ArmeNews

Armenians Need to Pursue Their Cause With More Confidence and Commitment

2012-02-11T11:34:00.000-08:00

BY HARUT SASSOUNIAN
This week’s column deals with the self-defeating attitude of some Armenians whose negative outlook manifested itself once again with the latest news about the French bill criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide.
Some people hold the skeptical view that any project undertaken by Armenians is doomed to failure. A few years ago, I was advised by several readers not to call for dismissal of the Los Angeles Times Managing Editor for censoring an article by Mark Arax on the Armenian Genocide. On another occasion, I was advised not to ask Time magazine to apologize and make amends for disseminating a Turkish denialist DVD. I ignored the defeatist suggestions that countering such powerful publications would be futile and even counter-productive. It was not an easy struggle, but I am happy to report that Armenian activists prevailed in both campaigns.
It is noteworthy that such apathetic individuals not only fail to offer any assistance or encouragement, but go to great lengths to discourage those who are furthering the interests of the community. Interestingly, those who sit on their hands are usually the ones who complain the most about others who are serving the common cause.
Imagine if twenty years ago the small band of Armenian freedom fighters had listened to such naysayers and decided that it was not possible to liberate Artaskh (Karabakh) from Azeri and Soviet occupation forces! Would I be here today if my ancestors, the brave people of Zeitoun, located in the heartland of the Ottoman Empire, had not fought against powerful Turkish armies and won more than forty battles and hundreds of skirmishes to preserve their safety and autonomy?
Returning to our own times, how often are we told by misinformed Armenians with an “all-knowing” attitude that the U.S. Congress will never recognize the Armenian Genocide, when in fact it was recognized in 1975 and 1984! Or how many times these misguided fortune-tellers have prophesized that no U.S. President will ever recognize the Armenian Genocide because Turkey is too important, unaware that President Ronald Reagan recognized it in a Presidential Proclamation on April 22, 1981!
These same Armenians were confident that the French Parliament would not adopt a bill criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide last December, either because there would be a last minute snag or that President Sarkozy was tricking Armenians to get their votes in the forthcoming Presidential elections. Yet the Parliament approved the legislation by a wide margin. When the bill made its way to the Senate on January 23, 2012, once again the skeptics confidently predicted that an unexpected development would block its passage. The bill was adopted by a vote of 127-86.
Last week, when some French legislators, aided and abetted by the Turkish Ambassador, appealed the bill to the Constitutional Council, some Armenians fell into deep depression. They insisted that there was an anti-Armenian conspiracy, claiming to have known all along that the initiative would end up in failure. These people do not seem to realize that the appeal does not necessarily mean defeat of the bill. In fact, should the Council determine that the bill is constitutional, those who would be arrested for denying the Armenian Genocide could no longer challenge the new law.
However, should the Constitutional Council reject the bill, it would not be the end of the world, as President Sarkozy has pledged to amend it and resubmit it to both legislative houses. Nevertheless, the pursuit of the Armenian Cause does not depend on any particular bill. Armenians have many other major demands from Turkey under international law.
Rather than simply deploring that the bill has ended in the Constitutional Council, Armenians should demand that certain members of the court disqualify themselves from this case due their impermissible affiliation with Turkish Think Tanks or for having made prejudicial statements on this issue. It is noteworthy that six of the French Senators who filed for the appeal are currently enjoying themselves in Azerbaijan as guests of the state, tasting Caspian caviar and indulging in other Azeri “delicacies.”
Far more important than any bill is Armenians’ solemn determination to continue the struggle for their rightful cause, undeterred by setbacks or obstacles. Having survived several millennia of occupation, pillage, massacres, and genocide, Armenians cannot succumb or surrender at the first sign of adversity!
Armenians can go forward only when they purge themselves of their self-defeating attitude and subservient mentality, left over from centuries of Ottoman Turkish subjugation and servitude.

Genocide Education Project Trains Grant Hs Teachers

2012-02-11T11:32:00.000-08:00

LOS ANGELES—Teachers at Grant High School in Los Angeles learned how to teach about the Armenian Genocide at a workshop provided by The Genocide Education Project on their campus on January, 17.
Suzanne Douzmanian, GenEd’s Southern California Regional Coordinator led the workshop for Grant’s social studies teachers, which is part of a series of teacher-training events provided in coordination with the Los Angeles Unified School District, which has purchased GenEd’s lesson plans and teaching materials for all its high school history teachers.
“Suzanne gave an enthralling and thought provoking workshop,” said Kevin Kruska, Grant’s social studies department chair. “I felt like everybody came away from the workshop with a greater understanding of genocide and specifically, the Armenian Genocide.”
Grant High School has a substantial Armenian student population that has experienced tensions with the school’s Latino students. In the weeks leading up to the workshop, Kruska and GenEd’s education director, Sara Cohan, discussed ways of integrating the study of Armenian issues into the curriculum, as a means of building understanding and mutual respect within the diverse student body, as well as between the teachers and students.
The workshop theme was “The Eight Stages of Genocide,” a valuable teaching tool developed by Dr. Gregory Stanton, a past president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. “By using Stanton’s work, teachers and students can better comprehend the intentional and methodical nature of the Armenian Genocide, as well as all genocides, and can analyze ways of preventing genocide in the future,” said Raffi Momjian, GenEd’s Executive Director.
Teachers received a full set of resources on the Armenian Genocide produced by GenEd and provided by the Los Angeles Unified School District.
The LAUSD is the second largest school district in the country and has been collaborating with GenEd over the past eight years to help fulfill the California state mandate to teach about the Armenian Genocide.

Hamparian: Confronting a Pre-Genocidal Turkey

2012-02-09T14:32:00.000-08:00

It’s sometimes said that the obstruction of truth and justice for the Armenian Genocide is the result of actions by the Turkish state, not a reflection of the values of Turkish society.

In modern Turkey, Hrant Dink's killer is treated like a hero, and those guilty of his assassination are let free.
On the surface, this explanation might have some superficial appeal.
But upon any meaningful examination, this formulation falls apart. It dramatically oversimplifies the complex reality on the ground in Turkey, at so many levels, and ignores the deep historical and societal roots of anti-Armenian racism and violence in modern Turkish culture.
An imperfect (but perhaps useful) analogy may help shed some light on this issue: America’s brutal treatment of African Americans and Native Americans was not simply the function of governmental policy driven from above, but rather a reflection and a direct result, sadly, of very toxic and hateful cultural attitudes on race. Attitudes that created the very basis for the horrors of slavery and the genocidal massacres and ethnic-cleansing of American Indian tribes from their ancient homelands. Reading our Declaration of Independence (and its reference to “merciless Indian Savages”) or our Constitution (and its inhuman description of African Americans as three-fifths of a human being) just scratches the surface of the untold terror visited upon these peoples.
Add to this intolerance the vast American wealth drawn from centuries of slave labor and the massive theft of native lands—a parallel to the foundation of the modern Turkish economy, built upon the wealth and properties of literally hundreds of thousands of Armenian families and businesses stolen during the Armenian Genocide era—and you compound racial discrimination with deeply rooted and highly influential economic interests. A powerful combination. Hard, but not impossible, to challenge.
To our credit, as Americans—after decades of denial, demonstrations and, eventually, dialogue—we are today openly struggling with these deeply intense issues that are so closely tied to our very foundation, growth, and future as a nation. In Turkey, it is still illegal to talk about them.
Imagine Birmingham or Montgomery, Ala., at the height of Jim Crow.
Imagine a time in American history, thankfully behind us now, when segregationists openly celebrated Klan lynchings, and school children were raised to revel in old-school Westerns that demonized American Indians and glorified their destruction.
Well, sadly, that is where Turkey stands today.
In modern Turkey, Hrant Dink’s killer is treated like a hero, and those guilty of his assassination are let free. Armenians are regularly threatened with renewed deportations, the remaining Christian heritage of Anatolia is being systematically erased, and the country’s most popular films and books are about scapegoating and striking down treasonous minorities.
There are, of course, Turks who line up on the side of the angels. Unfortunately, however, U.S. policy toward Ankara has long been to play to the lowest common denominator, backing demagogues who appeal to their population’s basest instincts, at the expense of the small but growing number of brave souls who are struggling and sacrificing for the simple freedom to speak and act in pursuit of their country’s highest aspirations.
Turkey today is not a post-genocidal state, but a pre-genocidal society, angrily lashing out at its imagined enemies and, it would seem, seeking out its next target. The remaining Armenians on the soil of present-day Turkey – reminders of the unfinished work of Turkey’s last genocide – are high on this list, as, of course, are the Kurds, the most likely victim of its next.
The bottom line is that what is needed is not simply a change in Turkey’s policies, but rather a profound, long-term movement driven by both international and domestic pressure to rehabilitate Turkey into a modern, tolerant, and pluralist society that—as proof of its reform—willingly forfeits the fruits of its genocidal crimes.
Any less would be a disservice to Turkey’s victims, to Turkey’s neighbors, and to Turkey’s own citizens.

IN TURKEY, LIFE OF AN ARMENIAN IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS MCDONALD'S - TURKISH MP

2012-02-03T10:11:00.000-08:00

ANKARA. - During the Turkish parliament's hearings on the proposal for fight against the financing of terrorism, the Kurdish "Peace and Democracy Party" (BDP) MP Sirri Sureyya Onder reflected on the court ruling on the case of Hrant Dink, the founder and former chief editor of Istanbul's Agos Armenian weekly, who was killed in 2007.
"The person [Erhan Tuncel] who was punished in the trial was punished for placing a bomb in a hamburger-selling company [McDonald's]. In Turkey, the life of an Armenian citizen is not as important as an American company that sells hamburgers. You cannot touch a hamburger seller, but you can kill an Armenian," Sirri Sureyya Onder said, Turkish Haberx news agency informs.
To note, Erhan Tuncel was found not guilty of prompting Dink's murder, and, instead, he was sentenced to 10 years and 6 months for an explosion in a McDonald's store. But taking into account that Tuncel was already incarcerated for that amount of time, the court had ruled his release.

Akcam to Talk on Armenian Genocide Trials at NAASR

2012-01-25T12:31:00.000-08:00

BELMONT, Mass.—On Thurs., Feb. 16, Dr. Taner Akcam, the Robert Aram and Marianne Kaloosdian and Stephen and Marian Mugar Professor of Modern Armenian History and Armenian Genocide Studies at Clark University, will give a lecture entitled “Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials,” at 8 p.m., at the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR) Center, 395 Concord Ave., Belmont. The lecture is co-sponsored by the Zoryan Institute for Contemporary Armenian Research and Documentation, the Mashtots Chair in Armenian Studies at Harvard University, and NAASR.

The cover of 'Judgment at Istanbul'
The recently published volume Judgment at Istanbul (Berghahn Books) by Vahakn Dadrian and Taner Akcam is a new, authoritative translation of the Key Indictments and Verdicts and detailed analysis of the Turkish Military Tribunals concerning the crimes committed against the Armenians during World War I.
The authors have compiled the documentation of the trial proceedings for the first time in English and situated them within their historical and legal context. These documents show that Wartime Cabinet ministers, Young Turk Party leaders, and a number of others inculpated in these crimes were court-martialed by the Turkish Military Tribunals in the years immediately following World War I. Most were found guilty and received sentences ranging from prison with hard labor to death.
In this lecture, Akcam will discuss the authors’ new findings and the importance of these trials in the light of recent scholarship, and will address the critiques of and attacks against the validity of the trials and documents discovered through the proceedings.
Until recently our knowledge of the trials was limited to those trials whose indictments and verdicts were published by the Takvim-i Vekayi. Over the course of years of meticulous research, Dadrian and Akcam discovered that there were as many as 62 trials. In Judgment at Istanbul, they not only list these until-now-unknown cases, but also analyze the political conditions of the time and the history of these trials.
Judgment at Istanbul will be available for purchase and signing the night of the lecture.
Taner Akcam is the author of From Empire To Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide and A Shameful Act: the Armenian Genocide and Turkish Responsibility, as well as numerous articles in Turkish, German, and English. His forthcoming book The Young Turks’ Crime Against Humanity: The Armenian Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in the Ottoman Empire, will be issued by Princeton University Press in April 2012.
Admission to the event is free (donations appreciated). The NAASR Center is located opposite the First Armenian Church and next to the U.S. Post Office. Ample parking is available around the building and in adjacent areas.
For more information, call (617) 489-1610 or e-mail hq@naasr.org.

Germany could likewise pass bill that criminalizes genocide denial – German MP

2012-01-19T09:53:00.000-08:00

Germany could likewise pass bill that criminalizes genocide denial – German MP
January 19, 2012 11:21
YEREVAN. – German ruling party’s MP Erika Steinbach considers it possible the country’s Bundestag (Parliament) could likewise pass a law that criminalizes the denial of genocides.
“It is crystal clear for me and my parliamentary faction that there was genocide, no matter how much Turkey denies the reality,” Steinbach said, who is the spokeswoman of the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union Parliamentary Group on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid.
In response to Armenian News-NEWS.am correspondent’s question as to whether their French colleagues’ track-record will be used in the Bundestag, too, Erika Steinbach noted that, in general, the German parliament can pass a bill that criminalizes genocide denial, but most of the other factions would hardly vote in its favor.
“The Armenian Genocide topic must constantly be kept on the agenda. Turkey bears a responsibility. Today’s authorities did not commit genocide, and they can easily accept this fact, say they are remorseful that there was an injustice, [and that] genocide was committed,” the German MP stressed.

AS FRANCE TIGHTENS THE NOOSE, TURKEY REACTS WITH OUTRAGEOUS WORDS AND DEEDS

2012-01-17T13:46:00.000-08:00

original article © Panorama
Published on January 17, 2012
AS FRANCE TIGHTENS THE NOOSE, TURKEY REACTS WITH OUTRAGEOUS WORDS AND DEEDS
· Turkish leaders routinely proclaim that they are not afraid of facing their country's past. Yet, the minute someone reminds them of the darkest chapters of their history, they panic and overreact.
The most recent example of Turkish officials' irrational behavior is their reaction to French initiatives to adopt a law criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide. Despite Turkish threats and retaliatory measures, the bill was adopted by the French Parliament on December 22, 2011 and the Senate is expected to approve it on January 23, 2012.
Here are a few examples of outrageous Turkish overreaction to France and all things French:
-- Prime Minister Erdogan accused French President Nicolas Sarkozy's father of participating in the Algerian atrocities, while serving in the French Army. Sarkozy's father shot back by admonishing Erdogan to read his biography, telling him that he had never set foot in Algeria.
-- To justify his own country's genocide of Armenians, Erdogan accused France of committing "genocide" in Algeria. Yet, Erdogan was shocked when Algeria's Prime Minister Ahmed Ouyahia rebuked him for playing politics with Algerians' blood. Ouyahia also blamed Turkey for the deaths of countless Algerians by providing ammunition to France during the colonial period for which former Turkish Pres. Ozal apologized to Algeria.
-- The Mayor of Ankara announced last week that the City Council had decided to change the name of "Paris Street" to "Algeria Street," rename "Charles De Gaulle Street" in honor of a yet to be named Algerian hero, and erect a monument dedicated to the Algerian "massacres" in front of the French Embassy in the Turkish capital.
-- Turkish factories have been busily manufacturing toilet paper, trash bags, and baby diapers carrying Sarkozy's name, and condoms with the picture of French Deputy Valerie Boyer. Meanwhile, a gang of Turkish hackers attacked the websites of French lawmakers and threatened to rape Mrs. Boyer and murder her children.
-- Prof. Oya Akgonenc wrote a hilarious article titled, "Armenian Events in the Triangle of Armenia, France and America." She identified three "dangerous attackers" of Turkey whose last names start with S: "Sarkozy of France, Sargsyan of Armenia, and Sassounian, head of the Armenian lobby in the United States!"
-- Although Turkey called for a boycott of French products and services, Turkish flights to Paris were fully booked, as the number of Turks visiting France during the holidays increased by 10% compared to last year. Similarly, trade between the two countries increased by 30% after the 2001 French recognition of the Armenian Genocide, despite the Turkish boycott of France.
-- French-Algerian businessman Rachid Nekkaz, who proudly declared during a recent visit to Turkey, "I feel like I am a Turk," announced setting up a million euro ($1.3 million) fund to pay the fine for any Turk arrested in France for denying the Armenian Genocide. Mr. Nekkaz failed to inform potential Turkish denialists that the pending French law also carries a sentence of one year in jail which his fund would be unable to prevent.
-- The head of a Turkish news agency called for the closing down of French schools in Turkey and banning the teaching of French in Turkish schools.
Such nutty statements are likely to multiply after the French Senate approves the bill criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide and Pres. Sarkozy signs it into law, in view of the fact that the two largest French parties have expressed their support for the Armenian bill. Imagine the whining of Turkish leaders, when Turks are arrested in France for breaking the upcoming law on genocide denial.
Turkish protests will reach a crescendo when the French government proposes to the 25 other states of the European Union a similar anti-denial law which would lead to the arrest and punishment of Turkish denialists throughout Europe.
Turkish leaders have no one else to blame but themselves for their embarrassing and demeaning predicament. Yet, Turkey is in no position to give lectures about freedom of expression to anyone, given its draconian laws that violate the basic human rights of its own citizens. In France, it is illegal to lie about genocide, while in Turkey, it is illegal to tell the truth!
Instead of blaming the French Senate or the three men "whose last names start with S," Turkish leaders could get out of their century long quagmire by acknowledging the Armenian Genocide and making amends to the descendants of dispossessed victims. Source: Panorama.am

“Grandma’s Tattoos’ Available for Watching Online

2012-01-13T11:17:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON (A.W.)—“Grandma’s Tattoos,” a Swedish production directed by Suzanne Khardalian, is now available online in full, and can be watched on Al Jazeera’s website.
Al Jazeera English is an international round-the-clock English language news and current affairs TV channel headquartered in Doha, Qatar. Launched in 2006, it reaches around a billion English speaking viewers.
“This is an extraordinary achievement for the film,” Khardalian told the Armenian Weekly. “The film will have a huge exposure, and will reach countries that would have been difficult to reach.”
“Grandma’s Tattoos” (2011), a 58-minute-long documentary, chronicles Khardalian’s quest to uncover the atrocities that scarred her grandmother, a woman who bore “devilish marks”—tattoos on her face and hands—that were the persistent reminders of a time in captivity and rape during the Armenian Genocide. Much of her experiences remain a mystery to her progeny, but the few tidbits Khardalian discovered years after her grandmother’s death are but a faint yet terrifying echo of the hellish occurrences that haunted the survivors to the grave.
“Witness,” the Al Jazeera program that features “Grandma’s Tattoos,” screens award-winning documentaries that present realities often in conflict- or disaster-stricken regions, from Nairobi to Palestine, Japan to Somalia, Libya to Turkey.
Al Jazeera English is an international round-the-clock English language news and current affairs TV channel headquartered in Doha, Qatar. Launched in 2006, it reaches around a billion English speaking viewers.

