Deutsche Presse-Agentur, Germany
October 12, 2006 Thursday
Turkey outraged by French support for Armenian genocide bill
DPA POLITICS France Diplomacy Turkey EXTRA: Turkey outraged by French
support for Armenian genocide bill Ankara
Turkey has expressed outrage Thursday at a vote in
the French National Assembly in favour of a bill that would make it a
crime to deny that Turkey committed genocide against the Armenian
people more than 90 years ago.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry in Ankara characterized the
assembly’s move as an “irresponsible action” that rested on the “weak
assertions by a few French politicians,” which would deal “a massive
blow” to Franco-Turkish relations.

The ministry added that Turkey would “deeply regret” approving the
bill.

Turkish Parliamentary President Bulent Arinc said the proposed law
was “humiliating” and a “inimical stance” towards the Turkish people,
adding that it would be “a blow against freedom of opinion and
thought” and “unacceptable” to Turkey.

Turkey, which vehemently maintains that the mass deaths of
Armenians during the First World War should not be considered
genocide, has threatened France with economic sanctions should the
Western European country pass the legislation.

The Associated Press
October 12, 2006 Thursday 4:43 PM GMT
French lawmakers infuriate Turkey with Armenia genocide vote
By EMMANUEL GEORGES-PICOT, Associated Press Writer
Infuriating Turkey, a thin turnout of French lawmakers Thursday
approved a bill that would make it a crime to deny that mass killings
of Armenians in Turkey during the World War I era amounted to
genocide.
In Ankara, angry Turks threw eggs at the French Embassy amid growing
calls to boycott French goods, although the bill could face an
impossible struggle to become law or even make it to the upper house
for further discussion.
“No one should harbor the conviction that Turkey will take this
lightly,” Turkey’s Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said.
The bill passed 106-19, but the majority of the 557 lawmakers in
France’s lower house did not take part in the vote.
President Jacques Chirac’s government opposed the bill, although it
did not use its majority in the lower house to vote it down. Instead,
most ruling party lawmakers did not vote on the text that was brought
by the opposition Socialist Party.
Chirac’s government is thought to be unlikely to forward the bill for
passage by the Senate.
The French president did not comment on the vote Thursday, although
he previously has said that the bill “is more of a polemic than legal
reality.”
His former spokeswoman Catherine Colonna, now France’s minister for
European affairs, told parliament Thursday that the government did
not look favorably on the bill.
“It is not for the law to write history,” she said shortly before the
vote.
The Armenia genocide issue has become intertwined with ongoing debate
in France and across Europe about whether to admit mostly Muslim
Turkey into the European Union. France is home to hundreds of
thousands of people whose families came from Armenia.
On Thursday, Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk won the Nobel literature
prize for his works dealing with the symbols of clashing cultures.
Pamuk was charged last year for telling a Swiss newspaper in February
2005 that Turkey was unwilling to deal with two of the most painful
episodes in recent Turkish history: the massacre of Armenians and
recent guerrilla fighting in Turkey’s overwhelmingly Kurdish
southeast. The charge was later dropped.
Chirac says he favors Turkey’s membership in the EU. But on a visit
to Armenia last month, he also urged Turkey to recognize “the
genocide of Armenians” in order to join the EU.
“Each country grows by acknowledging its dramas and errors of the
past,” Chirac said.
Gul, the Turkish foreign minister, said the bill dealt a serious blow
to Turkish-French relations and damaged the credibility of France as
an EU member which defends freedom of expression.
“From now on, France will never describe itself as the homeland of
freedoms,” Gul said.
France has already recognized the killings of up to 1.5 million
Armenians from 1915 to 1919 as genocide; under Thursday’s bill, those
who contest it was genocide would risk up to a year in prison and
fines of up to $56,000.
A law passed in 1990 makes it a crime to deny the Holocaust.
Armenia accuses Turkey of massacring Armenians during World War I,
when Armenia was under the Ottoman Empire. Turkey says Armenians were
killed in civil unrest during the collapse of the empire.
Outside the French parliament building, a few dozen protesters of
Armenian descent celebrated.
“The memory of the victims is finally totally respected,” said Alexis
Govciyan, head of a group of Armenian organizations in France.
The vote on the bill in Paris dominated front pages of most Turkish
newspapers, with some reporting that thousands of Turks have promised
to go to France and deny genocide in hopes of getting arrested if the
bill passes. Two TV networks in Turkey broadcast the parliamentary
floor debate live.
Associated Press writer Selcan Hacaoglu contributed to this report
from Ankara, Turkey.

