee that this will be the case forever. The removed MP
candidates do not only carry significance for the Turkish minority,
but are also very much important to the Netherlands. The Dutch
government has gold in its hands indeed. We cannot continue living
within boundaries. Countries need bilinguals in the contemporary world.

Concluding Remarks:

The Dutch society made important progression after the uneasy days
regarding the tension between minority and majority. The Dutch
establishment and society are among the most tolerable people with
their multicultural doctrine. Therefore, it is highly disappointing
that all these occur in this country. The decision of those parties
is rather ill-given in the stressful atmosphere of elections
than representing the Dutch opinion in general. The Netherlands is
geographically little, but there are many other indexes of measuring
how big a country is. A country, sending its soldiers to Uruzgan,
one of the most dangerous places in Afghanistan, apparently has some
significant ambitions in the international arena. The Netherlands can
take many initiatives in line with its worldwide positive reputation
rather than just copying what the trends without searching the reality.

References:

Albayrak Nebahat and Timmermans Frans, Zie de Fouten uit het Verleden
onder Ogen, Trouw, 4 October 2006.

De Armenisch-Turksche Kwestie, Algemeen Handelsblad, 25.05.1920. (The
name of the reporter is not given)

Laciner, Sedat. (2004) Turkler ve Ermeniler, ISRO Publciations, 2004.

SPEAKING OF NATO ACCESSION FOR GEORGIA INAPPROPRIATE NOW

PanARMENIAN.Net
17.10.2006 18:07 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Georgia’s active dialogue with the NATO does not mean
Georgia will become an Alliance member without fail, NATO Military
Committee Chair, General Ray Henault stated at a news conference
in Moscow. In his words, "Intense dialogue does not guarantee NATO
membership, but allows us holding talks with any state. The political
decision on admission of a state to the NATO is made on the basis of
a number of requirements, which should be met," Henault said.

He also added that among major requirements for a country, claiming
NATO membership, is sustaining good neighborly relations with adjacent
countries and a settled domestic political situation.

"Georgia has to solve unsettled matters with unrecognized republics
on its own, however in interaction with Russia. These matters refer to
domestic policy, and the state should solve these on its own. The NATO
is considering that matter as part of bilateral relations of Georgia
with surrounding states," the NATO Military Committee Chair said.

STATUE COMMEMORATING WORLD WAR I ERA MASSACRE OF ARMENIANS STOLEN

The Associated Press
October 14, 2006 Saturday 4:24 PM GMT

A statue commemorating the World War I-era massacre of Armenians in
Turkey was stolen, an official said Saturday, two days after French
lawmakers approved a bill that would make it a crime to deny that
the killings amounted to genocide.

The bronze monument, installed in front of the train station in the
Paris suburb of Chaville in 2002, disappeared between Friday night
and Saturday morning, said authorities for the Haut-de-Seine region.

The police have not ruled out the possibility that the statue, which
weighs several hundred pounds, was stolen to be sold as scrap metal,
said Stephane Topalian, who serves on the board of the local chapter
of the Armenian church.

However, Topalian stressed the timing of the robbery, which came
after France’s lower house of parliament on Thursday passed a bill
that make it a crime to deny the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman
Turks around the time of World War I amounted to genocide.

Under the bill, those who contest it was genocide would risk up to
a year in prison.

The legislation, which infuriated Turkey, passed 106-19.

President Jacques Chirac’s government opposed the bill, although it
did not use its majority in the lower house to vote it down. Instead,
most ruling party lawmakers did not vote on the text that was brought
by the opposition Socialist Party.

It still needs to be approved by the French Senate and the president
to become law.

Armenia accuses Turkey of massacring Armenians during World War I,
when Armenia was under the Ottoman Empire. Turkey says Armenians
were killed in civil unrest during the collapse of the empire, and
strongly objects to the killings being called genocide.

TWO THIRDS OF FRENCH AGAINST ARMENIAN BILL

Zaman, Turkey
Oct 16 2006

A public survey conducted in France has revealed that most of the
French public is against the Armenian bill passed in the French
National Assembly on Thursday. The Armenian bill makes it crime to
deny that an Armenian genocide occurred during World War I.

According to an online survey, 68 percent of respondents did not
welcome the Armenian bill.

Those who think that this bill serves an Armenian cause say that it is
"harmful" for France at the same time.

Only 26 percent of the respondents support the Armenian bill according
to the survey, while six percent refrained from expressing their views.

First the French Senate and then the President Jacques Chirac must
approve the bill before it can become law.

Today, Azerbaijan
Oct 13 2006

Suleyman Demirel: "Kocharyan said Armenia suffers neither Azerbaijan,
nor Karabakh, but Turkey"

13 October 2006 [20:22] – Today.Az

Turkey 9th president Suleyman Demirel’s exclusive interview to APA
Turkey bureau.

How do you appreciate the decision of France Parliament on a law
which makes it crime to deny so-called Armenian genocide?

It is a shame. It is France’s wrong stance on Turkey and Turkish
people. We criticize this decision. I do not believe this law will be
approved by the Senate and president. Otherwise France will lose the
friendship with Turkey.

What Turkey should do after such a decision?

We should immediately react to this. It is a problem of international
importance. Turkish people express solidarity in this problem. We
will never forget this.

How do you appreciate Turkey-Azerbaijan relation?

