Buenos Aires Herald , Argentina
Oct 13 2006
Denying genocide a crime in France?

PARIS – France’s Lower House of Parliament approved a bill yesterday
making it a crime to deny Armenians suffered genocide at the hands of
the Ottoman Turks, provoking anger in Turkey and raising fresh doubts
about its EU ambitions.
The Turkish Foreign Ministry said the vote would hurt ties between
the two NATO allies.
Analysts warn more is at stake than just bilateral ties, arguing that
the vote will encourage Turkish nationalists and undermine pro-EU
liberals by exposing the depth of anti-Turkey feelings in a founding
member of the European Union.
The bill might never become law, however, because it still needs the
approval of the Senate. The French government did not support the
motion and promised yesterday to oppose it when it gets to the
Senate, but Turkey said the damage had already been done.
Turkey denies accusations of a genocide of some 1.5 million Armenians
during the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire in World War One,
arguing that Armenian deaths were a part of general partisan fighting
in which both sides suffered.
However, France’s Armenian community, which at about 500,000-strong
is one of the largest in Europe, had pushed hard for the bill.
Yesterday’s motion was carried by 106 votes to 19. But it was a thin
turnout of lawmakers in the 557-seat House.
The legislation establishes a one-year prison term and 56,570-dollar
fine for anyone denying the genocide – the same sanction as for
denying the Nazi genocide of Jews.

National Assembly, Armenia
Oct 13 2006
With Readiness to Continue Efficient Cooperation

On October 11 the President of the National Assembly of the Republic
of Armenia Mr. Tigran Torosyan received the delegation headed by the
Director General of Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe , Mr. Guy
De Vel. The Special Representative of the Secretary General of the
Council of Europe Boyana Urumova and the Permanent Representative,
Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia to the Council of Europe Mr.
Christian Ter-Stepanian also attended the meeting.
During the meeting the NA President Mr. Tigran Torosyan informed
about the legislative amendments made after the referendum. He
especially noted about the abolition of the administrative custody,
which has been done at the level of the Constitution, the amendment
to the law on Constitutional Court, the broadening of the applicants’
circle to the Constitutional Court, the laws concerning the judicial
system. The adoption of laws and their sending for an expert
assessment simultaneously was explained by time issues, as
conditioned by the forthcoming general elections the National
Assembly can work more efficiently till the end of the year, and the
2007 Spring Session coincides with the period of parliamentary
pre-electoral campaign.
Director General of Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe , Mr. Guy
De Vel thanked the President of the National Assembly for the
efficient cooperation and expressed readiness to continue it. He
noted that Armenia has greatly met its obligations, adopted important
laws for democratic development, which are already exposed to expert
assessment. The two parties stressed the importance of the reforms of
the judicial system and the adoption of the Judicial Code, which will
be a document for these reforms. Mr. Guy De Vel touched upon with
contentment the debate of the Electoral Code with the experts of the
Venice Commission of the Council of Europe. Mr. Tigran Torosyan
highlighted the importance of adopting the Electoral Code till the
end of the year with first and second readings.
During the meeting draft laws that are in circulation were also
discussed, especially the draft law on Television and Radio.
Stressing the importance of adopting this draft law within the
framework of constitutional amendments Mr. Tigran Torosyan noted,
that the Parliament will try to adopt a relevant draft law before the
end of the year. The draft law on the City of Yerevan and other
issues of mutual importance were also discussed.

