EuroNews
Oct 3 2005
More needed from Turkey before EU membership
Distant cousin or near neighbour? Perceptions may differ in Europe
but both sides of the internal EU debate have long agreed on the need
for reform in Turkey before it can join the bloc. Ankara can claim to
have ticked many items off the list of changes demanded by Brussels.
These include scrapping the death penalty, enhancing minority rights,
banning sexual discrimination and curtailing the role of the
military.
But even after the start of entry talks more will need to be done
before eventual membership not earlier than 2014. It was only last
year, after decades of developing relations, that the EU agreed a
deal by which this week’s entry talks could begin. Among the issues
still to be dealt with is a European Parliament demand that Turks
acknowledge as genocide the mass killing of Armenians 90 years ago.
Ankara is also under pressure to recognise Cyprus, one of the new EU
members.
It has extended its customs agreement with the Union to include
Cyprus but says this does not amount to recognition of the Greek
Cypriot government as the sole legitimate authority on the island.
Among those wanting their voice heard is Turkey’s Kurdish minority. A
demonstration in Brussels on Friday was to intended to send a message
to EU negotiators that Kurds have grievances which still need to be
addressed. These are just some of the obstacles Ankara will have to
overcome on the long and difficult road to Brussels.

Shanghai Daily, China
Oct 3 2005
Turkey dares EU to break free from ‘Christian club’
2005-10-03 Beijing Time

Turkish nationalists shout during a rally of the Nationalist Movement
Party in Ankara yesterday. Nationalists protested against today’s
start of accession talks between Turkey and the European Union. –
Reuters
TURKISH Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said yesterday that
European leaders must decide whether the EU will rise to challenge of
becoming a global power or remain a “Christian club,” as they try to
break a deadlock on starting membership talks with his country.
Meanwhile, Turkey Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said in statements
published yesterday that Turkey was not intent on starting European
Union membership talks at any price – reiterating Ankara’s position
that it will never accept new conditions, or any alternatives to full
EU membership.
Predominantly Muslim Turkey, a largely poor country of about 70
million, is scheduled to start long-awaited membership talks today,
but those talks have now been thrown into disarray over Austrian
objections.
European Union foreign ministers were meeting yesterday to plead with
Austria to drop its objection to Turkish membership in an emergency
session. Austria balked at the last minute at opening entry talks
with the predominantly Muslim nation, and has suggested the EU
consider a “privileged partnership” instead.
As EU foreign ministers gathered in Luxembourg for the emergency
meeting, Turkish officials _ waiting in Ankara for word on the
outcome of Sunday’s talks _ ruled out anything less than full EU
membership.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said European leaders
must decide whether the EU will rise to challenge.
“We are not striving to begin negotiations no matter what, at any
cost,” Gul said in an interview published in Yeni Safak newspaper.
“If the problems aren’t solved then the negotiations won’t begin.”
Several countries also have been pushing Turkey to recognize EU
member Cyprus, and the European Parliament called on Turkey this week
to recognize the killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the
beginning of the 20th century as genocide.
Erdogan, addressing lawmakers of his party at a resort just outside
of Ankara, said Europe was at a historic crossroad.
“Either it will show political maturity and become a global power, or
it will end up a Christian club,” he said.
“No EU decision will deviate Turkey from its course” toward further
democracy and reforms, he said. “We will, however, be saddened that a
project for the alliance of civilizations will be harmed.”
Erdogan spoke to Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel by telephone
on Saturday, telling him that a privileged partnership was not an
option.
After more than 40 years of aspiring to join the European Union,
Turkey feels it is being held hostage on the eve of negotiations by
Austrian leaders using Turkey’s EU bid as an issue in upcoming
national elections.
Some 60,000 supporters of an anti-EU ultranationalist party, waving
Turkish and party flags, held a rally in central Ankara yesterday, in
part to protest increasing demands and conditions being forced on
Turkey.
“Prime Minister, the concessions that you have given the EU are
dragging Turkey toward darkness,” said Devlet Bahceli, a former
deputy premier and head of the Nationalist Movement Party.

BBC News
Oct 1 2005
Toasting Shakespeare in Armenia
By Gareth Armstrong
Armenia
William Shakespeare may have been born in the English town of
Stratford-on-Avon but, as the actor Gareth Armstrong discovered at a
theatre festival in Armenia, some literary giants belong to the
world.

I spoke of my pride in coming from the country which could claim
Shakespeare as her own
I had been warned about the “toasts”.
Armenian hospitality is infamous for its assault on the liver, and a
lunch that lasted nearly three hours gave plenty of scope to prove
it.
Including our hosts, there were 22 of us seated at the long dining
table. Altogether we represented a dozen different nations.
What had brought us to Armenia? Or rather who?
William Shakespeare.
We were all taking part in a week-long theatre festival of solo
performances based on Shakespeare’s works.
That along with the unlikely opportunity for an actor to work in the
Republic of Armenia is why I found myself downing icy shots of vodka
several hours before the sun was anywhere near the yardarm.
Toastmaster
Our host was the mayor of a small town an hour’s drive from the
capital city of Yerevan.
According to Anna, the charming young translator assigned to me, his
first toast was to the unity of nations.
Glasses were clinked with murmurs of solidarity in many tongues.
The Armenian tradition is that you drink vodka at meals only when
acknowledging a toast, and the mayor was an enthusiastic toastmaster.
After international friendship, he invoked art, music, Armenian
womanhood and then several less comprehensible subjects, which even
Anna had difficulty rendering into English.
But the mayor’s increasing incoherence did not mean an end to the
toasting.
An elderly Russian actor rose to his feet, unaffected by the
quantities he had drunk (which was just as well as that very evening
he was to perform his take on King Lear) and toasted our mutual muse:
the theatre.
Awed silence
Opposite me sat a thick-haired, moustachioed Iranian actor.
(His show was about an actor whose obsession with Hamlet gets him
committed to a mental institution.)
He stood, closed his eyes and, in a fine baritone voice, sang a
Persian love lyric that reduced everyone to an awed silence.
It was around then that I realised that each of us was expected to
give voice at some time during the proceedings.
I had been careless of my vodka consumption, since I had already
performed my solo show on Shylock from The Merchant of Venice on the
previous night.
But I decided that, if I was to make a coherent contribution, it was
now or never.
Convinced that I held the ace in this particular pack, I stood and
spoke of my pride in coming from the country which could claim
Shakespeare as her own.
He was Britain’s greatest poet, greatest playwright and most
illustrious son.
Lost in translation
I proposed a rousing toast: “To William Shakespeare”.