Synopsis of ‘Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials’

2012-01-06T10:47:00.000-08:00

‘Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials’By Vahakn N. Dadrian and Taner AkcamNew York and Oxford: Berghahn Books2011, 363 ppISBN 978-0-85745-251-1 (hardback)ISBN 978-0-85745-286-3 (e-book)
This book is a study of the World War I Armenian Genocide as documented through the Ottoman Special Military Tribunal’s criminal prosecution of the perpetrators involved. The aim of these post-World War I Ottoman courts-martial was the exposure and punishment of the organizers of the crime. As the courts-martial unfolded over nearly three years (1919-22), the near-omnipotent role played in the organization of the genocide by the top leaders of a militarized political party, the Young Turk junta—along with their governmental subordinates—became all too evident. That party was the Ittihad ve Terakki, or the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP).

A scene from the courtroom on April 3, 1919
This study is almost entirely anchored on original and authenticated documents. The evidence these documents yield is by no means ordinary in nature, but is rather a kind of evidence that is legally characterized as “evidence-in-chief.”
Most importantly, the documentation for the trials was rendered both incontestable and verifiable by a distinct legal procedure the tribunal adopted: When on the witness stand, the principal defendants were invited to examine and confirm the authenticity of the many secret and top secret documents bearing their own signatures. Most of these documents had been secured and authenticated during the pretrial investigations by officials from the ministries of the interior and justice. The authentication formula used was, “It conforms to the original.”
The book represents firsts in many ways.
This is the first time the complete known documentation of the trial proceedings are being provided in English. This study is based on authentic Turkish documentation, which the Ottoman government was forced to release during the trials. It includes the personal, eyewitness testimony of high-ranking Ottoman officials, given under oath, on the magnitude of the crimes against the Armenians. The indictments, evidence, and verdicts clearly prove the centralized planning and the genocidal intent of the Young Turk government against its Armenian citizens.
This is the first time information from the Ottoman newspapers of the era—whose collection, digitization, editing, transliteration, and translation were commissioned by the Zoryan Institute as part of the long-term project known as “Creating a Common Body of Knowledge”—has been utilized to reconstruct the trials. While the official government record lists only 12 trials, the newspapers provide details on 63. Between 2001 and 2004, researchers went to libraries in different cities in Turkey to locate and digitize all the articles in 17 Ottoman newspapers from 1919-21 on the trials. It was important not to alert officials about the intent of the project, or access might well have been blocked. In the end, Zoryan had a nearly complete collection of hundreds of articles on the trials from Ottoman newspapers. These articles have been transliterated into modern Turkish, and the titles of the articles translated into English. Digital images of these newspapers are now in Zoryan’s archives.
This is the first time a national court successfully prosecuted such a case of mass atrocity against its own citizens. The legal principle of “crimes against humanity” that arose in this case had a far-reaching influence and is echoed in the Nuremberg Charter, the Tokyo Charter, and the UN Genocide Convention.
This is the first joint publication by the two most internationally renowned scholars on the Armenian Genocide—Professors Vahakn Dadrian, an Armenian, and Taner Akcam, a Turk.
Wartime Cabinet ministers, Young Turk party leaders, and a number of other accessories were court-martialed for orchestrating Turkey’s entry into World War I and for the annihilation of the Armenians. Most were found guilty and received sentences ranging from prison with hard labor to death. Talat, Enver, Cemal, and Dr. Nazım were condemned to death in absentia.
On Jan. 13, 1921, the courts-martial were abolished altogether, with jurisdiction reverting to regular military courts. Nearly all of the key figures of the CUP managed to escape Turkey before being brought to trial. Scores of lesser CUP leaders were condemned to death in absentia or sentenced to prison terms. However, many of these eventually escaped or were set free, as the Allied Powers were very slow in implementing the trials, constantly undermined each other, and removed their forces from occupying Turkey, while at the same time freeing tens of thousands of prisoners of war, who readily joined the Kemalist insurgency. The July 24, 1923 Treaty of Lausanne was framed in such a way as to avoid the subject of war crimes and massacres. With Declaration VIII of Amnesty and the Protocol attached to this treaty, and as Kemalism gained the upper hand and eventually ended the Ottoman Empire, the pursuit of justice for the Armenians was abandoned.
The Armenian Genocide represents the first case of genocide (as described by Raphael Lemkin, the legal scholar who coined the term “genocide”), in which a government tried to eliminate an identifiable ethnic or religious group of its own citizens, and is recognized as the prototype for what specialists refer to as “modern genocide.” It serves as a classic example of how impunity for one crime can lead to another crime, as Adolf Hitler infamously justified his plans by asking his generals in 1939, “Who remembers now the extermination of the Armenians?”
Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials adds a new perspective to the historical and moral studies of the genocide, and serves as a legal case study. It holds great relevance today, with the current interest internationally regarding the Armenian Genocide and its denial.
See the Table of Contents attached for an outline of the book.
About the Authors
Vahakn N. Dadrian’s field of specialization is genocide, in general, and the Armenian Genocide, in particular. For several years he was engaged as director of a large Genocide Study Project sponsored by the H. F. Guggenheim Foundation. The project’s first major achievement was the publication, now in its fifth printing expanded, of an extensive volume titled The History of the Armenian Genocide: Ethnic Conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia to the Caucasus (Oxford & Providence, R.I., 1995). This work has appeared in French (Paris, second printing) and in Greek (Athens). Dadrian’s other major work, German Responsibility in the Armenian Genocide: A Review of the Historical Evidence of German Complicity, was published in 1996 (Cambridge, Mass.) and is now in its third edition. His third volume, Warrant for Genocide: The Key Elements of the Turko-Armenian Conflict, appeared in 1999 (London and New Brunswick, N.J.). His latest book is titled The Key Elements of the Turkish Denial of the Armenian Genocide (Cambridge, Mass., and Toronto, 1999). This book was translated into Spanish in Buenos Aires (2002). In addition to these monographs, Dadrian has published numerous articles in scholarly journals around the world. His extensive list of publications includes several articles on the Jewish Holocaust and the victimization of the American Indians. In 2005, he received four separate awards for his lifetime contribution to genocide studies. Dadrian is currently the director of genocide research at the Zoryan Institute.
Taner Akcam was born in the province of Ardahan in northeast Turkey and became interested in Turkish politics at an early age. As the editor-in-chief of a political journal, he was arrested in 1976 and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. One year later, he escaped and fled to Germany as a political refugee. His books include Dialogue Across an International Divide: Essays Towards a Turkish-Armenian Dialogue (2001) and From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide (2004). A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility was published in November 2006 and has since been translated into Dutch, French, Italian, Polish, and Spanish. He is the first Turkish scholar to have drawn attention to the historicity of the Armenian Genocide and has, as a result, been persecuted by the Turkish state. In April 2006, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts presented him with a distinguished award for outstanding work in human rights and fighting genocide denial. He is currently an associate professor of history and the Kaloosdian/Mugar Chair in Armenian Genocide Studies at the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Clark University.
Table of Contents
Ottoman-Turkish Words and Names xi
Introduction 1Vahakn N. Dadrian and Taner Akcam
PART I. The Conditions Surrounding the Trials
Chapter 1. History of the Turko-Armenian Conﬂict 13
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 2. Military Defeat and the Victors’ Drive for Punitive Justice 19
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 3. The Preparations for Courts-Martial 78
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 4. The Initiation of Courts-Martial 93
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 5. Emergent Kemalism and the Courts-Martial 101
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 6. The Series of Major Trials and the Related Verdicts: Falsiﬁcation of the Arguments of “Relocation,” “Civil War,” and “Intercommunal Clashes” 108
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 7. Legal Proceedings as a Conceptual Framework 126
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 8. A Summary of the Conditions Surrounding the Trials 154
Vahakn N. Dadrian
Chapter 9. The Judicial Liquidation of Some of the Arch Perpetrators by Both CUP and Kemalist Authorities, and the Demise of Other Accomplices 177
Vahakn N. Dadrian

PART II. The Trials and Beyond
Chapter 10. Death Sentences Handed Down by the Military Tribunal in Istanbul 195
Taner Akcam
Chapter 11. Coverage of the Trials by the Istanbul Turkish Press 200
Taner Akcam
Chapter 12. Formation and Operation of the Ottoman Military Tribunals 251
Taner Akcam
Chapter 13. The Full Texts in English of the Indictments and Verdicts 271
Appendix 333
Glossary of Terms 335
Archival, Judicial, and Parliamentary Documents 337
I. The Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic 337
II. Imperial Germany and German Oﬃcial Records 342
III. Imperial Austria-Hungary 344
IV. Great Britain 345
V. T e United States 346
VI. United Nations 346
VII. France and French Archives 346
VIII. Armenian Archival Documents 346

Select Bibliographic Secondary Sources 348
Books 348
Turkish 348
English 350
German 351
French 351
Armenian 351

Articles 352
Turkish 352
English 352
German 353
Armenian 353

Newspapers 354
Turkish 354
French 354
American 354
British 355
Canadian 355
Australian 355
Armenian 355
Index 356

On the Armenian Genocide: The Response of a Handful of Historians

2012-01-04T13:53:00.000-08:00

Bernard-Henri Lévy
French philosopher; Writer
On the Armenian Genocide: The Response of a Handful of Historians
Posted: 01/ 3/12 04:00 PM ET
Genocide , Armenian Genocide Bill , Aermanian Genocide , Armenian Genocide France , Armenian Genocide Law , France-Armenia-Genocide-Bill , World News
Are these people really incapable of comprehending? Or are they just pretending not to understand?
The law whose purpose is to penalize negationist revisionism, voted before Christmas by the French parliament, does not propose to write history in the place of historians. And this for the simple reason that this history has been told and written, well written, for a long time. This we have always known: that, beginning in 1915, the Armenians were the victims of a methodic attempt at annihilation. A wealth of literature has been devoted to the subject, based in particular upon the confessions offered by the Turkish criminals themselves, starting with Hoca Ilyas Sami, almost immediately after the fact. From Yehuda Bauer to Raul Hilberg, from researchers at Yad Vashem to Yves Ternon and others, no serious historian casts doubt upon this reality or denies it. In other words, this law has nothing to do with the will to establish a truth of state. No representative of the French National Assembly who voted for it saw himself as a substitute for historians or their work. Together, they only intended to recall this simple right, that of each of us not to be publicly attacked -- and its corollary, the right to demand reparations for this particularly outrageous offense which is the insult to the memory of the dead. It is a question of law, not one of history.
Presenting this law as one that denies liberty, one likely to hamper the work of historians is another strange argument that makes one wonder. It is the negationist revisionists who, up until now, have hampered the work of historians. It is their mad ideas, their hare-brained concepts, their twisting of facts, their terrifying and breathtaking lies that shake the earth upon which, in principle, a science should be built. And in punishing them, making their task more complicated, alerting the public that it is dealing not with scholars but with those who would enflame minds, that the law protects and shelters history. Is there one historian who has been prevented from working on the Shoah by the Gayssot law punishing denial of the Holocaust? Is there one author who, in good conscience, can claim that it has limited his freedom to do research and to raise questions? And isn't it clear that the only ones this law has seriously hindered are the Faurissons, the Irvings, and the other Le Pens? Well, the same applies to the genocide of the Armenians. This law, when the Senate will have ratified it, will be a stroke of fortune for historians, who can finally work in peace. Unless... Yes, unless those who oppose the law express this other, cloudier reservation: that it would be a bit premature to come to a conclusion, precisely and for nearly a century, of "genocide".
Some still say, isn't there some other way than the law to intimidate the "assassins on paper"? And hasn't the truth in itself, in its starkness and its rigour, the means to defend itself and to triumph over those who would deny it? It is a vast debate, one which has been discussed, in parenthesis, since the origins of philosophy. And to which one adds, in the case at hand, a specific parameter stating that, when in doubt, it is prudent to make sure one is backed up by the law. This parameter is the negationist revisionism of the Turkish State. And this specificity is that the negationists there are not just a vague bunch of cranks, but people who are supported by resources, diplomacy, the capacity for blackmail and retaliation of a powerful State. Imagine the situation of the survivors of the Shoah had the German State been a negationist State after the war. Imagine the immensity of their additional distress and anger had they been confronted, not with a sect of loonies, but with an unrepentant Germany that brought pressure upon their partners by threatening them with angry retaliation should they call the extermination of the Jews at Auschwitz genocide. It is, mutatis mutandis, the situation of the Armenians. And that is also why they have the right to a law.
And finally, I would add that it's time to stop mixing everything up and drowning the Armenian tragedy in the ritualized blahblahblah assailing the "memorial laws". For this law is not a memorial law. It is not one of those dangerous power plays capable of laying the path for dozens if not hundreds of absurd or blackguardly rules, codifying what one has the right to say about the Saint Bartholomew's Day massacre, the meaning of colonization, slavery, the Civil War, the misdemeanor of blasphemy and heaven knows what else. It is a law concerning a genocide -- which is not the same. It is a law sanctioning those who, in denying it, intensify and perpetuate the genocidal act -- which is something else entirely. There are not, thank God, hundreds of genocides, or even dozens. There are three. Four, if we add the Cambodians to the Armenians, the Jews, and the Rwandans. And to place these three or four genocides on the same level as all the rest, to make their penalization the antechamber of a political correctness that authorizes a stream of useless or perverse laws on the disputed aspects of our national memory, to say, "Watch it! You're opening a Pandora's box from which everything and anything can pop out !" is another imbecility, exacerbated by another infamy and sealed with a dishonesty that is, really, grotesque.
Let us confront this specious line of argument with the wisdom of national representation. And may the senators complete the process by refusing to be intimidated by this little band of historians.

Sassounian: Turkey Besieged by Armenian Successes Long Before the Genocide Centennial

2012-01-03T11:53:00.000-08:00

Turkish leaders made a serious tactical error in 2011. They were so preoccupied with countering the upcoming tsunami of the centennial of the Armenian Genocide in 2015, that they lost sight of the more immediate political storms facing them.

Armenians quickly capitalized on the Turkish blunder, managing to score a series of early successes: 1) the French Parliament adopted a bill banning denial of the Armenian Genocide, 2) the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution calling on Turkey to return Armenian churches and other properties to their rightful owners, 3) an Israeli parliamentary committee held a public hearing on the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, and 4) a U.S. Federal Court may shortly issue a default judgment against the Republic of Turkey.

Facing a tenacious French President who refused to be intimidated by insults and threats, Turkey reacted with slash and burn tactics that aggravated its problems and undermined its bid for European Union membership. By withdrawing its ambassador from Paris, the Turkish government deprived itself of the services of a capable diplomat at a crucial time when the French Senate is about to take up the bill criminalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide. Judging from past experience, the Turkish Ambassador will be sent back to Paris soon, making his dramatic recall an exercise in futility and attracting the ridicule of the diplomatic community. If Turkey withdraws its ambassador every time a country recognizes the Armenian Genocide or adopts a decision contrary to Ankara’s wishes, it will isolate itself from the rest of the world.

Even more damaging to Turkey’s interests is the threat to boycott goods imported from countries that are deemed to be “unfriendly.” Turkey would simply damage its own economy by purchasing inferior products at higher prices from alternative sources. Moreover, should Turkey stop buying highly technical items such as passenger planes and advanced missiles from the few countries that make them, it will end up with an antiquated air transport system and a weakened military. In recent days, however, Turkish leaders have sheepishly withdrawn their bombastic boycott threats, after realizing that the World Trade Organization would impose severe penalties on Turkey for violating its membership obligations.

Turning to the House resolution on return of church properties, the Turkish government and its high-priced lobbying firms were caught flat-footed on how to counter such a delicate matter. After years of success in derailing Armenian Genocide resolutions, the Turkish side was clueless about fighting a motion that called for the return of church buildings and other properties to their respective Christian communities. Consequently, the resolution was approved by a vote of 43-1 in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and by more than two-thirds of the full House. This is the first time that the U.S. Congress has gone on record demanding that Turkey restore the rights of genocide victims beyond the mere acknowledgment of the Genocide. In the coming months and years, Armenians will be presenting an ever growing list of demands to international organizations, parliaments around the world, and the Turkish government itself.

The third positive development took place in Israel, when the Knesset’s Education Committee held an unprecedented three-hour public hearing on the Armenian Genocide, despite pressure from Turkey, its lackey Azerbaijan, and the Netanyahu government. This discussion, held in front of TV cameras, and not behind closed doors, is expected to continue at a later date. It is shameful that the Israeli government continues to obstruct recognition of the Armenian Genocide, perhaps hoping to regain Turkey’s trust and friendship. Rather than playing political games with mass murder, the Netanyahu government should acknowledge the truth of the Armenian Genocide for the sake of its own reputation.

The final salutary development is an expected default judgment to be issued by a U.S. Federal Court against the Republic of Turkey on two lawsuits demanding payment for Armenian properties confiscated during the Genocide. Such a judgment would be a stern warning to the Turkish authorities that they cannot continue to enjoy the ill-gotten gains from the blood money of genocide victims.

Long before the arrival of the Armenian tsunami in 2015, Turkey is increasingly confronted by pressures for greater human rights and Kurdish autonomy, and far-reaching Armenian demands, while experiencing acute problems with virtually all of its neighbors. A Turkish regime besieged with serious internal and external challenges is less of a threat to its own population and its neighborhood, and more likely to settle past injustices and present conflicts.

