Kerry Hints At ‘Path Forward’ In Karabakh Conflict

KERRY HINTS AT ‘PATH FORWARD’ IN KARABAKH CONFLICT

Tengri News, Kazakhstan
June 4 2013

US Secretary of State John Kerry hinted Monday at a possible way
forward in another of the world’s “frozen conflicts,” saying Washington
still aimed to help end the Nagorny-Karabakh dispute, AFP reports.

Meeting with his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov, Kerry
briefly refocused his peace-making ambitions away from the Middle
East towards the disputed enclave run by Armenia-backed separatists.

“This is a frozen conflict, as we call it — one that threatens the
stability of the region and one that we need to deal with,” Kerry
said. “The last thing we want is a return to war and to conflict.”

Armenia and Azerbaijan remain locked in a stand-off over the enclave,
which ethnic Armenian forces seized during a war in the early 1990s
that killed nearly 30,000 people and forced another million to flee
their homes.

“I believe there is a path forward and we will continue to work
quietly and patiently in an effort to try to encourage the parties
to be able to take either confidence-building measures that may get
you further down the road, or to find a way towards a settlement,”
the top US diplomat said.

He stressed that both sides “have been close before, and at the
last minute things have happened that have denied everybody that
opportunity.”

Mammadyarov said that with Washington’s help, Baku believed it could
“successfully move forward” on many challenges “including one of
the biggest problems, the resolution with the neighbor, Armenia,
with whom we are definitely interested to live in peace, with dignity.”

Speaking in English, the Azerbaijani minister said his country wanted
to leave the “negative outcome of the conflict… in the past. And
we’ll look to the bright future of successful cooperation living next
to each other as a good neighborhood.”

But no final peace deal has been signed since a 1994 ceasefire, and
flush with petrodollars, oil-rich Azerbaijan has threatened to take
back the disputed region by force if negotiations do not yield results.

Armenia in turn has vowed massive retaliation against any military
action.

Frequent clashes between Armenian and Azerbaijani troops along their
border and in Nagorny-Karabakh — with 15 people reportedly killed
last year from both sides — highlight the risk of a fresh conflict
between the arch-foes.

Kerry was also due to meet with Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandian on Tuesday, but State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki
said there was no new US initiative in the pipeline.

http://en.tengrinews.kz/politics_sub/Kerry-hints-at-path-forward-in-Karabakh-conflict–19952/

The Perpetual ‘Other’: Nisanyan Discusses Court Sentence, Minority P

THE PERPETUAL ‘OTHER’: NISANYAN DISCUSSES COURT SENTENCE, MINORITY POLITICS IN TURKEY
By Nanore Barsoumian

June 4, 2013

On May 22, Turkish-Armenian columnist Sevan Nisanyan was sentenced
to more than 13 months in jail for a blog post he wrote in September
2012. The Istanbul court found Nisanyan guilty of “publicly insulting
the religious values of part of the population” for having written:
“Mocking an Arab leader who centuries ago claimed to have contacted
God and made political, financial, and sexual benefits out of this
is not a crime of hatred. It is an almost kidergarten-level case of
what we call freedom of expression.”

Sevan Nisanyan (Photo by Iris Nisanyan) Nisanyan’s statement was in
response to proposed “hate crime” bills in Turkey following the release
of “The Innocence of Muslims,” a controversial film denigrating the
Prophet Muhammad, which gave rise to demonstrations around the World,
and in some cases resulted in injuries and deaths.

Over the years, Nisanyan has remained defiant in the face of death
threats, court cases, and hate mail. In 2010, the alleged coup
plot known as Operation Sledgehammer specified eight targets for
assassination, including Nisanyan and three other Armenians: Hrant
Dink, Etyen Mahcupyan, and Archbishop Mesrob Mutafyan. An entrepreneur,
Nisanyan has faced demolition orders and over two dozen criminal
charges–carrying 50 years in prison–for his hotels in Sirince,
Izmir. In 2010, his comments on the Armenian Genocide during a
television program were followed by the suspension of the station that
aired the show. The order came from the Radio and Television Supreme
Council (RTUK), which found that the comments “humiliated the Republic
of Turkey.” Two years later, RTUK fined CNN Turk for comments made
by Nisanyan that were found to be “insulting and injurious”–once
again in the context of the film, “The Innocence of Muslims.”

The recipient of the 2004 Freedom of Thought Award by Turkey’s
Human Rights Association, Nisanyan wears many hats. Aside from his
involvement in journalism and the hotel business, he has published
a widely popular guidebook to small hotels in Turkey. As a linguist,
his research on the old and new names of places in Turkey yielded a
book and an online toponymical index.

In the following interview with the Armenian Weekly, conducted on June
3, Nisanyan discusses the recent court sentence, freedom of expression,
minority politics, and his struggle to define himself.

***

Nanore Barsoumian–What prompted your reaction to the proposed laws
on hate speech following the controversial film, “The Innocence
of Muslims?”

Sevan Nisanyan–Let me make it clear that my article was not about the
truth or falsity of Muhammad’s prophet-hood. I’d find that childish.