I encountered a mild hostility to my laying claim to the writer in
whose name we were toasting the afternoon away

There was polite assent but little enthusiasm. Had what I said lost
something in translation?
A German participant, who would be troubling Hamlet’s Ghost later in
the week, firmly echoed my toast to William Shakespeare. He even
quoted some of Hamlet’s lines in a German translation by Schlegel,
which he promised us was as good as the original.
Then a Polish lady, whose show dealt with the wretched women in the
life of Richard III, made a similar claim for her mother tongue.
Finally an Armenian actor who, like me, was exploring the enigma of
Shylock, claimed that the translations of the poet Havhannes
Hovhannesyan were unsurpassed.
What I had encountered was a mild hostility to my laying claim to the
writer in whose name we were toasting the afternoon away.
Universal genius
The accident of where Shakespeare was born – and therefore the
language he wrote in – gave me no special claim to his heritage.
His genius was quite simply – universal.
As far as I know, no other country has ever hosted a festival of
one-person plays about Shakespeare.
It took an Armenian to dream that up.
It had the virtues of economy of scale and expenditure and gave their
vibrant theatre community a focus to welcome artists from other
cultures and, of course, an excuse to show off their own.
The day after our tipsy lunch, we made a painfully early pilgrimage
to Khor Virap monastery: a very important site to Armenians who
repeatedly remind you that theirs was the first country to become
Christian.
But its poignant location is what stays in the memory.
Dove of peace
It lies at the foot of Mount Ararat, the snow-capped symbol of
Armenia, where Noah’s Ark in the Old Testament story ran aground
after the Great Flood.
It’s now located in Turkey with just a stretch of no-man’s-land
between the tense and disputed borders.
As we were leaving, a small knot of souvenir sellers descended on us
and, for a few small coins, I was prevailed upon to take hold of a
white dove: the bird that returned to Noah bearing the olive branch
in its beak, symbolising the hope for new life.
It was a tired, bedraggled creature that I held, but I was told to
release it and make a wish.
It fluttered rather pathetically, as if in the early stages of avian
flu, and returned gratefully to its master.
It would be more admirable if I could claim that my wish had been to
see an end to the legacy of bitterness between my host country and
its Turkish neighbour over events back in 1915.
But my silent desire was a little more mundane. An end to my
monumental hangover.
>From Our Own Correspondent was broadcast on Saturday, 1 October, 2005
at 1130 BST on BBC Radio 4. Please check the programme schedules for
World Service transmission times.

Turkish Daily News
Sept 30 2005
Ankara raps EP for politicizing ‘genocide’ issue
Friday, September 30, 2005
Foreign Ministry says the controversial allegations of Armenian
genocide must be assessed by historians
ANKARA – Turkish Daily News
Turkey criticized the European Parliament yesterday for demanding
recognition of an alleged genocide against Armenians towards the end
of the Ottoman Empire as a condition for membership in the European
Union, a charge Turkey vehemently denies.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Namýk Tan said a resolution the EU
assembly adopted on Wednesday `brought the alleged Armenian genocide
onto the European Parliament agenda once again’ and added: `We would
like to bring to mind once again that discussion of the matter at
political platforms has been of no benefit to anyone.’
European Parliament resolutions are not binding, and none of the EU
decisions on Turkey has cited recognition of the alleged genocide as
a requisite for membership. However, the assembly’s resolution came
amid sour ties between Turkey and the EU over a lingering dispute
over terms of a negotiating mandate and further exacerbated the
tension days before planned opening of accession talks on Oct. 3.
The resolution, which also demanded that Turkey recognize the Greek
Cypriot administration and open its ports and airports to traffic
from Greek Cyprus, said the Turkish authorities have not complied
with demands regarding recognition of the alleged genocide, as
expressed by the European Parliament in its resolution in June 1987.
Tan responded by noting that an appeal to the European Court of
First Instance challenging Turkey’s candidacy status because of its
refusal to recognize the alleged genocide had been turned down.
The appeal to get the candidacy status cancelled was made to the
court in 2003, and applicants cited the European Parliament’s 1987
resolution to justify their claims. The court, however, turned down
the application, saying European Parliament resolutions are
political, not legal documents.
`Turkey has always said disputed eras of history must be evaluated
by historians and opened its archives to researchers,’ Tan said.

Baðýþ: Resolution is a trap:
The European Parliament resolution is being heavily criticized in
Turkey, where many denounced the move as indicative of opposition to
Turkey because it is Muslim, culturally different and relatively
poor.
`These are traps, we should not bother ourselves too much on these
things,’ said Egemen Baðýþ, a deputy from Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdoðan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP).
`The European Parliament’s decision is yet another obstacle put
before Turkey as we near Oct. 3. It is one of the attempts to weaken
the enthusiasm of the Turkish people concerning the EU process,’
Baðýþ told the Anatolia news agency.

