PARLIAMENT TO DEBATE FRENCH BILL IN SPECIAL SESSION
By Cihan News Agency
Zaman, Turkey
Oct 17 2006
The Turkish parliament is set to convene on Tuesday afternoon with a
special agenda to discuss the French parliament’s decision to approve
a bill that criminalizes denying that the World War I-era deaths of
Armenians in Turkey were genocide.
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul will brief Turkish lawmakers
on the latest developments following the adoption of the bill in the
French parliament.
For further information please visit

ARMENIA ARMED FORCES FIRES ON AZERBAIJANI POSITIONS
Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
Oct 17 2006
Armenian Armed Forces continue to violate the ceasefire, Azerbaijani
Defense Ministry press service told the APA.
Armenian Armed Forces units in one km north -east of occupied Sarijali
village of Aghdam region fired on opposite positions of Azerbaijan
Armed Forces with submachine beginning from 23.30 to 23.35 on October
16. The enemy was silenced by response fire. No casualty was reported.
Armenian Armed Forces also violated the ceasefire in Fuzuli front,
APA Garabagh bureau reports. Armenian Armed Forces units in occupied
Mehdili village of Jebrail region fired on opposite positions of
Azerbaijani Armed Forces in Jojug Mercanli village of Jebrail region
with submachine for 15 minutes beginning from 21.40. The enemy was
silenced by response fire. No casualty was reported.

OZDEMIR: GIVING BACK THE LEGION D’HONNEUR MEDAL: NOW THAT’S THE WAY TO PROTEST
Hurriyet, Turkey
Oct 17 2006
Historical truths sit clearly, right in the middle for everyone to
see. But for some reason, we don’t seem to be able to convey them or
explain ourselves. Why? It always happens this way: first of all,
disaster befalls us, or is made to befall us (read: the Armenian
genocide bill in France). Then we start to feel the aches and pains.
But from time to time, the reactions we show are actually funnier
than the events themselves.
For days now we have been talking about the French genocide denial
bill. Developments in France and Holland brought this whole issue
onto our agenda again. We are a people who forgets fast though.
Otherwise, those who even slightly followed history would know that:
genocide allegations do not stick to us, and cannot be made to stick
to us.
The events of 1915 were mutual slaughter. Turks and Armenians died.
But the individual Armenian terror which began in 1973 turned into
organized terror by 1975, and since then, 42 of our diplomats and 4
foreigners have lost their lives as a result of it all.
***
Does it always take a catastrophe to bring us to our senses? We
should know by now which “headaches” will appear before us from time
to time. And we should really be prepared. And armed with knowledge.
Known as a faithful sector of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenians were
provoked by the West in 1915, as they being provoked by the West
today. By which I mean, in 1915, the West was a supporter of the
mutual slaughter, and today, is a partner in the baseless accusations.
Speaking to journalist Can Dundar, Ismail Cem pointed out recently
“Chirac’s apology to Erdogan was like a joke. Chirac seems to see
Turkey, the Turkish public, our press, but mostly Prime Minister
Erdogan, as ‘naive.’ If he was even in the slightest bit genuine, he
would have spoken these words of apology not in a private telephone
call, but in front of the world.” Don’t you think Ismail Cem is right
about this?
***
Today you will read in the Turkish newspapers about a response
appropriate for Chirac: that Tezic, the president of the Turkish
Board of Higher Education, has decided to return his medal of honor to
France. It had been awarded to him in 2002. In his letter to Chirac,
Tezic underscores the problem, as he sees it, with Chirac’s quick
rush to deny support of the recently accepted “genocide denial” bill:
“In statements, you bring to attention over and over again that the
French government was outside of and not involved in this initiative
by parliament members to approve the bill. But during an official
visit to Armenia at the start of October, you expressed the view that
‘Turks did commit a genocide against the Armenians.’ In saying so, you
clearly made this issue French state policy…..I can no longer carry
the ‘Commandeur de la Legion d’Honneur’ medal which was awarded to me.”