France Genocide Bill Sponsor Receives Death Threats

2011-12-30T12:19:00.000-08:00

PARIS—“All Frenchmen of Armenian descent, who live in France have the right, to protect the memory of their ancestors slaughtered in 1915,” Valerie Boyer, the French member of parliament who drafted the bill criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide, said on her Facebook page.
“This law aims to punish all those, who will question the fact of Genocide in French territory,” she explained.
“The Armenian genocide is recognized in Russia, Canada, Argentina, Italy, Sweden and even in Germany. Its denial is penalized in Switzerland. Yet, none of these states is being threatened in its diplomatic relations or business by Turkey,” Boyer wrote.
Meanwhile, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported Monday that Boyer has become a target of death threats and her Web site was hacked by Turks.
According to RFE/RL, Boyer told the BFMTV station that she, her children and parents have received “extremely grave” threats since then. “It’s totally paradoxical to be the author and the rapporteur of a text which speaks of human rights, human dignity, recognition and protection of the weak, and legislate under threat, be threatened by a foreign state and then be subjected to extremely grave personal threats,” she said.
“Death threats, threats of rape and threats of destruction, name-calling and insults. I find this very shocking.”
Boyer added that she will lodge a “complaint” with relevant French authorities but is undaunted by the threats. “This process can only strengthen us in both our beliefs and our resolve,” she said.
An adviser to French Interior Minister Claude Gueant told “Le Figaro” daily on Monday that the lawmaker and her family will be given a “discreet and effective protection for some time.” “The risk is not very high but we are not immune to a disequilibrium,” the official said.
Boyer, who is also the deputy head of French parliamentary caucus promoting ties with Armenia, spoke to the French news channel following a hacker attack on her website.
Visitors to www.valerie-boyer.fr were automatically redirected on Sunday to another website purportedly owned by a Turkish hacker group presenting itself as GrayHatz. It displayed the Turkish national flag and contained a message to the French government and France’s 500,000-strong Armenian community.
“You, the Diaspora Armenians, are such cowards that you don’t have guts to open up the Armenian archives and face the truth,” read the message posted in Turkish and English. “You, the French people, are so pitiful and pathetic that you are disregarding the truths for votes.”
The latter accusation was in tune with the Turkish government’s claims that Sarkozy engineered the bill’s passage to gain the support of French-Armenian voters in next year’s presidential election. Ankara has also denounced the legislation as an infringement of freedom of speech and academic debate.
“Freedom of speech and state propaganda are very different things,” Boyer told the French lower house last Thursday in a clear reference to Turkey’s vehement denial of a government policy to annihilate the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire during World War One.
Boyer’s website was still disabled as of Monday evening, displaying a blank page. The UMP deputy’s Facebook page had scores of abusive comments from apparently Turkish users and messages of support from Armenians posted in recent days.
Under the adopted legislation, anyone in France publicly denying the Armenian genocide could face a year in jail and a fine of 45,000 euros ($58,000). In order to enter into force the law needs to be approved by the French Senate dominated by members of the opposition Socialist Party.
The Paris-based Armenews.com news service reported on Monday that the Senate majority leader, Francois Rebsamen, has demanded that the government include it on the Senate agenda “as soon as possible.”
“Even if this text carries electoral suspicions, nothing would be worse today than to bury it, thereby creating misunderstanding and disappointment of the Armenian community, having raised the indignation and anger of the Turkish community,” Rebsamen said in a statement.
Turkey recalled its ambassador in Paris and imposed political and military sanctions on France following the National Assembly vote. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to take more punitive steps if “the current [French] attitude is maintained.”
Turkish ambassadors from all over the world reportedly gathered in Ankara on Saturday to discuss ways of preventing more countries from taking similar measures ahead of the 100th anniversary of the start of the Armenian massacres in 1915.
“We should all be prepared also because we will face an intensive campaign from the Armenian diaspora in 2015,” the AFP news agency quoted an unnamed senior Turkish diplomat as saying on Friday. “And we should take history not from 1915 but from 1914 and explain what happened in the Balkans during that period,” said the diplomat.
While criticizing the French bill, some Turkish commentators have urged the authorities in Ankara to address the genocide issue more openly. “We have avoided any talk on 1915 for decades,” Mehmet Tezkan wrote in the “Milliyet” daily.
“One must be blind not to see what will happen four years later,” Tezkan said, according to AFP. “The genocide will be recognized by the entire world in 2015 on its 100th anniversary.”
Meanwhile, the leader of the Socialist majority in the French Senate reportedly demanded that President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government submit the bill to the upper house of parliament “as soon as possible.”

Turkish Journalist: French Vote Is Only A Prelude, Hurricane Coming

2011-12-24T10:32:00.000-08:00

From: Mihran Keheyian <mkeheyian@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:22:06 +0400 (AMT)
TURKISH JOURNALIST: FRENCH VOTE IS ONLY A PRELUDE, HURRICANE COMING PanARMENIAN.NetDecember 22, 2011 - 13:24 AMT PanARMENIAN.Net - Turkish journalist Mehmet Ali Birand describesthe Armenian Genocide bill pending vote in the French parliament as'a signal flare.' "It is the tip of the iceberg that will hit Turkey in 2015," he saysin a piece of opinion published by Hurriyet Daily News. "The French vote is only a prelude. They are preparing to blow likea hurricane in coming years," Birand says. "What do we do? As always, we are trying to prevent what is comingby harsh warning letters and threat-filled statements. We are sendingdelegations to France trying to influence every segment. Next, we willtemporarily withdraw our ambassador and maybe there will be callsto boycott French goods. We will bring forward our significance forEurope, our strategic value, but nothing will change. These methods donot serve their purpose anymore. Moreover, they will be more uselesstoward 2015," he presumes. "Turkey has lost its struggle against the genocide. For almost 100years, first it buried its head in the sand, did not discuss it, ithas even left its own society ignorant. For all those years, it wasnot able make the international community believe that "there was nogenocide." It did not go beyond a total denial. We have missed thattrain," Birand says. "Only bold steps can save us from this accusation. The way to dispersethe genocide wind passes through launching of new "initiatives" thatwill surprise the world public. By publicly apologizing for mutuallosses and taking those steps to activate relations with Yerevan,we can only hold on to the edge of the genocide cliff. Otherwise,2015 will very much batter Turkey." he says. "A question I am very curious to hear the answer is this: "Is therea planned operation in Ankara to mitigate the losses of the coming2015 earthquake?" If not, be sure that we will feel the pain immensely. Actually, we are already late, but again, some things can be done. Let's not forget, the more we postpone taking precautions, the moreit will become expensive and cause risky decisions for us to escapefrom the trap. For once, let's act like a European, not like a Turk,"Birand advises. "To counterbalance 2015, threats such as "we will put an embargo, wewill withdraw our ambassador," will not work or affect anybody. Theonly way to draw the attention of the world public passes from takingbolder steps," he concludes.

STEVE JOBS HAD ASKED THE TURKS: "YOU SUBJECTED 1.5 MILLION ARMENIANS TO GENOCIDE. HOW DID IT HAPPEN?"

2011-12-22T10:44:00.000-08:00

STEVE JOBS HAD ASKED THE TURKS: "YOU SUBJECTED 1.5 MILLION ARMENIANS TO GENOCIDE. HOW DID IT HAPPEN?"
·
What Turkish tour guide Asil Tuncer said, with respect to Apple Inc.'s founder, the late Steve Jobs' visit to Turkey, caused great uproar in the country. The guide claimed that Jobs considered the Turks as enemies, and he did not even shake hands when bidding farewell to the tour guide.
Tuncer noted that when they had approached the Hagia Sophia, in Istanbul, and he had told that it was a church at first but then it was turned into a mosque, Steve Jobs had asked: "You, Muslims, what did you do to so many Christians? You subjected 1.5 million Armenians to genocide. Tell us, how did it happen?"
And the Turkish tour guide's denials further infuriated Steve Jobs, who left Turkey one day early.
To note, in Steve Jobs' biographical book it is written that, after the Armenian Genocide, his step-mother, Clara Hagopian, had emigrated from Malatya, Turkey.
Apple Inc.'s legendary founder had lost his battle to cancer on October 5, at age of 56.

Turkey has not apologized for Armenian Genocide but demands apology from others – Harvard Prof.

2011-12-13T11:42:00.000-08:00

Turkey has not apologized for Armenian Genocide but demands apology from others – Harvard Prof.
December 13, 2011 00:46
Turkey has not apologized for the Armenian Genocide and should not demand that others must apologize for the flotilla clash, said renowned legal expert Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz speaking at the annual business conference in Tel Aviv.
“Turkey has never apologized for the genocide in Armenia. Talk about chutzpah? Talking about Turkey demanding an apology from anybody?” he emphasized.
Dershowitz severely criticized Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan for demanding an apology from Israel over the flotilla incident, Israeli Arutz Sheva website reports.
He also added that Israel’s record is better than that of Turkey and NATO and others when it comes to the ratio of civilians to terrorists who are killed in warfare.

Sarkisian Urges Turkey to Face its History

2011-12-10T15:23:00.000-08:00

MARSEILLES, France—President Serzh Sarkisian urged Turkey to face its own past and “repent” for the Armenian Genocide, saying that it is inevitable for Turkey to eventually recognize the Genocide.
Sarkisian was speaking at an official reception organized by Marseille’s Mayor Jean-Claude Gaudin and attended by members of the Armenian community. He was visiting Marseilles to take part in a meeting of the European People’s Party and to inaugurate a new Armenian consulate in that city, where there is a large Armenian population.
“We are confident that Turkey will repent. This is neither a precondition nor a effort to exact revenge. Turkey must face its own history,” said Sarkisian.
The president said that Armenia’s position has not changed and that Yerevan is ready to have friendly relations with its neighbors. He cited the example of post-World War II Germany and Poland, when German Chancellor Willie Brandt visited the Warsaw Ghetto fully cognizant of the crime his country had perpetrated against Poland.
“Sooner or later Turkey, which considers itself a European country, will have a truly European leadership that will bow its head at Dzidzernagapert, The sooner the better, but that is up to the Turkish people,” said Sarkisian.
“One day Turkey’s leadership will find the strength to reassess its approaches to the Armenian Genocide,” added Sarkisian.
He also called a recent visit by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to Armenia “historic.” He added that Sarkozy’s statements in Yerevan, urging Turkey to come to term with its past was unprecedented, adding that no other world leader has never made such statement.

Bill Criminalizing Genocide Denial Passes French Parliament Committee

2011-12-10T14:37:00.000-08:00

PARIS—The committee on constitutional law of the French National Assembly approved a draft bill on criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide, reported freelance journalist Jean Eckian.
The bill introduced by Valerie Boyer and co-signed by 40 parliament members of the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) and the New Center parties, levies a fine of 45,000 euros and a one year prison sentence for those who deny the Armenian Genocide.
The bill will now be sent to the entire National Assembly for a debate and vote.
“I hope that we will go to the end and that France will always be a country of human rights,” said Boyer.
The resolution amends the law on freedom of press so that racially motivated crimes are now punishable by law.
A similar bill was approved by the National Assembly on October 12, 2006. On May 4 the French Senate rejected the measure.

Devilish Marks’ and Rape in the Time of Genocide

2011-12-07T09:01:00.000-08:00

“The story of those who didn’t die—the story of young women who survived and stayed behind—has never been told. Men write down history. So it is with Genocide. There is no room for the women. They were impure, tainted, and despised. Yet they were the ones who suffered most. They were the ones who paid a terrible price. They had to carry the heaviest burden of all: they had to regenerate life.”

'Devilish marks'
These powerful words are narrated by Suzanne Khardalian, the director of “Grandma’s Tattoos” (2011). The film chronicles her quest to uncover the atrocities that scarred her grandmother, a woman who bore “devilish marks”—tattoos on her face and hands—that were the persistent reminders of a time in captivity and rape. Much of her experiences remain a mystery to her progeny, but the few tidbits Khardalian discovers years after her grandmother’s death are but a faint yet terrifying echo of the hellish occurrences that haunted the survivors to the grave.
Variations of the “weird” tattoos inked on the grandmother’s face were seen on other female survivors as well. Thousands of these women—documented “cases”—lived and died quietly. Their stories still remain under-documented, and even taboo.
The League of Nations Archives in Geneva houses a collection of intake surveys from the Rescue Home in Aleppo, Syria, between 1922 and 1930. It details the profiles of around 2,000 women, girls, and boys who often escaped captivity—as domestic and sexual slaves—making their way to the Home. The tattoos stood out on many of their faces and hands. They were the fortunate ones who were able to flee from their captors.
Military men, Turks, Kurds, and Arabs would either snatch or bribe the gendarmes escorting the deportation caravans and bring Armenian women, girls, and boys into their homes, and harems, as servants, slaves, wives, or concubines. Others were sent to state-run orphanages where a Turkification process was underway. Accounts from the deportation marches tell of mass mutilations and unimaginable sexual violence. Children were raped then shot, as they became unable to continue on the death marches. The “good looking” deportees were distributed among men in different villages. Girls were sent to high-level government officials for their sexual pleasure, and forced into orgies. The director of the Rescue Home, Karen Jeppe, stated that out of the thousands of women who came her way, only one had been spared sexual abuse, as Matthias Bjornlund notes in his article “A Fate Worse than Dying.”

Khardalian with a tattooed woman and her child in Der Zor.
The Armenian children who were transferred to the perpetrator community—a common phenomenon in genocide—were regarded as slaves by Western humanitarians, since they became a source of free labor, were subjected to forced conversions and child marriages, and were sold on impulse, writes Keith David Watenpaugh in his paper “The League of Nations’ Rescue of Armenian Genocide Survivors and the Making of Modern Humanitarianism, 1920–1927.” Jeppe estimated that there were as many as 30,000 Armenian survivors held in rural Upper Mesopotamia.
“The children and young people arriving in Aleppo told of deportations, separations, mass extrajudicial killings, and repeated rapes, followed by years of unpaid servitude as agricultural workers or domestic servants, servile concubines, unconsenting wives, and involuntary mothers,” writes Wattenpaugh.
These survivors were placed in the bottom of the “gendered hierarchy” within the household, explains Watenpaugh. Because they were unprotected, they could be sold or sent to a different household on a whim. The girls were desirable as brides or second wives as they had neither protectors nor a bride-price. All children born to these girls belonged to the fathers. Furthermore, “unrelated girls and boys in the household—regardless of religious or ethnic origin—were sexually available to senior males.”
The women and children who were finally able to escape and find their way to the rescue shelters and orphanages had to piece together what bits of themselves they could salvage to see to the rebirth of the nation. The hardships were not lacking for the survivors, and as they tried to simply survive, many of the horrors were buried, along with the bones of their loved ones.
Khardalian’s documentary adds another chapter to this story of quiet suffering that many women bore in the decades following the genocide. The loss of lives and land has dominated the discourse on genocide, often at the expense of the stories of the survivors, specifically the women. The mass rapes, enslavement, and servitude were not closed chapters. Those scars remained with the surviving victims, who mostly kept their silence. Sadly, rape remains a taboo topic within Armenian communities. Often it is the victim who is viewed as somehow tainted or incomplete. Furthermore, in an effort to “protect” both victim and honor, lips stay locked and eyes look away. Sometimes it may take more than a lifetime for scars to summon truth, as was the case with the grandmother’s “devilish marks.”

Screenings of “Grandma’s Tattoos” and discussions with the director are being held this month in Detroit, New Jersey, and Boston.

Moral Considerations in the Art-Restitution Lawsuit Between the Armenian Church and the Getty Museum

2011-11-29T14:16:00.000-08:00

By Michael Toumayan
On Nov. 4, a Los Angeles Times article, written by Mike Boehm, reported that in an effort to get back the Canon Tables of the 13th-century Zeyt’un Gospels from the Getty Museum, the Armenian Diaspora has inaudibly put its weight behind the Armenian Orthodox Church’s quest to repatriate the allegedly stolen illuminated manuscripts back to Armenia, where the rest is housed at the Mesrop Mashtots Institute of Ancient Manuscripts.

Getty Museum
In 1915, as Armenians were subjected to a genocidal campaign by the Ottoman Empire, the intact codex changed hands for safekeeping. The eight pages that were torn from the larger codex during the Armenian Genocide ultimately resurfaced with an Armenian American immigrant family in Massachusetts, which sold them to the Getty in 1994.
Church attorneys were initially asked by the Getty to come up with solutions, and no less than 16 were put forth, only to be rejected by the Getty. Clearly the content of a proposal for a solution is a critical component to any successful resolution of conflict, but equally necessary is the timing of the efforts. Resolution can only be achieved if the parties are sincere in negotiating.
One wonders whether the Getty was ready and sincere when it asked church attorneys to come up with solutions. However, for the sake of being aware of our cognitive biases, we should also question whether both parties were engaging in positional bargaining, a negotiation strategy that involves holding on to a position, rather than interest-based bargaining in which parties collaborate to find a “win-win” solution to their dispute.
Nevertheless, on Nov. 3, 2011 a Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied the museum’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim that the Canon Tables are “wrongfully in the possession, custody and control” of the J. Paul Getty Trust, in the Getty Museum. Instead, the judge ordered the parties to four months of mediation, scheduling a March 2 resumption if the case isn’t settled. Citing that it was “not clear” whether the case would fall within statute-of-limitations law, perhaps the judge’s ruling may create the necessary conditions for the dispute to be ripe, and both will perceive that there is a suitable way out.
With a murky history and 90 years later, one cannot rule out the Getty’s possible legal possession and title to the disputed manuscripts. Simultaneously, the Getty’s concern in the preservation of world artistic heritage should not confine itself to considering just the legal entitlement. In mediation, where context is pivotal, there is an ethical obligation that rests on the museum taking into account the moral strength of the church’s case based on the circumstances during times of turmoil. Now is the time for the museum to exhibit consistency with its own core ethical values while also demonstrating sensitivity to the sacred values of the Armenian nation in its quest for restorative justice.
For the mediation to be successful, both must enter into it willingly and away from a zero-sum mindset, through a cooperative approach. The potential benefits of mediation will outweigh the steep cost of litigation, but more importantly, the long-term outcome will be a healed and expanded relationship between the two. This may open the path for a joint restoration project where both can take part in repairing the lost gleam of the larger Zeyt’un Gospels and have them showcased with other extraordinary works of Armenian art from the vaults of the church.

Michael Toumayan is an independent political commentator on the Caucasus and Middle East affairs. He holds a master’s degree in conflict resolution and mediation from Tel Aviv University in Tel Aviv, Israel.

