TURKEY’S PARLIAMENT CONDEMNS FRENCH GENOCIDE LAW
Focus News, Bulgaria
Oct 17 2006
Ankara. The Turkish Parliament adopted a declaration condemning the
law which Paris adopted a few days ago according to which everyone
denying the mass killings of Armenians in Turkey during World War I
will face legal sanctions, Reuters reports.
“With the adoption of this law the French parliament is causing
irreversible damage to the political, military and economic relations
between Turkey and France,” the declaration reads.

RUSSIA TIGHTENS CONTROL OVER THE ARMENIAN ENERGY SECTOR
Emil Danielyan
EurasiaNet, NY
Oct 17 2006
After more than a year of negotiations, Russia has completed the
acquisition of Armenia’s power distribution network, tightening its
grip on the Armenian energy sector. The Armenian government says
the $73-million takeover will breathe new life into the Electricity
Networks of Armenia (ENA). But government critics have denounced it
as a further blow to the country’s energy security.
The shares in ENA were formally transferred to an offshore-registered
subsidiary of RAO Unified Energy Systems (UES), Russia’s
state-controlled power utility, at a September 26 ceremony in Yerevan,
attended by senior Armenian officials and UES executives.
The deal was formalized one year after the government in Yerevan
announced and approved the Russians’ decision to buy ENA from Midland
Resources Holding, a British-registered firm that privatized the
once loss-making network in 2002. [For background see the Eurasia
Insight archive].
The Russian takeover of the Armenian power grid was first made public
in June 2005, presented as a long-term “management contract” signed
by UES and Midland. The World Bank and other Western donors questioned
the legality of that deal, arguing that it was cut without the approval
of Armenian regulatory authorities. But the donors acquiesced when UES
and Midland decided afterwards to sign a formal acquisition agreement
and follow relevant legal procedures.
It remains unclear why UES has taken so long to complete the
purchase. Unconfirmed reports in the Armenian press suggested that the
Russian energy giant, which has aggressively expanded its operations
in former Soviet republics, had second thoughts about buying ENA after
examining its books and discovering serious financial irregularities.
Officials in Yerevan maintain the deal strengthens the local energy
sector by injecting badly needed capital investments in ENA. Andrei
Rapoport, the UES vice-chairman, announced during the share transfer
ceremony that the Russian company will invest $20 million in ENA over
the next 12 months.
Critics, however, claim that Armenia’s energy dependence on Russia
has reached a critical level, posing a serious threat to the
Caucasus state’s sovereignty. According to Eduard Aghajanov, an
economist critical of the government, ENA’s sale all but completed
the country’s “energy colonization” by Moscow. “It is inadmissible
to give everything to one state, especially in the area of energy,”
he told EurasiaNet. “Russia is now in a position to impose its will
on us in both the economic and political spheres at any moment. We
are tying a noose around our neck.”
UES already owns a cascade of Armenian hydroelectric plants and
manages the finances of the nuclear power station at Metsamor.
Another state-run Russian energy giant, Gazprom, controls Armenia’s
largest thermal power plant, and is currently its sole supplier of
natural gas. Russian gas is used for generating nearly 40 percent
of the country’s electricity, with another 40 percent coming from
Metsamor.
ENA’s sale was preceded by an equally controversial Russian-Armenian
energy agreement that was announced last April following Gazprom’s
decision to double the price of its gas for all three South Caucasus
states. Under the terms of that deal, Gazprom paid $250 million to
take control of another incomplete thermal plant located in the town
of Hrazdan in central Armenia. Most of the payment, $188 million,
is to be made in the form of free-of-charge supplies of Russian gas.
This means that the overall price of Russian fuel for Armenia will
remain virtually unchanged until the end of 2008.
Defending the April deal, Armenian leaders argued that it also commits
the Russians to spending at least $150 million on completing the
Hrazdan facility in the next few years. “This agreement will only
reinforce our energy security,” Prime Minister Andranik Markarian
said at the time.