Tezic, in returning his Legion d’Honneur, has become the first person
ever to do so. These actions need no more words to explain them;
when you say ‘protest,’ this is the way to do it.

LOVE THY NEIGHBOUR?
WaluEurope
Tiscali Europe, UK
Oct 17 2006
New EU poll sheds light on countries from the Caucasus to the Atlas
mountains
The latest Commission survey looks over the fence at countries
bordering the European Union. This ‘Special Eurobarometer’, published
in October, asked the opinions of 30,000 people across the EU25, as
well as accession countries Bulgaria and Romania, candidate countries
Croatia and Turkey, and finally Northern Cyprus.
The questionnaire probed our knowledge and attitudes towards Europe’s
nearest neighbours, as well as EU policy on the ‘arc’ stretching
from the Caucasus to the Atlas mountains. First and foremost, it
revealed that just one in five people across Europe has even heard
of the European Neighbourhood Policy – but they still have opinions
on a wide range of issues.
When asked about Europe’s neighbours, we look first to countries
sharing a land border with the EU (Ukraine 58% and Russia 57%) before
those on the southern or eastern shores of the Mediterranean, also
known as the Maghreb and Mashrek respectively.
Close on three quarters (72%) of those interviewed say they are in
favour of more countries joining the club so long as the process is not
rushed. A similar proportion (70%) also back more special relationships
that stop short of full EU membership – mirroring the views of German
chancellor Angela Merkel and French interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy.
European public opinion is, however, more divided over whether the
EU should treat neighbouring countries in the same way as any other
third countries after the current enlargement process (52% the same
way vs. 36% not the same way).
“Perception is strong and sight weak,” said warrior-philosopher
Miyamoto Musashi. And though some capitals do not see eye to eye with
Ankara among others (France last week passed a law banning denial of
the Armenian genocide) the general public tends to have a positive
perception of relations with neighbouring countries. Some 60% of
respondents say these countries do not share the same values as the
EU, but they still believe that cooperation is good for both sides.

FRANCO-TURKISH RELATIONS STRAINED
ISN, Switzerland
Oct 17 2006
A bill to penalize Armenian genocide denial has put tension on
relations between France and Turkey, as the latter attempts to shore
up support for its quest to join the EU.
Commentary by Federico Bordonaro in Rome for ISN Security Watch
(17/10/06)
The French National Assembly on 13 October passed a bill, which,
if approved by the Senate and signed by President Jacques Chirac,
would penalize anyone denying the Armenian genocide at the hands of
the Ottoman Turks with a fine of up to ~@45,000 (US$56,000) and one
year in prison.
The bill was proposed by the Socialist Party.
The French decision infuriated Turkey, whose government accuses Paris
of using the memory of the Turkish-Armenian clash in a demagogic way
and for domestic political reasons, as France prepares for the 2007
general elections.
Presidential candidates, according to an official in Ankara, are
trying to win the votes of those citizens opposed to Turkey’s EU
accession bid. Moreover, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
administration believes that France is “permanently hostile” to
Ankara’s EU integration.
Armenia claims that between 1915 and 1923, the Ottoman Empire
systematically murdered 1.5 million ethnic Armenians when Ankara
forced them out of its eastern regions. Turkey, however, says that
Armenian casualties were between 250,000 and 500,000, and denies that
any systematic genocide took place.
Chirac expressed his view during a phone conversation with Erdogan
on 14 October, reportedly saying that although France recognized the
Armenian tragedy as a genocide, the proposed law was “useless.” The
French president’s attempt to appease Ankara came after Turkey
threatened the possibility of economic retaliation.
However, the controversy is far from over, and its economic and
political fallout is already spreading.
Turkish citizens protested against France over the weekend, while
Turkish Economy Minister Ali Babacan told media that although
the Erdogan government would not start a boycott campaign, other
organizations in Turkey might.
In fact, on 16 October, the Turkish daily Hurriyet quoted Bulent
Deniz, president of the Turkish Consumers’ Federation, as saying
that “a boycott against French products has already resulted in an
observed 30 percent drop in sales of goods for […] Total,” a French
oil company and one of Paris’ top players in Turkey.
