Author: Vorskanian Yeghisabet

‘THERE WAS NO ARMENIAN GENOCIDE’
Orhan Tung, Press Counsellor, Turkish embassy in London

New Statesman, UK

Oct 23 2007

The Turkish Embassy’s Orhan Tung responds to the Armenian ambassador
on the question of the 1915 genocide

Contrary to the Armenian allegations, in fact, there is no consensus
among the historians and legal experts to qualify the events of 1915 as
"genocide".

There is a legitimate historical controversy concerning the
interpretation of the events in question and most of the scholars
who have propounded a contra genocide viewpoint are of the highest
calibre and repute, including Bernard Lewis, Stanford Shaw, David
Fromkin, Justin McCarthy, Guenther Lewy, Norman Stone, Kamuran Gurun,
Michael Gunter, Gilles Veinstein, Andrew Mango, Roderic Davidson,
J.C. Hurwitz, William Batkay, Edward J. Erickson and Steven Katz.

This is by no means an exhaustive list. A good number of well-respected
scholars recognize the deportation decision in 1915, taken under
World War I conditions, as a security measure to stop the Armenians
from co-operating with the foreign forces invading Anatolia.

On the legal aspect, the elements of the genocide crime are strictly
defined and codified by the UN Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Genocide, adopted by the General Assembly on 9
December 1948. However, Armenians, claiming that "the evidence is so
overwhelming", so far have failed to submit even one credible evidence
of genocide.

While the position of the British Government is clear on the issue
– that the evidence is not sufficiently unequivocal to persuade us
that these events should be categorised as genocide as defined by the
1948 UN Convention on Genocide – the attempt to present some British
documents, particularly the infamous Blue Book, as they are confirming
"genocide" is a typical example of the Armenian way of misleading
the international community.

The following quotation from Arnold Toynbee, British historian and
co-author of the Blue Book, which is claimed to "leave no doubt about
what was taking place", clearly shows the extent of Armenian false
propaganda and how they come up with fabricated evidence:

"…Yet at the very time when the agreement (Sykes-Picot Agreement)
was being made, I was being employed by His Majesty’s Government
in a ‘Blue Book’, which was duly published and distributed as war
propaganda. The French Government made use of the Armenians in a
different way. They promised to erect an autonomous Armenian state,
under their aegis, in the Cilician part of their Anatolian Zone and
the promise brought them several thousand Armenian volunteers, most
of whom were enrolled in the Legion d’Orient and served for the rest
of the War" (Toynbee, Arnold J., The Western Question in Greece and
Turkey, Howard Fertig, Inc. Edition, New York, 1970).

Hovhannes Katchaznouni’s (The First Prime Minister of the independent
Armenian Republic) remarks in his report entitled "Dashnagtzoutiun
Has Nothing To Do Anymore" submitted to the 1923 Dashnagtzoutiun
Party Convention, gives an idea about the truth:

"…Are we not capable of doing in the Soviet Armenia what we did in
the Turkish Armenia, for tens of years? We certainly are. We might
establish a base in the Iranian Qaradað and send people and arms
to the other side of Araxe, (just as we did in Salmas once). We
might establish the necessary secret relations and armed "humbas"
in the Sunik and Dereleghez mountains just as we did in the Sasun
mountains and the Chataq stream (in eastern Turkey). We might provoke
the peasants in some far off regions to rise and then we might expel
the communists there or destroy them. Later we might create great
commotion even in Yerevan and occupy a state building at least for
a few hours just as we occupied the Ottoman Bank or we might explode
any building. We could plan assassinations and execute them just as we
killed the officials of the Tsar and the Sultan…; in the same way,
just as we did to Sultan Abdulhamid, we could plant a bomb under
Myasnikov’s or Lukashin’s feet. …when we created a great hubbub
in Turkey, we thought we would attract the attention of the great
powers to the Armenian cause and would force them to mediate for us,
but now we know what such mediation is worth and do not need to repeat
such endeavours…"

After the World War I, the Armenian allegations were investigated
between 1919-1922 as part of a legal process against the Ottoman
Officials. 144 high ranking officials were accused of "massacres" and
deported for trial by Britain to the island of Malta. The information
which led to the trial was mainly given by the local Armenians and the
Armenian Patriarchate. While the deportees were interned on Malta,
The British occupation forces in Istanbul, with absolute power and
authority, looked everywhere to find evidence in order to incriminate
the deportees. At the conclusion of the investigation, no evidence
was found that could corroborate the Armenian claims.