The head of the World Bank office in Yerevan, Roger Robinson, likewise
described the gas settlement as “very beneficial” for Armenia. Robinson
made the point that there is “nothing fundamentally wrong” with Russian
ownership of Armenian energy facilities. “The important thing is to
have a very strong regulator that sets the rules and monitors the
rules for the delivery of public utility services,” he said.
Gazprom initially confirmed, but then denied reports that the deal
will also give it ownership of an incomplete Armenian pipeline,
which is scheduled to start pumping gas from neighboring Iran early
next year. The Armenian government also denied this. Still, Russia’s
Prime-Tass news agency quoted Gazprom Deputy Chairman Aleksandr
Ryazanov as saying on June 30 that the Russian monopoly is keen
to control the pipeline, which was originally intended to reduce
Armenia’s dependence on Russian energy resources.
Moscow has already reportedly forced Yerevan to make sure that the
pipeline’s diameter is not large enough to allow Iran to re-export
its gas to Georgia and possibly Eastern Europe. “We trampled on
our national interests in favor of Russia just because it [Moscow]
does not want to face any competition in the European gas market,”
complained Aghajanov.
There have been indications, though, that Yerevan and Tehran are
considering building a second pipeline that would serve to deliver
Iranian gas to third countries. “Naturally, when Iranian gas starts
flowing into Armenia, perhaps it will be exported to other countries
as well,” the speaker of Iran’s parliament, Gholamali Haddad-Adel,
told reporters during a recent visit to Armenia.
Despite the potential for securing alternative gas supplies, President
Robert Kocharian’s administration seems increasingly convinced that
Armenia’s long-term energy security hinges on the construction of
a new nuclear power plant in place of Metsamor’s aging Soviet-era
reactor. The reactor is expected to be shut down by 2016. Earlier
this year, the Armenian parliament allowed the government to start
searching for foreign private investors. The estimated construction
cost of a new nuclear power plant is at least $1 billion.
The United States has already made it clear that it is less than
enthusiastic about the idea. Tom Adams, a senior State Department
official coordinating US aid to ex-Soviet states, argued during a May
visit to Yerevan that Armenia’s location in a seismically active zone
prone to powerful earthquakes should be taken into consideration. “I
think our view right now is that there are probably better alternatives
to a second nuclear plant,” Adams said without elaborating.
Editor’s Note: Emil Danielyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and
political analyst.

KURDISH QUESTION IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
By Khalid Khayati
Kurdish Aspect, CO
Oct 17 2006
The European Parliament voted in September on a report detailing
Turkey’s progress towards accession to the European Union.
A resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority that called on the
Turkish authorities to bring about further improvements in several key
areas, including that of the Kurdish question. The European Parliament
also urged the Turkish government “to take concrete steps for the
normalization of bilateral relations” with Cyprus, under the United
Nations’ settlement process. As with an earlier resolution in September
2005, the new European Union text calls on Turkey to recognize the
Republic of Cyprus and withdraw its military forces from the island,
as well as lift its embargo and end all port and airport restrictions.
Human rights abuses in Turkey were another area of concern highlighted
by the European Parliament. Whilst recognizing some recent limited
progress in this field, the parliament strongly criticized the Turkey’s
human rights record and current practices.
The MEPs were particularly concerned with the lack of religious
freedom, the inadequate protection of ethnic and cultural communities,
the use of torture and the severe curtailment of freedom of
expression. The criticism of denying ethnic minorities rights was
an obvious allusion to the Greeks of Pontos and the Assyrians, who
similarly to the Kurds, have been systematically denied their identity
and the right to political and cultural recognition. The report calls
on the Turkish government to “implement more effective measures”
for dealing with abuses of human rights by Turkish authorities.
Previous reports have deplored the lack of gender equality in Turkey’s
civil and penal codes, and the pervasive problem of domestic violence,
polygamy and forced marriage particularly among Turkey’s Kurdish
population. The report is particularly concerned with so called honor
killings and urges all involved to make an effort to put an end to
such atrocious practices. The document reemphasizes the right of
Turkish women to education.