Brussels Journal, Belgium
Oct 13 2006
Belgian and Dutch Parties Try to Put Genie Back in the Bottle
>From the desk of Paul Belien on Thu, 2006-10-12 22:49
Belgium introduced voting rights for non-Belgian residents in order
to counter the `islamophobic’ and Flemish secessionist Vlaams Belang
(VB). As a result multitudes of Muslim candidates were elected in
major cities in last Sunday’s local elections. In Antwerp the
immigrants are now demanding an alderman’s post in the city
government, which consists of the mayor and ten aldermen. In Brussels
the Parti Socialiste (PS) is embarrassed at the election of Murat
Denizli as a Socialist councilor. Denizli is a hardright Turkish
extremist belonging to the Grey Wolves. In the Netherlands political
parties are facing serious problems with Turkish candidates who
refuse to acknowledge the 1915 Armenian genocide.
In Antwerp all the mainstream parties have (again) teamed up in a
coalition in order to keep the VB out of local government. In 1989
the Belgian parties signed an agreement – the so-called `cordon
sanitaire’ – that, no matter what the outcome of the elections may
be, they will never enter into a coalition with the VB. The VB has 20
of the 55 seats in the new Antwerp city council. The new governing
coalition of Socialists, Christian-Democrats and Liberals holds 33
seats. Of the latter 9 seats are held by Muslims (7 Socialists and 2
Christian-Dems), which gives them real vetoing power within the new
coalition. The most popular candidate on the Socialist list of mayor
Patrick Janssens is Fauzaya Talhaoui. She got more votes than any
other candidate apart from Janssens himself. Talhaoui wants to become
a city alderman, but her demand is posing problems for the mayor, who
had already promised the position of alderman to other politicians
before the elections.
Yesterday the Brussels newspaper Le Soir ran a front page article
about the problems in the important Brussels borough of Schaarbeek.
The paper says it had been widely known for three months that a
member of the Turkish Grey Wolves was a Socialist candidate there.
(It should be noted, however, that Le Soir, the largest paper in
Brussels, failed to disclose this to its readers until yesterday,
well after the elections.) The election of Murat Denizli, Le Soir
says, has led to `open warfare and an identity crisis’ within the PS
because the Grey Wolves are know to be `ultra-nationalist, racist,
anti-European.’
Denizli was introduced on the PS list by the Schaarbeek PS leader
Laurette Onkelinx, who is also the Belgian vice prime minister and
minister of Justice. Schaarbeek PS members told Le Soir that last
April the local section of the PS had rejected the list of candidates
which included Denizli and `other immigrants adhering to rather
religious and conservative Muslim values.’ Onkelinx, however,
demanded that the candidates be accepted because `they are popular
and the party had to win the elections at any price.’ Today it
bothers many traditional indigenous Socialists who failed to get
elected that the party sold out to the immigrant hard-right and the
Islamists. `The end justified the means,’ one of them told Le Soir.
They are condemning a multilingual electoral campaign which was
conducted partly in Turkish and Arab and during which Socialists
visited mosques to attract voters and held `ambiguous speeches
denying the Armenian genocide.’ `Whenever one of the Belgo-Belgians
[the indigenous Belgians] complained he was told off for being a
racist.’
In the Netherlands general elections are due on 22 November. Since
the Muslim vote tipped the balance in favour of the Socialists in
last March’s local elections, both the Socialists, currently in
opposition, and the governing Christian-Democrats are putting forward
dozens of Muslim candidates. However, when Wouter Bos, the Socialist
leader, removed the Turkish candidate Erdinc Sacan from the list
after the latter had denied the Armenian genocide of 1915 in a
Turkish newspaper (a Turkish paper in Turkey that is) this led to an
outcry both in Turkey and among Turks in the Netherlands.
The Dutch Christian-Democrats removed two Turkish candidates, Osman
Elmaci and Ayhan Tonca, from their list for the same reason,
eliciting another outcry from Amsterdam to Ankara. Last week the
Dutch newspaper NRC-Handelsblad commented that the parties `are
frantically trying to put the genie back in the bottle.’
The Socialists are nervous because the position of Bos’s running
mate, Nehabat Albayrak, on the matter of the Armenian genocide is not
clear. Albayrak, who already is a member of the Dutch Parliament,
refuses to comment on the issue. Nihat Eski, another Dutch
parliamentarian of Turkish origin, though he sits for the
Christian-Democrats, is being called a traitor by many Turkish voters
for saying that he thinks the 1915 genocide is a historical fact.
In Belgium Emir Kir, a leading Socialist politician of Turkish origin
and the Brussels secretary of state for monuments, is campaigning for
the demolition of the Brussels monument that commemorates the
genocide of the Armenians.