Moreover, Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said in an official
statement on 14 October that Ankara had warned Paris that “if such a
bill were passed by its parliament, the loser would be France. Paris
will always be embarrassed by this.”
France’s strategic and commercial relations with Turkey may be damaged
in such a way that large industrial interests, as well as defense
and energy-related cooperation projects, could be hindered.
Frederic Saint-Geours, CEO of Peugeot Automobiles, said last week
that economic retaliation by Turkey against French goods was “almost
certain,” and would likely be painful for Peugeot, which holds between
5 and 6 percent of Turkey’s automobile market.
The Franco-German defense giant Eurocopter, which is owned by the
European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company, competes with other
big groups to provide Ankara with some 52 civilian and military
helicopters. The company could also suffer from the deteriorating
bilateral relations.
Lucrative contracts for civilian nuclear power plants and the massive
infrastructure of the fast-growing Turkish economy are also being eyed
by big French corporations. Should Ankara decide to boycott Paris,
the economic damage for France could be substantial.
However, the dispute is a politically thorny issue for Paris and
the EU. The French Parliament’s move comes at a time of increasing
difficulties in Euro-Turkish relations.
Prominent politicians in France, Germany and the Netherlands have
taken a hostile stance to Turkey’s EU integration, and now openly
speak in favor of a mere “special relationship” between the EU and
Ankara as opposed to its accession.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel told Erdogan on 5 October that “Turkey
must fully recognize [Greek-controlled] Cyprus” if it were to join the
EU. Since Germany will take the helm of the EU’s rotating presidency
next January, the announcement was a sign that Merkel would again
put pressure on Ankara.
Although Turkey remains crucial for European security, including in the
area of energy, Western European leaders appear increasingly sensitive
to cultural aspects of the integration issue, as the intellectual
debate over the political and social aspects of Islam is heats up
in Europe.
While Chirac may work to annul the bill, his chances of success are
not high, and the short-term outlook for Franco-Turkish relations is
bleak. Nicolas Sarkozy, the Union for a Popular Movement’s candidate
for the French presidency next year, is wagering on his electorate’s
opposition to Ankara’s accession, while the Socialists do not show
any enthusiasm for it, either. More generally, Euro-Turkish relations
appear to be deteriorating even as Ankara remains determined to join
the EU.
Federico Bordonaro, based in Italy, is an analyst of international
relations and geopolitics with the Power and Interest News Report
and Strategic-Road.com. He is an expert on the new structure of the
international system after the Cold War, the European integration
process, security and defense issues and political realism.
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only,
not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).

IN TURKEY, WRITING HISTORY’S WRONGS
By Roshni Sharma
Jerusalem Post
Oct 17 2006
Last September, the rising young Turkish novelist Elif Shafak was
charged with “public denigration of Turkishness” under Article 301
of the Turkish Penal Code. The subsequent legal case became only one
of a series of trials aimed at suppressing internal discourse about
the 1915 Armenian massacre, with the Turkish government continuing
to reject responsibility and the term “genocide” when describing the
fate of 1.5 million Armenians in the country during World War I.
Since the Article’s induction last year, a number of distinguished
Turkish writers and journalists have faced similar charges, including
Orhan Pamuk, who received the 2006 Nobel Prize for literature last
week. (In a well-publicized interview with Swiss journal Tages
Anzeiger, Pamuk had stated, “One million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds
were killed in these lands and nobody but me dares talk about it.”
The case against him stalled and was eventually dismissed against a
backdrop of growing international outrage.)
France’s lower house of parliament approved a bill making it a crime
to deny the Armenian genocide last week, just as Pamuk was announced
as the Nobel prize winner. President Chirac is expected to block the
bill’s progress, but if the law is passed the Armenian genocide will
join the Holocaust as something illegal to deny in France. The law
cuts to the heart of European-Turkish tensions, with Turkey’s highly
contested “literature trials”threatening to undermine the Muslim
country’s application for European Union membership.