Armenia pleased:
In Yerevan, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian welcomed the
European Parliament demand for Turkey to recognize the alleged
genocide as `positive and natural’ and said Ankara must resolve its
problems with neighboring countries if it wanted to join the EU.
He said Turkey’s EU process would help Turkey-Armenia relations to
normalize and claimed that the issue of opening the closed border
gate would also be raised during Turkey’s accession negotiations with
the EU.

KurdishInfo, Germany
Oct 1 2005
X-Sender: Asbed Bedrossian
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 — ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
‘Main problems in EU route: Kurdish, Armenian and Cyprus problems’

ANKARA (DIHA) – Turkey gained the right to register in university and
that does not mean the university is finished. I do not suppose that
Turkey will face with technical problems. The main problems will be
Kurdish, Armenian and Cyprus problems which are political ones.”
…says Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Baðcý from METU International Relationships
Department. He said Turkey does not have the right to say ‘No’ to EU
as that will cause an enmity to last for years.
In the process covered so far, the EU should not do wrong to Turkey
as she fulfilled the political conditions event though there are
gaps, said Mr. Baðcý.
The Kurdish, Armenian and Cyprus problems
Stating that the regulations were not put into practice, Prof. Dr.
Baðcý said: “The important thing is the way that Turkey will follow
during the process which will not be an easy one. There will be
political problems such as the Kurdish, Armenian and Cyprus problems
rather than the technical problems.”
He also added that the EU’ politics on Cyprus problem is wrong thus
accelerate the movements against EU.
“The poor does not want to separate from the rich in the world
history but in Turkey, it is the rich that tells the poor not to
separate from them. This problem should be resolved with democratic
ways not in awkward and unskillful terms. Let the Kurds go to
Kurdistan if they long for that, then the problems like
purse-snatching and robbery will lessen, says some. It is easy to say
‘go’ but they have properties here. That will create a new serious
immigration wave.” said he.
The role of the Kurdish politicians
Stating that the EU process has contributed to the Kurdish problems
by causing it to be discussed, Mr. Baðcý said: “The resolution is
related to the Kurdish politicians’ remaining in a democratic
structuring in Turkey. There is a Kurdish movement causing rebellions
since 1920s. With the rebellions, the Kurds say there is a problem.
The politicians admitted the Kurdish reality. That is not enough as
there is not a resolution yet. There is not a political structuring
in Turkey that can maintain a resolution. If Turkey can fulfill her
duties, she can be proposed as a candidate for the European
Parliament elections in 2019. The duties of Turkey in the process
will be determined under 31 titles in Negotiation Framework. These
duties go from the environmental security to hospitals, education,
law and many other fields to raise the standards in Turkey. If the
country can continue the negotiations without cease, 10 years later a
very different Turkey will come out. The time passes in favor of
Turkey. The EU after 10 years will need Turkey more than today.
Despite the all tensions, the relationships develop in favor of
Turkey.
‘There is a problem of starting a dialog process’
Another academic Prof. Dr. Duygu Sezer from Bilkent University
International Relationships Department said the regulations will take
time to be put into practice. He also said the democratic criterions
have not been implemented yet and the both sides should allocate time
to each other. Pointing out that the Kurdish problem is a bit
complex, he said: “First of all, freedom of speech and opinion should
be maintained. Meeting right and recognizing the cultural rights are
among the primary rights. There should not be relaxation unless these
rights are allocated. But the problem is to start a dialog process
between the Turkish and Kurdish politicians which can only be with
great sacrifices. There is nationalist circle, a middle one and a
resistant one among the Turks and the same applies to the Kurds.
There can not be a resolution if the extremes are not left. The
Kurdish politicians claim one flag and one land but not one language
which is a good development. Both sides have political bases. They
have to satisfy these bases so the resolution will take time.
A ten-year-long process
Mentioning to the Additional Protocol of European Parliament, Sezer
said:” These kinds of outflows damages the peace atmosphere tried to
be created in Turkey. We consider the EU process as a peace
atmosphere that closes us to each other. When powerful cracked voices
are raised in European Parliament, our searches are being influenced
adversely. The accession talks will start on Oct. 3 and the
membership will take at least a ten-year-long process.
Turn for Turkey
The chairman of Turkey-EU Association Prof. Dr. Haluk Günoður claimed
that the decisions of EP are advises rather than political decisions.
He said: “The Europe told what it would say; now it is turn for
Turkey. If they insist on recognizing the South Cyprus, then Turkey
had already explained that she will not be in such a deal. The
negotiations will start but if the conditions are as strict as those
decided by EP, the negotiation process can not be completed.”
“In the Cyprus problem Turkey did what can be done but in Kurdish
problem the situation is different. They are considered as minorities
by EU but Turkey does not think so. This problem will stay on the
agenda for long. Especially the army and nationalist circles do not
believe the problem will be resolved with discussion. The problem is
not an easy one.” added Mr. Günoður.