Turkey and Azerbaijan are a nation in two states. Our friendship is
forever. I wish Azerbaijanis happiness and peace.

Is there a relation between France Parliament’s decision and Nagorno
Karabakh conflict?

Kocharyan told me that Armenians suffer neither Azerbaijan, nor
Garabagh, but Turkey. I replied that if you break off relations with
Azerbaijan we will do the same with Armenia. But for Turkey Armenians
make the world enemy to Azerbaijan.

An American once blamed Azerbaijanis for Nagorno Garabagh conflict. I
replied that the real invaders are Armenians; they kill Azerbaijanis,
destroy cities and villages.

Armenians occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan territory. Is it possible
to liberate them?

Azerbaijan should increase its economical power. You should maintain
peace and avoid hostilities for some time. No country will support us
in current situation if we wage war.

Orkhan Pamuk won the Nobel Prize for literature. What is your view on
this?

We are very glad that Turkish writer won this prize. Turkey is a
democratic country and people can react differently. I congratulate
Orkhan Pamuk.

URL:

ITN News, UK
Oct 13 2006

Turkey reels after French genocide vote

9.29, Fri Oct 13 2006

Turkey’s EU ambitions are in doubt after France voted to make it a
crime to deny that Armenians suffered genocide at the hands of
Ottoman Turks during World War One. (Pic: Reuters)

The vote has not been supported by the French government and the
upper house is not expected to ratify it, but Turkey has warned the
damage has already been done to relations between the two countries.

Turkey continues to deny accusations of the genocide of some 1.5
million Armenians.

And it argues the French vote has exposed anti-Turkey feelings which
will undermine pro-EU liberals and bolster Turkish nationalists.

But French Parliament member Roland Blum said he thought the vote
would rectify a double standard in recognising parts of history.

He said: "This is not possible to have two categories of genocide,
Jewish genocide which has been always condemned while Armenian
genocide has been condemned only in some cases."

France is believed to have the largest Armenian immigrant community
in western Europe, with up to half a million people of Armenian
descent living there.

Armenpress

PROSECUTORS PROMISE AMNESTY TO ALL MILITARY DODGERS IF
THEY TURN IN FOR SERVICE

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 13, ARMENPRESS: Armenia’s chief
prosecutor Aghvan Hovsepian has instructed his
subordinates across Armenia to drop criminal
prosecution of those military service dodgers who will
turn in for their mandatory service during the autumn
call-up period.
A spokeswoman for the office of the prosecutor
general, Sona Truzian, said the office has called on
all Armenian males who are avoiding mandatory 24-month
military service to seize this opportunity, to get rid
of a status of a man on the wanted list and serve
their homeland.
The office of the prosecutor general has also urged
the parents of dodgers to press their sons to turn in
and do their service.

PUNCTUATED BY LIFE AND DEATH

The Northern Echo, UK
Oct 10 2006

[parts omitted]

Almost unnoticed amid the English breast beating, Armenia held Finland
to a goalless draw in Group A of the European Championship on Saturday,
before a crowd of 7,500.

The modern day Armenia is reckoned the likely site of the Garden of
Eden. For Ian Porterfield, it was probably only half way to paradise.

Sunderland’s goal scoring hero of the 1973 FA Cup final is continuing
his global football education, as we noted the other week, by becoming
Armenia’s national coach.

The Armenian league has just eight teams, three of which are
contemplating academies. There’s not a lot of choice.

"Armenian football is relatively new," says Porterfield. "The
future, if not the immediate future, is bright. It would be an
unbelievable feat for us to finish in the top two; I’d just like us
to be respected."

HEADBUTT RULING MARS DARCHINYAN’S VICTORY
by Grantlee Kieza

The Courier Mail (Australia)
October 9, 2006 Monday
First with the news Edition

AUSTRALIA’S IBF world flyweight champion Vic Darchinyan showed
yet again that he is one of the most dominant titleholders in
boxing, breaking the jaw and abruptly terminating the challenge of
American-based Filipino Glenn Donaire in Las Vegas yesterday.

It was a typically one-sided fight for the Armenian-born southpaw as
he forced Donaire to quit midway through round six.

Darchinyan, 30, decked Donaire at the end of round four with a short
right and kept doling out punishment until the fight was halted as
Donaire turned away in surrender.

But in a controversial ending, Darchinyan was awarded a technical
decision rather than a knockout after the referee, Tony Weeks, ruled
Donaire’s jaw was broken by a headbutt and not a punch.

Darchinyan was furious about the ruling because it robbed him of
another KO after his five previous world title wins had all been
by stoppages.

He is now unbeaten in 27 fights, with 21 wins by KO, though he will
forever argue that it should be 22.

Television replays showed no headbutt, only Donaire being hit at will
with rights and lefts from the Sydney Olympian, who is probably the
hardest-punching fighter in the world, pound for pound.

"It was not a headbutt," Darchinyan said.

"Donaire is a smart guy. I hurt him and he didn’t want any more. I
hit him on the chin with a punch, not a headbutt.

"This should have been a knockout on my record, not a decision win.

If I knew it was going to finish like this I would have knocked him
out much sooner."

It was the first fight for Darchinyan without regular trainer Jeff
Fenech. He was trained by long-time cornerman Billy Hussein.

Darchinyan says he is confident he can win world titles at six weight
divisions all the way up to junior-lightweight (59kg) and is now
targeting IBF bantamweight champ Rafael Marquez, of Mexico.