Turkey is of the view that parliaments and other political institutions
are not the appropriate forums to debate and pass judgments on disputed
periods of history. Taking one-sided and biased decisions on this
disputed period of the history can not be considered as a right and
ethical approach. Also, such kind of issues should not be abused for
the sake of the internal political concerns.

Past events and controversial periods of history should be left to the
historians. In order to shed light on such a disputed historical issue,
the Turkish Government has opened all its archives, including military
records to all researchers. On the other hand, Armenian state archives
in Yerevan and archives in some third countries including the Dashnak
Party archive in Boston are still being kept behind the closed doors.

In 2005, Turkey proposed to Armenia the establishment of a Joint
History Commission, which will be composed of historians and experts
from both sides and third parties in order to study the events of
1915 in their historical context and share the findings with the
international public. The fact that this proposal is yet to receive
a positive answer from the Armenian authorities, when considered
together with their rejection to open all the relevant archives to
the historians, gives a clear idea about their confidence in what
they claim. On the contrary, Turkey has no reason to be afraid of its
past and is ready to accept whatever the findings of this proposed
commission will be.

It should be emphasized that Turkey has always been keen to normalize
its relations with Armenia. In line with its vision towards Southern
Caucasus, Turkey, recognised Armenia on 16 December 1991 and has
produced a consistent policy of efforts to develop good-neighbourly
relations with this country. Due to the difficult economic conditions
it encountered after its independence, Turkey has extended humanitarian
aid to Armenia. Turkey has also facilitated the transit of humanitarian
aid to this country through its territory. Turkey supported Armenia’s
integration with the regional organisations, international community
and the western institutions, and invited Armenia to the Black Sea
Economic Cooperation Organization as a founding state. Additionally,
Turkey took a series of unilateral steps that would help creating a
favourable climate in the region. In this regard, some of Turkey’s
recent unilateral gestures towards Armenia are as follows:

Armenian citizens are welcome to visit Turkey through visas issued
at the entry points valid for 30 days. In stark contrast, this is not
the case for Turkish citizens who intend to visit Armenia. Thousands
of Armenian citizens reside primarily for employment in Turkey.

Turkey opened two air corridors for facilitating the international
flights, which amount in excess of hundred over-flights every month
and Turkish and Armenian air charter companies operate between Istanbul
and Yerevan on a regular basis, up to 4 times a week.

Transit trade towards Armenia or from Armenia towards abroad,
via Turkey is not subjected to any restriction or hindering. These
unilateral steps clearly show Turkey’s will for the normalization of
Turkish-Armenian relations.

However, these good-will gestures are not reciprocated by Armenia.

Instead, Armenia, passed a new bill on 4 October 2006, which makes
it impossible for any Armenian citizen, or third party in Armenia,
to voice dissent about the "genocide"; refused to issue visa for
the Turkish election observation team comprising eight academics,
who were to be deployed at the Election Observation Mission (EOM) set
up by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
(ODIHR) prior to the Armenian parliamentary elections scheduled for
12th May 2007; rejected the inclusion of a Turkish officer to the
NATO/PfP team that would conduct a working visit on border security
in Armenia in July 2007.

Finally, I want to draw your attention to the desperate plight of the
people of Armenia, suffering from the dire economic conditions in
the country which is self-isolated as a result of the intransigent
attitude of the wealthy diaspora. I believe that the Armenians
have become captive to their own lie of "genocide" and every single
support to the baseless Armenian allegations from the third parties
will further cut their connection with the truth and prevent their
integration to the West.

–Boundary_(ID_8uZ6SPN0jxJuITc719XNBA)–

IRAN NEEDS INDEPENDENT AND GLORIOUS ARMENIA

PanARMENIAN.Net
22.10.2007 19:06 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Cooperation between Armenia and Iran is firmly
developing. There are no obstacles and boundaries for our relations,
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in Yerevan during a joint
news conference with Armenian leader Robert Kocharian.

"Cooperation ensures stability in the region. We do need independent
and glorious Armenia, which can guarantee stability of the South
Caucasus. We all must leave in peace. Iran is confident that all
problems may be resolved via diplomacy, especially in our region
and we will do our best for peaceful solution of pressing issues,"
Mr Ahmadinejad underscored.

ARMENIAN-AMERICAN AUTHOR SITS DOWN FOR Q & A
By Phyllis Sides

Journal Times, WI
/local_news/doc471be9619f0c8574678785.txt
Oct 22 2007

RACINE – The Armenian experience told through the words of 17
first-generation Armenian-American writers is documented in a newly
released anthology edited by Racine native David Kherdian.

"Forgotten Bread: First-Generation Armenian American Writers" includes
the writing of William Saroyan, Michael J. Arlen, A.I.

Bezzerides and Kherdian, who are among the more well-known writers
in the anthology.

Writing is a tool many young Armenians used to maintain their
identities while becoming American and one they used to deal with the
pain of the past, Kherdian said. Kherdian is the author of more than
60 books of poetry and prose. His work has been translated into 13
languages and published in 12 countries around the world. He is the
editor of nine anthologies, in addition to the journals "Ararat,"
an Armenian American literary journal; "Forkroads: A Journal of
Ethnic American Literature," and "Stopinder: A Gurdjieff Journal for
Our Time."

On Wednesday, Kherdian took a few minutes to share his thoughts and
feelings about "Forgotten Bread" with his hometown newspaper.

Does the Anthology’s title have a special meaning?

It is taken from a poem by one of the poets in the book; an excerpt
appears on back of the dust jacket. It denotes something lost and
then found, perhaps something one did not know one had until its
absence sends an echo through one’s life. Everyone seems to love
the title, perhaps because its ambiguity resonates in each of us,
like the question: What does life mean?

How and why did you choose the authors included?

I had read all of them through the years, knew most of them personally,
and William Saroyan, the one international figure in the book, was
my mentor and friend.

Growing up in Racine, I felt cut off from the world of art, and for
years my yearning to be an artist myself had to be kept under wraps.

When some of these writers began publishing, in the late ’50s –
and they were not much older than I was then, I could see that the
possibility of an Armenian kid living in the hinterlands could also
possibly attain something of what they had achieved.

It was a long shot, but without their presence it wouldn’t have been
even that. And so when I moved to San Francisco after my final exam
at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I soon became friends with
the beat writers there, including Allen Ginsberg, Richard Brautigan,
Lawrence Ferlinghetti, et al, and then out of the blue I began writing
poetry myself, when I thought all along I would be a writer of prose
fiction.

This impelled me to search even deeper into my roots because it was
plain to me that my writing belonged to an older tradition, and so
other writers of Armenian descent became my connection, linking for me
the past with the present. It was natural that one day I would compile
this anthology, which, by the way, begins with three writers from the
old country who came here both before and after the genocide and made
the decision to write in English, thereby becoming Armenian-American
writers of the first generation.

When you selected them, did you have a specific goal in mind?

I wanted to preserve writing that I knew with certainty was going to
perish, with possibly a few – very few – exceptions. I didn’t want
this to happen, especially because during these writers’ lifetimes
the exigencies of life were such that their compatriots had little
time for art, and could not see that it might hold some kind of value
and importance for them.

As the anthology grew in my mind and on paper, I began to realize that
I was going to bring something very new to the table, from something
very old and forgotten. Because of this anthology, Armenian-American
literature is now born and is part of the American canon. We are a
distinctive strain, or sensibility if you like, that brings something
very unique to the body of American literature, and that is no small
thing, especially for a minority as tiny as ours.

CAFE OWNED BY ARMENIAN SET TO FIRE

Lragir
Oct 22 2007
Armenia

In the morning of October 22 the Turks destroyed and set to fire
the Armenian cafe in Brussels. The press secretary of the Armenian
foreign ministry Vladimir Karapetyan told Regnum the cafe became the
target of the Turks who went on protest in front of the U.S. embassy
to Brussels against the murder of Turkish soldiers by Kurds. "Later
the protestors moved to the Turkish district of Brussels and while
passing by the cafe owned by an Armenia they first broke everything
then set it to fire," Vladimir Karapetyan said, adding that the police
are currently investigating the incident.

TURKEY’S ARMENIAN PATRIARCH DISCUSSES GENOCIDE BILL WITH US OFFICIALS

Anatolia News Agency, Turkey
Oct 19 2007

Erzurum, 19 October: Turkish Armenian Patriarch Mesrob Mutafyan said
that he held meetings with officials of US Department of State on
Friday [19 October] regarding the Armenian resolution (on allegations
about 1915 incidents) which was approved at Foreign Affairs Committee
of US House of Representatives.

Mutafyan said that both Turkish-Armenian relations as well as the
relations between Turkish citizens of Armenian origin (living in
Turkey) and the majority can be harmed due to this bill.

Speaking to A.A [Anatolia Agency], Mutafyan said that they have always
expressed that they are against the draft.

Noting that he can also hold contact with officials of US Congress to
ensure the rejection of the draft, Mutafyan said that he expressed
the sensitivities (of Armenian community in Turkey) to all Democrat
and Republican officials so far.

Mutafyan also said the conditions of Turkish Armenians and diaspora
are not the same. He added that they are Turkish citizens of Armenian
descent and they have responsibilities towards Turkey.

When asked whether Armenian NGOs in the United States and Armenia put
any pressure on them as they are against the draft, Mutafyan said that
diaspora is making criticisms through press media and open letters,
adding that criticisms of diaspora are always directed on them.

Fresno Bee (California)
October 17, 2007 Wednesday
FINAL EDITION

Genocide resolution hits snag;
Doubts build as 17 backers withdraw support.

by Michael Doyle Bee Washington Bureau

Amid intense lobbying pressure, 17 House members have withdrawn their
support for a resolution that calls the killings of Armenians nearly
a century ago by Ottoman Turks a genocide.

A key House committee approved the resolution last week. But
defections are increasing, with seven lawmakers withdrawing their
support Monday — and that puts the resolution’s future in question.

"All of a sudden this is heating up," said Chico Republican Wally
Herger, one of the lawmakers who changed his position. "And so you
start to wonder, is this a wise thing to be doing now?"

Turkey has denounced the resolution. And administration officials,
worried about losing a key ally in the Iraq war, also oppose it.

The formal number of genocide resolution co-sponsors has dropped to
218, potentially a slim majority in a House with 432 voting members,
taking three vacancies into account. But more lawmakers could switch
positions in coming days.

"I suspect there will be others," said Rep. Allen Boyd, a Florida
Democrat who withdrew his support Monday.

The resolution approved Oct. 10 by the House Foreign Affairs
Committee declares that "the Armenian genocide was conceived and
carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923." The non-binding
resolution further avers that "1,500,000 men, women, and children
were killed."

President Bush called House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday to ask
her not to call for a House vote on the resolution, The Associated
Press reported. Pelosi has not yet scheduled a floor vote, although
she says she will.

"The president and the speaker exchanged candid views on the subject,
and the speaker explained the strong bipartisan support in the House
for the resolution," Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said, noting
that Bush initiated the phone call.

One key question is whether the vote will be put off if public
support falls further, however.

Even the 218 co-sponsors listed Tuesday may overstate support for the
resolution. One co-sponsor still listed Tuesday died in April. One is
a Puerto Rico delegate whose vote won’t count if it affects the final
outcome.

A third co-sponsor, Rep. Jane Harman, D-Los Angeles, argues that now
is "the wrong time" to bring up the measure. It’s not clear what she
will do when it comes up for a vote.

The lawmakers withdrawing support come from both parties and all
regions of the country. None come from regions with large
Armenian-American constituencies.

Some, like Rep. Sanford Bishop, D-Ga., declined Tuesday to explain
their change of heart. Others, like Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark.,
acknowledge they simply learned more since their original endorsement
decision.

"The closer we’ve come to a vote, the more informed I’ve become,"
said Ross, who withdrew his support Monday.

Besides Herger, however, all of the other eight House members whose
districts include portions of the Central Valley remain as
co-sponsors. Tens of thousands of Armenian-Americans live in the
region.

The resolution is symbolic, needing neither Senate approval nor the
president’s signature. Nonetheless, it has ignited a diplomatic
crisis.

The Turkish government considers the resolution a historically
inaccurate insult, contending that "hundreds of thousands" of Turks
and Armenians died in a complicated war. To protest the House
committee action, Turkey temporarily withdrew its ambassador to the
United States. Simultaneously, the Turkish parliament is expected
this week to brush aside Bush administration concerns and approve a
military strike against Kurdish separatists in northern Iraq.

"It’s a lot of saber-rattling on the part of Turkey," said Rep.
George Radanovich, R-Mariposa.

Still, Pentagon officials warn that deteriorating relations could
undermine the U.S. occupation of Iraq, which depends heavily on
Turkey’s Incirlik Air Base for supplies. Bush and his top cabinet and
Pentagon officials have been making personal calls.

"The White House is putting on a full-court press," said resolution
supporter Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced.

So is the government of Turkey, which has reported paying $300,000 a
month for lobbyists. A Congressional Caucus on Turkey, co-led by Rep.
Robert Wexler, D-Fla., is increasingly vocal although still much
smaller than the 156-member Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues.

With so many members, the Armenian caucus could easily rally
co-sponsors for a resolution "presented as not having any downside,"
Boyd said. He signed up on June 28, before the international
controversy escalated. Last week, during a visit to Baghdad, Boyd was
swayed by Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq.

"He was pretty adamant that the resolution would harm our interests
in the Middle East," Boyd said.

One of Pelosi’s top lieutenants and the chair of the House defense
appropriations subcommittee, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., will be urging
today that the resolution be dropped.

Herger, though, said he hadn’t heard directly from lobbyists. Rather,
he said he simply came to the conclusion by following media accounts
that "now is not the time to be going after Turkey."

ROBERT KOCHARIAN AND NIKOLAY RYZHKOV SATISFIED WITH ACTIVE PROCESS OF
ARMENIAN-RUSSIAN COOPERATION

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 19, NOYAN TAPAN. The Armenian president Robert
Kocharian on October 19 received the delegation heeded by Nikolay
Ryzhkov, co-chairman of the Armenian-Russian interparliamentary
cooperation commission, member of the Federation Council of the Federal
Assembly of the Russian Federation.

According to a press release of the RA president’s press service, the
sides expressed their satisfaction with the active process of the
Armenian-Russian cooperation. They underlined that the fact that
Russian capital is expanding its presence in Armenia and the bilateral
commodity turnover is growing is a result of dynamic development of the
partnership of the two countries.

Lragir, Armenia
Oct 19 2007

MISS ARMENIA 2007

Margaret Sarukhanyan, 18, from Yerevan won the beauty contest Miss
Armenia 2007. On October 16 the judges awarded Margaret the title in
the final of the contest. Margaret Sarukhanyan studies at the
University of Management. The crown of Miss Armenia was handed out to
her. The Crown is made of gold, diamonds, rubies and garnets.

The vice-miss is Arpine Atoyan from Yerevan, Sveta Mirzoyan from
Yerevan took the third place. Margaret Sarukhanyan was also awarded
the title `Miss Congeniality’ and Arpine Atoyan was awarded the title
`Miss Media’.

AZG Armenian Daily #192, 20/10/2007

ANTI-AMERICAN GATHERING IN TEHRAN

The Summit of Caspian States ended in Iranian capital Tehran. Similar
gatherings took place 26 times during the last years, but all of them
ended without any result; until today, the international and legal
status of the Caspian Sea is not determined yet. Before the start of
the Summit experts announced that this Summit also would end without
serious changes, as contradictions between Caspian countries,
especially Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and Iran were so deep that there
would not be any change on this issue.

Anyway, in spite of the absence of the hopes of achieving success on
the issue, the Summit of Tehran may be called historical, as that kind
of gathering, when the leaders of Caspian countries participated, took
place first time in the capital of Iran.

The international press was mainly interested in Russian president
Vladimir Putin’s visit to Tehran. It’s really a historical event, as
the other leaders of Russia has never paid an official visit to Iran
before, except of Stalin in 1943, when he participated in well-known
conference of Tehran, though Iran was a half-independent and
half-occupied territory, where the Northern part was controlled by
USSR, and the Southern part – by Great Britain.

Nevertheless, the interest in this gathering was big because of
straining relations about the nuclear programs of Tehran and the
increasing pressures by USA and European Union in the last months.

The visit of the Russian president to Iran was evaluated as a
contribution to Iranian policy.

Even before the start of gathering, many declared that the summit
would go on with anti-American and Iranian policy protecting slogans.

It became a reality, as the main result of the Summit was not the
progress in the issue of Caspian Sea, but the joint announcement of
the possible attack on Iran.

Actually, the Caspian Sea states signed a document that they reject to
provide their territories for possible gathering against the Islamic
Republic.

Signing of this document is a serious victory of Iranian
diplomacy. Iranians are under obligation to Russians for that success,
as the Russian contribution played a significant role in signing the
document.

It’s evident that the White House will not be satisfied with this
decision, as it is deprived of its opportunities to realize a military
policy in the region. Besides, the USA has all the basis to declare
that kind of steps of Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan as anti-American.

Because of American financing those two countries succeed in creating
their own navy.

It is clear that contributing to the military reinforcement of
Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan in the sea, the White House at the same time
expected to use the territories of those countries for spreading its
influence in the region.

It’s worth to mention that on Azerbaijani-Iranian border Pentagon set
about the construction of Radiolocation station, which heightened
Tehran’s displeasure.

Anyway, in this policy Russia’s attitude is of a great interest, as it
first declared about the joint use of Gabala station and then set
about a joint announcement in which the countries of the region
promise not to provide their territories in case of military actions
against Iran.

Nevertheless, acting as a defender of Iranian interests, Russia
strengthens its influence not only on that country, but also on
Caspian region that is of a strategic importance to it.

Besides, this policy is an answer to the rough attitude of USA of
having own anti-missile systems in East Europe.

Thus, Putin used Tehran Summit to strengthen its own position and
weaken the American policy in Caspian region.

By Armen Manvelian, translated by L.H

National Post (Canada)
October 19, 2007 Friday
National Edition

Turkey’s rage felt by its own Jews; Genocide Vote; Community fears it
may by used as scapegoat

by: Louis Meixler, Bloomberg News
Pg. A20

ISTANBUL – Turkey’s rage over a U.S. congressional resolution
accusing it of genocide against Armenians nearly a century ago is
being felt in quarters far removed from Washington: its own Jewish
community.

Turkish Jews’ concerns for their safety have been fanned by comments
from Ali Babacan, the Foreign Minister, that there’s a perception in
the country Jews and Armenians "are now hand-in-hand trying to defame
Turkey."

Even as support for the measure fades in Congress, it has intensified
feelings of vulnerability among Turkey’s 23,000 Jews, who have been
subjected to terrorist bombings.

"There have been insinuations that our security and well-being in
Turkey is linked to the fate" of the resolution, Jewish leaders said
in a half-page ad in the Washington Times urging its rejection.

"Public opinion is so emotional on the issue that they seem to blame
everyone who may not have been able to block it," said Sami Kohen, a
prominent member of the Jewish community in Istanbul and a columnist
for the Milliyet newspaper.

"Some elements — Islamists and ultranationalists — might use the
Jews as a scapegoat and say they have failed, they have done
nothing."

Armenian groups say 1.5 million Armenians were killed in a campaign
of genocide as the Ottoman Empire collapsed at the end of the First
World War and a new Turkish republic was established. Turkey says
that number is inflated, and Turks and Armenians alike were killed in
large numbers.

Turkey, which has close ties with Israel, has long relied on lobbying
from Jewish groups in Washington to help fend off proposals like the
one endorsed by a House of Representatives panel Oct. 10. But the
alliance suffered a blow when the Anti-Defamation League, the largest
U.S. organization aimed at combating anti-Semitism, said in August
the killings of Armenians were "tantamount to genocide," though it
still opposed the congressional resolution.

Mr. Babacan, in an Oct. 6 interview with Turkey’s Vatan newspaper,
said "we would not be able to keep the Jews out of this business" if
the resolution is adopted.

Three days later, he told the Jerusalem Post "the perception in
Turkey right now is that the Jewish people, or the Jewish
organizations let’s say, and the Armenian diaspora, the Armenian
lobbies, are now hand-in-hand trying to defame Turkey."

A Foreign Ministry spokesman issued a statement the day after the
Jerusalem Post interview, saying leaders of the "Jewish community,
which is a part of our society, have from the beginning rejected the
unjust and wrong contents" of the genocide resolution.

But Mr. Kohen said "this publicity could make … life difficult" for
Jews in Turkey.

On the Web site of the Islamic-leaning Zaman newspaper, 22% of the
869 people who had responded to an online survey by yesterday blamed
"Jews having legitimized the genocide claims" for the resolution
getting as far as it has.

"This perception has to be fought by the government, which must
de-link the American Jews and the resolution," said Soner Cagaptay,
an analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

"A lot of Jewish groups are working to defeat the resolution."

So is President George W. Bush, who has tried to prevent a
Congressional vote and said Wednesday Congress "has more important
work to do than antagonizing a democratic ally in the Muslim world."

The Turkish government recalled its ambassador after last week’s
panel vote. U.S. relations with Turkey, the only Muslim member of
NATO and a key supply route for troops in Iraq, were further strained
by Wednesday’s vote by the Turkish parliament to approve a possible
attack on Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq.

Leaders of the Jewish community in Turkey declined to be interviewed.
While there have been no reports of increased security at Jewish
sites, security is already high. Most synagogues are unmarked and
guarded by police.

In November, 2003, terrorists linked to al-Qaeda slammed truck bombs
into two synagogues in Istanbul, killing 25 people, mostly Muslim
bystanders and shopkeepers. In 1986, Palestinian gunmen entered the
main synagogue, firing guns and lobbing grenades at Sabbath
worshippers, killing at least 22.