Financial Times, UK
Oct 12 2006
Why the writers refuse to be silenced
Perihan Magden, a Turkish novelist and journalist, appeared in an
Istanbul court earlier this month accused of the slightly surreal
crime of “alienating the people against military service” because she
defended a young man’s right to be a conscientious objector.
As she entered the court she was attacked by a small crowd of
demonstrators shouting insults and causing a commotion that at least
guaranteed television news coverage.
It was a scene that has become familiar outside Turkish courtrooms. A
series of prosecutions of writers and journalists, for things they
said or wrote, has attracted bigots and xenophobes to each hearing,
adding a sharp political edge to the occasions and turning them into
spectacles that would be considered in some other countries to be
bringing the law into disrepute.
Ms Magden’s case was adjourned to another hearing in late July. She
faces three years in jail if she is convicted. “I cannot believe I am
being prosecuted,” she said in court.
Her alleged crime was to write an opinion piece in a magazine in
which she defended the notion of conscientious objection to military
service, arguing in favour of a young man who was refusing to wear
the uniform during his conscription because it was against his
beliefs.
The Turkish military, a powerful institution with a long history of
meddling in politics and silencing its critics, objected to the
article, arguing that it could undermine the standing of the armed
forces in the public mind and perhaps encourage youngsters to refuse
military service, which is compulsory for men.
The notion is absurd in a country where the armed forces are, on the
whole, highly regarded, and where military service is seen as a badge
of honour. But a prosecutor filed a case against Ms Magden, and it is
now being played out in court.
If Ms Magden thinks the case is absurd, many Turks would probably
agree. So would the European Union, which Turkey wishes to join. The
EU has put freedom of expression high on its list of issues Turkey
must address if any progress on entry is to be made.
In particular, the EU wants Turkey to change or abolish Article 301
of the revised penal code passed by this government, which is seen as
a license for any prosecutor to pursue a case against an individual
based on the flimsiest evidence.
The furore that invariably surrounds the prosecution of freedom of
expression cases in Turkey does immense damage to the country’s image
at home and abroad.
This raises the intriguing question of why Turkey, which is a modern
democracy with a pluralist media and no shortage of opinions on every
conceivable subject, still puts writers and journalists on trial, and
why such a powerful country is still so seemingly terrified of
wayward, unorthodox, or subversive yet non-violent opinion.
One reason, commentators say, is because the legal system tolerates
it. Although a constitution drafted by the military top brass and
imposed after a coup d’etat in 1980 has been heavily amended, its
legacy has been pernicious and authoritarian.
Even today, commentators and diplomats say, vaguely worded articles
allow for severe restrictions on freedom of expression. These
restrictions are less draconian than a decade ago, but they are still
effective in making a writer think twice before putting an opinion
down on paper.
Much of the impetus for prosecutors to pursue writers who might be
considered to have insulted Turkey in some way comes from the
hard-line, xenophobic nationalist extremes of Turkish politics.
This is not a large group but it is exceptionally noisy perhaps
because it feels itself alienated from the modern trend of Turkish
politics and it uses the legal system to announce and pursue its
grievances.
“Nationalists are feeling besieged,” says Ali Tekin, a political
scientist at Bilkent University. “When they see an avenue to express
their frustration, they seize it.”
A second reason is that, although debate on contested historical
questions is now more open in Turkey than it was five years ago, some
subjects are still regarded by some Turks as taboo, such as the fate
of Ottoman Armenians, the plight of the Kurds, or the continuing
usefulness of Kemalism, the republican nationalist ideology
bequeathed by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of Turkey. Those who
would silence debate on these issues say European countries do the
same thing.
They point to Austria, which jailed David Irving a British historian
who denied the Nazi Holocaust for three years.
That is a more severe sentence than any handed down in recent months
by a Turkish court. The saving grace of Turkish cases is that many
are either withdrawn or collapse under the weight of contradictions.
A third, and perhaps more important, reason why freedom of expression
is so sensitive in Turkey is that it is a country where opinions are
important, especially if they challenge received wisdom.
The columnist Cengiz Candar has described Turkish intellectuals as
“iconoclasts in a conservative society”, holding Turkey to account on
behalf of the world. There is a vast amount of opinion in Turkish
newspapers, sometimes at the expense of news, but it plays a vital
role in shaping public opinion.
Orhan Pamuk, the novelist whose trial last December on a charge of
“insulting Turkishness” led to an international outcry, recently made
a similar point about writers.
He told a conference of PEN, the international writers’ organisation,
that part of a writer’s task was to raise forbidden subjects “purely
because they wereforbidden”.
In his PEN lecture published in the New York Review of Books, from
which these quotations are taken, he recalled a visit to Istanbul in
the mid-1980s by the playwrights Arthur Miller and Harold Pinter, to
show support for jailed writers in Turkey.
Things are not that bad today. But Mr Pamuk observed that for a
writer to self-censor himself simply to avoid upsetting anybody was
“a bit like smuggling forbidden goods through customs” and was
shaming and degrading.
He has refused to be silenced in his own writings. Other Turkish
writers, as Ms Magden shows, feel the same way.