The death penalty was another issue of concern. The issue has been
raised in the past in connection with the case of PKK leader Abdullah
Ocelan. According to the report, the European Parliament maintained
“pressure on the Turkish authorities until they abolished the death
penalty in 2002.”
Although the European Parliament has not made Turkey’s EU membership
contingent upon its acknowledgement of the Armenian genocide,
Turkey has been urged to establish “good neighbourly relations” with
Armenia, and facilitate the work of researchers, intellectuals and
academics looking at the question of the genocide. However, Turkey
has described France’s recent decision to make illegal denial of the
Armenian genocide a “serious blow” to its relations with France and
has threatened sanctions.
Kurdish question on the agenda
The European Parliament also called on the Turkish government to
recognize “the cultural rights of the Kurdish minority” in Turkey,
whilst praising some positive developments, such as the decision to
permit broadcasting in the Kurdish language. The European Parliament
has also strongly condemned the resurgence of “terrorist violence”
on the part of the PKK, which the resolution accuses of resulting
in the “intimidation of civil society representatives” in Kurdish
areas. The resolution was indeed passed a few days before the PKK
declared a unilateral and unconditional ceasefire with the Turkish
military forces.
The European parliamentary resolution calls on the Turkish side to
pursue a democratic solution to the Kurdish issue following the last
year’s “encouraging statement” by Turkish Prime Minister Receb Tayyip
Erdogan, who admitted the existence of the Kurdish problem and called
for a solution. The report also urges the Turkish authorities to lift
restrictions on political parties such HADEP and to allow the Kurdish
language to be used in the education system and media. Furthermore,
it has been stressed that it was essential “to strike a balance between
the need to control the situation as regards security, avoiding civil
military strains, and effectively promoting the political dialogue
and the economic and social development of the “south-east” region
through a comprehensive strategy supported by adequate means”.
What prospects for the Kurds in Turkey?
Although the European Parliament urges the Turkish Government to opt
for a democratic solution to the Kurdish issue through the promotion
of political dialogue and the economic and social development of the
“south-east” region, possibly using EU pre-accession assistance, the
parliament’s message appears muddled and insufficient. The European
Parliament’s resolution fails to deliver a well-formulated and coherent
definition of the Kurdish problem, a necessary prerequisite before
proposing any solution to it. Similarly, the Kurdish political movement
in Turkey for its part has been hitherto unable to bring clarity to
the issue. The unilateral ceasefire that was issued by the PKK on
1st October and that was welcomed by many people, will perhaps open
the way for a general amnesty for PKK members and their inclusion in
the Turkish political process, but this is far from satisfactory.
For the Turkish government, engaged in an “open-ended” process of
becoming a full member of the European Union, it is time to carry
out fundamental changes in its political and judicial apparatus
in order to facilitate a real solution to the Kurdish problem. The
Kurdish question in Turkey concerns the claim of an oppressed but
distinct people to their right to preserve and institutionalize their
national identity. As Abbas Vali has outlined, it is about promoting
the representation of the “marginal” and excluded identities in the
political and legal processes of the country. It is also about the
changing the conditions of citizenship, which insist that the Turkish
identity of the sovereign and all political power is accepted.
It is time for the Kurdish political movement in Turkey to aim for such
a vision. We should remember that achieving the political recognition
for the Kurds in Turkey can only through a purely peaceful struggle
that will give birth to the emergence of a democratic political
culture in Kurdish society.

ERDEM: UN AND NATO PEACEKEEPING FORCES CAN BE PLACED IN THE CONFLICT ZONE AFTER THE PEACE TREATY BETWEEN AZERBAIJAN AND ARMENIA
Azeri Press Agency
Oct 17 2006
Vahid Erdem, head of delegation of NATO Parliament Assembly Future
Defense Planning Subcommittee held a press conference on the results
of his visit, APA reports.
Erdem said that the aim of his visit was to meet with the officials,
non-governmental organizations and mass media representatives and to
get acquainted with the current situation on the integration to NATO.
He will make a final report titled NATO’s role in South Caucasus on
the results of his visit.
“The report will be discussed in the meeting of the committee in
Canada under my leadership soon. Azerbaijani side has some offers to
the report and we will evaluate these offers,” he said.