Journal of Turkish Weekly
Oct 1 2005
October 3?
By Mustafa UNAL
Breaths are being held, three days before the historic rendezvous
with Europe. The air in Ankara is misty, even October 3 has not been
clarified yet, let alone the upcoming days.
No good news coming from Brussels and Strasbourg. The Cyprus issue
already was boring, now “Armenian genocide” has been added to it.
Christian Democratic MPs at the European Parliament, in a last minute
attack on Turkey, said, “Recognize the Armenian genocide.” However,
their “no” reply to the “privileged partnership” proposal was good
news.
Turkey, which has adopted European Union principles as a basic
policy, is exerting maximum efforts to approach this negative
atmosphere that has emerged in a coolheaded manner. Prime Minister
[Recep Tayyip] Erdogan pointed out that the European Parliament does
not have the power to impose sanctions and said its decision will not
affect Turkey’s membership process. Republican People’s Party leader
Deniz Baykal, who was in London, said, “Turkey has done its homework.
Now Europe must keep its promise, nobody can push Turkish people into
a state of uncertainty that will last for years. ”
While voting in Parliament on the recent decisions, there were two
deputies in Strasbourg from Turkey — former minister Yasar Yakis and
Turkish Group chairman of the Council of Europe Parliamentary
Assembly (COEPA), Murat Mercan… It would be useful to draw
attention to the fact that the European Parliament is not like the
Council of Europe, only member countries can send representatives.
Yakis and Mercan were not in the mechanism, they were there only for
lobbying purposes.
I talked to Mr. Mercan, but he had not yet overcome the shock of the
decisions, “The European parliamentarians’ attitude disappointed me,’
he said. `I was gripped by genuine worries about the future of the
European Union. It was not a very conducive atmosphere, nonetheless,
I really never expected anything like this.” One can’t help asking, ”
Wouldn’t it have been better if there had been more deputies from the
government and opposition parties in Strasbourg?” Maybe it wouldn’t
have been enough to change the result but the loud booming voice of
Turkey would have been heard from the lobbying being done.
The Strasbourg decisions are not acceptable to Turkey. It should be
emphasized that the Parliament’s decisions reflect the inner
sensitivities of their public opinions. It must be accepted that
anti-Turkey winds have been blowing for long in European capitals.
Besides the sanctional aspect, these decisions are controversial as
well. The Negotiating Framework Document that will determine the
destiny of October 3 has not been clarified yet, it appears as if
efforts to reach a consensus will continue until the last minute.
Austria has not abandoned its obstinacy regarding privileged
partnership…
What will Turkey do in this situation? In fact, Turkey has fullfilled
all its liabilities during the last three years with incredible
performance. Now it is Europe’s turn, it must thoroughly fulfill its
responsibilities. The Turks have every right to expect this. Turkey
has become introverted, it is discussing October 3 diplomatically and
with political will.
Turkey also has a public opinion just as Europe does. The society has
its sensitivities and the political will cannot ignore this. Choosing
not to go there and not to sit at the negotiation table is something
that cannot be ignored. The Framework Document will be the
determining factor. It is certain that giving shape to the contents
will last until the last minute. Which is right, never to sit at the
negotiating table or to give up during the negotiation process? are
now being evaluated. Who should abandon the negotiating table, Turkey
or Europe?
Turkey should continue its journey towards the West without making
any concessions on its basic policy and should not be the party that
surrenders, let Europe think about the rest… We accepted the risks
while setting out on this journey. That’s why the expression, “a long
and difficult road,” has been used from the very beginning. The road
to Brussels has sharp curves, it is full of obstacles. Besides, we
did not expect them to put a red carpet before us and throw roses
along our way.
It is not right to compare Turkey with other candidate countries such
as Bulgaria and Croatia. Turkey has a huge potential that can change
the Union’s chemistry. That’s why these obstacles emerge. October 3
is important not only in terms of foreign policy but in terms of
domestic political balances as well. Even if the last stop is not
Brussels, Turkey’s journey towards the West must continue…

CNN International
Oct 2 2005
EU holds emergency talks on Turkey
Sunday, October 2, 2005; Posted: 6:06 a.m. EDT (10:06 GMT)
ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan
said Sunday European leaders must decide whether the EU will rise to
challenge of becoming a global power or remain a “Christian club,” as
they try to break a deadlock on starting membership talks with his
country.
Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said in statements published
Sunday that Turkey was not intent on starting European Union
membership talks at any price — reiterating Ankara’s position that
it will never accept new conditions, or any alternatives to full EU
membership.
Predominantly Muslim Turkey — a largely poor country of about 70
million — is scheduled to start long-awaited membership talks on
Monday, but those talks have now been thrown into disarray over
Austrian objections.
EU foreign ministers were to hold a last-ditch meeting in Luxembourg
later on Sunday to try and overcome reservations from Austria, which
wants Turkey to be offered a “privileged partnership” with the EU
instead of full membership.
“We are not striving to begin negotiations no matter what, at any
cost,” Gul said in an interview published in Yeni Safak newspaper.
“If the problems aren’t solved then the negotiations won’t begin.”
Several countries also have been pushing Turkey to recognize EU
member Cyprus, and the European Parliament called on Turkey this week
to recognize the killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the
beginning of the 20th century as genocide.
Erdogan, addressing lawmakers of his party at a resort just outside
of Ankara, said Europe was at a historic crossroad.
“Either it will show political maturity and become a global power, or
it will end up a Christian club,” he said.
“No EU decision will deviate Turkey from its course” toward further
democracy and reforms, he said. “We will, however, be saddened that a
project for the alliance of civilizations will be harmed.”
Erdogan spoke to Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel by telephone
on Saturday, telling him that a privileged partnership was not an
option.
After more than 40 years of aspiring to join the European Union,
Turkey feels it is being held hostage on the eve of negotiations by
Austrian leaders using Turkey’s EU bid as an issue in upcoming
national elections.
Thousands of supporters of an anti-EU ultranationalist party were
scheduled to hold a rally in Ankara Sunday, in part to protest
increasing demands and conditions being forced on Turkey.
Gul said Saturday, “If the European Union decides not to keep its
word, if its own leaders decide to forget their signatures beneath
the decisions they’ve made before the ink has even dried … if they
decide to ignore all this and impose new conditions that Turkey will
never accept … then of course in that case this kind of partnership
can never be.”
A poll by A&G Research of 1,834 people in 19 provinces showed the
majority of Turkish people remain supportive of the EU bid, with 57.4
percent agreeing with the statement, “Turkey must join” the EU. The
poll, which was taken Sept. 24-29, had a margin of error of 2
percent.