Unison.ie, Ireland
Oct 13 2006
French Pass Bill That Punishes Denial of Armenian Genocide
PARIS, Oct. 12 – The National Assembly, defying appeals from Turkey,
approved legislation Thursday that would make it a crime to deny that
the mass killings of Armenians in Turkey during and after World War I
were genocide.
The legislation, which was criticized by Turkey’s government and some
European Union officials, could further complicate talks for Turkey’s
admission to the Union.
With 106 deputies voting in favor and 19 against, the law sets fines
of up to 45,000 euros, or about $56,000, and a year in prison for
denying the genocide. Of the 577 members of the Assembly, 4 abstained
and 448 did not vote at all, raising the question of whether there
would be enough political will to push the law through the Senate.
Scholars and most Western governments have recognized the killing of
more than a million Armenians by Ottoman Turks from 1915 to 1919 as
genocide. But the subject is still taboo in Turkey, and charges have
been pressed against writers and others who have brought attention to
the genocide, including Orhan Pamuk, who was just awarded the Nobel
Prize in literature.
`The Turkish people refuse the limitation of freedom of expression on
the basis of groundless claims,’ the Turkish Foreign Ministry said in
a statement. `With this draft law, France unfortunately loses its
privileged status in the eyes of Turkish public opinion.’
Ali Babacan, the Turkish economy minister and the country’s lead
negotiator on talks with Europe, said he could not rule out
consequences for French companies.
`What happened in France today, we believe, is not in line with the
core values of the European Union,’ Mr. Babacan said, adding that the
government would not encourage a boycott of French goods.
In Brussels, the European Union warned that the law could have a
harmful effect on negotiations. `It would prohibit dialogue which is
necessary for reconciliation on the issue,’ said Krisztina Nagy, a
spokeswoman for the Union. `It is not up to law to write history.
Historians need to have debate.’
Turkey’s potential membership in the European Union has been a hot
political topic here ahead of the presidential elections next spring.
The leading candidates to succeed President Jacques Chirac, including
Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy and Ségolène Royal, have agreed
that Turkey must acknowledge the genocide before gaining membership.
But the new legislation has been more of a campaign issue in France,
which has one of Europe’s largest Armenian populations.
Although most of France’s top politicians supported the European
Union’s planned constitution, the French rejected it last year in a
referendum that was also seen as a vote against further European
expansion. The problem for politicians seeking to succeed Mr. Chirac
is how to oppose Turkish entry without taking on the xenophobic tones
of the far right.
After the vote, Mr. Chirac’s government, which opposed the
legislation, expressed eagerness for dialogue with Turkey and said
the bill was unnecessary and inopportune. `We are very committed to
dialogue with Turkey, as well as to the strong ties of friendship and
cooperation which link us to that country,’ said Jean-Baptiste
Mattéi, a spokesman for the Foreign Ministry.
Ms. Royal, who is the leading Socialist candidate for president, has
loudly supported the bill. On Wednesday, she reiterated that
`obviously,’ Turkey would have to recognize the genocide, and added,
`My opinion is that of the French people.’
Two other senior Socialists, Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Jack Lang,