My article was about the right to question the truth of Muhammad’s
prophecy. Some people may think Muhammad was an impostor, or a bad
moral example, a joke, or whatever. Do they have the right to say so
openly and without fear? That is the issue.

Last autumn, several people very close to the prime minister [Recep
Tayyip Erdogan] started pontificating loudly on the need for a
“Hate Speech Law” curtailing disrespect of religious values. I found
that extremely worrying. Prime Minister Erdogan has grown fond of
legislating Islamic morality on issues like abortion, adultery,
alcoholic drinks, religious education, and blasphemy. I thought it
was a cheap shot to equate “hate speech” with “anti-Islamic speech,”
and I felt somebody must stand up and say this.

N.B.–How would you define hate speech?

S.N.–I believe freedom of speech is a paramount value. Criminalizing
“hate speech” means limiting that freedom. It can be legitimate only
if it concerns expressions that directly and tangibly endanger the
rights, the liberty, and the security of some individuals or groups.

Hate speech is only a threat if it actually puts some people in peril.

It is silly to talk about criminal hate speech where the object of
hate is powerful majorities or dominant ideas.

N.B.–Have you also been critical of other religions or religious
figures?

S.N.–I am not in the habit of discussing religious belief. Clearly
people hold all sorts of irrational beliefs, and it is a waste of
time to try to disabuse them of their faith. Religious belief only
becomes fair game when it tries to impose itself by force or by
legal subterfuge.

N.B.–In February 2012, tens of thousands of people gathered in Taksim
Square in Istanbul for anti-Armenian protests. Some of the signs and
slogans included, “You are all Armenians, you are all bastards.” Among
the speakers at the rally was Interior Minister Idris Naim Sahin. Are
prosecutions based on hate speech applied across the board, or are
they reserved for certain issues?

S.N.– Mr. Sahin was something of a loose cannon, and he was fired
because of that. But it is true that all sorts of outrageous libel
is considered acceptable in this country, so long as the libeler
is part of established power and the libelee is in the minority,
whether religious, ethnic, sexual, or lifestyle-related.

I don’t believe anyone has ever been prosecuted in Turkey for
advocating the murder, mayhem, or massacre of Armenians, Jews, Kurds,
atheists, gays, or liberals. Thousands, on the other hand, were
prosecuted and convicted in the past for “insulting Turkishness” under
the notorious Article 301 of the penal code. Now, “insulting Islam”
seems to be replacing that old juggernaut as a favorite instrument
to hit dissidents with.

N.B.–Back in October, before a criminal case was launched, Deputy
Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag said, “Swearing and insults can never be
assumed as opinion. Only ill-spirited people show such delirium…it
is a crime defined within the Turkish Penal Code. If [the prosecutors]
haven’t yet, then I’m denouncing it from here: I’m announcing a crime.

This is a typical hate crime. It is hate crime and it is a crime that
is defined in our penal code.” Why would a government official make
such a statement?

S.N.–Mr. Bozdag is a mouthpiece of the prime minister. His comments
are usually taken to represent the views of his boss. I believe that,
after 11 years in office, Mr. Erdogan has become over-confident of
his power. I find that disturbing, and even potentially dangerous.

N.B.–You also received criticism from within the Armenian community.

Bishop Sahag Masalyan from Istanbul reportedly said your statement
was provocative and offended societal peace. There have been other
voices of criticism as well. How do you read that?

S.N.– Caution is second nature to most Armenians in this country. One
cannot blame them, I suppose.

I have no pretense of representing the Armenian community, or even a
segment or subset of the Armenian community. I represent myself and
nothing else. So it is a little pathetic that the Armenian Church
feels obliged to comment on my conduct just because I happen to have
a surname that ends with “yan.”

N.B.–You are often at the center of controversy in Turkey. Why is
it that you are constantly pushing boundaries?

S.N.–It is fun. I enjoy it. I also think that I am performing a
useful social service.

N.B.–As a writer, a commentator, a member of a group that has
suffered persecution in those lands, how do you view your role,
and how do you define yourself?

S.N.– A few months ago I published my autobiography, whose dominant
theme was my lifelong inability to define myself. I don’t like to
define myself. I like being the perpetual “other.”

I suppose being Armenian contributed at least partly to that attitude.

I lived in the States for 10 years; with Yale and Columbia degrees,
I think I had a bright academic career ahead of me. But I never felt
at home in America. I feel perfectly at home in a country where most
people would rather see me go. A paradox? I don’t think so. I like
the precariousness of my situation. I think I contribute a lot to
the society I live in.

I am glad to say, a lot of people here seem to appreciate this. Some
50,000 people follow my blog and Twitter accounts. My books sell well.