The case against Shafak, a critically acclaimed, bestselling
novelist, was considered exceptional even among the recent court
scandals. In contrast to Pamuk, Shafak was prosecuted not because of
public statements she had made, but because of the opinions of her
fictional characters.
The novel at the heart of the controversy, The Bastard of Istanbul,
follows four generations of women in two families – one in Turkey
and the second a group of migr s based in the United States. Among
the book’s offending statements is the line, “I am the grandchild
of genocide survivors who lost all their relatives at the hands of
Turkish butchers in 1915, but I myself have been brainwashed to deny
the genocide because I was raised by some Turk named Mustapha!”
Originally written in English, the novel was released in Turkey last
March and became an overnight bestseller, selling over 60,000 copies.
>From her home in Istanbul, Shafak spoke recently with the Jerusalem
Post.
You didn’t attend the September hearing against you because of your
pregnancy, but why was The Bastard of Istanbul a political target in
the first place?
I gave birth four days before my trial, so both the trial and the
delivery took place in the same week. The book became the target
of ultra-nationalists. These groups compose a very small segment
of the society, but because their voices are so loud and message so
aggressive, they manage to dominate the political agenda. There is
this nationalist backlash that wants to prevent Turkey’s European
Union membership. So they are targeting intellectuals deliberately.
We’re not the main targets. The main target is Turkey’s EU process.
What was the initial response to the novel? Were there changes to
this response during or following your trial?
The book came out on March 8, International Women’s Day. It was read
and circulated freely. The feedback that I received from different
segments of Turkish society has been incredibly positive … This
nationalist reaction, the backlash, came much later. My experience
with Turkish society is yes, I think people are discussing issues.
It’s not easy, but the civil society here is quite dynamic. That’s
why [the trials are] a pity, because nationalist groups are giving
the whole country a black eye.
Did thoughts of flight cross your mind during the trial, or did you
expect the verdict?
I wasn’t expecting this trial. It caught me by surprise, but I never
thought about abandoning Turkey, going away once and for all.
There is a metaphor I like very much in the Koran: it’s a tree called
Tuba that’s supposed to have roots up in the air. Sometimes when
my nationalist critics accuse me of having no roots, I say I feel
like the Tuba tree … My roots are in the air, not in the ground,
and when your roots are in the air you can feel connected to more
than one country, culture, and identity. I like that flexibility.
What is your response to this notion of a “clash of civilizations”?
What was your take on the Pope’s controversial recent statements
about Islam?
I found the Pope’s recent statements worrisome because we are living in
an increasingly polarized world and we don’t need further polarization
… There are very rigid ultra-religious within the Muslim world,
in the Christian world, and in the Jewish world, and I think that
these hardliners have a lot in common. They have the same mentality
based on exclusion, and they think they are better than others …
I do not believe there is a clash of civilizations between Islam and
the West, but I think there is a clash of opinions in each country. I
think Islam is … not one color or one voice. It is composed of
different voices, different interpretations, just like every other
religion. There are progressive, heterodox forces within Islamic
history and the Islamic domain. What worries me most is to see how
people on both sides believe in a clash of civilizations. I think
this is very dangerous.
What is the Turkish writer’s relationship with censored history?
For me, history is important, memory is important, a sense of
continuity is important. Turkey is a dynamic, future-oriented society,
but that potential for transformation came at the expense of memory
… The events of 1915 are part of that. Many Turks do not have a sense
of curiosity for our past. There is this mentality to let bygones be
bygones and a tendency to draw a clear demarcation line between past
and present.
Walter Benjamin has a metaphor I like very much. He said, “sometimes I
feel like I’m walking on a pile of rubble and I try to listen to the
sounds coming from beneath, to understand if there is still something
alive underneath that rubble.” Sometimes I try to see if there are
still stories or words that are alive under the ground and, when I
encounter something, I pull it from the ground, I shake off its dust
and put it in my novels so that it can live and circulate.