had reservations about the bill.
On the center right, Mr. Sarkozy has opposed Turkey’s joining the
European Union, but he kept silent about the genocide bill, which was
sponsored by the Socialists.
A leading Turkish analyst of the European Union, Can Baydarol, said
that although the decision would seem to have no direct effect on
Turkey’s relations with Europe, the hostile attitude of French
lawmakers demonstrated some of the obstacles to Turkish membership.
`Now people see that more than the technical details, political
maneuvers will mark the years-long process on the way to full
membership,’ he said.
Sebnem Arsu contributed reporting from Istanbul.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Nobel winner denounces French genocide bill
1:30 PM October 13, 2006
ANKARA (AFP) – Dissident Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk, winner of the 2006
Nobel Literature Prize, denounced a French bill that would make it a crime
to deny Turks commited genocide against Armenians, saying it flouted
France’s “tradition of liberal and critical thinking.”
“What the French did is wrong,” Pamuk, better known for criticizing his own
government, told the NTV television from New York, a day after the bill was
voted in the lower house of the French parliament, infuriating Ankara.
“France has a very old tradition of liberal and critical thinking and I
myself was influenced by it and learned much from it.
“But the decision they made constitutes a prohibition. It does not suit the
French tradition of liberalism,” he said.
The bill, which still needs the approval of the Senate and the president to
take effect, foresees up to one year in jail and a heavy fine for anyone who
denies that the World War I massacres of Armenians under Ottoman rule were
genocide, a label Ankara fiercely rejects.
The 54-year-old Pamuk himself stood trial in Turkey this year for contesting
the official line on the massacres under an infamous provision for
“insulting Turkishness,” which Ankara is under European Union
pressure to amend.
The trial was dropped on a technicality in January, but won Pamuk the
reputation of a “traitor” among Turkish nationalists.
His Nobel award, announced shortly after the French vote on Thursday, was
greeted with mixed reactions at home.
The government was among the many who hailed the first Turk to win a Nobel
prize, but skeptics questioned whether Pamuk was rewarded for his writing or
the political dissidence that has often embarrassed his country in the West.
Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc and several newspaper columnists had called
on the writer to speak out against the French bill if he was an earnest
campaigner for free speech.
Pamuk, a staunch advocate of Turkey’s bid to join the European Union, urged
his compatriots not to “blow the issue out of proportion” in their reactions
to France.
“Don’t burn the duvet for a flea,” he said, using a Turkish proverb.
Commenting on the mixed reaction to his award, Pamuk said: “There was never
a Nobel literature prize that was not met with any (negative) reactions…
I’m not angry with anyone. People are free to think what they like.”
“These debates will one day end but the fact will remain that Turkey has won
a Nobel prize,” he said. “I’m very honored and proud to have brought this
award to my country.”
Pamuk first drew the ire of the state in the mid-1990s when he denounced the
treatment of the Kurdish minority as the army waged a heavy-handed campaign
to suppress a bloody separatist insurgency in the southeast.
The state extended an olive branch in 1998, offering him the accolade of
“State Artist,” but Pamuk declined.