My etymological dictionary is now recognized as the standard work of
reference in its field. My village, Å~^irince, prospers, largely thanks
to me. My hotel is probably the most widely admired in the country. I
build architectural follies as I fancy; I am increasingly commissioned
to build them for third parties, too. What else could one want?

http://www.armenianweekly.com/2013/06/04/the-perpetual-other-nisanyan-discusses-court-sentence-minority-politics-in-turkey/

Karabakh Speaker And Czech MPs Discuss Electoral System

KARABAKH SPEAKER AND CZECH MPS DISCUSS ELECTORAL SYSTEM

June 04, 2013 | 18:32

STEPANAKERT. – Chairman of the National Assembly of the
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) Ashot Ghulyan on Tuesday received a
group of deputies from the Czech Republic who are on a visit to NKR.

Welcoming the Czech guests, Speaker Ghulyan stressed the importance
of such contacts, which, according to him, provides an opportunity
for receiving information the lawmakers are interested in.

Czech MPs showed interest in the legislative field and the electoral
system of the NKR, activities, structure of the National Assembly and
the representation of political forces, especially the socio-political
life of the country and other issues on which the Speaker of the
National Assembly gave a full explanation.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

Haykakan Zhamanak: SAS Group Presents False Invoices While Importing

HAYKAKAN ZHAMANAK: SAS GROUP PRESENTS FALSE INVOICES WHILE IMPORTING PRODUCTS

11:23 ~U 04.06.13

Haykakan Zhamanak paper writes that the studies by the Armenian Control
Chamber showed that few companies have presented false invoices while
importing products.

The paper says they have lowered the real prices of the products to
pay smaller tax during customs clearance procedure. The paper says
among these companies is SAS Group belonging to Republican party MP
Artak Sargsyan.

Armenian News – Tert.am

Artak Budaghyan’s Condition Remains Grave – DM Spokesperson

ARTAK BUDAGHYAN’S CONDITION REMAINS GRAVE – DM SPOKESPERSON

11:42 ~U 04.06.13

Defense Ministry’s spokesperson Artsrun Hovanissian has written in
his facebook page that the condition of the wounded Colonel Artak
Budaghyan shot near Syunik governor’s house in Goris remains grave
with no changes being registered during these days.

He wrote that he may undergo another operation.

Referring to the situation on the contact line, he said the enemy
creates new tensions, but gets worthy confrontation and is being
thrown back. The Armenian Armed Forces fully control the situation.

http://www.tert.am/en/news/2013/06/04/facebook-artsrun-hovhannisyan/

Second Fatality, Thousands Injured As Police Try To Curb Turkey Prot

SECOND FATALITY, THOUSANDS INJURED AS POLICE TRY TO CURB TURKEY PROTESTS

12:13 ~U 04.06.13

A second fatality has been confirmed as protests in Turkey enter their
fifth day. With several thousands already reported injured Turks
continue to flood social media with video, images, and allegations
of police brutality, the RT reports.

On Monday, the Union of Turkish Doctors confirmed the death of
22-year-old Abdullah Comert in the city of Antakya, which is located
in the province of Hatay, near Turkey’s border with Syria.

The fatality was the second so far to be confirmed since protests
flared up on Friday in Istanbul and Ankara, and sprouted demonstrations
nationwide.

According to Turkish news reports Comert died of injuries sustained
after being shot by unidentified gunmen, though many users via social
media were placing the blame on local police forces.

The BBC has reported that Comert was a member of the youth wing of
the opposition Republican People’s Party, but did not speculate as
to the exact cause of death.

Earlier on Monday, the Turkish Doctors’ Union announced that
20-year-old Mehmet Ayvalitas, the first reported fatality since Friday,
was hit by a car in the Mayis district of Istanbul on Sunday.

Though many Turkish social media users again placed blame on police
forces for the death of Ayvalitas, any such link had yet to be
confirmed. According to the BBC the vehicle in question ignored
warnings to stop and ploughed into a crowd of demonstrators.

Armenian News – Tert.am

Here’s What You Need to Know about the Clashes in Turkey

HERE’S WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE CLASHES IN TURKEY

Has the government of Prime Minister Erdogan finally succumbed to
the authoritarian impulses that doomed so many other Turkish leaders
before him?

BY FIRAT DEMIR | JUNE 1, 2013

ANKARA, May 31 — As I write these words in my Ankara hotel in the
early morning hours, I can still hear the distant voices of massed
demonstrators chanting slogans a few blocks from the presidential
palace and the prime minister’s residence. Thousands of people are
continuing to protest the government and its deeply undemocratic
actions. The TV is showing images of the brutal police attack against
peaceful demonstrators that took place earlier today in Istanbul’s
Taksim Square.

The clashes in Istanbul go on as I write: Emergency rooms in the
hospitals near Taksim are struggling to cope with the hundreds of
people injured by the police. Earlier today in Ankara, where the
protests have so far remained largely peaceful, I’ve watched protestors
linking arms to form human chains blocking the streets.

What struck me the most was the reaction from ordinary people. Rather
than protesting the snarled traffic caused by the demonstrators,
Ankarans passing by in their cars supported the protestors by honking
and waving victory signs from their windows.