Sunday Herald, UK
Oct 2 2005
Enlargement fatigue hits EU as it talks Turkey
ANALYSIS: By Trevor Royle, Diplomatic Editor

Diplomats call it `enlargement fatigue’ – the feelings of anxiety and
lack of energy that have suddenly checked the seemingly inexorable
growth of the European Union. Today in Luxembourg, EU foreign
ministers will test the syndrome to the full when they sit down at
emergency talks aimed at breaking the deadlock over Turkey’s bid to
join the European club in 2015. Unless agreement is reached, the
accession talks due to start tomorrow morning will be put on hold and
Europe will have a crisis on its hands.
Brussels saw warnings and protests yesterday as 4000 Turkish Kurds
marched through the city, demanding that the entry talks include
recognition for a Kurdish homeland in the southeast of the country.
Lord Patten, the former EU external affairs commissioner, also warned
yesterday that if negotiations break down over the coming days it
will `have very bad implications’. He added: `What the hell signal do
we send to the rest of the world if we can’t accept Turkish accession
to the EU?’
The deliberations will test Britain’s presidency of the EU to the
full – no other issue has divided the community so deeply in recent
years. Doubts have surrounded Turkey’s application ever since it was
mooted in 1999, resurfacing with a vengeance last week when Austria
gave notice that it was opposed to the move.
It mooted a compromise which would give Turkey a partnership with the
EU instead of full-blown membership. The proposal did not go down
well in Ankara: prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has angrily
insisted his country will walk away from the talks rather than
negotiate for what is seen in Turkey as a grubby compromise.
In some quarters, opposition to Turkish accession has been touted as
an anti-Islamic prejudice. Turkey’s population of 70 million is
predominantly Muslim, and there are lingering memories of the
massacres of 1.5 million Armenian Christians during the first world
war, an episode generally regarded as the first genocide of the 20th
century.
Although it seems perverse to use a 90-year-old incident as evidence
of a modern country’s unfitness to join the EU, the genocide is
usually mentioned in conjunction with accusations about Turkey’s
human rights record, not least its continued prosecution of writers,
notably of distinguished novelist Orhan Pamuk for criticising the
state.
There are also concerns about Turkey’s refusal to acknowledge Cyprus.
Critics point to the anomaly that would see Cypriot ships and
aircraft being banned from Turkish ports and airports while Turkey’s
application was being negotiated. But it is not just anti-Islamic
sentiment which is holding up the negotiations.
A recent poll across the EU found that there is only 35% support for
Turkey’s membership – in Austria, just 10% – and there is a
widespread feeling that the enlargement policy has gone far enough;
the EU has to fully absorb its current membership of 25 before it
starts adding others.
Ahead lie applications from Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova and the states
in the Balkans and the Caucasus and there is a growing feeling that
the enlargement policy has to be settled before entering into
negotiations with Turkey.
And that is the rub. The EU is no longer the buoyant, wealth-filled
institution which thought that it could grow like Topsy, regardless
of cost, convenience or constitutional change. France has already
voiced its disapproval by voting `No’ in the recent referendum on a
European constitution, largely in protest against Turkey’s
application, and there is similar disquiet in older EU members, such
as Germany and the Netherlands.
That opposition has led to calls for the European institutional
framework to be put in place before Turkey’s application is
considered. As a German diplomat told the Sunday Herald last week:
`We don’t even have a constitution for 25 states, so how can we
stretch it further to embrace 35?’
One way out of the impasse could be provided by the country which
leads the objections to Turkey’s membership. Austria supports
Croatia’s bid to join the EU, which began earlier this year but was
put on hold until Zagreb co-operated more fully with the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Given
Austria’s traditional friendship with Croatia, it would not surprise
anyone if it were brought into the equation ahead of tomorrow’s
crucial meeting.

Valley Star , CA
Oct 2 2005
PROFILE: Martirosyan Moves the ASU Forward
By Zabie Mansoory
Published: Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Nelli Martirosyan had to be elected as Valley College’s ASU president
twice last spring in order to overcome student complaints surrounding
the original balloting. No president would ask to begin an
administration under a cloud of controversy, but the 24-year-old
Martirosyan isn’t letting that stumbling start slow her down.
“That page of the history book is closed now and I’m moving ahead,”
said Martirosyan. “I’m too busy with current projects and I don’t
have time to think about past issues.”
Photo:
Media Credit: Dan Villasenor
BRINGING STUDENTS TOGETHER – ASU President Nelli Martirosyan brings a
fiery and bold energy to the student union.
Martirosyan and opponent Theresa Chavez were both disqualified from
the first race last semester due to election-code violations. The ASU
election committee unilaterally appointed third-place finisher Adam
Park president, but Advisor Sherri Rodriguez overturned the decision
and called for a second election, in which Martirosyan again emerged
victorious.
Shrugging all of that off, Martirosyan organized the ASU Textbook
Exchange, a book swap to help students save money. Officials say more
than 350 students sold or bought books through the program, making it
one of the best-participated recent ASU events. ASU will repeat the
program at the beginning of the winter and spring semesters.
“This was a very big success for us,” said Martirosyan. “We haven’t
had this many students participating in an ASU event in a long time.”
“[Martirosyan] is very high energy,” said Rodriguez. “She is
passionate and dedicated to the goals she sets for herself.”
She said she moved to the United States six years ago because of the
economic, social and political upheaval in Armenia. “I had to learn
everything from zero,” she said.
Martirosyan attended the Medical Institute in Hollywood, where she
earned diplomas in ultrasound technology and medical billing
procedures. Afterward, she worked as a medical biller for seven
months.
“I realized that I want to help people, not bill them,” said
Martirosyan. “It was a good way to make money, but I wasn’t happy.”
Majoring in political science at Valley, Martirosyan hopes to
transfer to Georgetown University, UC Berkeley or Columbia. She plans
to get her master’s degree in comparative politics.
“After I receive my Ph. D., I want to return to Armenia and help
people,” said Martirosyan. “That is my goal in life.”
Martirosyan credits her parents, significant other and close
colleagues for guiding her and influencing her work.
ASU currently has four vacant positions, including commissioner of
public relations, commissioner of athletics, inner-club council
representative and secretary.