Knesset to discuss Armenian Genocide recognition in early December

2011-11-25T10:46:00.000-08:00

November 25, 2011 15:17
TEL AVIV. – The Knesset committee on education, culture and sport, headed by Alex Miller will discuss the issue on the recognition of the Armenian Genocide in early December. However, coalition key parties’ opinion on the issue varies, IzRus portal reports.
The committee will have a session devoted to recognition of the 1915 Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire. The committee decided to discuss the issue at the Knesset plenary session this May. According to preliminary estimations, majority of the committee, headed by Miller are against the recognition.
Speaker Reuven Rivlin (Likud Party) wants to participate in the session. He made a public speech for the recognition in May. Besides, Ze’ev Elkin, who is also for the recognition, will participate in the session. The key parties of the coalition “Likud” and “Israel is Our Home” (IOH) principally differ on the issue. Significant majority of the ruling party is for the recognition, Reuven Rivlin, Ze’ev Elkin, Gilad Erdan and Benny Begin among them.
At the same time IOH members are categorically against. Moreover, even the discussion is harmful for the strategic partner Azerbaijan.
“There is no single chance that the Knesset will recognize the Genocide. It is impossible. We cannot afford breaking relations with Azerbaijan, our main strategic partner in the Muslim world because of arguable issues of the history regarding events which occurred one hundred years ago,” Israeli deputy FM Danny Ayalon (IOH) told IzRus portal.
“I am against populist decisions, and will not accept outrageous behavior during the session,” Miller said on Thursday.
=

Seminar in Germany focuses on inner-Turkish debate of 1915

2011-11-23T12:43:00.000-08:00

FacingHistory.org
Potsdam, Germany - Why does Turkey have such difficulty in dealing with its historical past? Why can the Turkish authorities not acknowledge that in 1915 the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire was the victim of genocide? If the German post-war political elite was capable of facing up to the Holocaust and establishing relations with the Jewish people, in Israel and elsewhere, why cannot the Turkish leadership do as much?
The question was raised during a seminar in Potsdam, Germany on November 5, on "The Inner Turkish Discussion of 1915/1916" (Die innertürkische Diskussion über 1915/16 in German). Other issues discussed were the history of Turkish denial and how Turkish publications have attempted to deal with this, as well as subjects related to the genocide itself, the fate of the survivors, and how Armenians have been struggling with their traumatic past.
What made this gathering sponsored by the Lepsiushaus (http://lepsiushaus.wordpress.com) and held at Potsdam University quite special was the list of guest speakers, almost all of them prominent Turkish intellectuals, most of them from Turkey. Their task was to present the current status of the discussion process inside the country regarding 1915/1916.
The title of the event itself is symptomatic of the problem: instead of referring to the Armenian genocide, it cited "1915/1916," perhaps to protect those Turkish participants from being subjected to punitive measures from state authorities on their return home.
In fact, one planned guest speaker, Ragip Zarakolu, a prominent publisher who has issued books on the Armenian question, was prevented from attending the conference by an arrest on October 28, when he, along with 48 others, were detained in a crackdown on suspected sympathizers of the plight of Turkey's Kurds.
Thus, the Potsdam gathering was a special event, because the themes addressed and the personalities involved constituted a challenge to the current Turkish establishment, albeit neither political nor militant, but nonetheless a challenge on the intellectual and psychological level.
Policy of the Turkish republic
The comparison to the German treatment of the Holocaust was historically relevant and instructive. In answer to the question, why Turkey has such difficulties in dealing with its past, some suggest that they fear demands by the Republic of Armenia and/or the Diaspora for territorial concessions and reparations, the latter on the German model of compensation to Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and to the state of Israel.
But there is more. Elke Hartmann, an Ottoman expert from Berlin, explained that Turkey, unlike Germany, was neither defeated nor occupied. To be sure, the Ottoman Empire lost in World War I, but the Turkish Republic emerged victorious from its struggle for national sovereignty and independence.
In post-war Germany, it was the occupying powers who organized the Nuremberg trials which tried, convicted, and executed leading Nazis for crimes against humanity. In subsequent years, especially in the 1960s, historians worked through the Nazi experience, and the broader German public was educated about the reality of the Nazi regime.
In Turkey, immediately after the Ottoman defeat, trials were also held and leading Young Turk officials, who had not managed to flee the country, were put on the dock, convicted, and in some cases executed. Others, including the leading figures Talaat Pasha and Djemal Pasha, were hunted down in their exile and assassinated by Armenian vigilantes.
But after the establishment of the Republic in 1923, Mustafa Kemal declared the assassinated Turks to be martyrs, and, where possible, had their remains returned to Turkey for heroes' burials. To grasp the import of this act, one should reflect on a hypothetical rehabilitation of Nazi leaders by Germany's post-WWII leader Konrad Adenauer.
As Rober Koptas, the new editor in chief of Agos, Hrant Dink's newspaper, explained, the 1919 trials had been made possible because an opposition government had come into power after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and the flight of the leading Young Turks. One could write about it, discuss it openly, and Turks heard a lot about the atrocities against Armenians in 1919.
But with the establishment of the Turkish Republic under Mustafa Kemal, that changed radically. Kemal arranged for CUP members on trial by Allied powers in Malta to be freed, and redefined the perpetrators as martyrs. Thus, the policy of "forgetting" began with the establishment of the Republic.
The phases of denial
The history of the Turkish Republic's handling of 1915/1916, was summarized by Elke Hartmann, who stepped in for Prof. Dr. Halil Berktay from Sabanci University on short notice. In a paper on "1915 and Scientific Reappraisals since the founding of the Turkish Republic: Between State Guidelines and Freedom of Research," Berktay showed how at the time of the events, the perpetrators knew exactly what they were doing, and demonstrated it in their memoirs, for example, those of Talaat, which were full of justifications for what had occurred. After Turkey's war of independence, the policy was one of silence and forgetting. Attempts from the outside to address the genocide, as in making of the film on Musa Dagh in the 1930s, were blocked by Turkish political pressure.
Although the dramatic revelations of the dimensions of the Holocaust after World War II overshadowed discussion of the Armenian genocide, in 1965, when Armenians in Armenia and elsewhere demonstrated to commemorate the 50th anniversary of their tragedy, and began to erect monuments, the issue was again on the political agenda.
A turning point occurred in 1973, when the first Turkish diplomats were assassinated by 78-year-old genocide survivor Gourgen Yanikian, which inaugurated the wave of revenge killings. This led to a policy change in Turkey, in that the Turkish authorities decided to present their own version of events. As Koptas put it, after the assassinations began, Turkey realized that "they had a 1915 problem."

Dadrian, Akcam Co-author Book Setting Istanbul Trials in Legal Context

2011-11-22T12:08:00.000-08:00

In the aftermath of its disastrous defeat in World War I, Ottoman Turkey had to face the wartime crime of the destruction of its Armenian population. An inquiry commissioned by the Ottoman government in 1919 presented enough preliminary evidence to organize a series of trials involving the perpetrators of these crimes. It is the record of these trials, and the unparalleled details they provide on the planning and implementation of the crimes, that brought together the two most renowned scholars of the Armenian Genocide, Professors Vahakn Dadrian and Taner Akcam, in their first joint publication. After years of research and analysis, the authors have compiled the complete documentation of the trial proceedings and have set these findings in their historical and legal context.
The book is entitled Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials and is published by Berghahn Books of New York and Oxford.
In describing the book, Dadrian said, “This is a most important work, for two reasons. First, it is based on authentic Turkish documentation, which the Ottoman government was forced to release during the trials. Second, unlike most books on the Armenian Genocide, which are historical interpretations, this study, for the first time, is based also on the testimony of high-ranking Ottoman officials, given under oath, on the magnitude of the crimes against the Armenians, and in this sense, serves as a legal case study of the Armenian Genocide.”
During his more than 50 years of research on the subject, Dadrian discovered that the Takvim-i Vekayi, the official Ottoman government’s gazette, was not the only major source of information on the military tribunals. In fact, Renaissance, a French-language Armenian newspaper in Istanbul at the time, reported summaries of many of the trial proceedings taken from the reports of the Ottoman-language newspapers of the day, which were otherwise not accounted for in official government records.
Akcam, the book’s co-author, noted that “While the official government record lists only 12 trials, newspapers provide us details on 63. For the first time, information from the Ottoman newspapers of the era has been utilized to reconstruct the trials. A great deal of effort was required to track down all issues possible of 14 different Ottoman newspapers, which meant visiting many libraries in different cities. Often, the articles we were looking for had been cut out of the paper in one location, but we were able to find a copy in another location.”
The Zoryan Institute sponsored the collection of these newspapers, their translation and transliteration, as part of the long-term project known as “Creating a Common Body of Knowledge,” and retains copies in its archives.
According to the Institute’s president, K.M. Greg Sarkissian, “The objective is to provide knowledge that will be shared by Turkish and Armenian civil societies and western scholarship. The aim is to locate, collect, analyze, transliterate, translate, edit, and publish authoritative, universally recognized original archival documents on the history of the events surrounding 1915, in both Turkish and English. Elaborating on the importance not only of the primary source material in this book, but also the analysis provided by the book’s authors,” he continued, “the more such documents are made available to Turkish society, the more it will be empowered with knowledge to question narratives imposed by the state. Restoring accurate historical memory will benefit not only Turkish, but also Armenian society. Both will be emancipated from the straightjacket of the past. Such a common body of knowledge will hopefully lead to an understanding of each other, act as a catalyst for dialogue, and aid in the normalization of relations between the two societies. Judgment at Istanbul is the most recent example of the Zoryan Institute’s strong belief in the importance of a Common Body of Knowledge as a key factor in helping the future of any relationship between Turkey and Armenia.”
The trials described in Judgment at Istanbul had a far-reaching bearing in the international community. As the first national tribunal to prosecute cases of mass atrocity, the principles of “crimes against humanity” that were introduced then had their echo subsequently in the Nuremberg Charter, the Tokyo Charter, and the UN Genocide Convention. This book is an essential source for historians, legal scholars, political scientists, sociologists, policy makers, and those interested in genocide studies, Turkish studies, and Armenian studies. It also holds great current relevance, with recent interest internationally regarding the Armenian Genocide and its denial.
To order a copy for yourself or as a gift, or to help sponsor a book to be placed in university libraries, contact the Zoryan office by calling (416) 250-9807 or e-mailing zoryan@zoryaninstitute.org.

Something Armenian in Portugal

2011-11-09T11:51:00.000-08:00

BY TALEEN BABAYAN & KARINE ABALYAN

Portugal does not have a sizeable Armenian community or an Armenian Church. But it is here, in Europe’s westernmost country, that the philanthropist Calouste Gulbenkian’s esteemed private art collection accidentally found its home.
Surrounded by a vast property featuring stretches of lawn and bamboo gardens, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation and Museum is a centerpiece of Lisbon’s cultural life. On a warm day last summer, tourists and Lisboans took in the splendor of the peaceful landscape, pausing to appreciate one of the city’s most visited sites.
Inside, schoolchildren and art enthusiasts browsed Gulbenkian’s extensive collection, which is comprised of more than 6,000 pieces dating from antiquity to the early 20th century. These include works by Rubens, Van Dyck, Rembrandt, Renoir, Manet, Degas, and Monet, as well as Persian rugs, Chinese pottery, and jewelry by Rene Lalique.

Gulbenkian began acquiring artwork at a young age. Born in Istanbul in 1869, he was the son of a wealthy merchant who had holdings in the oil fields of the Caucuses. After earning a degree in engineering and applied science at King’s College in London, Gulbenkian was encouraged by his father to get involved in the oil business.
Earning British citizenship in the wake of the 1895 massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, Gulbenkian established valuable networks with leading European and Russian oil businessmen.
In 1907, he helped found the Royal Dutch Shell Group, and five years later was influential in the development of the Turkish Petroleum Company, of which he owned a five percent share. Gulbenkian’s insistence on securing this fraction with subsequent projects eventually earned him the epithet “Mr. Five Percent.”
During World War II, Gulbenkian planned to emigrate to America. But a brief visit to neutral Portugal—where he found a welcoming and hospitable atmosphere—changed his course. Gulbenkian spent the last 13 years of his life at the fashionable Hotel Aviz in central Lisbon.
During this time, he decided to establish an international foundation to showcase his art collection and to bring together different cultural values and interests. After Gulbenkian passed away in 1955 at the age of 86, his vision was realized with the opening of the Foundation and Museum in Lisbon in 1969.
Building on Gulbenkian’s artistic vision, the foundation added a Modern Art Center to the property in 1983. Dedicated primarily to 20th-century Portuguese artists, the center also serves as a depository for other modern pieces.
Known for its leading efforts in restoration and preservation, the Modern Art Center attracted the attention of Vartoosh Mooradian, the sister of the artist Arshile Gorky, and her son, Karlen. The Mooradians placed their collection of Gorky works here in 1985.
In her will, Mooradian left the artwork to the Eastern Diocese, which has continued the partnership with the Gulbenkian Foundation. The works have been exhibited at various times in Lisbon and thanks to this unique collaboration, the Gorky paintings have been exhibited at museums worldwide. In 2007, the Paris branch of the Gulbenkian Foundation worked with the Centre Georges Pompidou to display Gorky’s works as part of the “Year of Armenia” in France. In addition, Gorky’s works have been shown at the Tate Modern in London, the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, the Philadelphia Museum of Art and most recently at the Gagosian Gallery in New York City.

‘I Want for Armenians what I want for Kurds’: An interview with Mayor Abdullah Demirbas

2011-10-29T10:51:00.000-07:00

DIYARBAKIR, Turkey (A.W.)—Abdullah Demirbas is a man on a mission. The mayor of Diyarbakir’s central district strives to restore some of the city’s multicultural, multiethnic character through a series of initiatives to renovate places on worship, adopt multilingualism, and encourage those with roots in the city to return.

I sat down with the mayor in his office in Diyarbakir on Oct. 23.
“For decades, we were told, ‘people [of different cultures] can’t live together, so we won’t tolerate difference, we will make them all the same,’” Demirbas laments. “Ours is an effort to restore what was lost during the state’s campaign to erase different identities, faiths, and cultures in the city.”
From the moment a visitor enters the city, signs of this multicultural approach manifest themselves, literally. Diyarbakir is the first city in Turkey to welcome its visitors with signs in Armenian.
“We could have done it in Turkish and Kurdish only. But these lands do not belong to the Turks and Kurds alone. They are also the lands of Armenians, Assyrians, and Chaldeans,” the Kurdish mayor explains.
These signs are not just for visitors, but constitute an effort to change mindsets. “We want the people living in the city to realize that historically, Diyarbakir has always been a multicultural city,” he noted.
More than 100,000 Armenians lived in the Diyarbakir province in 1914. Although mostly peasants living in villages like Palu and Lice, the majority of the tradesmen in the province were also Armenian. In turn, Armenian craftsmen and artisans, constituted a significant presence in the province.
The Armenian genocide shattered this vibrant community. Diyarbakir witnessed one of the most violent and comprehensive campaigns of massacre in the Ottoman Empire, with most Armenians being killed outside the city walls. The Armenian wealth was confiscated by the authorities and local elites. Within a few years, the centuries-old Armenian presence in the province was erased.
Demirbas does not mince his words when talking about the Armenian genocide. “Our grandparents, incited by others, committed wrongs. But we, their grandchildren, will not repeat them. Not only that, but we will also not allow others to repeat them,” he says. “We learned from the past. Those lessons inform our actions in the present, and will continue informing them in the future.”
The mayor insists that he does not believe in “dry apologies” but actions that demonstrate genuineness and sincerity. He sees the renovation of Sourp Giragos as one manifestation of this approach. “Today, we are not simple asking for forgiveness in a dry fashion,” he notes. “I am a Kurd. And I want for Armenians what I want for the Kurds.”
“What is your message to the Armenians who were uprooted from their ancestral lands?” I ask him. He changes his posture, looks at me straight in the eyes, and says, “Return! At least come and find your homes and your lands. If you can find your old houses, renovate them! Have a home here too. This is your motherland. Other lands cannot and will not be your motherland. Come to your lands, we want to correct the past wrong. This is our message!”
Demirbas has suffered dearly for his multicultural initiatives and for being an outspoken critic of the Turkish state. Twenty-three lawsuits have been filed against him, he says, asking for 232 years of imprisonment. “I am the only mayor in Turkey who was forced out of his post. I was imprisoned for two years for my opinions and policies, but when I returned, I was reelected with an even bigger margin,” he says.
Diyarbakir, a predominantly Kurdish region, promises to become an oasis of multiculturalism in a desert of denial and oppressive policies. The strategy of embracing all cultures—as opposed to struggling solely for Kurdish autonomy and rights—could serve as an example for other Kurdish dominated municipalities in the Southeast.
Demirbas’s efforts are not lost on the international community. The European Union and the U.S. encourage Diyarbakir’s multicultural initiatives and restoration efforts. The EU has provided a grant to highlight the city’s historic and cultural heritage. The U.S. Ambassador to Turkey, U.S. consuls in Istanbul and Adana, and embassy staff attended the mass in Sourp Giragos. The consuls also attended the consecration of the church the day before. “Our multicultural approach is in line with theirs,” the mayor notes.
The Turkish state, on the other hand, is far behind, argues Demirbas. “There was no representative from the state today [in Sourp Giragos]. But they will come. They will have to. And it all depends on our struggle,” he says. “I was thrown in prison, my 16-year-old son has joined the PKK and is on the mountains, and [the state] will harass me again, they will imprison me again, even something worse might happen to me, but I act based on my convictions. And one day they, too, will come.”