Over the past few weeks I’ve been taking some of my students from the
United States on a trip around Turkey. The aim of our trip has been to
explore the pros and cons of the country’s development experience. We
started with the early days of the republic (overshadowed by the war
for independence, ethnic cleansing, authoritarianism, forced cultural
modernization, and economic failures) and have worked our way up to
the challenges that shape the country today (democratization, the
Kurdish conflict, the rise of the current Islamist government, and the
tensions between secular Kemalism and religious politics). I’ve done
my best to help my students see the forty shades of blue separating
the empty half of the glass from the part that’s full.

There’s no denying that Turkey is now a thriving emerging market
economy with a vibrant civil society. Istanbul last year attracted
more tourists than Amsterdam or Rome, ranking right behind London and
Paris in the number of tourist arrivals. There are more arts concerts
in Istanbul in a given month than in a year in most E.U. member
states. On the economic front, the inflation rate has been brought
down from 100 percent just a few years ago to below 10 percent today.

Public debt is down to manageable levels; this month Ankara paid back
its last remaining loan to the IMF. Interest rates are at record lows.

More than 98 percent of all Turkish exports are in manufacturing
products, and Turkey now ranks among the top producers of household
durable goods and automobiles in Europe.

On the political side, Turkey has been now more than 30 years without
a full-fledged military coup, and the country has had free elections
(despite the generals’ interventions) since 1950. The military appears
to have finally returned to barracks for good, and its leaders show
little inclination to return to the past. The Ergenekon trials,
which have seen once-unaccountable generals compelled to defend their
actions in court, are a welcome sign for those of us who have long
pushed for Turkish society to adopt the political and legal norms
worthy of modern democracies. I’ve supported efforts to reform the
judicial system, making judges and attorneys more aware of their
responsibility to defend individual freedoms rather than the interests
of a small military-bureaucratic elite who see themselves as the true
owners of Turkey.

As for the current government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
his performance does earn a top grade in at least some respects.

Without question his greatest achievement has been his opening to
the Kurds. Erdogan’s AK Party has passed more laws than any previous
governments recognizing the rights of Kurds in Turkey, including
opening a Kurdish channel on public TV and starting Kurdish language
and literature programs in universities. Yet even these positive
steps pale in regard to his dramatic negotiations with the Kurdish
guerilla group PKK — a truly groundbreaking event. Today’s Turkey,
in short, is very far indeed from the state that was once known,
almost proverbially, as the “sick man of Europe.”

Recently, however, these positive developments have been overshadowed
by less promising trends that are causing citizens to feel increasing
anxiety about the future of the country. When I started the trip with
my students just a few weeks ago, I was still, on balance, positive
about the prospects for Turkey. But now that’s changed.

With no public consultation or discussion, the Erdogan government
decided earlier this month to approve a project that would transform
Taksim Square into a shopping center, rerouting the traffic that
now passes through this vital hub on the European side of Istanbul
through tunnels underneath. The news of the project has generated a
flood of angry responses from the public, all of which the government
has uniformly ignored. Among other things, the proposed redevelopment
plan will wipe out one of the few remaining greenspaces in the densely
packed area — the latest in a long series of similarly insensitive
urban design schemes.

The Taksim plan follows another controversial plan to build a
gigantic and spectacularly ugly new bridge next to the current site
of the Galata Bridge, one of Istanbul’s longest-standing architectural
landmarks. The bridge project is the brainchild of Istanbul’s Islamist
mayor, an Erdogan ally, who designed it himself. The almost-completed
bridge has already completely transformed the silhouette of the old
city. Apart from the fact that this is the mayor’s sole attempt to
dabble in architecture, the complete absence of any public consultation
or competition for the project has confirmed, for many Turks, Erdogan’s
seeming aspiration to crown himself as the new sultan of Turkey. The
ruling party’s misguided ambitions for Galata and Taksim come after
a series of demolitions of 500-year-old Istanbul neighborhoods such
as Sulukule, Tarlabasi, or Balat that have fed public discontent —
particularly since many of those who benefited also appear to have
unseemly links with the ruling Islamists. Just to make matters worse,
last month the government also finalized a contract for a new nuclear
power point despite mass public opposition to nuclear power throughout
the country.

Erdogan’s decisions regarding a proposed third bridge over the
Bosphorus and a new Istanbul airport have followed similar lines. The
government announced that construction of the bridge and airport will
entail the destruction of one of the most important green spaces of the
city — including the loss of more than 300,000 trees. Just this week
the president and the prime minister unilaterally announced that they
have decided to name the bridge after one of the most controversial
Ottoman sultans in Turkish history, Yavuz Sultan Selim.

Selim is remembered, among other things, for ordering the mass
slaughter of tens of thousands of members of the Alevite sect, who
today comprise Turkey’s biggest religious minority.

All of these issues added up to a highly flammable brew of discontent
— which the government then ignited by declaring a de facto state
of martial law in Istanbul in order to ban people from celebrating
May Day in Taksim Square. The police and the governor of Istanbul
stopped all ferry travel on the Bosphorus, raised two bridges on
the Golden Horn, stopped all bus and metro service to and from the
Taksim neighborhood, and unleashed waves of tear gas on the roughly
3,000 demonstrators who still managed to reach Taksim square for
the protests that day. Erdogan justified his decision by saying that
those who went to Taksim aimed only to protest his government, not
to celebrate May Day — as if this somehow justified his actions.