Financial Times, UK
Oct 12 2006
Royal seeks to reignite French passion for EU
by: By JOHN THORNHILL
Segolene Royal, one of the leading contenders for the French
presidency, sketched out her blueprint for Europe yesterday, calling
for a revision of the eurozone’s fiscal rules, harmonisation of
labour market standards and reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.
Europe’s institutions must be brought closer to the people, protect
workers better from the worst ravages of globalisation and promote
environmental initiatives, such as zero tax rates on renewable
energy, she said. A strong Europe was also essential for tempering US
hegemony and alleviating poverty in the developing world.
In a suggestion that will infuriate the UK and many businesses, Ms
Royal, favourite to become the opposition Socialist party’s
presidential candidate, called for the suppression of the “opt-out
clause” allowing employees in some European countries to work more
than 48 hours a week. She said minimum social standards must be
applied across the European Union.
Ms Royal appeared keen yesterday to counter accusations she was all
style and no substance. She was also responding to Nicolas Sarkozy,
the most likely presidential champion of the Gaullist right, who has
recommended a new mini-treaty to make Europe’s institutions work more
efficiently.
At a frantic press conference, Ms Royal read out seven ideas for
reigniting French enthusiasm for Europe and relaunching the European
project. “Europe is blocked. France is isolated. I want to unblock
Europe and lead France out of isolation,” she said. “There is a
demand for the French in Europe and a demand of Europe in the world.”
Declaring herself to be a convinced European, Ms Royal attacked
politicians for fanning selfish nationalism and turning the EU into a
scapegoat for unpopular economic policies. This had produced only
indifference and distrust towards Europe, leading to the rejection of
the constitutional treaty by French and Dutch voters last year.
She said Europe must overcome its “democratic deficit” and involve
citizens more in its decision-making processes. She said it was not
“healthy” that the European Central Bank was concerned only with
taming inflation rather than encouraging growth and jobs.
She called for the EU’s growth and stability pact, the rules
underpinning the euro, to be revised, allowing countries to exclude
investments in research and -innovation from their budget deficit
calculations.
She suggested the EU budget should be increased so long as the extra
money was spent on sensible -projects, such as research, innovation,
renewable energy and trans-European transport networks.
Ms Royal called for a redeployment of spending within the Common
Agricultural Policy, switching money from intensive farming into
environmentally-friendly agriculture. “No subject should be taboo,
not the CAP nor the British rebate,” she said.
The 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, the bloc’s founding
moment, next year would provide the perfect opportunity to debate the
EU’s past and future and think about new rules for governing its 27
member states, she said. This debate would lead to new ideas for
helping Europe emerge from the institutional impasse created by the
rejection of the constitution.
Ms Royal appeared less sure when questioned about Turkey. She refused
to say whether or not she supported Turkey’s accession to the EU,
saying it was up to the French people to decide in a referendum.
The French parliament will vote today on a Socialist bill that would
make the denial of the 1915 genocide of Armenians during the collapse
of Ottoman Turk rule an offence.
The Socialist party’s members will vote for their preferred
presidential candidate on November 16. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the
centrist pro-European former finance minister, and Laurent Fabius,
the former prime minister turned leftwing firebrand who inspired the
No campaign in last year’s referendum, are also running.