In fall 2005, you taught a course entitled “Gender Issues and Women’s
Literature in the Middle East” at the University of Arizona. You
asked, “Do women write differently than men? Are there essential
differences between Western women writers and those coming from the
Middle East?” How would you answer those questions?
These are questions that are very dear to me. I think about these
questions a lot. I don’t think there are fundamental differences
between women writers and male writers that are biologically determined
… our pen, our writing, should be bi-sexual; it should transcend
gender boundaries. And I am against making a distinction between
Middle Eastern writers and Western writers. I prefer to see each and
every writer in his or her own individuality.
Did you receive any threats to you or your family during the trial?
I have received some very poisonous letters, few in numbers, but
they were quite full of hatred and rage. That being said, it was
interesting to see that most of the [negative] letters came from Turks
living abroad, in America or in Europe. I tend to think immigrant Turks
[are] much more nationalist, religious or conservative than the Turks
in Turkey.
You’ve quoted Bertolt Brecht, “Unhappy the country that needs
heroes.” How would you respond to this, in terms of your relationship
with national heroes?
It troubles me very much. I think only true democracy can come from
below, from civil society, and it can be achieved collectively,
not individually.
When Turkish writers are persecuted, sometimes the Western media
treats us as if we were victims, and I don’t like that. I’m not a
victim. I’m not a hero, either. We don’t need individual heroes. We
need collective networks, collective movements of progressive people.
I think there should be more collaboration between progressive,
democratic forces in Turkey, in Israel, progressive democratic forces
in France. We don’t need heroes, but we need these movements, civil
society movements coming from below.

ARMENIAN LOBBY TRIES TO USE AUTHORITY OF NOBEL LAUREATE
Author: A.Alasgarov
TREND, Azerbaijan
Oct 17 2006
A Turkish writer, Orkhan Pamuk, who has been recently awarded the
Nobel Prize for his contribution to culture, is invited to present a
report at the European Parliament on the so-called ‘Armenian Genocide’.
Trend Special Correspondent in Ankara reports that Pamuk received
this proposal from the Italian MP, Mario Rgetzio, who is well-known
for his pro-Armenian views.
Earlier Pamuk was criticized for his statements indirectly
acknowledging the Country’s guilt in the ‘termination of Armenians’.

IF PEACEFUL TALKS REGARDING NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT DON’T YIELD ANY RESULTS, AZERI ARMED FORCES TAKE STEPS – AZERI DM
Author: S.Ilhamgizi
TREND, Azerbaijan
Oct 17 2006
We hope that the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will be
settled peacefully. However, should the talks prove to be unsuccessful,
the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan will, with the determination of the
Azeri people and the approval of the State Head, take action to release
the Azerbaijan land from the Armenian invaders, the Azerbaijan Defense
Minister, Colonel-General Safar Abiyev stated on 16 October in Baku
during the meeting with the delegation of the Ad Hoc Committee for
Future Defense and Security of the Defense and Security Committee
of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly which was headed by the Chairman,
Vahid Erdem.
The Defense Minister stressed that Azerbaijan co-operated with NATO
in 1994 within the framework of the Program “Partnership for peace”,
and since 2004 the co-operation has been continuing on the basis of
the Individual Partnership Action Plan. Abiyev informed the delegates
of the military-political situation in the region of South Caucasus,
as well as the history of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. He
stressed that placing large military arsenals in the Azerbaijani
territories occupied by Armenia imposes serious threats for the
large-scale economical projects in the region.
Erdem voiced his confidence that the conflict will be resolved
peacefully. He was interested in the structure of the Azerbaijani
Armed Forces, the military budget and the character of co-operation
with NATO. He stated that the participation of the Azerbaijani Armed
Forces in the peacemaking operations carried out by NATO testifies that
the relations between Azerbaijan and NATO are developing favorably.