Just to make everything worse, the prime minister announced last week a
new set of strict restrictions on the consumption and sale of alcohol
in Turkey to “protect new generations from such un-Islamic habits”
and raise them according to the Turkish and Islamic culture.

While Erdogan’s many fans among the Turkish electorate probably
welcome such measures, it has aggravated the many others who prefer
a secular lifestyle and reject the imposition of religious rules on
a diverse society.

But there’s another issue that has is making many Turks wary of the
current administration’s policies. For a long time now the government
has been providing direct (though undisclosed) support to Syrian
opposition groups — support that has taken a variety of forms short
of supplying the rebels with actual weaponry. Though Turks have little
sympathy for the government in Damascus, that doesn’t mean that they
automatically sympathize with those fighting against it. Many Turks
correspondingly view the two car bomb attacks that killed 51 people in
town of Hatay close to the border with Syria on May 11 as evidence that
Erdogan’s policies may be drawing Turkey into the war. The Turkish
government responded to the bombings all too characteristically:
by imposing a ban on any press coverage of the incident.

The tipping point in this long series of disconcerting events came
when Erdogan announced the plans for Taksim. He has personally
pushed the development project forward despite the disapproval of
the government’s own regulatory agencies, who have cast doubt on its
legality, and even some potential investors, who have decided against
participating in the scheme due to the widespread public opposition.

The current clashes are, quite simply, a grassroots response to the
top-down actions of the Erdogan government. The general discontent
has now morphed into the anti-government demonstrations that are now
being suppressed by tear gas and police batons in Istanbul and Ankara.

I am afraid that the government of Prime Minister Erdogan, like so
many others before him in this country, has finally succumbed to the
siren calls of dictatorship. Social engineering and authoritarian
decision-making have now become the government’s top policy tools. The
Islamists seem to have replaced the Kemalist dreams of authoritarian
modernization with their own dreams of authoritarian Islamization. But
perhaps there is a bright spot in all of this. I suspect that the
current protests in Ankara and Istanbul will soon spread to other
cities. If that happens, it could very well mark the beginning of
the end of Erdogan’s ambitions to govern against the will of his
own citizenry.

ADEM ALTAN/Stringer

SUBJECTS: POLITICS, HUMAN RIGHTS, ISLAM, TURKEY, DEMOCRACY,
DEMOCRACY LAB

Firat Demir teaches in the Department of Economics at the University
of Oklahoma.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/01/here_s_what_you_need_to_know_about_the_clashes_in_turkey?page=full

ANKARA: Qandil Has Terms: Kurdish Rebel Leader Discusses Expectation

QANDIL HAS TERMS: KURDISH REBEL LEADER DISCUSSES EXPECTATIONS FROM PEACE PROCESS WITH TURKEY

Taraf, Turkey
June 1 2013

Interview by Ceyda Karan with Murat Karayilan on Mt Qandil

According to Murat Karayilan the most important condition for the
Kurds to go along with the presidential system is democratization.

We are in the Qandil Mountains in the region known as the “Medya
Defense Areas.” We are sounding out the region while the PKK [Kurdistan
People’s Congress, KGK] is leaving Turkey in groups.

Accordingly, together with Kurd journalist colleagues Erdal Er and
Gunay Aslan we got the opportunity to interview KCK [Assembly of
Communities of Kurdistan] Executive Council Chairman Murat Karayilan.

Under the shade of a huge walnut tree in the Qandil Mountains we
discussed the withdrawal process, the conference for peace and
democracy, what Karayilan calls “The New Turkey” as well as the
campaign to have Abdullah Ocalan set free, the AKP’s [Justice and
Development Party] desires for a presidential system plus regional
developments starting with Syria.

Common Solution Project For All Component Parts

Karayilan says: “The Kurd problem is Turkey’s problem. All those people
and circles in Turkey who feel responsible, who favor the peoples
living together, who favor fraternity and the peoples having equal
freedom need to consider the solution their duty. That is why our
leadership suggested four conferences.” However, he underscores that
there is no manipulation on their part concerning the conferences:
“That is not the case. The groups there, the forces included in the
conference ran it on their own initiative.” He believes the first
conference “attained a certain level of response.”

“I think that as a first step it was a success, it was positive.

However, it could have had more scope. It should be expanded and
continued. For example, I think that by taking a second step it could
have greater scope and could be an important effort that targets those
groups that were unable to attend.” He says that every group needs
to clarify their proposals through discussion and come up with a text
that can be called “the common solution project for all the component
parts.” He continues: “Perhaps at the top there is a process that
is playing out as these forces clashing. Correct. However, the only
real way to find a deep-rooted and lasting solution to this problem is
through social accord. In other words, it is a problem that can only be
fixed by the inclusion of all social forces with everyone contributing
as much as they can, showing humility, developing empathy and with
everybody making a real effort to fix this century-old problem.”