Economist.Com
October 12, 2006 Thursday
Denial and bad law
French MPs vote to make it a crime to deny that a genocide took place
in Armenia in 1915, provoking anger in Turkey and raising doubts
about freedom of speech
French MPs vote to make denial of genocide in Armenia a crime
“I DON’T like what you say, and I will jail you for saying it”. That
inversion of the definition of free speech commonly attributed to
Voltaire sounds so unappetising that it is hard to see why anyone
should support it. But that is just what is happening. The lower
house of the French parliament voted on Thursday October 12th to make
it a criminal offence to deny what is commonly called the “Armenian
genocide” of 1915.
Many Armenians, especially in the wealthy and well-connected
diaspora, feel that until Turkey relaxes its stance on what they call
the genocide of 1.5m compatriots, negotiations on its membership of
the European Union (EU) should be blocked (Turkey denies a genocide
took place). Many in the diaspora, especially in France, also want it
to be a crime for anyone to claim that a genocide did not occur.
There is a precedent: denial of the Nazi Holocaust is illegal in a
dozen European countries. Armenians say recognition for their
historical suffering should be protected in the same way. Though many
countries’ parliaments have voted to recognise the Armenian genocide,
few have gone further.
The French government, mindful of its ties with Turkey, is calling
the vote “unnecessary and untimely” and is trying to make sure that
it remains symbolic. To become law, the bill needs the backing of
both the upper house of parliament and the president. But the vote
has already prompted fury in Turkey, where discussion of the issue is
seen as a hypocritical Western ploy, manipulated by Turkey’s enemies
abroad. Yet the very discussion of what happened in 1915 is fraught
with legal difficulties within Turkey. Writers and scholars who raise
the matter are prosecuted, and sometimes imprisoned. One of these
writers, Orhan Pamuk, who had faced trial in December for talking
about the deaths of the Armenians, was awarded the Nobel prize for
literature on October 12th.
Many Turks recognise that hundreds of thousands of Armenians died
during “relocation” to other parts of the then Ottoman empire in
1915, but they argue that this was not a deliberate policy of mass
murder, and that the deaths took place in a context of internal
rebellion and inter-communal warfare. One problem is that the
archives concerned are not easily accessible. They are written in
archaic Ottoman Turkish, using the Arabic script, rather than the
Latin alphabet introduced by the Turkish republic’s founder, Kemal
Ataturk. Allowing the production of a scholarly and accessible
edition of the relevant files would be a big step forward–but for
many nationalist Turks even that would be an unwelcome move towards
their critics.
Turkish officials doubt this issue will affect negotiations for EU
membership (Cyprus is a far more serious concern). But the country is
trying to counter-attack in the propaganda war. Turkish deputies want
to introduce a law making it a crime to deny that the French
committed genocide in Algeria. That seems a big stretch: France
conducted a brutal colonial war, but no reputable scholar argues that
its aim was the mass extinction or expulsion of an entire ethnic
group.
The bigger question is whether laws on Holocaust or genocide denial
are a good thing in principle. Most of the countries which forbid it
were Nazi-occupied, or Nazi allies, during the second world war. They
generally passed the laws in the early years of post-war democracy,
typically along with bans on Nazi symbols, songs and regalia. That
may have been justifiable when a clean break with the past was vital;
it seems less so today.
Many scholars are convinced that making it a crime to deny the
Holocaust is a mistake. Fines and jail sentences create martyrs; they
do not deter those who hold outlandish views. The proposed law in
France, for example, sets a one-year prison term and E45,000
($56,570) fine, the same punishment as for denying the Nazi genocide.
Enforcing that against the thousands of Turks living in France for
whom denying the Armenian genocide is part of national identity,
would be all but impossible. Passing unenforceable laws looks like
gesture politics, rather than good jurisprudence.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Stolichnyye Novosti, Kiev,
10 Oct 06; p 3
RUSSIAN PLANE MAYBE NOT DESTROYED BY UKRAINIAN MISSILE, BUT BOMB ON
BOARD
US and Israeli secret services have evidence that the Russian
aircraft travelling from Tel Aviv to Russia that crashed into the
Black Sea in 2001 was not accidentally hit by a Ukrainian missile, a
newspaper has said. Its US correspondent reports that it was
destroyed by an explosion on board. Israel and Russia agreed to the
missile theory to prevent mutual accusations, because a group of
Russian experts on weapons of mass destruction was flying on board
the plane, the paper alleges. The following is the text of the
article by Dmytro Dymov entitled “Ukrainian missile did not bring
down Russian plane, was it blown up?” published in the Ukrainian
publication Stolichnyye Novosti on 10 October:
A week ago it was the fifth anniversary of the tragedy that took the
lives of almost 80 people – the disaster to the passenger liner of
the Sibir airline company flying from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk.
Our correspondent in America, on conditions of anonymity, was
informed of a sensational theory of the crash of the Russian plane
over the Black Sea. The American and Israeli special services have
reliable information at their disposal that the Tu-154 plane was not
brought down by a Ukrainian missile [during military exercises in
Crimea], but was blown up by a bomb placed in the luggage. The
explosion was also reported on 4 October 2001 and the only witness of
the horrific tragedy was the commander of an AN-24 of Armenian
airlines that was flying on a parallel route. He did not see any
trace of a missile in the sky.
So who destroyed the plane and why? Why was it that only one theory
was immediately launched into the media, which serious specialists
completely dismiss? The answer to the mystery, it is thought, lies in
the plane’s passengers. Not all of them, but a group of scientists
who had been in Tel Aviv at the invitation of their Israeli
colleagues. It is known with absolute precision that those people
were staff from the secret Novosibirsk scientific centre that was
developing weapons of mass destruction. It may be not only Muslim
terrorists that had an interest in their death, but also in theory,
for example, the Americans.
However, our collocutor believes that the explosion on board was
indeed organized by terrorists. But the Israelis and Russians agreed
on the “missile theory” in order not to accuse each other, making
Ukraine into the “scapegoat” once again. Military specialists from
various countries even then expressed doubts as to the ability of a
Ukrainian S-200 to overcome such an enormous distance and accurately
to hit the target. They also drew attention to the absence of visible
external damage, scorching and traces of soot remaining after an
“external” blast on the surface of the liner. The video clips shown
five years ago made experts assume there and then that the blast had
indeed been on board. And the missile itself that was launched from
the test site but did not shoot down the plane, it seems, can be
sought on the sea bed – there are relevant estimates of the place
where it fell, very far from point of the plane disaster.
So far as can be judged, the bomb could have been planted in
Bulgaria. The Tu-154 made an unscheduled stopover there, which has
never been reported in the press. In all likelihood, it is a matter
of the airport in Burgas, where some people left the plane and some
luggage was put on board. One other thing is surprising: at the time
of the disaster one of the crew members declared to be on board was
missing.
We hope that in the near future the editorial board will have new
facts at its disposal shedding light on the terrible tragedy. And we
will certainly continue the topic.