American Thinker, AZ
Oct 2 2005
Killing from Qur’anic Piety: Tamerlane’s Living Legacy
October 1st, 2005
Osama bin Laden was far from the first jihadist to kill infidels as
an expression of religious piety. This years marks the 600th
anniversary of the death of Tamerlane (Timur Lang; `Timur the Lame’,
d. 1405), or Amir Timur (`Timur’ signifies `Iron’ in Turkish). Osama
lacks both Tamerlane’s sophisticated (for his time) military forces
and his brilliance as a strategist. But both are or were pious
Muslims who paid homage to religious leaders, and both had the goal
of making jihad a global force. Santayana was correct when he told us
that those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat
it.
Tamerlane was born at Kash (Shahr-i-Sebz, the `Green City’) in
Transoxiana (some 50 miles south of Samarkand, in modern Uzbekistan),
on April 8 (or 11), 1336 C.E. Amir Turghay, his father, was chief of
the Gurgan or Chagtai branch of the Barlas Turks. By age 34
(1369/70), Timur had killed his major rival (Mir Husain), becoming
the pre-eminent ruler of Transoxiana. He spent the next six to seven
years consolidating his power in Transoxiana before launching the
aggressive conquests of Persia, Afghanistan, and Iraq, and then
attacking Hindustan (India) under the tottering Delhi Sultanate. [1]
Grousset [2] contrasts Jenghiz Khan’s `straightforward planning’ and
`clean sweeps’ with the `higgledy-piggledy’ order of Timur’s
expeditions, and the often incomplete nature of the latter’s
conquests:
Tamerlane’s [Timur’s] conquering activities were carried on from the
Volga to Damascus, from Smyrna to the Ganges and the Yulduz, and his
expeditions into these regions followed no geographical order. He
sped from Tashkent to Shiraz, from Tabriz to Khodzhent, as enemy
aggression dictated; a campaign in Russia occurred between two in
Persia, an expedition into Central Asia between two raids into the
Caucasus…[Timur] at the end of every successful campaign left the
country without making any dispositions for its control except
Khwarizm and Persia, and even there not until the very end. It is
true that he slaughtered all his enemies as thoroughly and
conscientiously as the great Mongol, and the pyramids of human heads
left behind him as a warning example tell their own tale. Yet the
survivors forgot the lesson given them and soon resumed secret or
overt attempts at rebellion, so that it was all to do again. It
appears too, that these blood soaked pyramids diverted [Timur] from
the essential objective. Baghdad, Brussa (Bursa), Sarai, Kara Shahr,
and Delhi were all sacked by him, but he did not overcome the Ottoman
Empire, the Golden Horde, the khanate of Mogholistan, or the Indian
Sultanate; and even the Jelairs of Iraq ‘Arabi rose up again as soon
as he had passed. Thus he had to conquer Khwarizm three times, the
Ili six or seven times (without ever managing to hold it for longer
than the duration of the campaign), eastern Persia twice, western
Persia at least three times, in addition to waging two campaigns in
Russia…[Timur’s] campaigns `always had to be fought again’, and fight
them again he did.
Timur’s campaigns are infamous for their extensive massacres and
emblematic `pyramids of heads’. Brown [3] cites `only a few’
prominent examples:
As specimens of those acts mention may be made of his massacre of the
people of Sistan 1383-4, when he caused some two thousand prisoners
to be built up into a wall; his cold- blooded slaughter of a hundred
thousand captive Indians near Dihli [Delhi] (December, 1398); his
burying alive of four thousand Armenians in 1400-1, and the twenty
towers of skulls erected by him at Aleppo and Damascus in the same
year; and his massacre of 70,000 of the inhabitants of Isfahan in
(November, 1387)…
Timur was a pious Muslim, who may well have belonged to the
Naqshbandi Sufi order. [4; also see my earlier essay, `Sufi Jihad’,
for a discussion of Sufism and jihad.] Grousset [5] emphasizes the
important Islamic motivation for Timur’s jihad campaigns:
It is the Qur’an to which he continually appeals, the imams and
[Sufi] dervishes who prophesy his success. [emphasis added] His wars
were to influence the character of the jihad, the Holy War, even
when- as was almost always the case- he was fighting Muslims. He had
only to accuse these Muslims of lukewarmness, whether the Jagataites
of the Ili and Uiguria, whose conversion was so recent, or the
Sultans of Delhi who…refrained from massacring their millions of
Hindu subjects.
The Turki chronicle Malfuzat-i-Timuri, a putative [6]
autobiographical memoir of Timur, translated into Persian by Abu
Talib Husaini, illustrates these driving sentiments, complete with a
Qur’anic quotation : [7]
About this time there arose in my heart the desire to lead an
expedition against the infidels, and to become a ghazi; for it had
reached my ears that the slayer of infidels is a ghazi, and if he is
slain he becomes a martyr. It was on this account that I formed this
resolution, but I was undetermined in my mind whether I should direct
my expedition against the infidels of China or against the infidels
and polytheists of India. In this matter I sought an omen from the
Qur’an, and the verse I opened upon [Q66:9] was this, `O Prophet,
make war upon infidels and unbelievers, and treat them with
severity.’ My great officers told me that the inhabitants of
Hindustan were infidels and unbelievers. In obedience to the order of
Almighty Allah I ordered an expedition against them.
Timur’s jihad campaigns against non-Muslims – whether Christians in
Asia Minor and Georgia, or Hindus in India – seemed to intensify in
brutality. Brown [8] highlights one particular episode which supports
this contention, wherein Timur clearly distinguished between his