Wise Persons And Conference Not “Rivals”

So, is there any “rivalry” between the planned conferences and the
Wise Persons process that the government came up with to sell the
solution process to the Turkish public? Karayilan said: “There could
have been rivalry but really all those sides who genuinely favor a
solution to the problem need to treat these conferences as positive.”

He adds: “Just as we find the Wise Persons activity to be lacking we
nevertheless see it as something positive. Why? We thought it was
going to have a much broader function, but it has been shaped with
a very different format and it is operating differently. All the
same, it is a good thing, we say. This is because they are trying
to generate a mindset in favor of the solution. They are trying to
convince people. This really is a good thing. All we are saying is
that its scope could have been different. Actually, the other side
should be thinking like that. So, this is a good activity. Now though,
a process that includes all the forces of democracy in Turkey, the
left-wing groups, the Alevi groups, other identities, the Armenians,
the Assyrians, the Suryanis, in fact all the groups that have been
kept out of the system until now, can of course develop much better.

If the other side really is in favor of a solution it really should
not ignore this.”

The AKP Wants To Do Everything Its Own Way

Karayilan criticizes the AKP at this point: “The AKP seems to want to
do everything its own way. It wants to drive everything itself under
its own influence and its own supervision. If a problem has two sides
to it then both sides needs to have the initiative. But while the
AKP is trying to direct the process like this its approach is that of
treating the other side as a back-up, and this is unacceptable. Nobody
is anybody’s back-up. They need to make it easier for all those
components that need to play a role to be able to play that role.”

Emphasis On “New Turkey”

Karayilan emphasizes the “New Turkey” saying: “If we really want to
develop a process of social accord, we need to include all of this
society’s components like it or not, especially the left-wing ones,
the social democrat groups and all those groups that have been kept
out of the system and even harmed by it until now so that we can form
a new Turkey. I mean, if we really are talking about forming a new
Turkey what is this new Turkey going to be like? Is it going to take
shape only with a handful of projects being run by the AKP in its
line of thought? No. New Turkey is only possible with the powerful,
initiative-taking and active participation of all social groups and
the political will that speaks for them. Some people are saying the
AKP is running the show so we should wait and see what the AKP is going
to do. That approach is wrong. No. Everybody needs to be included and
active and influential. I think that would be the correct approach.”

Gulen Community Should Come Along Too

We ask who the other groups were whose participation was hoped for:
“Does this include political Islamists, the Gulen Community and the
business world?” Karayilan’s answer was interesting: “Included of
course, why not? They can come along. This problem is all of Turkey’s
problem, not just the problem of the left. This first formation in a
way shaped the left’s perspective. Common ground was formed. It can
now grow and become broader. There could be effort to this end. For
example, with a second step you could work to include even more diverse
groups. This would produce an even more refined solution project,
one that everybody could take charge of.”

On The Contrary, We Understand The Process Better Than Anyone

We ask about the government’s criticism of Karayilan in particular
Yalcin Akdogan’s comment of “he misunderstands the process.” Karayilan
appears reluctant to engage in polemics. He says he does not want to
create more problems for the process. However, he does stress: if we
really had misunderstood the process we would not be at this point
now. I can say that he has got it all wrong, that we understand the
process very well indeed and that we have tried to read the spirit
of the times correctly.”

What The CHP And MHP Are Taking Advantage Of Karayilan finds fault
with the way the CHP [Republican People’s Party] is criticizing the
government saying, “The process is not transparent.” “The AKP has yet
to present its own solution project. Actually, the process is more
transparent than the previous one, more transparent than Oslo. But
not entirely. The reason for this is that the AKP has not clearly
presented the public with the government’s or the state’s perspective
on a solution or its project. That is why some groups are asking what
is going on. Furthermore, those who are opposed to the process are
taking advantage of this and adopting an even more critical approach.

In fact, some part of the CHP and the MHP [Nationalist Action Party]
are exploiting this. Yet, if what is wanted is presented clearly there
is nothing here that the Turkish people will be offended by. We are
not talking about Turkey breaking up but about a project that will
cements Turkey’s voluntary and lasting unity. We think it is wrong
to portray giving the Kurds their rights, which are universal and
natural rights, as being an under-the-table deal. I mean, I think
that should this be explained to the public in a more courageous
fashion it would provide an answer to those types of criticism.”

Let Everything Be Discussed Openly

We ask Karayilan about criticism to the effect that in Turkey the
people learn about developments from him and not from the government:
“We actually share our opinions with the public as much as our means
will allow. There is nothing off limits for us but there is this:
Let us say there is something that has been discussed and debated by
both sides. We would naturally never fully disclose anything in a
way that would disturb the other side. That would not be nice. But
it is our wish that the projects be discussed openly. That is the
right thing to do.”

Karayilan’s New Turkey

So, does the “New Turkey” that Karayilan talks about rest on the
nation-state model? Karayilan first counts the Kurd problems and
the democratization of Turkey as inseparable parts: “New Turkey
should be a democratic country. It should a pluralist, egalitarian
and libertarian country. We think that the Kurd problem can only be
given a permanent solution on this basis. Turkey as a true democracy
means a solution for the Kurd problem.”