Federation of Armenian organisations in the Netherlands (FAON)
Address: Weesperstreet 91, The Hague, The Netherlands
Telephone: +31704490209
Contact: M. Hakhverdian
Website:
E-mail: [email protected]
Press Release

ARMENIAN FEDERATION WELCOMES FRENCH LAW
The Hague – The Federation of Armenian Organisations in the Netherlands
(FAON) is glad that the French National Assembly in large majority has
adopted a bill, which makes denial of the Armenian Genocide a crime. Denying
the holocaust has been a crime in France since 1990.

The Federation believes that with such a provision a dam is raised against
denial propaganda of the Turkish government, which is painful for the
Armenians.

Also in the Netherlands such denial material is spread, on internet sites,
in writings and also in the public debate. For victims and their surviving
descendants it is cause for problems each time. On basis of the
discrimination prohibition in the Criminal Code such remarks are in
principle already a crime. It would be a major improvement if the Dutch
legislation would make it explicitly clear that public expressions, where
genocides are systematically denied with the intention to hurt or
discriminate people, will be impossible in The Netherlands. The Federation
hopes, therefore, that the initiative bill submitted by Mrs.
Huizinga-Heringa, Member of Parliament of Christian Union faction, which
foresees the punishment of the genocide denial, will be adopted by the House
of Representatives.

The Federation emphasises for sake of completeness that this Dutch bill is
not directed to the denial in itself, as it is suggested sometimes in the
media, but to the offending or discriminating aspects of genocide denials.
Such denials stand in any case never in itself, but have always link with
discriminating or heinously treat of populations. We must not tolerate such
expressions in The Netherlands.