vanquished Muslim and non-Muslim foes. After rampaging through
(Christian) Georgia, where he `devastated the country, destroyed the
churches, and slew great numbers of inhabitants’, in the winter of
1399-1400, Timur, in August 1400,
…began his march into Asia Minor by way of Avnik, Erzeroum, Erzinjan,
and Sivas. The latter place offered a stubborn resistance, and when
it finally capitulated Timur caused all the Armenian and Christian
soldiers to be buried alive; but the Muhammadans he spared.
The unparalleled devastation Timur wrought upon predominantly Hindu
India further bolsters the notion that Timur viewed his non-Muslim
prey with particular animosity. Moreover, there are specific examples
of selective brutality directed against Hindus, cited in the
Malfuzat-i-Timuri, from which Muslims are deliberately spared:
My great object in invading Hindustan had been to wage a religious
war against the infidel Hindus, and it now appeared to me that it was
necessary for me to put down these Jats [Hindus]. On the 9th of the
month I dispatched the baggage from Tohana, and on the same day I
marched into the jungles and wilds, and slew 2,000 demon-like Jats.
I made their wives and children captives, and plundered their cattle
and property… On the same day a party of saiyids, who dwelt in the
vicinity, came with courtesy and humility to wait upon me and were
very graciously received. In my reverence for the race of the
prophet, I treated their chiefs with great honour…On the 29th I again
marched and reached the river Jumna. On the other side of the river I
[viewed] a fort, and upon making inquiry about it, I was informed
that it consisted of a town and fort, called Loni… I determined to
take that fort at once… Many of the Rajputs placed their wives and
children in their houses and burned them, then they rushed to the
battle and were killed. Other men of the garrison fought and were
slain, and a great many were taken prisoners. Next day I gave orders
that the Musalman prisoners should be separated and saved, but that
the infidels should all be despatched to hell with the proselyting
sword. I also ordered that the houses of the saiyids, shaikhs and
learned Musulmans should be preserved but that all the other houses
should be plundered and the fort destroyed. It was done as I
directed and a great booty was obtained…[9]
On the 16th of the month some incidents occurred which led to the
sack of the city of Delhi, and to the slaughter of many of the
infidel inhabitants…On that day, Thursday, and all the night of
Friday, nearly 15,000 Turks were engaged in slaying, plundering, and
destroying… The following day, Saturday, the 17th, all passed in the
same way, and the spoil was so great that each man secured from fifty
to a hundred prisoners – men, women, and children. There was no man
who took less than twenty. The other booty was immense in rubies,
diamonds, pearls and other gems; jewels of gold and silver, ashrafis,
tankas of gold and silver of the celebrated `Alai coinage; vessels of
gold and silver; and brocades and silks of great value. Gold and
silver ornaments of the Hindu women were obtained in such quantities
as to exceed all account. Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the
`ulama and the other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked. [10]
Timur left Samarkand with a large, powerful expeditionary force
destined for India in April, 1398. By October he had besieged
Talamba, 75 miles northeast of Multan, subsequently plundering the
town and massacring its inhabitants. He reached the vicinity of Delhi
during the first week of December having forged a path of
destruction- pillaging, razing, and massacring- en route through Pak
Patan, Dipalpur, Bhatnar, Sirsa, and Kaithal. Prior to fighting and
defeating an army under Sultan Nasir-ud-din Mahmud Tughluq on
December 17, 1398, Timur had his forces butcher in cold blood 100,000
Hindu prisoners accumulated while advancing toward Delhi. [11]
Srivastava describes what transpired after Timur’s forces occupied
Delhi on December 18, 1398: [12]
The citizens of the capital, headed by the ulema, waited on the
conqueror and begged quarter. Timur agreed to spare the citizens;
but, owing to the oppressive conduct of the soldiers of the invading
force, the people of the city were obliged to offer resistance.
Timur now ordered a general plunder and massacre which lasted for
several days. Thousands of the citizens of Delhi were murdered and
thousands were made prisoners. A historian writes: `High towers
were built with the head of the Hindus, and their bodies became the
food of ravenous beasts and birds…..such of the inhabitants who
escaped alive were made prisoners.’
Timur acquired immense booty, as well as Delhi’s best (surviving)
artisans, who were conscripted and sent to Samarkand to construct for
him the famous Friday mosque. Leaving Delhi on January 1, 1399 for
their return march to Samarkand, Timur’s forces stormed Meerut on
January 19th, before encountering and defeating two Hindu armies near
Hardwar. [13] The Malfuza-i-Timuri [14] indicates that at Hardwar,
Timur’s army
…displayed great courage and daring; they made their swords their
banners, and exerted themselves in slaying the foe (during a bathing
festival on the bank of the Ganges). They slaughtered many of the
infidels, and pursued those who fled to the mountains. So many of
them were killed that their blood ran down the mountains and plain,
and thus (nearly) all were sent to hell. The few who escaped,
wounded, weary, and half dead, sought refuge in the defiles of the
hills. Their property and goods, which exceeded all computation, and
their countless cows and buffaloes, fell as spoil into the hands of
my victorious soldiers.