…WHEN A WAITER DROPS A TURKEY
Kenneth Zammit Tabona
Times of Malta, Malta
Oct 17 2006
What happens when a waiter drops a turkey? The Downfall of Turkey,
the Spreading of Greece, the Breaking of China and the Leaving of
Hungary! Such was the rather droll method of remembering historical
facts employed in the schoolroom a century or so ago.
Since the downfall of Turkey, read The Ottoman Empire, the Middle
East and the Mediterranean Basin have been in a constant state of
flux. There was something about the Ottoman Empire which since its
inception in 1453 kept and contained the vicissitudes of its far-flung
territories strictly within its borders.
The Turkish menace waned slowly and painfully after Lepanto, stifled in
its own reactionary stance until a very imperialist and expansionist
Western Europe along with Russia decided that Turkey was The Sick Man
of Europe (please note “Europe” not “Asia”) and fought over it in the
Crimean War. It was in fact a scenario rather similar to that of the
Eastern bloc in our own lifetimes before the Wall fell and the USSR
was dismembered.
We were, in the days of Tito’s Yugoslavia, blissfully unaware of
situations like that between Serbs and Bosnians. We were brought
up to view a globe where any country beyond the Iron Curtain was
impenetrable. Very little news was allowed to be filtered through
and many of us were surprised at the avalanche that took place after
the liberalisation of Rumania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro etc;
incidentally all of which were countries that till the 19th century
were part of the Ottoman Empire.
Therefore the uncanny similarity in policy between the Ottoman and
Soviet empires kept the ethnic and religious conflicts and situations
in the countries in question very much under wraps. Today the situation
is vastly different. Europe itself has doubled in size and the EU is
poised to take in many other countries that formerly lay within the
bloc. Strangely enough it is not these countries that are causing
controversy but Turkey.
It all started when the present Pope was still Cardinal Ratzinger and
pronounced himself as being against Turkey’s entry into the EU because
Turkey, he said, has always been different; a very debatable point. He
added that the Turks had laid siege to Vienna, twice, if you please,
and other irrelevant historical facts that could have been easily
ascribed to Spain or his own homeland Germany, while conveniently and
inexplicably leaving out the two worst blots on the Turkish escutcheon;
the Armenian and Kurdish genocides.
Next month Benedict XVI is off to Turkey. Very few people realise how
controversial and significant this visit is. Apart from the Ratzinger
pronouncements, one must contend with the ill-advised and to me still
inexplicable remarks that caused such a furore in Regensburg last
month and also the stormy relations the papacy has always had with
Islamic Istanbul and previously Christian Constantinople for 1,000
years and more!
Let us not forget that it was a Turkish gunman who tried to assassinate
John Paul II. The visit will, I am sure, prove to be one of the great
watersheds of contemporary history. We will see which way the cat
will jump and pray that it will bring peace.
Recently French MPs approved an Armenian Genocide Bill by which
if it is ratified by the Senate will make it a crime to deny that
Armenians suffered genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Turks. This
has provoked anger in Turkey and has raised fresh doubts about its
EU ambitions. Denying the Armenian Genocide in France carries the
same penalties as denying the Jewish Holocaust.
The move has been identified as a vote-catching exercise for all
Armenians who live in France. However, as Turkey still officially
denies that 1.5 million Armenians were massacred during and after
WWI, when the empire was dismembered, the move is proving to be very
sensitive and controversial. It will also undermine the pro-EU movement
within Turkey itself and further strengthen the nationalists.
I do not profess to fully understand Turkey and the Turks. We in Malta
still hold, by and large, a warped impression, coloured by the Great
Siege mentality, which is completely unfocused.
Let me start by saying that, from the very beginning, the Ottomans
who conquered Constantinople in 1453 did not sack it as the Western
Christians did during the Fourth Crusade 200 years before under the
leadership of the unscrupulous blind doge, Enrico Dandolo. Mehmet II,
aptly called The Conqueror, merely let his troops wreak the minimum of
damage as allowed by convention and immediately set about reorganising
Byzantine bureaucracy in his own way.