By Khatchig Mouradian

Open Letter to "Facing History and Ourselves"

2011-10-26T13:04:00.000-07:00

Readers are urged to contact "Facing History" athttp://www.facinghistory.org/contact?openform;

The below letter by journalist and human rights activist David Boyajian of Belmont, Massachusetts is addressed to Facing History and Ourselves Executive Director Margot Strom, Associate Executive Director Martin Sleeper and Board Chairwoman Tracy Palandjian.I am deeply offended and disappointed to learn that one of our nation’s foremost genocide education organizations–Facing History and Ourselves (FHAO)--has elected to “partner” with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to sponsor a panel discussion on “The New Anti-Semitism: A Contemporary Discussion in Historic Faneuil Hall” in Boston on November 7, 2011.
Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, will be one of the panelists. I respectfully urge you to withdraw FHAO from its partnership with the ADL for this event. Mr. Foxman and the national ADL have denied the factuality of the Armenian genocide of 1915–1923 committed by Turkey. And they have used their considerable influence to actively assist the government of Turkey to defeat Armenian genocide resolutions in the U.S. Congress. A political agreement two decades ago among Turkey, certain organizations such as the ADL, and Israel brought this about.
Since the summer of 2007, due specifically to their disapproval of the ADL’s genocide denial and lobbying efforts against the Armenian-American resolution, more than a dozen major Massachusetts cities and towns have ceased their affiliation with the ADL’s so-called “No Place for Hate” program.
In April of 2008, for precisely the same reasons, the Massachusetts Municipal Association (MMA), which represents every city and town in the state, also severed ties with “No Place for Hate.” The national ADL drew widespread condemnation from principled Jews, human rights advocates, editorialists, and others. These events made national and international news.
To deflect growing criticism, on August 21, 2007 Mr. Foxman issued a statement which masqueraded as an acknowledgment of the Armenian genocide. The statement not only used deceptive and dishonest language, such as “tantamount to genocide,” but also implied that the Armenian killings were not intentional but rather merely the “consequence” of Turkish “actions.” FHAO is aware that Article II of the United Nations Genocide Convention specifically requires “intent” for killings to be considered genocide. “Consequences” is, however, the opposite of “intent.” Cities, towns, and the MMA weren’t buying Mr. Foxman’s act. They severed ties with the ADL’s “No Place for Hate” even after the ADL statement.The ADL has yet to unambiguously recognize the Armenian genocide. And Mr. Foxman continues to oppose passage of the Armenian genocide resolution, contemptuously calling it a “counterproductive diversion.”
Neither Mr. Foxman nor the ADL has ever apologized to the Armenian people for their actions.The ADL has stated that any diminishment of the Holocaust is anti-Semitic and constitutes hate speech. Yet the ADL has diminished the Armenian genocide. By its own definition, therefore, the ADL is guilty of hate speech. Would FHAO partner with an organization and man that diminished the Holocaust and opposed the many Congressional resolutions on the Holocaust? Why, then, would you partner with the ADL? This is incomprehensible, especially as FHAO has long had an educational program on the Armenian genocide We know that the ADL and similar groups’ appeasement of Turkey–for example, Mr. Foxman presented Prime Minister Erdogan with a “Courage to Care Award” a few years ago–has failed dismally on an international level as well.I am at a loss to understand why or how your partnership with Mr. Foxman has come about. One hopes that ADL members among FHAO’s donors and its treasurer, Elizabeth Jick, who is an ADL Executive Committee member, did not unduly influence your decision.I respectfully call upon you to withdraw FHAO’s partnership with the ADL in the November 7 event. I hope that when FHAO considers the facts and the long-term credibility of its programs and dedicated staff, it will do the right thing.Sincerely,David BoyajianBelmont, MAcc: Media; genocide scholars.Note: To ask Facing History and Ourselves to not partner with the ADL on November 7, contact FHAO by e-mail, phone: 617-232-1595, toll-free 800-856-9039; mail: 16 Hurd Road, Brookline, MA 02445.=

Human Rights Court Rules Turkey Cannot Criminalize Genocide Recognition

2011-10-25T10:53:00.000-07:00

STRASBOURG—The European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday unanimously ruled that the recognition of the Armenian Genocide cannot be criminalized in Turkey. The verdict stemmed from a case brought to the court by noted scholar Taner Akcam.
In the case Taner Akcam vs. Turkey, the court ruled that Turkey’s ongoing criminal prosecution of scholarship on the Armenian Genocide issue constituted a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The court ruled that the Turkish law meant the Akcam lives in constant fear of prosecution for his views about the vents of 1915. In his suit Akcam said that the fear of prosecution for his views on the Armenian issue had caused him considerable stress and anxiety and had even made him stop writing on the subject.
Akçam, who is an associate professor at the Robert Aram, Marianne Kaloosdian and Stephen and Marion Mugar Chair in Armenian Genocide Studies at Clark University in Worcester, Mass., is a Turkish and German national who was born in 1953. As a professor of history, he researches and publishes extensively on the historical events of 1915 concerning the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire. The Republic of Turkey, one of the successor states of the Ottoman Empire, does not recognize the word “genocide” as an accurate description of events. Affirming the Armenian issue as “genocide” is considered by some (especially extremist or ultranationalist groups) as a denigration of “Turkishness” (Türklük), which is a criminal offence punishable under Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code by a term of imprisonment of six months to two or three years. Amendments have been introduced following a number of controversial cases and criminal investigations brought against such prominent Turkish writers and journalists as Elif Şafak, Orhan Pamuk and Hrant Dink for their opinions on the Armenian issue.
Notably, in October 2005 Hrant Dink, editor of Agos, a bilingual Turkish-Armenian newspaper, was convicted under Article 301 for denigrating “Turkishness.” It was widely believed that because of the stigma attached to his criminal conviction, Dink became the target of extremists and in January 2007 he was shot dead.
The three major changes introduced to the text were: to replace “Turkishness” and “Republic” with “Turkish Nation” and “State of the Republic of Turkey,” to reduce the maximum length of imprisonment to be imposed on those found guilty under Article 301; and, most recently in 2008, to add a security clause, namely any investigation into the offence of denigrating “Turkishness” has to first be authorized by the Minister of Justice.
On 6 October 2006 Akçam published an editorial opinion in Agos criticizing the prosecution of Hrant Dink. Following that, three criminal complaints were filed against him by extremists under Article 301 alleging that he had denigrated “Turkishness.” Following the first complaint, he was summoned to the local public prosecutor’s office to submit a statement in his defense. The prosecutor in charge of the investigation subsequently decided not to prosecute on the ground that Akçam’s views were protected under Article 10 of the European Convention. The investigations into the other two complaints were also terminated with decisions not to prosecute. The Government submitted that it was unlikely that Akçam was at any risk of future prosecution on account of the recent safeguards introduced to Article 301, notably the fact that authorization was now needed from the Ministry of Justice to launch an investigation.
Accordingly, between May 2008 (when this amendment was introduced) and November 2009, the Ministry of Justice received 1,025 requests for authorization to bring criminal proceedings under Article 301 and granted such authorization in 80 cases (about 8% of the total requests). Furthermore, Akçam had not been prevented from carrying out his research; on the contrary, he had even been given access to the State Archives. His books on the subject are also widely available in Turkey.
According to Akçam, however, the percentage of prior authorizations granted by the Ministry of Justice was much higher, and these cases mainly concerned the prosecution of journalists in freedom of expression cases. He submitted statistics from the Media Monitoring Desk of the Independent Communications Network for the period from July to September 2008 according to which a total of 116 people, 77 of whom were journalists, were prosecuted in 73 freedom of expression cases. Akçam further claimed that the criminal complaints filed against him for his views had turned into a harassment campaign, with the media presenting him as a “traitor” and “German spy.” He has also received hate mail including insults and death threats. He further alleged that the tangible fear of prosecution had not only cast a shadow over his professional activities – he effectively stopped writing on the Armenian issue in June 2007 when he brought his application to this Court – but had caused him considerable stress and anxiety.
Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression), Akçam alleged that the Government could not guarantee that he would not face investigation and prosecution in the future for his views on the Armenian issue. He further alleged that, despite the amendment to Article 301 in May 2008 and the Government’s reassurances, legal proceedings against those affirming the Armenian “genocide” had continued unabated. Moreover, the Government’s policy on the Armenian issue had not in essence been changed and could not be predicted with any certainty in the future.
The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on June 21, 2007. Judgment was given by a Chamber of seven, composed of Françoise Tulkens (Belgium), President; Danutė Jočienė (Lithuania), David Thór Björgvinsson (Iceland), Dragoljub Popović (Serbia), András Sajó (Hungary), Işıl Karakaş (Turkey), Guido Raimondi (Italy), Judges; and also Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar.
The decision of the Court The Court found that there had been an “interference” with Akçam’s right to freedom of expression. The criminal investigation launched against him and the Turkish criminal courts’ standpoint on the Armenian issue in their application of Article 301 of the Criminal Code (any criticism of the official line on the issue in effect being sanctioned), as well as the public campaign against him, confirmed that there was a considerable risk of prosecution faced by persons who expressed “unfavorable” opinions on the subject and indicated that the threat hanging over Akçal was real.
The measures adopted to provide safeguards against arbitrary or unjustified prosecutions under Article 301 had not been sufficient. The statistical data provided by the Government showed that there were still a significant number of investigations, and Akçam alleged that this number was even higher. Nor did the government explain the subject matter or the nature of the cases in which the Ministry of Justice granted authorization for such investigations. Moreover, the court agreed with Thomas Hammarberg, Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe, in his report which stated that a system of prior authorization by the Ministry of Justice in each individual case was not a lasting solution which could replace the integration of the relevant Convention standards into the Turkish legal system and practice.
Furthermore, in the Court’s opinion, while the legislator’s aim of protecting and preserving values and State institutions from public denigration could be accepted to a certain extent, the wording of Article 301 of the Criminal Code, as interpreted by the judiciary, was too wide and vague and did not enable individuals to regulate their conduct or to foresee the consequences of their acts. Despite the replacement of the term “Turkishness” by “the Turkish Nation,” there was apparently no change in the interpretation of these concepts.
For example, in the case Dink v. Turkey of 2010 the Court criticized the Turkey’s Court of Cassation for understanding them in the same way as before. Thus Article 301 constituted a continuing threat to the exercise of the right to freedom of expression. As was clear from the number of investigations and prosecutions brought under this Article, any opinion or idea that was considered offensive, shocking or disturbing could easily be made the target of a criminal investigation by public prosecutors. Indeed, the safeguards put in place to prevent the abusive application of Article 301 by the judiciary did not provide a guarantee of non-prosecution because any change of political will or of government policy could affect the Ministry of Justice’s interpretation of the law and open the way for arbitrary prosecutions.
In view of that lack of forseeability, the Court concluded that the interference with Akçam’s freedom of expression had not been “prescribed by law,” in violation of Article 10.
NOTE: Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, this chamber judgment is not final. During the three-month period following its delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.

: Armenian Surp Giragos Church In Turkey ready for Holy Mass

2011-10-20T07:44:00.000-07:00

Armenian Surp Giragos Church ready for Holy Mass

Historic Armenia, the land of our roots, where less than a century ago, our parents and grandparents lived and raised Armenian families rooted in the faith, language, traditions and history of our ancient race, now left void of its original inhabitants, magnetically draws us to its soil with an unquenchable thirst of what had once been a glorious past.

The Armenian Church Surp Giragos in Dikranagerd (Diyarbakir), which was one of the biggest and important Armenian churches in Middle East, now is ready to be reopened after a century of tragic silence. Many hundred Armenians from all over the world are expected to attend the Holy Mass in Diyarbakir on 23rd October.

According the historians, Surp Giragos Dikranagerd church, dating from 15th century, with its seven altars and several different buildings, was partially destroyed in 1915-1916 during the Genocide and left in ruins for nearly hundred years. The church was given back to the Armenian community in Diyarbakir in devastated condition in 1960, when some thousand Armenians were still living in the city and its surroundings. The condition of the church deteriorated in the 1970s – 1980s when nearly all Armenians left Diyarbakir.

Some years ago, the Armenian community in Turkey made an action plan with the cooperation of the Kurdish Municipality in Diyarbakir to restore the church. The Armenian Diaspora, especially in North America, also supported financially part of the restoration with fund raising events. The Kurdish Municipality in Diyarbakir gave 600 000 US dollars for the rebuilding.

1915 events were Genocide - Turkish MP

2011-10-18T12:10:00.000-07:00

1915 events were Genocide - Turkish MP
October 18, 2011 00:04
ISTANBUL. - Turkish MP from Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party, Altan Tan restated his words recently said in the international scientific conference in Artuklu University in Mardin, Turkey in the interview with Agos Armenian newspaper published in Istanbul.
Altan insisted that Kurds and Muslims also played a role in the 1915 Genocide implemented against Armenians.
“Not all Kurds though took a sword. However, Kurds do have their serious share of blame in the Genocide,” Altan stated criticizing also the attitude of the Muslims in rejecting the Genocide.
Altan Tan had earlier stated that as a political figure he calls the 1915 events Genocide implemented against Armenians. No matter what the conditions were, those people were killed. The proof is the territory and the demographic situation. At that time 13 million people lived in Turkey and Armenians made 10% of the population. Currently the population is 75 million, while Armenians are only 40,000, MP had stated.

THIS BELONGS ON “BELIEVE IT OR NOT BY RIPLEY”

2011-10-17T10:59:00.000-07:00

Wearing Emporio Armani considered Armenian propaganda in Turkey, and is punishable by law
October 17, 2011 11:41
ISTANBUL. – Turkish press widely covered Taraf daily’s columnist Roni Margulies’ funny story about three unlucky Turks, who were found guilty of wearing Emporio Armani t-shirts and thus carrying out Armenian propaganda.
In his article, Margulies presents the three Turks’ self-defending speeches made in the court. “…a merchant asked me why I’m wearing that t-shirt and called the police…I don’t think I was making propaganda,” said the first defendant.
The second defendant noted that he already gave testimony to the gendarmerie, insisting: “I didn’t have ulterior motives…That t-shirt is a very well-known Italian brand…I don’t find myself guilty.”
The third defendant likewise did not find himself to be guilty, underscoring that the t-shirt was a gift from his mother, since it is a famous Italian brand.
The article also notes that the three translators, who had come as a result of a public announcement by Town Hall of Avsha Island, where this incident occurred, confirmed that Emporio Armani means “Armenian Empire,” and subsequently the defendants were sentenced to life in prison.
Roni Margulies also wrote this story might sound improbable, but stated that, aside from the court ruling, rest of the story is completely true.

Jewish-American lobby will neither support nor obstruct Armenian Genocide bill - analyst

2011-10-15T11:01:00.000-07:00

Jewish-American lobby will neither support nor obstruct Armenian Genocide bill - analyst
October 15, 2011 12:28
YEREVAN. – Current stance of America’s main Jewish organization is to not support, but also not obstruct, the Armenian Genocide bill, Heritage Foundation’s Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy Project Manager Ariel Cohen said in an interview with Public Television of Armenia, commenting on deterioration of Turkish-Jewish relations.
“The Turks can no longer place their hopes on the Jewish lobby. The AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) main Jewish organization’s current stance is to not support, but also not obstruct, the Armenian Genocide bill…We also know that a great majority of ethnically Jewish congressmen is in favor of this bill, for several years now. I believe there would be certain movement and dynamics toward approval of this bill, just as it happened in France, or Sweden, or in other parliaments,” Cohen noted.
In response to the question whether deterioration of Turkish-Israeli relations would impact Israel-Armenia and Israel-Azerbaijan relations, Cohen stated: “Armenia has very good relations with Iran, but Israel does not…Israel has friendship with Azerbaijan and buys petroleum. We also see Turkey exerting pressure on Azerbaijan so that Baku limits its relations with Israel. I hope Baku would act otherwise. Even though Israel would not want to deteriorate relations with Azerbaijan, I do anticipate certain warming between Yerevan and Jerusalem.”
With respect to the observation that there is inconsistency in Turkey’s steps, as it is speaking about the need to lift the blockade of Gaza yet it keeps its border with Armenia closed, the American analyst said: “European Union and US consider Hamas a terrorist organization…but…when conducting friendship with Palestine, Turkey cooperates with Hamas, and not Mahmoud Abbas (President of the Palestinian National Authority). Turkey remains silent when Hamas launches missiles at Israel. The same Turks continue to combat against the Kurds. Is this nothing but duplicity?”
And reflecting on Armenian-Turkish relations, Ariel Cohen maintained: “Just as Turkey supports Hamas…[Turkish PM Recep Tayyip] Erdogan did not heed, in the same way, Hillary Clinton’s encouragements to normalize relations with Yerevan. In Washington…a question is rising: is Turkey an ally?”

Steve Jobs spoke fluent Armenian

2011-10-14T11:06:00.000-07:00

Apple CEO Steve jobs who, passed away on Wednesday at age 56, is said to have had a good command of the Armenian language.Conducting a probe into the great legend ' s biography, the Arab language website Khabararmani.com has found out that Jobs, who was raised in the family of an Armenian mother and an American father, spoke Armenian fluently. "[Jobs ' adoptive mother] Claire Hagopian played a very big role in bringing up the genius," the website said, adding that Jobs had never been keen to speak about his biological parents. Jobs was born in San Francisco and was adopted by the family of Paul and Clara Jobs (née Hagopian) of Mountain View , California . Paul and Clara later adopted a daughter, Patti. Jobs ' biological parents – Abdulfattah John Jandali, a Muslim Syrian immigrant to the U.S from Homs, who later became a political science professor, and Joanne Schieble (later Simpson), an American graduate student who went on to become a speech language pathologist – eventually married. Together, they gave birth to and raised Jobs ' biological sister, novelist Mona Simpson.Jobs experimented with different pursuits before starting Apple Computers with Stephen Wozniak in the Jobs ' family garage. Apple ' s revolutionary products, which include the iPod, iPhone and iPad, are now seen as dictating the evolution of modern technology.A book about Job ' s is coming soon. iSteve: The Book of Jobs, authored by a former CNN CEO and an editor of the British Times, Walter Isaacson, is the first official biography of the Apple legend.http://tert.am/en/news/2011/10/06/jobsarmenian/

Turkish PM promised to reward Macedonia for defeating Armenia

2011-10-06T12:51:00.000-07:00

IS THIS PROOF THAT TURKEY FEARED ARMENIAN’S AS FAR BACK AS THE 19TH CENTURY WHEN THEY STARTED THE GENOCIDES?

Turkish PM promised to reward Macedonia for defeating Armenia
October 06, 2011 13:43
Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan promised a reward to of Macedonia’s football team for defeating Armenia on October 7, says sovietunion.ru portal, citing its sources in Macedonian Parliament.
According to the source, Erdogan voiced the tempting offer at his private meeting with the Speaker of Macedonian Parliament Trajko Veljanoski.
The point is the leadership of Turkey wants to avoid the meeting of Turkish team with rapidly progressing Armenian team in Euro 2012 play-off.
For the first time in history Armenia has a real chance to reach the final stage of EURO 1012 if it plays successfully with Macedonia and Ireland (October 7 and 11).