Anatolia news agency, Ankara,
12 Oct 06
TURKISH MINISTER, EU’S FRATTINI DISCUSS CONCERNS OVER ARMENIAN
GENOCIDE LAW
Brussels, 12 October: Turkish State Minister and Chief Negotiator for
EU talks Ali Babacan met European Commission Vice-President Franco
Frattini for Justice, Freedom and Security in Brussels on Thursday
[12 October].
Speaking to Turkish reporters, Babacan said that French parliament’s
decision on adoption of a bill on criminalizing denial of so-called
Armenian genocide was a concerning development regarding the future
of the EU, noting that this decision would make a negative impact on
(Turkish people’s) senses on EU.
“It is not reasonable to respond to France’s mistakes by making
mistakes. We will keep fulfilling reforms,” Babacan stressed.
Replying to questions on Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK),
Babacan noted that technical works on this matter were under way. “We
will monitor its implementation. There can be amendments on any law.
However developments in France will make difficult initiatives on the
matter,” he said.
Responding to a question on Turkey’s attitude in regard to the
decision of France, Babacan said that the government has not made a
decision on the matter yet, underlining that this issue would be
discussed in the first meeting of the Council of Ministers.
Noting that European Commission’s reaction to the decision of France
was a very important development, he stressed: “We consider the
commission’s attitude positive and sound.”
“We are continuing legal arrangements on EU adjustment laws. Turkish
Parliamentary General Assembly will debate the law on foundations
next week,” Babacan said upon a question. He noted: “Now Turkey aims
to be a full member of the EU.”
Stating that he held very fruitful meetings in Brussels, Babacan
indicated that there could be progress regarding visa procedure for
Turkish businessmen, students and academicians.
In regard to prominent Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk, who won the 2006
Nobel Prize for literature, Babacan stated: “It is a very important
development.”

Anatolia news agency, Ankara,
12 Oct 06
TURKISH FOREIGN MINISTER CRITICIZES ADOPTION OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE LAW
BY FRANCE
Ankara, 12 October: “France will live with this shame,” said Turkish
FM Abdullah Gul when commenting on the resolution on the so-called
Armenian genocide adopted by the French parliament today.
Gul and Afghan FM Rangin Dadfar Spanta held a joint press conference
after their meeting at the Foreign Ministry residence in Ankara.
FM Gul stated that France cannot define itself as “the homeland of
freedoms” from now on.
Noting that Turkey will not underestimate this development, Gul said
that Turkey will take every type of measure.
“I hope that France will take a backward step from this dead end,” he
added.
On the other hand, Gul said: “We are very pleased that a Turk has won
such a prize” when referring to prominent Turkish novelist Orhan
Pamuk, who won the 2006 Nobel Prize for literature.
“This is an important development for Turkey’s promotion,” he added.

Anatolia news agency, Ankara,
12 Oct 06
TURKEY SAYS FRANCE’S ARMENIAN GENOCIDE LAW AGAINST DEMOCRACY
Ankara, 12 October: “The reliability of the states depends on their
standing by the values they advocate,” the Turkish Ministry of
Foreign Affairs (MFA) said on Thursday [12 October] after French
national assembly adopted a bill on criminalizing denial of so-called
Armenian genocide.
Releasing a statement, the MFA said: “Although enactment of the bill
depends on a long process including approvals of the Senate and the
President, it has caused a profound disappointment in Turkey. We will
maintain our initiatives in all levels within this process.”
“Recent strong criticisms against the bill have already unveiled that
even France was not fully satisfied with it and that such an
unfortunate initiative did not receive support of all public opinion.
However, it does not diminish the seriousness of the event,” MFA
said.
“This bill means a violation of French constitutional order regarding
freedom of expression as superior over all other constitutional
rights, and the relevant European Convention. It also contradicts the
spirit of France which inspired the whole world by defending the
concepts of freedom, equality and brotherhood,” it said.
The MFA noted: “When it comes to dealing with France’s own history,
French parliamentarians advocate that it is the responsibility of
historians. However, they consider themselves the authority that
makes a decision on the history of another country. This is nothing
but a contradiction. This bill has also revealed the double-standard
attitude of France in a period when Turkey has been encouraged to
take additional steps on freedom of expression despite all recent
reforms aiming at further improving fundamental rights and freedoms.”
“This bill contradicts democratic regime since it prevents freedom of
thought and expression. It has caused a profound sorrow among Turkish
people including our Armenian citizens. 70m Turkish nation rejects
such a restriction on freedom of thought and expression on basis of
totally baseless allegations. Unfortunately, by adopting the bill,
France has lost its privileged position within Turkish nation’s point
of view,” the Ministry added.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress