DARCHINYAN TO SEARCH FOR MORE WORLD TITLES
Stathi Paxinos
The Age, Australia
June 9 2006
AUSTRALIA’s flyweight world champion Vic Darchinyan said yesterday he
would only fight for new world titles after he completed his fourth
title defence by a knockout last weekend.
And the feisty Armenian-born Darchinyan said he was prepared to move
up three weight divisions to secure the fights he wanted.
Darchinyan, who yesterday received a disappointingly low-key reception
in Sydney after retaining his International Boxing Federation and
International Boxing Organisation belts last weekend, said he was
only prepared to fight other world champions from now on.
He said negotiations were being held to fight World Boxing Organisation
flyweight champion Omar Narvaez on the undercard of either the Hasim
Rahman and Oleg Maskaev fight in August or the next Diego Corrales
fight scheduled for September – both of which would give him extensive
coverage in the US.
He said he would wait one month after that bout to secure fights
with holders of other flyweight belts. If he could not secure a bout,
he would move divisions.
“Super-flyweight, bantamweight, super-bantamweight, it doesn’t matter
for me. If someone has a belt and wants to fight me, I will fight
him. But he needs a belt,” Darchinyan said.
“I don’t want to just defend my titles, I want other titles … I
want to put my name in the memory of boxing.”
Darchinyan said he has sparred against Israel Vazquez, World Boxing
Council and IBF super-bantamweight champion, and was comfortable at
that weight.
He extended his perfect sequence of knockouts in world title fights
to five with his eighth-round stoppage of previously unbeaten Mexican
Luis Maldonado in Las Vegas last weekend.
The exciting southpaw’s “warrior” style earned him plenty of fans in
the US and delighted promoters.
But when Darchinyan arrived at Sydney airport just after 6am yesterday,
there were only a couple of reporters and no television cameras or
fans to meet him.
The scene was in contrast to the throng that met former
junior-welterweight world champion Kostya Tszyu on his early-morning
return from numerous overseas conquests.
Darchinyan, who relocated to Sydney from Armenia after representing
that country at the 2000 Sydney Olympics, was diplomatic about the
continued modest level of recognition for his feats.
“Maybe it’s because there’s not too much advertising or too much
media involved,” he said. “But my promoters and (US pay TV network)
Showtime told me, ‘Your style is very exciting, everyone wants you,
they’d like to watch you again’.”

REPORT: PLAYERS IN PUNCH-UP OVER ‘ANNA KOURNIKOVA OF CHESS’ AT BERMUDA EVENT
By Ruth O’Kelly-Lynch
Royal Gazette, Bermuda
June 8 2006
The Bermuda chess team has been dubbed one of the world’s worst teams
in international papers, but it has also gained the reputation of
throwing the best parties.
This year its annual party will be remembered because of a punch-up
that happened between a world championship judge and the world’s
third-ranked chess champ over a young Australian beauty.
“[The Bermuda party] is always organised by the Bermuda team because
they are one of the world’s worst teams but they run the best party,”
Graeme Gardiner, a former Australian Chess Federation president,
told a Sydney paper.
The young woman who sparked the row at the Bermuda party is Arianne
Caoili, she is ranked number 2,569 in the world and dubbed “the Anna
Kournikova of chess” the Australian paper said.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported that British grand chessmaster
Danny Gormally was infuriated when he saw her dancing with the world’s
number three player, Armenia’s Levon Aronian. Arianne, who graces a
stamp in Austria and came in seventh in the first World Chess Beauty
Contest in May, was reported to be salsa dancing with the Armenian
when the first punch was thrown by Mr. Gormally.
“She’s a 19-year-old, very attractive girl,” Mr. Gardiner said.
“She’s probably got the guys queuing up for her. As far as I’m aware
in this incident she was an innocent party in the sense that she was
merely having a dance at the Bermuda party.”
The following day Mr. Gormally, who is ranked sixth in Britain, left
the competition and was reportedly “gutted” when he realised what he
had done, a source told the paper.
He also apologised to the Armenian team, but not before the some
members of the delegation threw some punches at him.

JOURNALIST BELGE ACQUITTED
Erol ONDEROGLU
BÝA, Turkey
June 8 2006
Istanbul – An Istanbul court on Thursday acquitted “Radikal” newspaper
journalist Murat Belge on charges of attempting to influence the
outcome of judicial proceedings in an article he wrote last year that
challenged the decision of an Istanbul administrative court to ban
an academic conference on Armenians under the Ottoman Empire.
Belge faced six months to 10 years imprisonment if found guilty and
was the last defendant on trial in a case where four other journalists
were acquitted on the same charges in April.
Charges against Radikal and Milliyet newspaper journalists Ismet
Berkan, Haluk Sahin, Erol Katircigolu and Hasan Cemal in the same
case were dropped, but the favourable verdict was appealed against
by the prosecutor and taken to the Court of Appeals.
Only Belge’s most recent article was deemed in exception of a statue
of limitations imposed for offences committed in writing and through
publications, which is why his case continued.
The Istanbul Bagcilar 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance on Thursday
dropped charges based on one of Belge’s articles due to the statue
of limitations and acquitted him on the other.
The charges against Belge and previous co-defendants were leveled on
a criminal complaint made by a “Jurists Union” who have, since launch
of the tribunal proceedings in February, been actively involved in
the case demanding to be accepted as an intervening party.
–Boundary_(ID_10+G871mqAZmj6ManPIBHQ)–
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

BLACK SEA FORUM SEEKING ITS RATIONALE
By Vladimir Socor
Rompres, Moldpres, Interfax-Ukraine, AzerTaj, June 5, 6
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
June 8 2006
Russia snubs summit of Black Sea leaders Presidents Traian Basescu of
Romania, Vladimir Voronin of Moldova, Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine,
Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia, Robert Kocharian of Armenia, and
Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan were joined by senior officials from the
United States, Turkey, Bulgaria, and international organizations
at the inaugural session of the Black Sea Forum for Partnership and
Dialogue on June 4-6 in Bucharest.
A Romanian initiative, the Forum is tentatively meant to hold annual
presidential-level summits — the venues rotating among participant
countries — and thematic or sectoral-cooperation meeting during
those annual intervals. The Forum is not meant to create new regional
institutions, but rather to turn into a regular consultative process
among countries of the extended Black Sea region (defined as including
the South Caucasus to the Caspian Sea) and between this group of
countries and international organizations such as the European Union.
Russia refused to send a delegation to the Forum; instead, it merely
authorized the ambassador to Romania, Nikolai Tolkachev, to sit
in as an observer, without taking part in discussions or signing a
concluding document. Moscow had turned down the Forum initiative as
soon as Bucharest announced it last December: Russia’s Ministry of
Foreign Affairs publicly deprecated the proposed Forum as redundant,
duplicative of existing cooperation frameworks, and apt to siphon
off limited resources from those frameworks (Interfax, December
13, 2005). From that point on and practically until the Bucharest
session’s eve, Russia turned down entreaties to join the Forum as a
participant and to send an official delegation on a ministerial or
some other decent level.
Officially, Moscow maintains that existing cooperation frameworks
such as the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) and the joint naval
activity Black Sea Force (Blackseafor) are adequate in themselves as
well as the only possible basis for deepening regional cooperation.
Tolkachev reiterated this position to local media during the summit,
thus in effect sniping at the Forum from the sidelines. Moscow finds
BSEC and Blackseafor to its liking because it can dominate them jointly
with Turkey and can also use them to promote Russian objectives in
the region.
There is, however, a broader political message in Russia’s dismissive
attitude toward the Forum: It suggests, first, that it is not for
“lesser” countries to take major regional initiatives on their own that
are not worked out with Moscow; and, second, that no regional project
can be successful without Russia’s participation — a proposition that
has almost become reflexive in Black Sea diplomacy and that Moscow
tries to reinforce by distancing itself demonstratively from the Forum.
Nevertheless, Forum organizers hoped until the last moment to secure
a decent-level Russian representation at the founding session as well
as participant status for Russia in the Forum down the road. This
consideration loomed large in shaping the summit’s agenda in a way that
would not risk irritating Moscow. In this regard, the Forum summit
duplicated (instead of learning from and avoiding) the experience of
the December 2005 summit of the Community of Democratic Choice (CDC)
in Kyiv. There, President Viktor Yushchenko’s forlorn hope (tied to
the electoral campaign) to induce Russian President Vladimir Putin to
visit Ukraine trumped the CDC’s own democracy-promoting goals and made
for a bland, irrelevant agenda at that summit. Similarly in Bucharest,
the shadow of absentee Russia weakened the Forum’s agenda and raised
unnecessary question marks about the rationale of this initiative.
Energy transit and the secessionist conflicts — those uppermost
policy issues in the extended Black Sea region — seemed almost lost
among a wide variety of issues on a kaleidoscopic agenda. Several
participating heads of state did not avoid addressing the conflicts.
Thus, Saakashvili described the latest claims by Russia-sponsored
secessionist movements to legitimacy through a “democratic referendum”
as a “cannibal-style democracy”: It involves the violent seizure
of a territory, ethnic cleansing, despotic rule, and criminality,
all of which is then to be crowned by a referendum and claims for
international recognition on such a basis, Saakashvili noted.
For his part, Voronin criticized the draft of the Forum’s concluding
declaration for failing to identify the external source and sponsor
of the secessionist conflicts: Resolving the conflicts will not be
possible if the external factor is not identified with the necessary
clarity, Voronin observed. Aliyev declared that Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity would not be subject to negotiations; while
Kocharian characterized Karabakh as a “classic case of secession
through self-determination” — a formulation seemingly in line with
Moscow-led recent attempts to provide a “model” for post-Soviet
conflict resolution. Aliyev and Kocharian held five hours of
inconclusive talks, including a working dinner with Basescu, during
the two days of the Bucharest summit.
Yushchenko’s speech harked back to the 2005 CDC, although that
initiative does not seem to have survived its birth. He also urged,
as he had then, Black Sea countries to co-invest in a project to
build a massive industrial center and transport hub at Donuzlav on
Ukraine’s Black Sea coast, without providing specifics; and he called
for coordination among Black Sea, Caspian, and Baltic countries in
addressing energy problems. Yushchenko held a news conference for
Ukrainian journalists, presumably dealing with deepening instability
back home, and prompting the local press to complain of being excluded.
Aliyev’s speech, delivered extemporaneously, stood out for reflecting
the political stability and bright economic prospects of Azerbaijan,
possibly the most successful among the region’s countries at
this stage. The speech exuded quiet confidence in the strategy of
evolutionary political and economic reforms on parallel tracks and
the advance of Azerbaijan from a regional to a global role in energy
projects.

ANOTHER SENATOR IS FIRED: THE KREMLIN TARGETS THE LEADER OF KALMYKIA
By Andrei Smirnov
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
June 8 2006
Russia continues to be rocked by purges of the Federation Council,
the upper house of the Russian parliament, where deputies (often called
“senators”) represent regional governments.
On May 14, Sergei Mironov, speaker of the Federation Council,
dismissed four members of the Council. The ousted senators represented
a northern region (Nenets autonomous okrug), two Siberian regions
(Yamal-Nenets autonomous okrug, and Khakassia), and a region in the
Far East (Primorsky krai). After some local resistance, regional
parliaments approved Mironov’s decision (see EDM, May 25).
However, it soon became clear that more resignations were in the
pipeline. On June 2, Senator Levon Chakhmakhchyan was arrested by
officers of the Federal Security Service (FSB) on charges of bribery.
Chakhmakhchyan represents Kalmykia, a region in southern Russia is
and vice-president of the Association for Russian-Armenian Business
Cooperation. Chakhmakhchyan and Igor Arushanov, chief accountant
for the Association, were arrested at the headquarters of Transaero
Airlines. FSB officers confiscated a bag containing $300,000, which
they claimed was a bribe.
Chakhmakhchyan was arrested after meeting with Alexander Pleshakov,
the chairman of the Transaero board of directors. The senator said that
he had visited Pleshakov “to discuss a Transaero advertising campaign
in Armenia and Transaero’s possible membership in the Association”
(lenta.ru, June 5). After the meeting, Pleshakov told the senator to
take a bag sitting under the table; Chakhmakhchyan thought the bag
contained souvenirs for him. FSB officers were waiting outside and
detained the senator and the accountant as they left the office.
Speaking to Ekho Moskvy radio on June 5 Chakhmakhchyan said, “As soon
as the two of us were out of Pleshakov’s office, we were stopped by FSB
officers. The reasons for the detention were not given. My demands for
release and the arguments that I am a member of the Federation Council
were ignored. The agents behaved rudely and cynically, used physical
violence, treated me with contempt, including [making] comments of
nationalistic nature. Only two and a half hours later was I released.”
According to the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office, the money
confiscated from Chakhmakhchyan and his associate were part of a
bribe to an official in the Russian Federation Board of Accounting
to close a case of tax evasion against Transaero. Armen Oganesyan,
Chakhmakhchyan’s father-in-law, works at the Board, so the senator had
suggested to Pleshakov that he could assist in solving the problem
for Transaero. Pleshakov, however, complained to Sergei Stepashin,
chairman of the Russian Board of Accounting, that Board officials
had blackmailed him.
Stepashin got in touch with FSB Director Nikolai Patrushev,
who ordered a special operation to arrest Chakhmakhchyan and his
father-in-law. Chakhmakhchyan was released due to his immunity as a
member of the Federation Council, but the next day proceedings were
initiated at the Federation Council to withdraw his mandate. On June
5, Mironov’s press service issued a statement saying that the speaker
had sent a representative to the parliament of Kalmykia recommending
that Chakhmakhchyan be recalled from the Federation Council before
his term expired (Interfax, June 5).
Despite the accusations of corruption, many observers and politicians
in Kalmykia and in Moscow regarded the attack on Chakhmakhchyan as an
attack by the central authorities on Kirsan Ilumzhinov, the president
of Kalmykia. According to Kommersant newspaper, Chakhmakhchyan and
Ilumzhinov are close friends, and Chakhmakhchyan helped Ilumzhinov
during the 2002 presidential elections in Kalmykia, which the latter
won despite resistance from the Kremlin. In 2004 the Kalmykian leader
returned the favor by helping Chakhmakhchyan to be elected by the
local parliament to represent Kalmykia in the Federation Council
(Kommersant, June 5).
“One can only regret this unpleasant accident,” Ilumzhinov said,
commenting on the arrest of Chakhmakhchyan. “I believe that the guilt
of the senator should be proved by the court.” At the same time,
the Kalmykian president added, “I have no grounds not to trust Sergei
Mironov. If he demanded the senator’s recall, it means he had grounds
for this.” However, Ilumzhinov also stressed that Chakhmakhchyan’s
guilt should be determined in court and he also pointed out that the
senator “did a lot of useful things for Kalmykia” (strana.ru, June 6).
Apparently Ilumzhinov does not have enough power to help his
old friend this time. He is under great pressure from the Kremlin
himself. The Russian authorities regard the Kalmykian leader as a too
independent regional governor. Moscow thinks that maverick governors
such as Ilumzhinov could be a problem as the Russian parliamentary
and presidential elections approach. President Vladimir Putin’s
administration is not sure that such governors will guarantee a
“correct vote count” during the elections.
The Kremlin was especially enraged by the Kalmykian leader’s recent
meeting with Garry Kasparov, the world chess champion and the
leader of the United Civic Front, a radical, democratic, anti-Putin
organization. On June 4, Ilumzhinov was reelected chairman of the
World Chess Federation. In his interview with Sport Express, Russia’s
leading sports newspaper, Ilumzhinov thanked Kasparov for providing
help in the elections (Sport Express, June 7). This statement was a
direct challenge to the Kremlin, and the Kalmykian leader flaunted
his independence by mentioning Kasparov.
The arrest and firing of Chakhmakhchyan may prove to be the Russian
authorities’ first steps in an anti-Ilumzhinov campaign. However,
there are no doubts that the campaign will not be easy, since the
president of Kalmykia has proven to be a formidable adversary for
the powerful Kremlin bosses.

AUTHOR ELIF SAFAK UNDER INVESTIGATION
Erol ONDEROGLU
BÝA, Turkey
June 8 2006
Istanbul – Elif Shafak, one of Turkey’s best selling authors and a
social scientist with a Master of Science degree in Gender and Woman
Studies, is under investigation for her March 2006 published book
“Father and Bastard” that was originally written in English.
Shafak and the book’s Turkish publishing house Metis director Semih
Sokmen testified to the Beyoglu Prosecutor’s Office this week in
relation to an investigation launched under article 301/1 of the
Turkish Penal Code.
The allegation of “insulting Turkishness” was brought forth in a
criminal complaint filed by nationalist lawyer Kemal Kerincsiz from
the Jurists Union. It is the same charge that was levelled at Turkey’s
internationally acclaimed writer Orhan Pamuk.
In their statement to the prosecution, Shafak and Sokmen stressed
that the book subject to investigation was a work of literature and
that comments and remarks taken from the scripts of the characters
in the book could not be used to level allegations against the author.
They said the complaint was unjust and that counter to the allegation,
the book targeted to broaden a culture of peace between people.
They said that making the book an issue of trial would not only deliver
a blow to the democratic developments and process in the country,
but would damage the interests of Turkey abroad.
The prosecution will decide within this month whether to level charges
against Shafak and the publishing house or dismiss the complaint.
Kerincsiz, the lawyer who filed the complaint against the book,
is known for his interventions during the Pamuk case where he not
only demanded new charges be launched against the author but wanted
to be accepted as an intervening party in the trial itself. He was
also present as the intervening side in the case launched against
five Turkish writers who criticised a court decision postponing the
Ottoman Armenian Conference in Istanbul.
“Father and Bastard” which was published on March 8 is already on the
best seller list and the book is sold in Turkey. Originally written
in English, the book is in the publishing schedule of Viking/Penguin
publishing house.
Elif Shafak, a Turkish citizen, was born in France and spent her
childhood in Spain. After studying political science in Turkey, she
held teaching positions in the United Kingdom, Turkey, and the United
States and then took the position of Assistant Professor in the Dept.
of Near Eastern Studies at University of Arizona.
Her publications include both novels and essays, among them The Saint
of Incipient Insanities, which was her first book published in English,
Bit Palas, Mahrem, which won the Turkish Writers’ Association Best
Novel of the Year Award, and Sehrin Aynalari. She has also published
reviews in The Economist, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Boston
Globe, and The Washington Post.
–Boundary_(ID_KV+Vr8WwPCPI5EhJ4G9BgQ)–

MAGDEN COURT CASE STARTS TENSE
Erol Onderoglu
BÝA, Turkey
June 8 2006
Istanbul – The trial of author Perihan Magden for allegedly
“discouraging people from military service” in her magazine article
titled “Conscientious Objection is a Human Right” started in tension
this week with families of Turkish soldiers killed in action staging
a protest at the court house.
Police crack teams were called in to maintain discipline at Istanbul’s
2nd Criminal Court of First Instance when a group calling themselves
“Families of Martyrs” turned up in front of the building and started
a protest as Magden arrived.
The scene was reminiscent of previous protests by nationalist groups
in the trials against authors Orhan Pamuk and Hrank Dink as well as
the five writers on trial for criticising a court decision in Istanbul
to postpone the Ottoman Armenian Conference.
Similar to the other cases, a group of 11 families of martyrs members
applied to the bench to be accepted as an intervening party in the
prosecution’s case against Magden but they were turned down on grounds
that they were not an aggrieved party.
Magden’s is one of the six cases against press and expression freedoms
heard in Turkey this week and is based on a criminal complaint filed
by the Chief of General Staff office in relation to her article which
was published in the “Yeni Aktuel” magazine in December 2005.
If found guilty of the charge of “discouraging people from military
service” under article 318 of the Turkish Penal Code, she faces a
maximum of three years imprisonment.
On Wednesday, Magden and her lawyer filed under heavy police protection
a written defence with the court after which the bench gave time to the
Republic Prosecutor to decide on whether to expand the investigation
and deliberate. The court was adjourned to July 27.
In the indictment against Magden’s article on individual rights against
compulsory recruitment, the prosecution maintains that “taking into
consideration the geographical conditions of our country, it is
evident how important compulsory military service is”.
The indictment further states that those recruited are then assigned to
the East and Southeast of the country according to their qualifications
where they serve in various capacities including as teachers and
doctors. The indictment charges that Magden, rather than use her
right to freedom of expression, was discouraging people from military
service in her article.
–Boundary_(ID_8DBY/9p+dEapgDk1ygDXhg)–

KESKIN: “THE CAMPAIGN IS MANIPULATED”
Ayse Durukan
BÝA, Turkey
June 8 2006
Istanbul – Human Rights Association (HD) Istanbul branch former chair
Eren Keskin held a press conference this week in relation to the
“violet condemnation” of her by 20 women organisations through public
advertisements in the Hurriyet and Cumhuriyet newspapers.
During the conference and a subsequent exclusive interview with Bianet,
Keskin said she did not believe the text of the advert was from the
women organisations themselves adding that the attack against her
person appeared to stem from a single source. She also recalled that
after similar kinds of public criticism, former chairman of the IHD
Akin Birdal was shot in an assassination attempt.
IHD chairman Yusuf Alatas, IHD Istanbul Branch chair Hurriyet Sener
and Derya Demirtas and Feray Salman of the Network of Solidarity with
Eren Keskin accompanied Keskin at her conference.
Keskin: I invite them to act with responsibility
“It is an extremely painful situation for a woman or women
organisations to issue an advertisement inviting violence” Keskin said.
“It is sad for a women to do this to a woman. Those who identify
themselves as feminists should first stand up against militarism. If
they are not doing this, they should then ask themselves how much of
women rights defenders they are”.
Keskin invited those who issued the adverts against her to act with
responsibility and asked “after this advertisement, if some people
come up and take their own initiative, are they then going to feel
responsible to this?”
Interview with Keskin
Following her press conference, Keskin was interviewed by Bianet
asked and replied to various questions pertaining to the situation.
You are a woman, so are they. Why are they attacking you?
“I do not believe this attack directed at me is has been writer by
the women organisations. I believe it stems from the same place. I
have been receiving threats for years. I am one of the persons who
the Chief of General Staff has filed a [criminal] complaint against.
I believe this text is not very independent.
“Because in relation to this incident, to the speech, while Necla
Arat filed a criminal complaint they did it together with the Chief
of General Staff. Arat testified against me at court”.
What does being a persona non grata mean?
“For instance, I would immediately rush to an injustice inflicted
on a Kemalist woman. I would not think she is a Kemalist. If I
did, I would not be a women’s rights advocate. They, on the other
hand, do not approach it in this way. In my view what determines
them primarily is their Kemalist identity. Their other identities
come after that. This is where the problem is. To me this is really
painful. They have declared me a persona non grata, they are condemning
me ‘violently’. As it is, declaring someone as persona non grata
means getting rid of them.
“Because, in the year 98, such articles, advertisements came out
against Akin Birdal and a short while later Akin Birdal was shot.
Because of this I invite them to rethink this. Will they be able to
get out from under such a responsibility? There are people in this
society who could read this advertisement and act in rage”.
Are you being protected?
“No I am not protected.”
Have you applied for protection?
“No. But in the year 1999, at the time [outlawed Kurdistan Workers
Party leader] Abdullah Ocalan was brought [to Turkey], I was one of
his lawyers. At that time Osman Baydemir and I were receiving a lot
of threats. The state proposed to give us protection. At that time we
rejected this. They have to protect us anyway. This is their duty. I
did not see it necessary to constantly go around with policemen. ”
One of the accusations against you is that you are with the PKK. Are
you a member of the PKK?
“Of course I am not. I am an advocate of human rights. Other than this,
in every speech I made I have voiced that violence is not a solution
to the Kurdish problem, that the time of armed struggle in the world
had passed by, that violence strengthened militarism. I have never
been a member of any organisation but I am a lawyer of PKK cases. I
have acted as attorney to them and to various Kurdish and socialist
circles. I have also acted as attorney to Abdullah Ocalan.
These are separate things.
“This is my profession. I am a lawyer who attends political trials. I
also defend a democratic solution to the Kurdish problem and even the
right of the Kurdish people to determine their own fate. I voice this
everywhere. In any case it is the easiest thing to declare you as a PKK
member when you say anything against the red points of militarism. A
very easy method.”
You said that women should review their policies on issues such as
the Cyprus question and other issues. Do you think it is easy for
women to conduct politics?
“Women live through all forms of oppression with double the impact.
Their fronts are closed. They cannot go out on the street. Not every
woman is like us. If she does not have economic freedom, how will she
conduct politics? I believe that an antimilitarist policy is necessary
and that this can only be achieved by antimilitarist feminists and
homosexuals. Because in my view these are sections that are totally
void of any prejudice. I do not even believe socialists are void
of prejudice.”
Does prejudice increase pressure?
“Prejudice and those prejudiced against are being distanced. I
think those who face prejudice are the ones who most understand what
militarism is pressing upon them. In my view militarism is not on
the agenda of many organisations in Turkey who see their place in
the opposition front.”
Currently there are debates on new human rights, women rights,
children rights. What do you think about these?