Erdem said that Azerbaijan successfully cooperates with NATO and over
300 servicemen serve in peacekeeping forces in various areas. Showing
his attitude to the problem he said after the peace treaty between
Armenia and Azerbaijan the peacekeeping forces can be placed in
the territory.
“UN and NATO peacekeeping forces can be placed in the conflict
territory after the peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia,”
he said.
Vahid Erdem also said that unlike Azerbaijan Armenia has unambiguously
attitude towards NATO.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

AZERBAIJANI TV CHANNELS FORBID SHOWING FRENCH FILMS AND CLIPS
Azeri Press Agency
Oct 17 2006
Some Azerbaijani TV channels forbid showing films and clips produced
by France, APA reports. The reason for making such decision was the
adoption of bill by France Parliament which makes it crime to deny
“false” Armenian genocide.
ANS vise-president Mir Shahin proved the fact. He said that ANS decided
not to show the films and clips produced in this country after the
adoption of the law. Azad Azerbaijan TV channel also stopped to show
the films and clips. Azad Azerbaijan TV Programs Department chief
Elshen Dadashov said they did it to object to France Parliament’s
decision. Azerbaijan Television and Radio CJSC department Chief Fuad
Velikhanov also said that they stopped to display French films and
clips. Lider TV News department Chief Veli Akbar told the APA that
they have not made decisions yet and they do not consider displaying
French films and clips according their plan.
Minije Jeferli, Space TV Programs department chief said that they
made the plan of the programs before the bill was adopted so, they
continue to show French films and clips. She said if TV authorities
make decision about it they will stop showing. Chingiz Aslanov, the
assistant of Director of ITV said that they have never shown French
films.

WATCHDOG SAYS CORRUPTION IN ARMENIA ON RISE
By Hovannes Shoghikian
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Oct 17 2006
Corruption in Armenia remains widespread and has even increased
in recent years despite government claims to the contrary, local
representatives of an international anti-graft watchdog insisted
on Tuesday.
Amalia Kostanian, head of the Armenian branch of Transparency
International, said that an anti-corruption program adopted by the
Armenian government three years ago has failed to reduce the scale
of corrupt practices. She reiterated her view that the government
lacks the “political will” to tackle the problem in earnest.
“Despite what is being done in Armenia, the expert and public
perception is that not only has corruption not decreased but has even
increased, that corruption has taken new forms, that its has become
more politicized and large-scale,” she told a seminar in Yerevan.
Government officials claim the opposite, however, saying that the
anti-corruption plan is being successfully implemented. They cite
a long list of laws and legal amendments adopted by the Armenian
parliament since its launch in November 2003. The process is being
overseen by a high-level commission headed by Prime Minister Andranik
Markarian.
But Kostanian insisted that the plan is inherently flawed because of
its emphasis on legislative measures. She cited a lack of popular
faith in the authorities’ stated anti-corruption campaign and the
fact that senior government officials are still rarely prosecuted
for bribery and other forms of graft.
Armenian law-enforcement authorities claim to have identified 371
corruption-related crimes last year and prosecuted 97 state officials
as a result. None of them are known to have ties with Armenia’s most
powerful individuals or their relatives.
Armenia ranked 88th out of 146 nations that were covered by
Transparency International’s 2005 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI).
The Berlin-based group’s previous global survey, released in 2004,
put it in 82nd place.
A separate survey released by the World Bank in July concluded that
last year Armenian firms continued to pay bribes to government
officials at the same rate as in 2002. “Increases in bribery are
apparent in some areas, such as taxes, customs and the courts,
although the levels reported by firms in the previous survey in 2002
were extremely low,” the bank said in a statement.
President Robert Kocharian’s former anti-corruption adviser, Bagrat
Yesayan, has repeatedly questioned the credibility of Transparency’s
rankings. “Corruption is a phenomenon which is impossible to measure,”
he declared last year.
Yesayan’s successor, Gevorg Mherian, was not available for comment
on Tuesday.