Only a couple of days after the entry into the Rome of the East,
Mehmet conferred ecclesiastical concessions on the Oecumenical
Patriarch Gennadios, a move that drove the wedge between Eastern and
Western churches even deeper than ever before.
When one examines Mehmet’s portrait by Gentile Bellini, who lived
in Constantinople as the Sultan’s guest from 1479 to 1481, we see
a sensitive and pensive aristocratic face that belies his fierce
reputation as the Scourge of Europe.
Mehmet’s adoption of Byzantine policies and methods was so successful
that it did not take countries like France long to reap the advantages
and establish diplomatic relations with what came to be known as The
Sublime Porte. This policy existed with variations right up to 1924.
Just to give you an example of the friendly relations countries like
France and its allies like the Order of Malta under de Rohan enjoyed
in the 18th century, our own Antoine Favray spent time in Istanbul
painting the portraits of the French Ambassador to Turkey, the Comte
de Vergennes, and his wife in Ottoman dress. His paintings of harems
and zenanas grace many a wall in museums and private houses in Malta.
It goes further into the 19th century too.
The Most Noble Amodeo, Count Preziosi worked in Constantinople from
1842 to his death in 1876 while other artists like Thomas Allom and
Jean Etienne Liotard worked in both Turkey and Malta.
Turkey is a country of strong contrasts and contradictions. While it
professes to be a secular state, Islamic permutations have allowed
crimes like honour killings to proliferate, not only within its own
borders but also in the countries that have adopted millions of Turks
as cheap labour like Germany!
Freedom of speech is as curtailed as it is in other Islamic states
as can be attested by Orhan Pamuk, Turkey’s best-known contemporary
novelist, who has just won the 2006 Nobel Prize for literature. Mr
Pamuk faced trial for “insulting his country” earlier this year. This
coincided with the French parliamentary move to criminalise denying
the Armenian Genocide.
Mr Pamuk’s novels also criticise the mania, started by Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk, to make Turkey more Turkish which because of the complexity
of the Byzantine/Ottoman Empire entailed ethnic cleansing to achieve.
Anyone who has read Louis de Berniere’s excellent and riveting
novel Birds Without Wings will be horrified by the displacements of
entire peoples from Greece to Turkey and vice versa for instance. The
Greco-Turkish problem in Cyprus is a direct consequence of this.
It is Mr Pamuk, however, who symbolises free thought and is held
by the West as one of the reasons that could make Turkey a valid
and contributing member of the EU family. The Turks themselves must
face the fact that they must be part of a homogenous whole and that
mediaeval mentalities have no place in it. In fact joining the EU
requires Turkey to make such a great leap forward (with apologies
to the late Chairman Mao) that I cannot see it happening for another
decade at least.
I have been told by many who follow my weekly scribbles that I am,
at times, a bit too historical to follow. To explain a situation like
this entails delving into the past to find out why and how things
developed the way they have. Events rarely happen in isolation.
I am sure there are scholars and historians far more well-informed
and accomplished than I on the subject next to whom I am mere acolyte.
We cannot ignore the situation that has developed in the world between
what used to be conveniently called the struggle between the Cross
and Crescent. Although what is happening today is a direct derivation
of that same struggle we must realise that not since the death of
Suleiman the Magnificent has the Crescent been such a threat to our
own Western civilisation and way of life.
Today’s Islamic states with their oil and riches hold the world to
ransom. Allowing Turkey to join the EU and encouraging it to adopt
many of our own mores while abandoning their own outdated ones will
in the long run benefit both and will symbolise the beginning of a
rapprochement that will, with a bit of luck and goodwill, enable the
Cross and the Crescent to co-exist in future and bring what may be
called “Peace in Our Time”.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ARMENIA AND FINLAND SIGN AGREEMENT ON AVOIDING DOUBLE TAXATION
Armenpress
Oct 16 2006
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 16, ARMENPRESS: Armenia and Finland signed an
agreement on avoiding double taxation of goods and property.
The foreign ministry said the agreement was signed by minister Vartan
Oskanian and Finnish ambassador to Armenia, Teri Hakkala.