“Of course international law has made some gains. We cannot deny
this. But I believe that the international law system is extremely
dominated by men and is militarist.
“If one needs to cite an example, thousands of women following World
War I and World War II were raped as it happens during all wars. But
the Tokyo and Nurenburg trials did not accept that rape was a war
crime. Whereas after the clashes Bosnia and Ruanda, as result of the
struggle of the women there, it was regarded as a war crime.
“Still the Convention on Immigrant Rights does not accept violence
against women as a single reason for asylum.
“Or conscientious objection. It is still not given as a duty for
state by international law. It is only in the Copenhagen criteria
and with an open end. In other words, these show that international
law is dominated by men and is militarist throughout the world. These
examples show this openly.
What lies behind the attack on you by woman organisations that identify
themselves as feminist?
“First of all, in feminism, feminists must definitely be
antimilitarist… Feminists also stand up against racism, chauvinism,
capitalism, the effects of these on women and to all other forms of
influences and pressures. This is what I see as feminism.
“But unfortunately in Turkey the official ideology is always that of
a Turkish style feminism. A Turkish style environmentalism. A Turkish
style socialism. In other words it always gets caught somewhere at
one point. Not just for women. Because of this I believe those who
identify themselves as feminist and those who say the are advocates of
women rights should oppose all of those red points that are created
by militarism. For instance the Cyprus issue, the Armenian genocide,
the Kurdish issue. In other words, I believe they need to re-evaluate
themselves on all issues.
–Boundary_(ID_tLhOcvM+4B6ZdPfNd9VHSQ)–

CPJ CONCERNED FOR PERSECUTION OF COLUMNISTS
BÝA, Turkey
June 8 2006
New York – “We are concerned by the ongoing criminal prosecution of
journalists in Turkey” says the Committee to Protect Journalists
New York-based, independent, nonprofit organization that works to
safeguard press freedom worldwide.
CPJ’s concern is the three journalists appearing before the courts
in Istanbul this week for their work.
Magden
Perihan Magden, a columnist for the weekly magazine Yeni Aktuel, went
on trial on Wednesday charged with discouraging Turks from performing
military service by defending conscientious objectors.
In a December article, Magden took up the case of Mehmet Tarhan, who
received a record four-year sentence in military jail for refusing
to wear his military uniform, The Associated Press reported. Magden
called for the establishment of civilian service as an alternative
to military conscription. She faces up to three years in jail if
convicted under article 318 of the Turkish penal code. Magden’s trial
was adjourned until July 27.
Belge and Saymaz
The trial of journalist Murat Belge of the daily Radikal resumes
Thursday. He is charged with attempting to influence the outcome of
judicial proceedings through his writing. He wrote an article last
year challenging the decision of an Istanbul administrative court to
ban an academic conference on the mass killing of Armenians under the
Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1917. The Armenian massacre is still taboo
in Turkey. If convicted, Belge faces up to four and a half years in
prison under article 288 of the Turkish penal code. Charges against
four other journalists prosecuted along with Belge for writing about
the conference ban were dropped in April.
Another journalist for Radikal, Ismail Saymaz, will also appear in
criminal court tomorrow on charges under article 288, which stem
from an article alleging the torture of children by authorities,
according to the Turkish press freedom organization BIA.
Cooper: “Repeal the laws
“The existence of repressive laws in Turkey gives an opening to the
enemies of press freedom. We urge Turkish prosecutors to withdraw the
charges against these journalists, and refrain from filing future
charges,” CPJ Executive Director Ann Cooper said. “We call on the
Turkish government to continue to work for the repeal of laws that
restrict work of the press.”
BIA says that since the new Turkish penal code went into effect on
June 1, 2005, 17 journalists who discussed human rights cases, the
Armenian conference ban case, and torture cases, have been charged
with attempting to influence court decisions under Article 288.
–Boundary_(ID_fYekFSwvJFznJgyOrhenpg)–

84 ARRESTED ON HUMAN TRAFFICKING CHARGES
Radio Polonia, Poland
June 8 2006
A criminal gang smuggling people across the Polish border has been
broken by the border services in Opole, south-western Poland. The
detention of 84 members of the group came as the crowning of an
investigation going on for over a year. Apart from Poles, the gang
included citizens of Ukraine and Armenia. They are all being charged
with smuggling people and forging documents.