ALIEV VOWS TO ‘FIGHT’ ARMENIAN DIASPORA
Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
Oct 17 2006
Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliev announced Tuesday a campaign to
counter the influence of the Armenian diaspora.
Aliev said his oil-rich ex-Soviet republic was opening embassies
and consulates in parts of the world where the Armenian diaspora was
especially influential.
“It’s no secret that California is a state with a large Armenian
population. We opened a consulate general (in Los Angeles) to be
there and to fight the Armenian lobby,” Aliev said in an interview
with Arabic network Al-Jazeera, a transcript of which was published
by Azerbaijan’s state news agency Azertaj.
Aliev said his country planned to open an embassy in Argentina, where
the Armenian lobby “is strongest among Latin American nations.” “One
might ask, ‘Why open an embassy in a country with which we have no
serious links.’ But we’re opening an embassy to fight the Armenian
lobby on its own turf,” Aliev said.
Azerbaijan and Armenia have been locked in a territorial dispute over
the Nagorno-Karabakh ethnic-Armenian enclave since before the break-up
of the Soviet Union. Azerbaijan lost control of the territory and seven
surrounding regions during a war in the early 1990s, but Karabakh’s
status has yet to be settled. Diaspora Armenians are key to financing
the rebel government controlling the enclave. The world-wide Armenian
diaspora has numbered in the millions since Armenians were forced out
of Ottoman Turkey in a series of massacres and forced marches during
World War I.
Aliev said Azerbaijan’s new oil wealth gave it a chance to
outweigh ethnic-Armenians’ influence abroad. “What is attractive
about Armenia…? Only the fact that it has a rich diaspora that
influences the policies of various countries,” Aliev said. “Azerbaijan
is a country that will supply Europe and world markets with energy
resources. Imagine Azerbaijan on one side of the scale and Armenia
on the other.”

EXPERT: ARMENIA’S POSITION ON JAVAKH IS FORMED IN THE WEST
Regnum, Russia
Oct 17 2006
An extended dialog is being carried out now between Armenia
and Georgia, where Yerevan takes an inferior position. However,
the determining role in the dialog is played not by the bilateral
relations, but by the West’s position and goals in the Javakh area
(Armenian-populated region in Georgia – REGNUM). Armenian political
analyst Igor Muradyan expressed such opinion talking to reporters in
Yerevan on October 17.
In general, Muradyan motivates the assumption by the fact that Armenia
has nothing to take from Georgia, and Yerevan does not interfere
into the Javakh process only because there is such directive by the
West. The expert finds it difficult to say what the price of Armenia’s
neutrality on this issue is. He believes that West’s interest in
Javakh should not be underestimated. A narrow group of top-level
experts is being occupied with the problem in the West; key figures
are EU High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs and Security Javier
Solana in Europe, and US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and
Eurasia Daniel Fried in the USA, Igor Muradyan believes. “The matter
is, that Western expert community derives from the fact that Georgia
cannot secure its safety on its own. In this connection, the West is
going to settle the task on its own,” Igor Muradyan says.
Grounding on this logic, he considers the process at the US parliament
aimed at easing the process of deploying US military forces in the
territories of other countries. Importance of the problem, the analyst
believes, is stressed in connection with the fact that the US-Turkey
relations and relations between the USA and the Black Sea countries
depend on the future of Javakh. In this connection, the expert says,
the West is trying to rule out internalization of the Javakh issue
and prevent the situation from exacerbating, so, Armenia is being
engaged in this very process.
“There is no conspiracy between Armenian and Georgian leadership
concerning the Javakh problem. It is just Armenia having serious
obligations to the West in this aspect,” Muradyan says. As an example
of cooperation of Armenia, Georgia and the West he cited recent arrest
of one of United Javakh leaders, Vahagn Chahalyan. “They should release
this guy, persuade United Javakh members to go into parliament,
initiate a political process and work at settling problems of the
region.” As for Russia’s stance on the issue, Muradyan believes it
is inactive, for which there are objective reasons.

AZERBAIJAN DOES NOT INTEND TO SEEK EXPELLING FRANCE FROM OSCE MINSK GROUP
Regnum, Russia
Oct 17 2006
“I have not heard of any official announcements that Azerbaijan is
seeking expulsion of France from the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs,”
Head of the Information and Press Department at the Azerbaijani Foreign
Ministry Tair Tagizade is quoted as saying to Day.az, while commenting
on calls for it after the lower house of France’s parliament passed
a law that envisages criminal punishment for denial of the Armenian
Genocide.
In this connection, he noted that “diplomats have to work with
reality of political facts.” “France’s foreign policy is formed les
by the parliament and more by the French foreign ministry. So, I do
not understand, on what proponents of expelling France from the MG
co-chairs ground,” Tair Tagizade said.
Commenting on a statement by the bloc of Azerbaijani parties “Our
Azerbaijan” on necessity to freeze all relations with the country,
impose an embargo on French goods, recall the ambassador from Paris
and so on, he noted that “any political force in the country has a
right to make these or other statements.” “In this case, aspiration
can be seen vividly to gain political profit grounding on any issues,
including those that are not supposed to be subject for speculations,”
the head of the information and press department said.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

“RESPOND FRANCE BY PROMOTING FREEDOMS”
Erol Onderoglu
BÝA, Turkey
Oct 18 2006
PEN’s Sayar gives out signals on freedom of expression after “genocide
vote” in France saying “retaliation should be by abolishing article
301”. TGC’s Erinc refutes France PM’s statement. Prosecuted journalist
Duzel wants to see what happens ýn practice.
BÝA (Istanbul) – What kind of messages do statements made by Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his government after the French
Parliament’s vote on the “Draft Law to Punish Those Who Deny The
Armenian Genocide” entail for development of freedom of expression
in Turkey?
International PEN Turkey Chair Vecdi Sayar who believes the statements
are encouraging says “In retaliation to the Genocide Bill, Turkey
should rid herself of article 301 and similar constraints on freedom
of expression”.
Journalists Association of Turkey (TGC) chair Orhan Erinc, meanwhile,
refers to television news program on which the Prime Minister is being
quoted saying “Freedom of expression is banned in France. Over here
we can talk as we wish”.
“I wish” says Erinc. “I prefer to see these remarks of the Prime
Minister as a message that the obstacles placed in front of the freedom
of expression in the Penal Code (TCK) and the Anti-Terror Law (TMY)
will be lifted”.
Subject to a series of enquiries and prosecutions based on her
important interviews published in the “Radikal” newspaper, journalist
Nese Duzel believes one should not take the government for its words.
“I don’t know what will be changed in Turkey. Let’s see what happens
in practice” she cautions.
Government doesn’t give credit to “tit for tat”
In the days during which the Armenian genocide bill was being debated
in France and passed at parliament, messages of “boycotting French
products” spread in Turkey.
The Parliament Justice Commission chaired by Justice and Development
Party deputy Koksal Toptan intended to react to the bill with a Turkish
draft that was alleged to be five months old which would recognize
the Genocide in Algeria [committed by France] and criminalize the
recognition of the Armenian genocide.
Although criticism of France was severe and sporadic boycotts occurred
at public level in some wok places, government members agreed on the
position that Turkey should not make te same mistake.
Historian, EU and RSF reaction to France
In this period France, a part of the European Union that has on the
international arena wanted for article 301 in Turkey to be abolished,
was accused itself of shackling down opinions.
Not only Turkey but officials of the EU as well as the Paris-based
Reporters Without Frontiers (RSF) organization reacted to France.
Following these developments, bianet asked their opinion of the future
of freedom of expression from International PEN Turkey Center chairman
Vecdi Sayar, TGC chairman Orhan Erinc and journalist Nese Duzel.
Sayar: Retaliate by lifting 301
PEN Turkey Center chairman Vecdi Sayar believes that in retaliation
to the French bill, Turkey most conclusive step would be to abolish
article 301 of the TCK and similar other restrictive legislation.
“Government statements are giving such positive indications in this
direction” he says. “I believe this would be the correct thing to do.
Perhaps we can extract something right out of the mistake in France”.