Ha’aretz, Israel
Oct 13 2006
Taking sides on genocide

By Jonas Attenhofer

On an official visit to Turkey, Swiss justice minister Christoph
Blocher expressed sympathy for his hosts’ anger at Switzerland’s
prosecution of two Turkish men who publicly denied the Armenian
Genocide. The two, a historian and a politician, are being prosecuted
under a Swiss anti-racism law.
Blocher, leader of the right-wing People’s Party, also mentioned
during his visit that the Department of Justice he heads was working
toward a revision of the law, which he said caused him pain as well.
These remarks caused an uproar in Swiss political and academic
circles, which broadly support the law that withstood a referendum in
1994. Aside from racism in general, the law explicitly prohibits the
public denial, grave belittlement, or attempted justification of
genocide and other crimes against humanity.
Upon his return to Switzerland, Blocher stated his intention of
working to exclude from the anti-racism law the section that
prohibits denial of a genocide. He was quoted as saying that this
particular passage could impair freedom of expression, as well as
Switzerland’s relations with other states. Regarding freedom of
expression, the question is whether a law that prohibits the
racially, ethnically or religiously motivated violation of the human
dignity of particular individuals, represents a serious limitation of
individual freedom.

The president of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, Giusep
Nay, sees the law as a necessary limitation to freedom of expression.
He sees no threat to this freedom as expressed in the Swiss
Constitution and the United Nations Charter. A state’s interest in
limiting this basic right was explained by the Armenian Republic’s
ambassador to Switzerland, who observed that by allowing the denial
of past genocides, the perpetrators remain unpunished by public
opinion, and the prevention of future genocides is undermined.
The Swiss law covers only public statements. In a case in which a
group of Swiss soldiers gave the Nazi salute and expressed racist
sentiments while serving in the army, a military court recently
applied the term “public” to expressions made during military
training. If the anti-racism law were rescinded, it would become
easier to dismiss historic facts surrounding a genocide – effectively
favoring freedom of expression over the moral integrity of minority
groups. Equally controversial is the surrender of their moral
integrity by dropping the law in favor of good relations with states
that might disagree with it.
In the case of Switzerland and Turkey, Blocher’s call to weaken the
law has not earned much support among fellow cabinet members, whose
scheduled visits to Turkey have been cancelled by the host country
over frictions about the question of the Armenian Genocide. The Swiss
National Council had previously recognized the Armenian Genocide, and
this may be seen as the official Swiss position.
Blocher was sharply criticized by his colleagues in the seven-member
cabinet for disagreeing with a Swiss law while in a foreign country,
for not aligning his statements with the official positions of the
joint cabinet and for not fully coordinating his activities abroad
with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
As minister of justice, Blocher was not involved in any official
negotiations, but merely accepted an invitation by his Turkish
counterpart on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of the
establishment of Turkish civil law, which is modeled on the Swiss
Civil Code (ZGB). At the ceremony, the dean of the faculty of law of
Ankara University mentioned the constructive role Western European
law codes played in the shift from an Islamic society to a modern,
secular one.
Should neutral Switzerland engage in Armenian-Turkish mediation in
the future, recognition of the Armenian Genocide will unlikely be
subject to negotiations. Upholding its humanitarian tradition,
Switzerland can be expected to maintain a firm stance on the issue.
This also seems to be the intention of France’s Jacques Chirac and
Germany’s Angela Merkel, who want to make the issue a precondition
for Turkey to enter the European Union. France is presently
discussing implementation of a law that explicitly prohibits denial
of the Armenian Genocide.
The situation could have significance for the Middle East. The
European Union will eventually share a border with Iran. When a
Western European country considers weakening its stance against
public denial of the Holocaust, how is the message perceived in the
Middle East?
The writer is a law student at the universities of Zurich and Berne.

Grenada Broadcasting Network, Grenada
Oct 13 2006
TURKEY CONDEMNS GENOCIDE
12th October, 2006
Turkey has condemned a French parliamentary vote which would make it
a crime to deny that Armenians suffered “genocide” at the hands of
the Turks.
Turkey called it a “serious blow” to relations and has threatened
sanctions. The vote was also criticised by the EU.
The bill, tabled by the opposition but opposed by the French
government, needs approval from the Senate and president.
Armenia says Ottoman Turks killed 1.5 million people systematically
in 1915 – a claim strongly denied by Turkey.
There are accusations in Turkey that the Armenian diaspora and
opponents of Turkey’s European Union membership bid are using the
issue to stop it joining the 25-member bloc.

The Daily Telegraph
Oct 13 2006
Turkey angered over France genocide denial move
By David Rennie, Europe Correspondent
(Filed: 13/10/2006)
The French parliament triggered a fresh crisis yesterday in Turkey’s
relations with Europe by approving a bill that would make it an
offence punishable by jail to deny that Armenians suffered a genocide
at the hands of Ottoman Turks.
The Turkish foreign ministry said the vote in the French Assemblée
Nationale had dealt “a heavy blow” to bilateral relations.

Patrick Devedijan, a French deputy of Armenian descent, addresses the
National Assembly
Turkey denies that massacres of Armenians between 1915 and 1923
amounted to genocide, saying large numbers of Turks and Armenians
died in civil war.
Ali Babacan, Turkey’s economics minister, said it was too soon to
know whether the Turkish public would heed calls from nationalist
groups to boycott French goods.
“As the government, we are not encouraging that, but this is the
people’s decision,” he said. “I cannot say [the vote] will not have
any consequences.”
The Socialist-backed law was widely criticised in Turkey as another
attempt by European politicians to place obstacles in the path of
Ankara’s painful progress towards membership of the European Union.
Polls have shown that 60 per cent of the French public is opposed to
Turkish entry into the EU.
advertisement
France would impose a one-year prison term and a 45,000 euro
(£30,000) fine for anyone denying the Armenian genocide, following
the lead of an earlier law on denying the Nazi Holocaust.
The vote came months ahead of French presidential and parliamentary
elections, in which the 400,000-strong Armenian community in France
will form a formidable voter bloc.
The bill does not have government support and it seems likely to fall
in the upper house, the Senate.
Both President Jacques Chirac, and Segolene Royal, the Socialist
presidential front-runner, say that Turkey must acknowledge the
genocide of the Armenians before joining the EU. Nicolas Sarkozy, the
conservative front-runner, is opposed to Turkey’s EU entry under any
conditions.
The Turkish parliament scrapped plans for a tit-for-tat law that
would have made it illegal to deny that French colonialists committed
genocide against the Algerians in their war for independence. Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told MPs: “You don’t clean up dirt with
more dirt.”
He repeated calls to Armenia jointly to research the killings by
opening the historical archives of both countries to historians.
The European Commission, which will next month unveil a key report on
Turkey’s progress towards meeting EU admission standards, said the
vote threatened to silence the first signs of debate inside Turkey on
the Armenian issue.
Krisztina Nagy, the EC’s enlargement spokesman, said: “It is
important to see that there is an opening in Turkey to conduct debate
on that issue.” The bill, if it became law, “could have a negative
effect on debate”.
Ankara is under intense pressure to improve free speech rights, and
abolish the notorious Article 301 of its penal code, which allows for
the prosecution of anyone who insults “Turkishness”.

The Daily Telegraph, UK
Oct 13 2006
Nobel prize for Turkish author who divided nation over massacres
By Oliver Poole in Istanbul
(Filed: 13/10/2006)
Orhan Pamuk, the Turkish novelist prosecuted for “insulting
Turkishness” after commenting on the scale of the Armenian massacre,
was yesterday named winner of the Nobel Prize for literature.

Orhan Pamuk: Overjoyed
This could bring renewed claims that the prize is now politicised
after Harold Pinter, a critic of the Iraq war, won last year despite
his last acclaimed stage work having been written in 1978.
Yesterday’s announcement was particularly contentious as it came on
the day French MPs voted to make it a crime to deny that the Armenian
massacre occurred, a move that provoked fury in Turkey.
Pamuk, 54, is lauded for novels such as Snow and My Name is Red that
deal with Turkey’s coming to terms with its imperial past and its
position as a crossroads between East and West.
But last year he became better known as a symbol for free speech
campaigners after he was put on trial for rejecting the official line
on the Armenian massacre, which the Turkish government says was not
genocide. Pamuk told a Swiss newspaper that Turkey was unwilling to
face the reality that “30,000 Kurds and one million Armenians” had
been killed in the country’s recent history.
advertisementHe faced up to three years in prison, but the case was
dropped on a technicality in January.
However, Pamuk’s comments resulted in death threats and a provincial
governor calling for his books to be burnt. At one point he had to go
into hiding abroad.
Horace Engdahl, the head of the Nobel academy, stressed that Pamuk
had been chosen for his literary achievements. “It could lead to some
political turbulence but we are not interested in that,” he said. “He
is controversial in his own country, but so are almost all our
prize-winners.”
Pamuk was selected because he “enlarged the roots of the contemporary
novel” through his links to both Western and Eastern culture.
The citation for the award praised his latest work, Istanbul:
Memories of a City, as a “quest for the melancholic soul [in which
he] has discovered new symbols for the clash and interlacing of
cultures”.
The Turkish cultural ministry chose to dwell on Pamuk’s achievement
in becoming the first Turk to win the prize rather than the recent
court case, or his decision in 1998 to reject the accolade of State
Artist. “I am concerned only with Pamuk as a novelist,” said Mustafa
Isen, the ministry’s under-secretary. “I congratulate him.”
Pamuk was born into a wealthy, westernised family and turned to
writing after deciding he did not have the talent to become a
painter. He has published five novels and won the International IMPAC
award for My Name is Red.
Pamuk, who will receive a gold medal and a £750,000 cheque, described
his writing as a study of “international themes. . . seen through my
Turkish window”.
It is a vantage point that has enabled him to examine East-West
issues and subsequent clashes between Islam and secularism, tradition
and modernity. In My Name is Red and Snow, he explores “the confusion
in-between” that occurs when the cultures attempt to exist together.
The study of Istanbul, written in a room overlooking the Bosphorus,
celebrates the “melancholy” atmosphere caused by the impact of
westernisation on a city filled with reminders of a glorious but
abandoned imperial past.
Embracing that emotion, he says, at least offers the citizens a
chance to escape from the far more painful belief of cultural
triumphalism.
Pamuk, at present a visiting professor at Columbia University, New
York, said that he was overjoyed by the award.
It was “an honour bestowed upon the Turkish literature and culture I
represent”.
Kemal Kerincsiz, who leads a group of ultra-nationalist lawyers that
helped bring the charges against Pamuk, said he was ashamed by the
award.
“I don’t believe it was given for his books or literary identity. It
was given because he belittled our national values, for his
recognition of the genocide. As a Turkish citizen I am ashamed.”

The Brunei Times, Brunei Darussalam
Oct 13 2006
French MPs vote on Armenia `genocide’ bill despite Turkish fury

13-Oct-06
FRENCH MPs yesterday adopted a bill that would make it a crime to
deny that the 1915-1917 massacres of Armenians by the Ottomans was
genocide.
The draft law which has provoked the fury of Turkey, the modern state
that emerged from the Ottoman Empire will now be sent to the Senate,
or upper house of parliament, for another vote.
If it becomes law, it would make it a crime in France to deny that
the killings of the Armenians were genocide. Those violating the law
would face up to one year in prison and a fine of up to +euro+45,000
(US$57,000).
Ankara reacted swiftly, with the foreign ministry saying France had
dealt “a heavy blow” to its relations with Turkey, while parliament
speaker Bulent Arinc called the vote “shameful” and reflecting a
“hostile attitude”.
Turkey has threatened economic reprisals against France if the
legislation passes, warning that French firms could be excluded from
public tenders and that a boycott of French goods might be imposed.
The MPs in the lower house, the National Assembly, passed the bill,
introduced by the opposition Socialist Party, by 106 votes to 19.
Most of the parliamentarians from President Jacques Chirac’s ruling
conservative party were absent from the 577-seat chamber for the
vote.
The vote was the first step in what could be a lengthy legislative
passage for the bill, which has supporters and opponents ranged
across party lines. Turkey, though, is united in slamming the draft
law.
“If the bill is adopted, Turkey will not lose anything, but France
will lose not only Turkey, but something of itself as well,” Turkish
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said on Wednesday. Ankara contests the
term “genocide” for the killings and strongly opposes the bill’s
provisions.
It says 300,000 Armenians, and at least as many Turks, died in civil
strife when Armenians took up arms for independence and sided with
invading Russian troops as the Ottoman Empire fell apart during World
War I. Armenians claim up to 1.5 million of their ancestors were
slaughtered in orchestrated killings that can only be seen as
genocide.
Around 400,000 people of Armenian origin are estimated to live in
France, the most famous being the singer Charles Aznavour, born
Chahnour Varinag Aznavourian to immigrant parents. One French MP of
Armenian descent, Patrick Devedjian, who belongs to the ruling UMP
party, told RTL radio that “I see no reason why the right shouldn’t
vote” in favour of the bill.
He said an amendment he had attached to it which would exclude
scientists, historians and academics from the provision of the law
made the bill “more reasonable ”. Turkey was simply trying to
employ “denial propaganda” over the Armenian killings, he claimed.
A Socialist MP, Jean-Michel Boucheron, took an opposing position,
saying “no parliament has the right to impose an ‘official’ history,
especially regarding a foreign country…. What would we say if the
Turkish parliament tried to shape France’s history?”
France in 2001 already adopted a law officially calling the massacres
a genocide sparking a first found of Turkish anger that had
short-lived negative consequences for French firms in Turkey.
The new bill would go further by making it illegal to deny that
genocide took place, much in the way denial of the Holocaust during
World War II is a crime in France.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called the proposed
law “a blunder” and Turkish newspapers Thursday were scathing in
saying the bill undermined France’s commitment to freedom of
expression. “Liberty, equality and stupidity”, was how one daily,
Hurriyet, headlined its opinion. AFP