Afterwards, he stresses self-rule and argues with the French example
that the central state structures are weak now: “The world’s first
centrist nation-state was founded in France in 1789. After that, many
countries took France as their example when carrying out bourgeois
national democratic revolutions. Turkey also took France as its
example. But for example when the President of France passed away what
did Mitterand say? He said just as there was a need for centralization
in the founding of France back then, so there is just as much need
for decentralization in France’s development today. And the island
of Corsica today is almost exemplary. It has its own parliament and
education in its own language. It has everything. This is happening
in France.”

According to Karayilan, this means “being a model” and not “break-up.”

France is not breaking up. It is a country that is taken as a model. A
model country for centralization, a single language, a single nation
etc. Today, though, it is developing local governance because it is
not possible for democratization to develop without first developing
the approach and the understanding of local government and developing
the means by which society can govern itself locally and be included.

Furthermore, social life is so rich now that it is difficult to govern
from a single center. This means that the economic structure that
has taken shape, in particular the level of science and technology
in this day and age, the improvements in the electro-technical field
and in the field of telecommunication; all these things have effected
radical changes in social life. Therefore, it has become difficult
to govern even one village or town from a single center. There is a
trend towards decentralization because people are seeing this.”

Presidential System Will Make Life Hard

In his interview with veteran journalist Hasan Cemal, Karayilan
said that the parliamentary system had already failed to introduce
democracy and so there was no harm in debating the “presidential
system.” Reminding him that within the PKK there was a powerful
leadership structure in which Ocalan was practically a “living legend,”
we ask Karayilan whether or not “the way of thinking in Turkey was
conducive to a presidential system in which all the mechanisms of
democratic control would function fully, or whether it might lead to
an authoritarian administration.” Karayilan says: “For one thing,
the problem is without doubt one of mindset. I mean, it is not
possible to create a social superstructure without a change in the
way of thinking.” He says the KCK system was created to develop local
administration not central. You can feel his concern at having his
comments on the presidential system interpreted as them being ready to
reach an agreement with the AKP. Karayilan says: “The Kurd problem is
one that is forcing a solution in a very urgent fashion. We think that
discussing the solution to this problem together with the question of
whether the system in Turkey should be parliamentary or presidential
all within the same context might create further problems. That is
not our preference. But while Turkey is being restructured it is best
not to look out of one window only. I mean, you need to discuss the
alternatives. That is what we meant by saying, ‘We are not necessarily
opposed to a presidential system.’ What we are in favor of actually
is this: The Kurd problem needs to be treated separately. That is true.

Turkey’s system problem needs to be discussed within the context of
democratization. But placing them both in the same basket and making
that basket heavier might make it harder to achieve a solution. That
is what worries us.”

Opposed To Turkish-Style Presidency

According to Karayilan, the Kurds have some terms for accepting a
“presidential system”: “What matters to us is democratization. I mean,
under any Turkish-style or Middle East-style presidential system in
which just one group has any say; there is no way such a system can
bring democracy or Turkey or be any use at all. We would never go
along with it. We are saying it would be correct to look for a system
that will bring democracy to Turkey and that if really has legal
underpinnings and local government and if initiatives are shared; if
it will bring maturity to the foundation for democratization and not
a tyrant, then yes it can be debated. In this respect, we are saying
that too much debate and putting this ahead of everything else will
cause a log-jam. Our proposal: do not lead with this.”

What Does Second Stage Expect?

Karayilan boasts that they have fulfilled to a significant degree their
responsibilities for the solution and that they will continue to do
so. “Look, there is the ceasefire, the release of captive soldiers,
and the most important decision of all, to decide to withdraw and put
that decision into practice. In this respect, a huge distance has been
covered in terms of developing the climate for democratic debate and
preparing the grounds needed for new steps to be taken. This first
stage is coming to an end particularly with the fast current that is
going to take place in the month ahead. It is over, really.” According
to Karayilan, the second stage needs to begin already: “The second
stage is all about the legal and constitutional topics pertaining to
fixing the Kurd problem. As a result, it is a period where the state
and the government need to do more of what needs to be done. We have
said this on many occasions. We expect this. We now expect the steps
that need to be taken to be put on the agenda.”

First Expectations Of Second Stage: The release Of prisoners, The
KCK Trials

We ask Karayilan about his expectations of the “second stage,” which
he says will begin next month. “The ball is now in the government’s
court. There are things that need to be done first. The government
is forcing itself to wait, but for what we cannot say. There was that
trip the United States and back. Most recently there was that period
of trying to determine or direct developments in the region.” He
says that before the constitution is changed there needs to be an
“annual clean up” and that the government has no more excuses left
not to take the democratization steps that it is going to take. He
lists his expectations.