Lawsuit Seeks Return of Seized Lands: Incirlik Airbase Sits on Disputed Territory

2011-10-04T14:58:00.000-07:00

By Aram ArkunMirror-Spectator Staff
LOS ANGELES — The struggle for justice concerning the Armenian Genocide has taken many forms. Armenians have tried to use academia, the media, legislation and diplomacy, protests and even, briefly, violence in this struggle. Until recently international political and scholarly recognition of the Armenian Genocide’s very existence was the primary goal, but with this seemingly largely accomplished, despite some important exceptions, Armenian efforts have turned to the issue of compensation and land. American and international courts have furnished new arenas to pursue these efforts. The California-based lawyer Vartkes Yeghiayan has been the most active single individual in initiating lawsuits for compensation to Genocide victims and their descendants. Most recently, after a series of suits against insurance companies withholding payments to the heirs of Armenian victims, he filed suit directly against the Republic of Turkey and two Turkish banks concerning Armenian-owned land now either near or part of an airbase used by the United States in Incirlik, Turkey.
This airbase, seven miles east of the city of Adana in southeastern Turkey, has played an important role in supporting the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its construction began in 1951 and was completed in 1954 as part of US Cold War efforts. Its strategic location turned it into a primary host for U2 spy missions into the Soviet Union and for the 1958 US intervention in Lebanon. It also has served as a hub for US humanitarian aid to Turkey. The US operates there as part of NATO. Nuclear bombs are stored at the base. More mundanely, but pertinent for the lawsuit, large American corporations like Baskin- Robbins, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut operate on the territory of the base. The properties on which the base lies were entrusted to Ziraat Bank from 1915 to 1923, and to the Central Bank of Turkey thereafter.
The three Armenian-American plaintiffs — Rita Mahdessian, Alex Bakalian and Anais Haroutunian — are represented by the Yeghiayan Law Firm, together with Los Angeles attorneys Kathryn Lee Boyd and David Schwarcz of Todd, Ferentz, Schwarcz & Rimberg. Michael Bazyler from the Chapman University School of Law, a specialist on genocide law and restitution, is serving as a consultant. The three plaintiffs, acting on behalf of their respective relatives and families, have deeds and documents proving that their grandparents owned part of the land of the base. The lawsuit, filed on December 15, 2010, asks for “fair market rents and other relief” for roughly 122.5 acres of property estimated to be worth $63.9 million based on data from the US Department of Defense. Roughly $100 million is sought as compensation.
One of the plaintiffs in particular, Mahdessian, is Yeghiayan’s wife, adding no doubt an additional personal element to the suit, though Yeghiayan did not initiate it for this reason. Yeghiayan said in a recent interview, “Many survivors from Incirlik found me. We had about 14 property deeds and we have another 16 deeds of other people who want to join the lawsuit but are still negotiating conditions. In almost every property deed they mention the names of neighbors, three out of four of which are Armenians. So there are a lot more Armenians for whom we are looking. I put ads in papers to find them but am still awaiting further contacts.”
Yeghiayan provided additional information about the background of the plaintiffs. In his words, “plaintiff Alex Bakalian is a resident of Washington, DC, and lawful heir of three relatives, each of whom owned property in Turkey. Bakalian’s first relative is his paternal grandfather, Dikran Bakalian, who was born in 1868 in Adana and died June 1950 in Beirut, Lebanon. Dikran Bakalian and his family were forced to flee in 1921, leaving behind all their possessions and properties. Bakalian’s second relative is his paternal grandmother, Kalina Hatun (Gulenia) Shamassian. Born in 1892 in Adana, she married Dikran Bakalian in 1903. She died in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1978. Kalina Hatun (Gulenia) Shamassian’s only surviving son, Guiragos Bakalian, currently lives in Beirut, Lebanon, and Bakalian is his nephew. Bakalian’s third relative is Ahsapet Shamassian (born Bouldoukian), the sister-in-law of his paternal grandmother. She was born in Adana, married Hovsep Shamassian (the brother of Kalina Hatun (Gulenia) Shamassian), and eventually settled in Damascus, Syria.”
The second plaintiff, Anais Haroutunian, “is a United States citizen and resident of Pasadena, Calif. Anais Haroutunian is the granddaughter and lawful heir of Apraham Geovderelian. Apraham Geovderelian owned four pieces of property in Incirlik. In 1915, when the Armenian Genocide began, he was murdered together with his wife and three of his children. The four remaining children all relocated to Beirut, Lebanon, and are now deceased.”
The third plaintiff, Mahdessian, representing the Boyadjian family, including maternal cousin Mihran Boyadjian, is “related to Mihran Boyadjian Sr., who owned two properties in Adana. Mihran Boyadjian Sr., fled Adana in 1915 at the outset of the Armenian Genocide. When the province of Adana was given to France as a mandate at the end of World War I, Mihran Boyadjian Sr., returned to Adana to reclaim his properties. However, when the French mandate was removed in 1922 and the region returned to Turkey, Mihran Boyadjian Sr., had to escape from the province of Adana/Incirlik again, with his family, and relocate to Hama-Homs, Syria. The family then moved to Cyprus.”
In a May 17, 2011 article in the Turkish newspaper Hürriyet by Vercihan Ziflioglu, Yeghiayan stated the rationale behind his lawsuit, “In this case our clients are able to sue the government of the Republic of Turkey, the Central Bank of Turkey and the Ziraat Bankası because of the following reasons: Turkey committed a violation of international laws and proceeded to illegally confiscate properties from their rightful owners; in the process, Turkey also proceeded to violate its own constitution and the Lausanne Treaty. But more importantly, they have used these ill-obtained properties to run commercial operations.”
Turkey refused to accept service of the lawsuit, so the plaintiffs had recourse to US diplomatic channels. Turkey was given sixty days (by August 19, 2011) to answer but did not, while the two banks, the Central Bank of Turkey and T. C. Ziraat Bank, received an extension allowing them to respond by September 19. They proceeded to hire several US attorneys, including David Saltzman from the firm of Saltzman and Evinch. Saltzman has served as counsel for the Turkish embassy in Washington in the past, and counsel for the Turkish Coalition of America. He has been involved in a number of other lawsuits on behalf of Turks or Turkey against various Armenian parties, and has promoted denial of the Armenian Genocide. The bank’s newly hired attorneys filed replies on September 19 asking for dismissal of the case on a number of grounds. They argued that though banks, the two institutions qualify as “foreign states” with sovereign immunity from the jurisdiction of the California court; furthermore, they claimed that the Act of State doctrine, according to which the courts of one country may not judge the domestic acts of another government, bars the suit, while the 1934 claims agreement between Turkey and the US, and the 1980 agreement for cooperation on defense and economy between the same two countries also conflict with this suit. The court and the state of California would be impermissibly interfering with US foreign affairs. The convenience of the parties involved and the interests of justice require a different forum for this action.
The defendant banks argued that all applicable statutes of limitations bar the suit, and finally, they asserted that there is no relevant claim given for which relief can be granted. Now it is the turn of the plaintiffs represented by Yeghiayan to give their counterarguments to the court against the banks.
The Republic of Turkey, unlike the banks, has continued to take a different approach. Consequently, on August 29, the plaintiffs asked the US District Court for the Central District of California to declare the Republic of Turkey to be in default, which could eventually result in a variety of penalties and a decision in favor of the plaintiffs. As Yeghiayan said in the May 17 Hürriyet article, “Choosing to ignore the lawsuit won’t make it go away.” The court agreed that Turkey was in default on September 1.
In addition to the newspaper Hürriyet, the lawsuit has received further coverage in other Turkish media outlets like Vatan (September 2, 2011), Today’s Zaman (September 9) and haber7.com. In the latter’s September 7 issue, an article entitled “Incirlik Ermeni degil, vakıf malı çıktı!” argues that the Incirlik property actually belonged to the Ramazanoglu Foundation. Journalist and researcher Fatih Bayhan claims that his evidence concerning the Incirlik properties goes back to the 1500s, and wonders how the Armenians would have obtained these properties. The Ramazanoglu Foundation has opened thousands of lawsuits, according to Bayhan, to get back its properties in the Adana area and elsewhere, and has already won some of them. A writer in Today’s Zaman Mobile Edition (September 15) summarizes an interview of Yeghiayan in the Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos, wonders about the statute of limitations, and promises to follow the case as it develops.
In the Republic of Armenia, Naira Hayrumian in a December 23, 2010 lragir.am article speculated that the United States was somehow behind this lawsuit, and other actions against Turkey concerning the Genocide, as a way to threaten and pressure Turkey to carry out various US policies. In this particular case, she wrote that it was connected to talks Turkey was holding with Iran concerning a new NATO anti-rocket defense system. However, Hayrumian has not presented any evidence to back up this theory, while Yeghiayan’s dedication to the issue of compensation and justice for the Genocide seems enough to ensure that similar lawsuits will continue to be filed. Yeghiayan commented on the claim of US manipulation behind the scenes: “Absolutely not true. We represent the clients who have justifiable claims as will be proven in court and we have no connection to the US Government nor are we trying to put pressure on the US Government.”
Yeghiayan continues his work on other Armenian Genocide-related legal issues while pursuing the Incirlik case. In 2007, a US district court judge ruled that Armenian Genocide survivors’ heirs could use a law passed by the California legislature in 2000 extending the statute of limitations to sue German insurance companies, but this was reversed in a 2009 ruling by a three-judge panel of the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This reversal was overruled in December 2010. This case, Movsesian v. Victoria Versicherung, still is unresolved as the defendants now have requested a panel of judges to rehear the case. There are a number of other Armenian Genocide-related lawsuits that Yeghiayan is involved in at the present.
There is also an outstanding dispute between Yeghiayan and his former partners, Mark Geragos and Brian Kabateck, concerning the disposition of money jointly won from the French insurance company AXA for Armenian Genocide victims’ heirs, which hopefully will be settled quickly, justly and openly, thus restoring confidence in the judicial route for compensation for Armenian Genocide victims. According to Roman M. Silberfeld, the lawyer representing Yeghiayan on this particular matter, Yeghiayan has already provided through a voluntary and cooperative process documents which Silberfeld expects will satisfy Geragos and Kabateck that in fact nothing improper has taken place. As far as AXA is concerned, there will be a hearing before Judge Christina A. Snyder in Los Angeles on September 26. The three parties (Yeghiayan as represented by Silberfeld, Geragos and Kabateck) and their law firms are intensively conducting an investigation. They intend to file a joint report for the court outlining what they discover about the settlement administration, which was not conducted directly by any of the three lawyers. There are some half a dozen problems to be sorted out involving a significant sum of money. Some 75 people who were issued multiple checks say that they did not receive all the checks to which they were entitled.
LINK
CenterAR News

Ottoman Military Band Parade Organizers Pull Event Permit

2011-09-29T09:18:00.000-07:00

LOS ANGELES—Organizers of the Ottoman Military Marching Band parade, scheduled for Monday in Hollywood have abruptly cancelled their special events permit, according to the relevant unit at the Los Angeles Police Department.
The Pacifica Institute, the parade organizers, bills itself as an organization established by Turkish-Americans aimed at establishing cross-cultural awareness. However, the group is nothing but a brazen front for the notorious Gulen movement, which is at the center of controversy and an FBI investigation into its charter school establishment throughout the country. The Pacifica Institute is also the organizer of the Anatolian Festival, which is slated for next weekend at Irvine Meadows.
Armenian National Committee of America-Western Region, its local Los Angeles chapter, the Armenian Youth Federation and community leaders have been working diligently to address the abrupt cancellation and the community’s anger toward the organizers of this egregious event.
In an announcement issued on Tuesday The ANCA-WR questioned “the irresponsible decision by the City of Los Angeles to grant a permit to a group who claims descent from the notoriously murderous corps of the Ottoman Army known as the janissaries. The nature and planned performance of the band are not only insulting but wholly unacceptable to the Armenian American community.”
“Just over one mile from the borders of Little Armenia, in Los Angeles, the adoptive home of hundreds of thousands of Armenian Americans – including many whose families were gravely affected by the Armenian Genocide – the Ottoman Military Marching Band will play the anthems of a military credited with exterminating 1.5 million Armenian people and hundreds of thousands of other minorities within the Ottoman Empire. It is a chilling parallel: the Band will again march through the streets of an Armenian neighborhood, recreating the horrific scene of the Ottoman military parading through Armenian towns and villages 100 years ago, before they methodically and brutally murdered the Armenian populace in the first genocide of the 20th century,” said the ANCA-WR.
“The parade’s planning and execution, in a heavily Armenian-populated community, leaves no question that the Ottoman Military Marching Band is brazenly taunting the Armenian American community in a blatant example of hate speech. Despite this flagrant attempt at incitement, we call upon the Armenian American community of Los Angeles to oppose this painful and egregious provocation peacefully,” continued the ANCA-WR statement.
Follow Asbarez for more on this developing story.

At UN, Sarkisian Armenian President Makes Case for Self-Determination

2011-09-24T14:28:00.000-07:00

UNITED NATIONS—President Serzh Sarkisian on Friday addressed the 66th United Nations General Assembly, making the case for applying of the principle of self-determination to Nagorno-Karabakh.
In his remarks, Sarkisian also drew the international community’s attention to the increasing efforts by Azerbaijan to thwart the Karabakh peace process and spreading what he termed “armenophobia.”
On the Turkey-Armenia front, Sarkisian outlined that while many nations and international organizations have recognized the Armenian Genocide, Turkey continues to deny that historical fact.
“Without recognition and condemnation, it will be impossible to develop and implement effective mechanisms of prevention, which is one of the UN’s priorities. Armenia will contribute its most to the recognition, punishment, and prevention of genocides,” said Sarkisian.
Below is the translated text of the President’s remarks provided by the presidential press service.
Mister President,Mister Secretary-General,Ladies and Gentlemen,
Firstly, I would like to thank and wish much success to Mr. Nassir Abdulaziz al Nasser, the President of the 66th session of the UN General Assembly, and thank Mr. Deiss of Switzerland for his leadership during the 65th session.
I would also like to take this opportunity to once again congratulate the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for his second term in office.
Mister President,
I wish to recognize the important choice of the general debate theme for this session and highlight the role of mediation in the settlement of disputes by peaceful means and as a means of preventing the resumption of hostilities.
We highly appreciate the mediation efforts of global and regional structures and organizations in various parts of the world in preserving peace and security and in conflict settlement through peaceful negotiations.
It is particularly worth mentioning the engagement of regional organizations that have built-up an enormous experience in mediation and have an in-depth knowledge of the political, cultural, and military realities on the ground. The success of mediation hinges, among other things, upon the articulation of a clearly-defined mandate. A case in point for us is the mission of the OSCE Minsk Group in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Another key factor worth highlighting here is the mediators’ role in preventing conflict escalation and the resumption of hostilities. This aspect of mediation is sometimes overlooked, yet it is of no less importance to international peace and stability than finding a solution to a contentious matter.
Mr. President,
Three years ago, when I had the honor to speak from this rostrum, I stated that the time has come for seriously considering the exercise of the people’s right to self-determination in the 21st century. We are today witnessing new cases of the exercise of this inalienable right.
In this context, I would like to congratulate the newly-elected 193rd member of the United Nations Organization, the Republic of South Sudan. Its path to having a place in this august hall has been long and difficult, but the people of South Sudan, through the free expression of will, exercised their right to live sovereignly and independently, thus crossing the path that many of the UN member states present here today have crossed.
Mr. President,
The people of Nagorno-Karabakh made the same choice two decades ago by exercising their right to self-determination, by withstanding the war unleashed by Azerbaijan, and surviving bloodshed to earn their right to live in freedom.
The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement talks are continuing with the mediation of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs. We are grateful to the co-chair countries and their leaders for their mediation efforts. However, the mediators cannot reach an agreement in place of the negotiating parties.
Azerbaijan’s utter unwillingness to reach an agreement and its “everything or war” position have stalled progress in the peace talks. Despite the expectations and the high-level advice from the international community, Azerbaijan took yet another step back during the last meeting in Kazan by rejecting the previously elaborated arrangement and trying, in fact, to break down the negotiation process.
Baku has turned armenophobia into state propaganda, at a level that is far beyond dangerous. It is not only our assessment; the alarm has also been sounded by international structures specializing in combating racism and intolerance. Even more dangerously, armenophobic ideas are spread among the young Azerbaijani generation, imperiling the future of peaceful coexistence.
By denying and destroying all that is Armenian, Baku stubbornly continues to disseminate false accusations against Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh, and the Armenians at all levels everywhere, including here, within the framework of the UN. The Azerbaijani propaganda machine continues regularly to overwhelm the international community and the domestic audience with horrendous lies about the so-called “Armenian brutality” and the killings of children. These stories are fabricated and disseminated using a trite yet painful logic, whereby their authors believe that some people out there will rise to the bait of this black PR against Armenia, and it will thus serve a purpose.
In recent years, owing to the efforts of the Minsk Group co-chair countries, particularly the direct mediation by the President of the Russian Federation, a number of documents have been signed, including the Meindorf, Astrakhan, and Sochi Declarations, which have stressed the need to strengthen the confidence-building measures between the parties. The signature of the President of Azerbaijan also stands on those documents.
Azerbaijan, however, continues to turn down the repeated proposals by the international community concerning agreement on the non-use of force and strengthening the confidence-building measures.
Moreover, the belligerent rhetoric and war threats uttered by Azerbaijan have intensified and ceasefire violations have grown more frequent, continuing to deprive of life innocent civilians. All of this is orchestrated from the highest state level.
The dangerous rise in manifestations of armenophobia not only fails to contribute to an atmosphere of trust in the region, but also leads to questions about Azerbaijan’s understanding of the goals of the United Nations to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors. Aspiring for membership in the Security Council of the UN with such an understanding is impermissible and even dangerous.
Mr. President,
In the frameworks of this Assembly, alongside debates on some of the most vital and urgent issues of our time, a high-level meeting took place yesterday on the 10th anniversary of the Durban Declaration, which reiterated the urgent need to eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of intolerance.
Unfortunately, such intolerance is known to us, Armenians, not only through the examples I mentioned earlier. As a nation that has survived a genocide, the most extreme form of racism and xenophobia, we are morally obliged to act for the prevention of future genocides.
The elimination of racism and xenophobia and the inculcation of tolerance can become a truly effective mechanism if accompanied with clear prescription of liability. Impunity and avoidance of liability give birth to yet new crimes. Hence, it is incumbent upon us in the international community to identify and denounce without delay any expression of intolerance, but especially its extreme forms.
The Genocide of the Armenians perpetrated in the Ottoman Empire has been recognized and condemned by numerous countries, parliaments, international organizations, and genocide scholars’ community. Unfortunately, the same does not hold true for the Republic of Turkey, which continues to engage in a policy of denying this atrocious crime committed against humanity.
We unequivocally welcome the clear position adopted by the international community in precluding any possibility of immunity or pardon for perpetrators of genocide or other crimes against humanity.
Without recognition and condemnation, it will be impossible to develop and implement effective mechanisms of prevention, which is one of the UN’s priorities. Armenia will contribute its most to the recognition, punishment, and prevention of genocides.
These references to the Armenian Genocide lead me to recall another important celebration marked this year: the 150th birthday of Fridtjof Nansen, the first High Commissioner for Refugees. In the most difficult period for my nation, the great humanist rendered priceless support to the survival of the homeland-deprived fragments of the Armenians fleeing from the Genocide. Holders of the Nansen passports settled in various countries of the world, reaching as far as South America. They rose to their feet and partook in the development of the countries and peoples hosting them.
I believe that justice and the equality of rights between states have become standards in international relations owing to such powerful individuals who promoted their vision of morality in that cruel world of the “realpolitik.”
Mr. President,
Speaking from this rostrum in 2008, I had expressed hope that the Armenia-Turkey normalization process initiated by us and the establishment of diplomatic relations and the opening of the borders closed by Turkey, trespassing international law, would become the first steps in enabling us to start a dialogue and overcoming the air of mistrust, suspicion, and uncertainty existing between us. Although our initiative was commended and widely supported by the international community, Turkey has in all ways possible aborted the ratification and implementation of the protocols we initialed in 2009.
Mr. President,
Today, on the eve of the Rio Summit on Sustainable Development, political will must be demonstrated to honor the international commitments in order to turn the South Caucasus into a region of cooperation and prosperity.
The correlation between security and development is not an abstract theory for our region where economic cooperation and deeper integration with the global economy are hindered by unlawful blockades and the blockage of regional integration projects.
These attitudes, alongside the fueling of an arms race, not only are dangerous for the peoples of the region, but they also continue to absorb the resources direly needed for sustainable development.
The time has come for the leaders of the countries in our region to try to stand above the dictates of a narrow political agenda and to move towards solutions that are aimed at a peaceful and prosperous future for generations to come.
I want to believe that, not in the distant future, our region will be perceived as a solid and firm bridge uniting civilizations, rather than as a dividing line.
Mr. President,
Two days ago, the Republic of Armenia celebrated the 20th anniversary of its independence. In September 1991, Armenia restored its independence, realizing the dream of the Armenian people and reuniting with the Family of Nations.
In the realm of history, 20 years may seem like a short period, but it has served for the present generation as a period of great change, construction of independent statehood, and a renewed perception of their role and place in the world. I wish to take the opportunity from this esteemed rostrum to express my gratitude to all the states, peoples, and individuals that have supported us in these 20 years of development and construction of statehood.
Freedom, peace, and democracy are our choice, and we are committed to this path. We are proud of our achievements today. In two decades, the Republic of Armenia has implemented a wide-scale program of constructing statehood. Much has been done in the fields of democratization, human rights and economic reforms, the establishment of the rule of law and liberal economy. We have many achievements, but much still remains to be done. Above all, we are convinced that we are on the right path, a path that is irreversible.
Mr. President,
Exactly a decade ago, New York, the city which is home to the United Nations Organization, experienced one of the worst atrocities in the history of mankind, the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Armenia unconditionally supports and actively contributes to the international community’s counter-terrorism efforts and all of the UN’s initiatives in this area. We are doing and will continue to do our best for the world to be a safer and more peaceful place.
We stand ready, to the best of our abilities, to contribute to global security and respond to global threats, be it through peace-keeping missions, elimination of the consequences of natural disasters, environmental protection, or the fight against terrorism, racism, and intolerance. Over the years, we have proven our aspirations and determination with deeds, and we stand ready to continue doing the same.
Thank you.