Erinc: We can’t talk how we want
Referring to PM Erdogan’s remarks on a CNN Turk television program
saying “Freedom of opinion is banned in France. Over here we can talk
the way we wish” TGC’s chairman Erinc says he does not share this view.
“While it is impossible not to share he view of the Prime Minister
in his first sentence, the remark that we can talk the way we wish
is a view that unfortunately we cannot share” Erinc said.
Erinc prefers to see Erdogan’s remark as an indication that
restrictions on the freedom of expression brought on by some articles
of the TCK and TMY will be lifted and adds, “Otherwise, looking at
the prosecutions launched against freedom of expression, it is not
possible to accept these words of the Prime Minister”.
Noting that 69 court cases had been filed in Turkey under article 301
in the past year, Erinc says the effect of the French vote on Turkey
could have been negative. In his words, “With its vote France has not
only completely disregarded its own freedom of expression, but has
also pulled up a wall in front of the changeability of the articles of
law that impose a bottleneck on the freedom of expression in Turkey”.
Duzel: Not waiting for anything, looking at practice
Journalist Nese Duzel who has been charged for “enticing hatred
and enmity” but later acquitted for her important interviews in
“Radikal” newspaper with Alawite leaders is now subject to an enquiry
and prosecution for “propaganda of a terrorist organization” due to
her reporting on the views of various experts and politicians on the
Kurdish issue.
“I don’t know what will be changed in Turkey” she says “but we need
to look into what happens in practice”.
Duzel has a gloomy look at the future and recalls “With 301
the government withdrew what it had given. Many leaps towards
democratization in the past two years have been withdrawn with the
TMY and the new TCK”.
Noting that legislation restricting freedom of expression continued
to exist in the new penal code, Duzel says “A progressive step has
not yet been taken. In practice it has started to become like the
past too because cases that to me once had come to an end are being
revived again”.
Dink: Let us do what is correct
Appearing on an NTV live program the previous evening, Armenian-Turkish
journalist Hrant Dink who is prosecuted in Turkey for his remarks
recognizing an Armenian genocide, said the French vote results could
actually be favorable for Turkey and that Turkey should do what
is correct.
Editor-in-Chief of the Armenian-Turkish “Agos” newspaper, Dink said,
that Turkey would not be the one to lose out of this bill and expressed
belief that “after this, Turkey will display the freedom of expression
that has been taken from its hands”.
Stating that until the French vote the world public opinion saw
the Armenians as the aggrieved and the Turks as being unjust, Dink
noted “From now on the Turkish expression has become the one that is
aggrieved. I believe that the Turkish official expression will use
these conditions and will display the freedom of expression that has
been taken from its hands”.
Dink said that anti-EU circles could be expected to exploit the
development and that this itself could lead to problems in Turkey’s
relations with the Union.
Saying that the French Parliament continuously used the expression
that “Turkey should look to itself”, Dink asked “is Turkey going to
be able to look to itself? They have mentioned [Penal Code] article
301. These are not wrong either. There we are against the [violation
of] freedom of expression. But in Turkey there are laws, cases, that
repress the freedom of expression. Let us do what is right. After that,
as France has done in their mistake, they will be left isolated”.
What did government officials say?
On the freedom of expression, senior government officials have made
some recent remarks that were widely reported in the media. State
Minister and chief negotiator Ali Babacan told Turkish journalists
in Brussels that the French decision would affect feelings towards
the EU in a negative way.
Babacan said, “If the French make mistakes, it is not correct for
us to give a response with further mistakes. We will continue with
our reforms. What is correct is clear and we will continue what is
correct with reforms”.
Gul: Progress will continue
Visiting Luxembourg for a meeting Turkey’s Foreign Minister Abdullah
Gul emphasized the difference between Turkey and other countries.
“Our difference is that we are aware of what we are missing,” he said
adding, however, that the country had advanced much in a short time.
“Some things do overshadow the progress we have made,” he said. “We
still have things to do and we are determined to do them”.
–Boundary_(ID_owa4mItPNAnqJMmNZ4Tj9Q )–