He talks about the inmates in prison who have contracted fatal
illnesses: “They number in their dozens. I do not know for sure, but
close to 100. Normally, in any democratic and humanist county they
would be released because they are near the end of their lives or
they cannot make it under prison conditions. There have been times in
Turkey when sick prisoners are released on presidential orders. But
some sick prisoners are not released because they are Kurds. There
is discrimination. This discrimination needs to be over now. People
are dying in prison because they are Kurds. So, I think these kinds
of humanitarian steps ought to have been proposed by now.”

One other expectation the PKK has is for the trials relating to the
KCK remand prisoners to be dropped: “Again, a process has begun that
will take guns out of the equation entirely in the Kurd problem. This
was started by Leader Apo [Ocalan] and we are committed to seeing it
through. What happens then? Politics happens. Should that not require
politicians in prison to be released? Everybody knows that none of the
KCK prisoners have done anything illegal in their lives, not so much
as carry a knife. They are only inside because they were in politics.

Examples like this could have been a road cleaning. Again, at the heart
of the, in inverted commas, Counterterrorism Law is martial law in
Kurdistan. It is legislation for martial law. So, seeing that we want
to launch a new era should this not be done away with? It should be,
of course. The government could do this without breaking a sweat.

If it were to do this, this would give us confidence and give our
society confidence too. We would take even more courageous steps.”

Tomorrow: “Let Nobody Think we are Lowering our Sails”

[Translated from Turkish]

Salon du livre : le dernier des Manouchian très sollicité

Ouest-France
lundi 27 mai 2013

Salon du livre : le dernier des Manouchian très sollicité

« Les enfants, vous pourrez dire que vous avez vu l’un plus vieux
anciens combattants de France. » À 97 ans, Arsène Tchakarian, le
dernier des survivants des commandos de l’Affiche rouge, aura marqué
cette 5e édition du salon du livre. Pas facile d’interviewer quelqu’un
qui a risqué sa vie plus d’une centaine de fois dans l’« armée des
ombres ». C’est lui qui pose les questions : « Qu’est-ce que vous
savez de l’Affiche rouge ? Qui étaient ces gens ? Vous le savez ? Moi,
pas. Car on ne se connaissait pas. On ne se disait même pas nos noms,
nos prénoms. On pouvait être arménien, polonais, espagnol, hongrois,
catholiques ou juifs, on ne posait jamais de questions car c’était
interdit. Mais tous étaient instruits et courageux. »

Dans l’ombre de Missak Manouchian.C’est pour tous ces anonymes des
commandos de l’Affiche rouge qu’Arsène Tchakarian a pris son bton de
pèlerin : « Manouchian avait été mis à la tête mais ce n’est pas lui
qui nous commandait. C’est Michel, de son vrai nom Marcel Rajman, qui
nous a commandés dès le départ en 1943. Il avait 19 ans et a été
fusillé à 20 ans. On ne parle jamais de ces gars-là. Comme on ne dit
pas que 30 % étaient juifs. Oui, je suis Arménien, comme Manouchian,
mais c’est d’abord de mes camarades juifs dont je veux parler. Je
sais, ce que je dis, ça déplaît ».

Sauvé par un commissaire de police. Comment Arsène Tchakarian a-t-il
échappé à l’arrestation ? « Grce au père d’un ami, blessé en 1940 et
que j’avais aidé. Au moment de l’arrestation du commando, j’ai été
prévenu que les Allemands m’attendaient chez moi. Je suis allé voir
cet ami et son père m’a caché dans un endroit à Paris ». Des amis que
n’avaient pas les résistants juifs : « C’est pour ça que la majorité
des fusillés sont des juifs. »

Un dossier de légion d’honneur resté enfoui. Comment la France
l’a-t-elle remercié ? « Je n’attendais rien. Si, je suis officier de
l’armée française ». Et la légion d’honneur ? « J’ai fait le dossier
il y a trente ans. Il est resté dans les tiroirs d’un ministère. » Il
lui faudra attendre début 2012 pour être fait officier de la légion
d’honneur.

Que lui reste-t-il du groupe Manouchian aujourd’hui« La fraternité
»,répond Arsène Tchakarian. En interrogeant :« Où est cette fraternité
maintenant ?»

Russian Officer Dies in Car Crash in Armenia

Russian Officer Dies in Car Crash in Armenia

00:38 03/06/2013
Tags: Gyumri, Armenia

YEREVAN, June 3 (RIA Novosti) – An officer stationed at a Russian
military base in Armenia died in a car accident on Sunday, Armenia’s
emergencies ministry reported.
The accident occurred in the city of Gyumri where Russia’s 102nd
military base is located. According to local media, a BMW sedan
swerved from the road and turned over.
`The victim of the accident, Senior Lieutenant Atavin, who served at
the base headquarters, died on the way to the hospital from sustained
injuries,’ the ministry said in a statement.

Police is investigating the circumstances of the accident, the statement said.

The Gyumri base, near Armenia’s border with Turkey, is part of the
post-Soviet Commonwealth of Independent States air defense system and
is home to 5,000 personnel, S-300 air defense systems and Mikoyan
MiG-29 fighters.

In 2010, Russia and Armenia signed amendments to a 1995 bilateral
treaty, extending Russia’s use of the 102nd base through 2044.