Garbis: Reflecting on 20 Years of Independence

2011-09-22T11:29:00.000-07:00

By: Christian Garbis

Twenty years ago when Armenia declared itself independent from Soviet rule, it was not only claiming statehood, it was calling for a restoration of values. The Armenian people would be able to think and create freely in a fledgling democracy that was both naive and highly optimistic. Many people believed that prosperity was on the horizon, jobs would be created, and a bright future awaited them. Little did they know that both war and unchecked entrepreneurship would set them back several years. Some have never seen any kind of prosperity after independence, whether financial or spiritual.

When Armenians worldwide feel confident that the Armenian government is able to provide the means and conditions for promoting growth throughout the regions, they will begin to immigrate.
Armenia today is ruled by a handful of wealthy families competing for prominence, similar to what you would find in a Hollywood film about the mafia, but without all the gory violence. The common people are subjects to the nepotistic society these leaders, or oligarchs, have created. Citizens who speak out against government decisions are cruelly suppressed by this system. Others are victims to bad policies and lose their livelihoods in the process. Civil society is weak, and initiatives to bring about change in the form of grassroots movements are often supported by outside special interest groups, mainly from the U.S. or Europe. Narcissism has long become a virtue of the nepotists, with their general disregard for law and order, and respect for neighborhood peace violated day and night. Society is increasingly polarized, with the dividing line between the haves and have-nots all the more obvious. The social equality of Armenia’s Soviet past is long gone.
Although the president is quite aware of the dire economic and societal issues that most Armenians face daily, he either plays them down or fails to address them. For instance, he recently discounted the somber fact that entire villages have been relocating to remote parts of Russia as part of a controversial resettlement program promoted by the Russian government. Judging from the headlines in the Armenian press, it is clear that the president is often out of sync with what is transpiring in the country he supposedly rules.
Below is a list of problems that the president needs to contend with to ensure Armenia’s democratic and economic progress in the years to come:
Create jobs. In the wake of independence, countless factories that were prosperous during the Soviet era closed either overnight or during the course of several years. Although some, like chemical plants and sugar processing facilities, have reopened in recent years, Armenia’s industrial output is nowhere near what it was just before the Soviet Union began to crumble. The permanent closure of key factories in rural areas, like Sisian in the southern Syunik region and Charentsavan to the north of the capital, not to mention scores of other towns throughout the country, have resulted in depopulation, with many people once living in small towns and villages flocking to Yerevan or leaving the country—most of them for Russia—in search of work. The president must create an environment whereby new factories can be built by wealthy Armenian citizens or foreign businessmen currently weary of doing business in Armenia. Eradicating corruption in the tax and customs departments and simplifying the business registration process would be an excellent start.
Promote small business. Yerevan Mayor Karen Karapetyan made himself a public enemy by sweeping traders off the streets (oddly only florists are allowed to sell roses from sidewalk stands) and destroying inconspicuous kiosks where cobblers, tailors, and cigarette sellers set up shop. Shopkeepers are harassed by taxmen and some are even forced to close for days on end while they scramble to clear up minute discrepancies found as a result of loopholes purposely left open by the tax authorities to extort bribes. Although Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian has often talked about encouraging the growth of small businesses, he has been reluctant to disclose the details of policies his government plans to implement. Tax breaks coupled with guaranteed interest-free government loans would encourage small businesses to open and help nurture an environment of trust.
Encourage civil society. In flourishing, deep-rooted democracies, dissent and opposition to government policy are tolerated, and public advocacy is allowed to function. Initiatives to promote civil society must be implemented, mainly by immediately stopping police confrontations or crackdowns on peaceful demonstrators. Society cannot be built while oppression and fear loom overhead Armenian citizens.
Tax the wealthy and give tax breaks to the lower classes. Hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue can be generated if only oligarchs were taxed, the sums of which could be funneled to important social programs. By 2006 estimates, 26.5 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. Free housing could be provided to impoverished citizens still living in shacks, temporary housing, or on the street. Also, pensioners could finally receive monthly stipends that are in line with the current standard of living, which is continually on the rise with food prices often skyrocketing, especially in the period leading up to the holiday season. The government should aim to eradicate poverty nationwide, and it can easily do so if and when taxes are properly collected.
Prevent emigration and promote immigration. President Sarkisian desperately needs to draft a plan for slowing down the exodus from Armenia. That should include job creation through promoting foreign investment in the manufacturing and IT sectors, an increase in the minimum wage, and equal opportunity, particularly in government agencies. He also needs to address the relatively low birthrate, with 12 children born for every 1,000 people and on average 1 child born per household, according to 2011 figures. He must also ensure that infrastructure is modernized even in the most remote villages of the republic. Several areas of Artsakh along with the Armenian-controlled territories surrounding it must be populated, and that again can only come about with increased investment and the vital infrastructure in place. When Armenians worldwide feel confident that the Armenian government is able to provide the means and conditions for promoting growth throughout the regions, they will begin to immigrate.
These are only a handful of issues that loom over Armenia’s destiny. There are just as many if not more challenges related to Armenian foreign policy that must be addressed, the most important being the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict, which seems to be floating in an eternal stalemate.
In his Independence Day remarks, President Sarkisian hailed the new generation of the republic, recognizing its “concerns and demands” of a better society. He also stated that “… in the next 20 years we will be able to build a country that will come close to our ideals. I believe in that because I believe in our collective power.”
Now the pressure is on the president. He alone can muster the support of both an apathetic public and the oligarchic society backing him by making the right policy decisions that will benefit all, not just a select few. That is a difficult balancing act, but the means to accomplish such a feat simply need implementing and the vision to do so. Having said that, it is up to Armenian society as a collective whole to ensure he aspires to the same ideals to which he alludes—the same that all citizens expect to live by.

Akcam: Before Further Escalation in Syria

2011-09-08T15:35:00.000-07:00

By: Taner Akcam

It looks like the countdown to regime change has begun in Syria. And Turkey may end up having a say in the international intervention that’s likely to occur. Still, Turkey should engage in sober deliberations before getting involved in any outside intervention. From the perspective of Syria and the region, Turkey’s participation will not be perceived or explained as wanting to create free and democratic regimes in the region. One should never forget that the peoples of the region view themselves through a window that’s been framed by the events and perceptions of what has occurred in history.

Erdogan and his wife greet supporters after the 2011 elections in Turkey.
Turkey’s declaration that it will be playing a new role in the region and in the world was made in an address to the nation that followed the elections.[1] When making the declaration, “It’s time to count me in,” all of Turkey’s neighbors and their capital cities were recited one by one. The fact that Armenia and Yerevan were missing from that list was extremely significant. I’m not saying this because of my own personal interest in the subject of Armenia. The key to understanding if Turkey will be able to play a new role can be found from where it fits Armenia (and to that extent Christians) in the policies it will develop for the region. The Iran factor, too, should be added to the mix—Tehran was also not mentioned in the address. The clues to what the AKP’s policy will be in the region will be discovered in the place and role that will be given to the Shia sect, one of Islam’s major branches, along with Christians.
Allow me to formulate AKP’s policy like this: to end the victimization of Islamic societies, viewed as having been oppressed and victimized for centuries, through the adoption of international universal norms. Another way of stating this could be to call it a fight to protect the rights of the Muslim world, which is viewed as having been despised and oppressed by the West, and to raise its status to one of equality with the West, again through the direct adoption of Western norms. In other words, using the Hegelian German term aufheben, to repeal or abrogate the “masterslave” relationship and change the status of the “slaves” into “masters.” If necessary, they will achieve this by defying the West. This back story is instrumental to Erdogan’s tough stance with Israel and his “one minute” insistence at Davos.[2] The great wave of sympathy that was unleashed in Turkey and the region because of that tough stance shows that the AKP has pressed its finger upon a very deep wound.
‘Strike the West with a Western weapon’
The idea is that criticizing the nation-state boundaries that were forced upon the Middle East in accordance with the West’s colonial motives and developing policies of economic and political integration would reunite the fates of all the peoples in the region. In other words, the basis for the AKP’s regional policies is taking the Middle East and reconfiguring it as a kind of “common home” for all its inhabitants. The “zero problems with neighbors”[3] policy is a reflection of this thinking. It would be extremely shallow and shortsighted to conclude that Turkey’s new policies in the region are expansionist and imperialist schemes. One should take a wider perspective when examining them. One could argue that the creation of processes established on humanitarian universal and democratic (i.e., Western) values in the Middle East and of an economic, political, and cultural integration that ignores state boundaries, along the lines of the European Union, would be a very positive goal. The real question, however, is, does Turkey have what it takes, ideologically, politically, and economically, to create such a union in its region? The answer is both yes and no.
‘Crimes against Christianity’
Why “yes”? For this, I would like to point out an interesting and somewhat unknown fact: “Crimes against humanity” is a very important international legal term, used for the first time on May 24, 1915, in connection with the Armenian Genocide. It comprised the moral and legal background for the Nuremberg trials and the more recent Yugoslavian, Rwandan, and other international prosecutions of war crimes. This is common knowledge, but what is not so commonly known is that the expression was first drafted as “Crimes against Christianity.”
Great Britain, Russia, and France had initially defined the crimes committed by the Union and Progress Party (CUP) as “Crimes against Christianity,” but later exchanged the word “Christianity” with “humanity” after considering its possible misinterpretation and the negative reaction it could engender among the Muslim peoples who were under their own dominion at the time. It is as if all of the secrets of the subject being discussed here lay within that word: The revision of the word Christianity to humanity, and those against whom it was used (Unionists and the Ottoman Turks), seems to summarize all of the difficulty faced by the AKP and Turkey today.
The substitution of the word humanity for Christianity is like a short history of the values we accept as humanitarian universal norms. Values like human rights, democracy, etc., are actually the products of the Christian political and cultural world. This world, based on its GrecoRoman roots and the experience of enlightenment, has managed to take many of its own norms and sensitivities and turn them into universal, humanitarian values. One could view the history of humankind, to some extent, as a journey from Christian-specific values towards the creation of values that are universal to humanity. Nevertheless, it is completely understandable why this journey has been perceived by the Muslim world as one that is marked by hypocrisy and cunning, since Muslims perceive it as a history of colonialism.
Moving from world of Islamic culture to universality
What the AKP is trying to do is move the Islamic cultural world towards universality, just as the Christian cultural world moved away from its own particularity towards universality. Why can’t the Islamic world and its new leaders, like the AKP, do the same? One can interpret Erdogan’s address to the nation through this approach. Actually, one needs to concede that the AKP, in this sense, follows an Islamic tradition that dates back to the 18th and 19th centuries. The “newly awakening” Islamic movements of those centuries declared the universal norms of the West as values that were specific to Christianity, and saw them as hypocritical statements meant to disguise the West’s imperialist policies. This tradition viewed the Islamic world as the “oppressed nations” and defined the fight against the West as the “challenge by the oppressed against their colonizing masters.” It was, however, far from being able to define its own struggle on universal terms. Still, it represented the first steps that Islamic thought had taken towards universality. By having resurrected this powerful Islamic tradition and combining Western values with the Islamic cultural tradition, the AKP seems to be setting itself up as the last stop on this journey.
In this way, just as the West managed to take “crimes committed against Christianity” and turn it into “crimes committed against humanity,” under leadership like that of the AKP, it is possible for the Islamic world to turn “crimes committed against Muslims” into a more comprehensive category of “crimes committed against humanity.” So the strong Islamic cultural weight or emphasis on Islamic sensitivity found in Erdogan’s statements are not that important or, more precisely, are a necessity. In fact, one could say that the main reason for Erdogan’s popularity in both the Middle East and in the world is the way he manages to merge this emphasis on Islamic sensitivity with the West’s own values.
Muslim history not just a history of the oppressed
Why “no”? The main problem lies with whether the AKP will be able to take Islamic cultural values and traditions and move them towards universal humanitarian values. The key terms here are “oppression” and “victimhood.” As is known from the human rights organization that Muslim activist circles close to the AKP have created in Turkey, the Islamic sector sees itself as the truly oppressed. What the West (as well as the civilian-military bureaucratic elite, the West’s representatives in Turkey) is facing is a population that believes itself to be oppressed and victimized, and conceives its current struggle as one for equality and freedom for the oppressed. This is why Palestinians holds such a special place within this fight—; they constitute the most oppressed group in our region.
In truth, defining oneself as “oppressed and victimized” is a method used by just about every group. The problem is that the Islamic population has not experienced its recent past as “oppressed and victimized.” Mass murders, for which Muslims are in one way or another responsible, took place against Christians on this very soil. If the AKP enters Syria without either mentioning this history or honestly confronting those crimes, they will surely be reminded of all the crimes that were committed against other religions in recent history, thereby challenging the notion of the freedom fight that Islam, history’s oppressed and victimized, has been waging for centuries.
If the AKP, which seems to be the answer to the Muslim majority’s demands for “freedom and democracy” through a Muslim sensitivity, does not bring this fight to where it becomes a critique of the crimes that Muslims have committed in recent history, it will not be able to complete the journey towards universal humanitarian values. It will never be able to comprehend the successful transition the West made from Christian values to universal humanitarian values, and it will get stuck in a limited pre-defined space denoted by the sensitivity of Sunni-Muslims.
Adding Armenia to the Address to the Nation
From all appearances, there are two main issues plaguing the region: One is freedom and democracy; the other is security. It isn’t a coincidence that the Christians and other minorities support the Ba’ath regime in Syria. In order to get security, they are willing to give up their freedoms. While Turkey seems to provide answers to the Sunni-Muslim majority’s demand for freedom in Syria, it cannot do the same for the Christians’ demands for security. Quite the opposite. Turkey looks very much like a security threat to them, because it reminds them of what happened in 1915. It is very important to note that the Ba’ath regime recently appointed a Christian to the ministry of defense.
In order to change this perception, the AKP has to confront history and take a clear position regarding the crimes that were committed against the Christians. The AKP, however, is very far from being capable of doing this and, for this reason, will continue to be perceived as a potential repeat actor of 1915 to the Christians in the region. Therein lies the irony. Turkey, which wants to get involved in the region as an intervenor on behalf of “freedom and democracy,” is instead going to be a reminder of its past “crimes against humanity.”
We need to add two other important factors to this: The first is the close ties between Iran and the Syrian Alewites (Shia). Even if they rest upon a defense of the authoritarian regimes of Syria and Iran, Turkey’s intervention (made in the name of freedom and democracy, but missing an honest accounting of history) can lead to sectarian fighting—between the Sunni-Hanefis and Shia (Alewite). Secondly, it is a fact that under Jemal Pasha’s leadership, the CUP hung the leaders of the Arab nationalist movement along the main streets from Beirut to Damascus in 1915 and 1916. There is a known connection between the suppression of the Arab nationalist movement and the genocide of 1915. Each was a piece of the CUP’s policy to shape Anatolia around a Turkish-Muslim identity. Whether it is the Syrian Ba’ath regime or Arab nationalist circles in the region, no one will hesitate to remind Turkey of the truth behind the hanging of their own national leaders.
The bottom line is that the AKP can say whatever it wants about whatever Islamic cultural back story it is using to develop its new policies in the Middle East. If it does not confront history, however, it will appear as nothing less than a new Union and Progress Party. And herein lies the importance of including Armenia and Yerevan in the Address to the Nation: If the AKP wants to defend freedom and democracy in the region, and if it wants to walk a path towards universal humanitarian values by way of Islamic sensitivities, it needs to learn how to look at Islam’s recent past with a more critical eye. A statement about freedom and democracy must be defined in a way that responds to Christians’ demands for security and includes them in the equation. The road there passes through an honest reckoning with the crimes that have been committed in the past, not least of which was the Armenian Genocide.
What the AKP should not forget is that it was a very powerful self-critique that laid the foundation for the Christian West’s bombing of Christian Serbia.
Translated by Fatima Sakarya. The Turkish version of this editorial was published in Taraf, a daily newspaper in Istanbul, on Aug. 11, 2011.