Timur then traversed the Sivalik Hills to Kanra, which was pillaged
and sacked, along with Jammu “…everywhere the inhabitants being
slaughtered like cattle.” [15]
Srivastava summarizes India’s devastated condition following Timur’s
departure: [16]
Timur left [India] prostrate and bleeding. There was utter confusion
and misery throughout northern India. [India’s] northwestern
provinces, including northern tracts of Rajasthan and Delhi, were so
thoroughly ravaged, plundered and even burnt that it took these parts
many years, indeed, to recover their prosperity. Lakhs [hundreds of
thousands] of men, and in some cases, many women and children, too,
were butchered in cold blood. The rabi crops [grown in
October-November, harvested around March, including barley, mustard,
and wheat] standing in the field were completely destroyed for many
miles on both sides of the invader’s long and double route from the
Indus to Delhi and back. Stores of grain were looted or destroyed.
Trade, commerce and other signs of material prosperity disappeared.
The city of Delhi was depopulated and ruined. It was without a master
or a caretaker. There was scarcity and virulent famine in the capital
and its suburbs. This was followed by a pestilence caused by the
pollution of the air and water by thousands of uncared-for dead
bodies. In the words of the historian Badaoni, `those of the
inhabitants who were left died (of famines and pestilence), while for
two months not a bird moved wing in Delhi.’
The 13th century chronicler, Bar Hebraeus (d. 1286), provided this
contemporary assessment of how the adoption of Islam radically
altered Mongol attitudes toward their Christian subjects:
And having seen very much modesty and other habits of this kind among
Christian people, certainly the Mongols loved them greatly at the
beginning of their kingdom, a time ago somewhat short. But their love
hath turned to such intense hatred that they cannot even see them
with their eyes approvingly, because they have all alike become
Muslims, myriads of people and peoples. [18]
Bar Hebraeus’ observations should be borne in mind when evaluating
Grousset’s uncompromising overall assessment of Timur’s deeds and
motivations. After recounting Timur’s 1403 C.E. ravages in Georgia,
slaughtering the inhabitants, and destroying all the Christian
churches of Tiflis, Grousset states : [19]
It has been noted that the Jenghiz-Khanite Mongol invasion of the
thirteenth century was less cruel, for the Mongols were mere
barbarians who killed simply because for centuries this had been the
instinctive behavior of nomad herdsmen toward sedentary farmers. To
this ferocity Tamerlane [Timur] added a taste for religious murder.
He killed from Qur’anic piety. {Note: Curiously, the 1970 English
translation omits the word `coranique’ in translating `Il tuait par
piete coranique’ (p. 513 of the original L’Empire Des Steppes), so
that the phrase becomes, `He killed from piety’ as opposed to
Grousset’s original, `He killed from Qur’anic piety’}. He represents
a synthesis, probably unprecedented in history, of Mongol barbarity
and Muslim fanaticism, and symbolizes that advanced form of primitive
slaughter which is murder committed for the sake of an abstract
ideology, as a duty and a sacred mission.
Tamerlane’s barbarous legacy is still with us, 600-years later, in
the heinous acts of jihad terrorism being committed by contemporary
jihadists. Bin Laden, Zarqawi, the Sufi Basayev, and the Shi’ite
Mugniyya – inspired by Islamic teachings conveyed through prominent
contemporary Muslim religious leaders – have continued the practice of
mass killing from `Qur’anic piety’.
Dr. Bostom is an Associate Professor of Medicine, and the author of
the forthcoming The Legacy of Jihad, on Prometheus Books (2005).
Notes
[1] E.G. Browne. A Literary History of Persia In Four Volumes, Vol.
3. The Tartar Domain (1265-1502), Cambridge University Press, 1928,
pp. 180-206; Rene Grousset. L’Empire Des Steppes. Attila,
Gengis-Khan, Tamerlan. Paris: Payot, 1952. [Translated as The Empire
of the Steppes, by Naomi Walford, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press, 1970, pp. 409-465.
A.L. Srivastava. The Delhi Sultanate, p. 222.
[2] Rene Grousset. The Empire of the Steppes, pp. 419-420.
[3] E.G. Browne. A Literary History of Persia. p. 181.
[4] Beatriz Forbes Manz. The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane, Cambridge
University Press, 1989, p. 17.
[5] Rene Grousset. The Empire of the Steppes, pp. 416-417.
[6] For conflicting views regarding the apocryphal nature of this
work, see E.G. Browne. A Literary History of Persia. pp. 183-184, and
Elliot and Dowson, A History of India, Vol. 3, pp. 389-394.
[7] Elliot and Dowson, A History of India, Vol. 3, pp. 394-395.
[8] E.G. Browne. A Literary History of Persia. p. 196.
[9] Elliot and Dowson, A History of India, Vol. 3, p. 429
[10] Elliot and Dowson, A History of India, Vol. 3, pp. 432-433.
[11] Elliot and Dowson, A History of India, Vol. 3, pp. 445-446.
[12] Srivastava, The Delhi Sultanate, pp. 222-223.
[13] Srivastava, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 223.
[14] Srivastava, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 223.
[15] Elliot and Dowson, A History of India, Vol. 3, p. 459.
[16] Srivastava, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 223.
[17] A.L. Srivastava. The Delhi Sultanate, p. 224
[18] The Chronography of Bar Hebraeus. Translated from Syriac by
Ernest A. Wallis Budge, Oxford University Press, Vol. 1, 1932, p.
354.
[19] Rene Grousset. The Empire of the Steppes, p. 434.; p. 513 of the
original French, L’Empire Des Steppes. I want to thank Ibn Warraq for
pointing out the omission of the word `coranique’, i.e., Qur’anic in
the French to English translation by Walford.
Andrew G. Bostom