WILL THIS BE THE BEGINNING OF ISRAEL RECOGNISING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?

2011-09-08T09:24:00.000-07:00

WILL THIS BE THE BEGINNING OF ISRAEL RECOGNISING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?

Israeli activist accuses Erdogan of historical amnesia for denying Armenian Genocide
September 08, 2011 04:28
Haim Ouizemann, vice president of the Israeli Organization of the Francophonie (OFI), who is also involved in politics and is working for several media outlets, has written an open letter to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
In his letter Ouizemann condemns Turkey’s response to the report of Palmer and decision to expel Israeli Ambassador to Turkey Gaby Levy. Ouizemann also raises the issue of the Armenian Genocide and condemns Turkey for historical amnesia. In a letter published on Israël Flash website Ouizemann says that Turkey intends to appeal to the International Court in The Hague but at the same time is suffering from historical amnesia and denial policy. He stresses that Ankara continues to deny their undeniable responsibility for one of the biggest genocides in modern history, the Armenian Genocide.
He also mentions that Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk was forced to emigrate to U.S. due to persecution and death threats because of his extraordinary courage, unconditional support to the Armenian issue and his words: “One million Armenians and 30 thousand Kurds were killed in these (Turkish) lands, but no one, except for me, dares talk about it.”
“One and a half million Armenians, Turkish citizens, are still waiting for justice. Meanwhile, you are resisting paying tribute to memory of the victims. If you want to come to The Hague, then you should get there before us. You’re already late for a century,” he says.

News from Armenia - NEWS.am=

Sassounian: Turkey Can Run but Can’t Hide from Long Arm of US Law

2011-09-06T12:18:00.000-07:00

By: Harut Sassounian

World heavyweight boxing champion Joe Louis once warned one of his opponents: “You can run, but you can’t hide.” This same warning now applies to the Turkish government and two of its major banks.

Ironically, after making every effort to block the serving of court papers, the Central Bank and Ziraat Bank filed a motion on June 1, 2011, seeking the dismissal of the case, arguing they had not received the proper documents.
Last December, when three Armenian Americans filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit in U.S. Federal Court against the Republic of Turkey, the Central Bank, and Ziraat Bank, the Turkish government ridiculed the charges, claiming “sovereign immunity.”
The Armenian American plaintiffs were seeking $64 million in compensation for the confiscation of their properties in Adana, Turkey, in the aftermath of the Armenian Genocide. The plaintiffs were also demanding additional millions of dollars for the accrued rent and interest the U.S. government paid Turkey in the past 60 years for use of the strategic Incirlik Air Base, located on Armenian-owned land.
Since one of the first steps in filing a lawsuit is to serve a copy of the court documents to the defendants, the three Turkish entities concocted elaborate schemes to avoid receiving the legal papers in order to delay or obstruct the trial. As a result, the plaintiffs’ attorneys had to go to extraordinary lengths during the past nine months to deliver the court documents to the Turkish defendants.
Ironically, after making every effort to block the serving of court papers, the Central Bank and Ziraat Bank filed a motion on June 1, 2011, seeking the dismissal of the case, arguing they had not received the proper documents.
On Aug. 2, U.S. Federal Judge Dolly Gee rejected the Turkish request, asserting that the plaintiffs’ representatives “made several attempts to serve the Bank defendants at their addresses in New York City. After being repeatedly denied access to the buildings and, in one case, being misdirected as to Ziraat Bank’s actual location, the process servers left copies of the summonses and complaint with the building security guards. Plaintiffs’ counsel then mailed additional copies to the each of the Bank defendants at these same addresses.”
The judge ruled that the Republic of Turkey had been adequately served with legal documents and ordered the Turkish entities to present their pleading in court no later than Aug. 19.
The plaintiffs’ attorneys faced greater difficulties in serving the court documents to the Turkish authorities than to the New York offices of the two banks. On Jan. 26, 2011, the English and Turkish versions of the complaint were mailed to the Ministry of Justice in Ankara, as required by the Hague Convention. On March 1, Turkey informed the plaintiffs’ lawyers in writing its refusal to accept the court papers, claiming the lawsuit infringes Turkey’s “sovereignty and security.”
After exhausting all other channels, the plaintiffs’ lawyers submitted the court documents to the U.S. Department of State on April 14, asking the latter to present them officially to the Turkish government. On June 20, the State Department advised the plaintiffs that the documents were forwarded through diplomatic channels to the Republic of Turkey.
The American Embassy in Ankara transmitted the documents with a “diplomatic note,” warning the Turkish government that under U.S. law “a defendant in a lawsuit must file an answer to the complaint within 60 days from the date of notice or face the possibility of having judgment entered against it.” The U.S. Embassy strongly urged the Turkish Foreign Ministry to comply with the requirements of United States laws or face “a default judgment.”
On Aug. 29, after the mandated 60 days had expired and no response was received from Turkey, the attorneys for the Armenian American plaintiffs asked the Federal Court to enter a default judgment against the Turkish defendants.
Vatan newspaper reported last week that the two Turkish banks, alarmed by the serious prospect of losing a multi-million dollar lawsuit due to their failure to respond to the U.S. Federal Court, rushed to hire a lawyer and asked for more time until Sept. 19, 2011 to file a response.
Should the Turkish defendants not show up in court on Sept. 19, the federal judge could enter a default judgment and order that their assets in the U.S., up to the value of the judgment, be seized and turned over to the Armenian American plaintiffs.
The Turkish government can no longer hide from its responsibilities for the devastating damage caused to the Armenian people as a result of the genocide. It is high time for Turkey to acknowledge its long history of colossal criminal acts and make appropriate amends.

Catholicos Warned Obama About Georgia’s Abuse of Minorities

2011-09-01T12:25:00.001-07:00

His Holiness Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians, in December 2009, wrote a letter to President Barack Obama alerting him to the continued abuses of religious and ethnic minorities in Georgia, a cable released Friday by the whistleblower site WikiLeaks revealed.
In his letter, the Catholicos brought the “unacceptable situation” of religious minorities in Georgia to Obama’s attention, noting that the situation has worsened since the collapse of the Soviet Union.“As head of the Armenian Church, our unfortunate experience over the past two decades leads us to conclude that nothing in the religious sphere within Georgia has changed for the better since the collapse of the Soviet Union. On the contrary, religious life in the Republic of Georgia today “except within the Georgian Orthodox Church” is more restricted, repressed and intolerant for ethnic and religious minorities.
“After numerous years of effort and countless unsuccessful attempts to work with the Georgian government and the Georgian Orthodox Church to regulate the Armenian Church diocese and communities in Georgia, we are forced to formally bring to your attention the unresolved issues regarding:1. The lack of legal status for religious minorities in Georgia; and2. The Georgian government’s refusal to return church buildings and church properties. We require your decisive assistance to compel the Georgian authorities to live up to their international obligations, among which are the fostering of an environment where all Christian churches, as well as religious organizations of other faiths, can operate normally and have their human rights respected and protected,” said the Catholicos’ letter.
“The most recent example of the Georgian government’s indifference and wanton neglect resulted in the collapse two weeks ago of the historic St. Gevork of Mughni Armenian Church (built in 1356) in Tbilisi, Georgia; which is the second church we have lost in this manner. This has caused great indignation among our people and Church,” delineated the Catholicos.
The Catholicos concluded the letter by expressing hope that the US government “will implement the necessary steps to positively affect this unacceptable situation.”

Sassounian: Same Old Turkish Trick: Make Promises, Get Praised, but Deliver Nothing

2011-09-01T12:03:00.000-07:00

Turkish leaders came up with a new ploy last week to impress world public opinion with fake magnanimity toward the country’s long-oppressed minorities.
Prime Minister Erdogan signed a decree last Saturday that supposedly will return hundreds of buildings that belonged to Christian and Jewish community foundations or charitable trusts. There are currently 162 such trusts (vakfs) registered in the Republic of Turkey.
Back in 1936, the Turkish government demanded that all non-Muslim foundations declare their property holdings. In 1974, Turkish courts illegally stripped these foundations from all properties acquired after 1936, and even some that belonged to them before that date. Last week’s decree requested the foundations to submit to the government within the next 12 months the list of properties confiscated from them — now worth billions of dollars — including schools, hospitals, orphanages, and cemeteries. If and when parliament adopts this decree, the Turkish government is pledging to either return the seized properties or pay compensation for those sold to third parties. It is important to note that this decree does not cover the hundreds of thousands of private properties that were confiscated by the Turkish authorities from Armenians and other minorities during and after World War I.
Before anyone starts thanking the Turkish leadership for its “kindness” or “fair mindedness” toward its non-Muslim citizens, one needs to scrutinize Ankara’s motives and anticipate its possible next steps.
Although Erdogan’s ruling party has more than sufficient votes in parliament to pass the proposed measure, no one should be surprised if this “generous” offer is considerably watered down in terms of the number and types of properties it covers and their current value, conveniently blaming these restrictions on the opposition parties. Erdogan’s previous promises to return confiscated properties to minority foundations were mired in bureaucratic red tape, causing lengthy delays and failure to honor almost all requests.
Most probably Turkish officials decided to issue this decree after losing several major property claims filed by Armenian and Greek foundations in the European Court of Human Rights. Clearly, Turkey can ill afford to lose hundreds of similar lawsuits. Adnan Ertem, head of Turkey’s administration of charitable trusts, told Sabah newspaper that by dealing internally with non-Muslim foundations, the government would be able to avoid paying much larger sums, including damages and court costs, should it lose the lawsuits filed in the European Court. Ertem claimed that there are 370 confiscated properties that should be returned to minority foundations.
More important than saving money, Turkey would spare itself the embarrassment of losing hundreds of court cases that would tarnish its reputation in the eyes of the world, particularly at a time when it is trying to join the European Union. In addition, Turkey has already scored a major propaganda coup by merely promising to return these properties. The international media has published glowing news reports of this “magnanimous” Turkish gesture, before a single piece of property has been returned to the minorities. No one should be surprised if Turkey uses this new decree as a propaganda tool to counter recent U.S. Congressional demands for the return of church properties to their rightful owners.
Likewise, no one should be surprised if Turkish leaders brazenly demand that the Armenian, Greek, and Israeli governments reciprocate with a gesture of their own toward Turkey. Turkish officials should be reminded that by returning the confiscated properties they are not doing a favor to the religious minorities. Such misplaced gratitude would be akin to a robbery victim thanking a thief who for selfish reasons decides to return a small portion of what he has stolen.
Even though the Turkish media has prematurely characterized the Erdogan decree as “historic” and “revolutionary,” in practice, it is less enforceable than the Turkish government’s obligations under the Treaty of Lausanne, which provides the country’s Armenian, Greek, and Jewish minorities much greater protection under international law. While domestic laws can be amended at any time, Turkey’s international treaty obligations cannot be restricted by governmental decree. Fearing for their own safety, none of the non-Muslim communities have dared to file a complaint with the United Nations or international courts, despite the fact that successive Turkish governments have violated the provisions of the Lausanne Treaty since its ratification in 1923.
My advice to Turkey’s minorities would be not to withdraw their lawsuits from the European Court of Human Rights until they recover their confiscated properties or receive appropriate financial restitution.

Special Report: What is Turkey Returning to Armenians?

2011-09-01T10:50:00.000-07:00

Special Report: What is Turkey Returning to Armenians?

Armenian Weekly)–The Turkish government recently announced that real estate assets confiscated by the State, which once belonged to Armenian, Greek, and Jewish charitable foundations, would be returned to the rightful owners, and that the government would pay compensation for any confiscated property that has since been sold to third parties. This is definitely a long overdue positive step in the right direction by the Turkish government, when compared with decades long injustice and discrimination of the past Turkish governments against its non-Muslim citizens. While this decree was hailed by the EU, Turkish media as well as the minority charitable foundations in Turkey, it was met by the Armenian Diaspora as an insufficient gesture at best, a cynical political trick at worst. Perhaps the following facts can help put the issue in context.

Selamet Han
In 1936, the Turkish government required the non-Muslim minority charitable foundations to submit a list of all their real estate assets to the state, which they did. In 1974, during the height of the Cyprus crisis and with inflamed hatred toward the Greeks, the Turkish government installed by the 1971 coup d’etat decreed that any assets not shown on the 1936 lists, that is, properties deeded to the charitable foundations after 1936, are illegally obtained and therefore, must be seized by the Turkish state. Some 1,410 properties willed or gifted to the non-Muslim charitable organizations from 1936 to 1974, were confiscated by the State, thus suddenly depriving the foundations from their beneficial uses and revenues. These assets included apartment, school and office buildings, houses, shops and vacant land, mostly in or near Istanbul, where most of the remaining non-Muslim minority citizens in Turkey lived. The present government decree pledges to return 162 of the 1,410 assets confiscated in 1974. Over the past several years, the charitable foundations had tried through Turkish legal channels to get back these assets but to no avail. They had recently applied to the European Court of Human Rights, which had already ruled against the Turkish state on a number of cases.
Below is a partial list of the Armenian charitable foundation assets to be returned by the government:
1. Gedikpasha Armenian Protestant primary school – the building is already demolished, at present used as a park
2. Gedikpasha Armenian Protestant Church – one apartment building in Kumkapi, a restaurant, a playground
3. Surp Harutyun Armenian Church – several flats in Beyoglu
4. Ferikoy Surp Vartanants Church – an apartment building and a vacant lot in Sisli
5. Kurucheshme Surp Khatch Yerevman Church – one building in Arnavutkoy
6. Kumkapi Surp Harutyun School – a store in Kumkapi and a store in Kadikoy
7. Kumkapi Mayr Asdvadzadzin Church – a flat in Eminonu
8. Yenikoy Surp Asdvadzadzin Church – a vacant lot in Istinye
9. Bomonti Mkhitaryan Armenian Catholic School – school buildings, two shops and a flat in Sisli
10. Yedikule Surp Prgitch (Holy Saviour) Armenian Hospital – a total of 19 properties, including one building lot, a house and four shared lots in Sariyer, a residential building in Moda, 2 residential buildings in Sisli, one flat in Beyoglu, one store in Kapalicarsi Covered Bazaar, a house in Uskudar, one apartment building, one flat and a warehouse in Kurtulus, a four storey hotel in Taksim, a retail and office commercial building in Beyoglu, a flat in Chamlica, a 47,500 sq. m. vacant lot in Beykoz, and a 44,000 sq. m. land adjacent to the Hospital, formerly the gardens of the Hospital, presently used as Zeytinburnu Soccer Stadium, a sports building, a parking lot and a tea garden, and last but not least, the valuable office building called Selamet Han in Eminonu, Istanbul.
It is noteworthy to emphasize the significance of the Selamet Han office building, which was donated in 1953 by well known businessman and oil magnate Caloust Gulbenkian. The impressive six storey art nouveau style building was built in early 20. century by Armenian architect Hovsep Aznavour, builder of many of the Istanbul landmarks in the Pera/Beyoglu district. The Selamet Han building, confiscated by the state in 1974, fell into disrepair and is now in a dilapidated condition. The Surp Prgitch Foundation has announced that as soon as the building is given back, it intends to restore it and put into use as a boutique hotel, to generate much needed revenues for the hospital operations.
The recent government decree at last and at least partially addresses the injustices of the 1974 confiscations, by pledging to return about ten percent of the 1,410 properties, mostly in Istanbul. However, there is a massive list of properties and assets belonging to the thousands of Armenian churches, monasteries and schools in Anatolia, lost after 1915. One example to illustrate the enormity of this issue is the case of the Surp Giragos Armenian Church in Diyarbakir, which by itself had owned more than 200 properties in central Diyarbakir prior to 1915. Another interesting example is the Sanasaryan High School in Erzurum. This school, which provided education of such high caliber that it even surpassed the Istanbul Armenian schools in the late 19. century, was closed down in 1915. It is still a little known fact in Turkey that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, when drumming up support and organizing the resistance to the Allied occupation of Anatolia, convened the famous Erzurum Congress in this Armenian school in July-August 1919. The Sanasaryan School Foundation, had built and owned one of the largest office buildings in Istanbul in the late 19th Century, in order to support the Sanasaryan School in Erzurum. It is also a little known fact that the famous Sanasaryan Han Office Building in Istanbul was seized first by the Ottoman and then the Turkish Republic governments and converted into the General Security and Police Headquarters of Istanbul. This building became notorious for the imprisonment, torture and murder of hundreds of intelligentsia during the military government regimes in the 1970’s and 1980’s.
One last glaring example involves the lands belonging to the Surp Agop Armenian Cemetery, which were confiscated in the 1930s by the Istanbul municipal government. These lands were deeded in the 16. Century by the Ottoman Emperor Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent to the Armenian people for cemetery uses, as a reward to his personal cook Manuk Karaseferyan of Van, who saved the Sultan from a poisoning plot against him by the Germans and Hungarians after the campaign to take Budapest. The Armenian cemetery was in use for nearly four centuries from 1560s to 1930s. As these vast lands lie adjacent to the most popular road in the centre of the city, they were deemed most valuable by the Istanbul government and expropriated from the Armenian Surp Agop Foundation without any compensation, despite years of legal struggles. At present, these lands are occupied by the State Radio and Television Headquarters, The Turkish Armed Forces Istanbul Headquarters, the Military Museum, many fashionable hotels such as Hilton, Regency Hyatt, Divan, several apartment and office buildings, as well as the expansive Taksim Park, which has walkways made from marble of the Armenian tombstones.
The decree by the present government may seem insufficient or insignificant, but everything is relative, and this is an enormous first step of a long journey in the right direction when compared with past Turkish government policies. This journey requires mutual empathy, cooperation, encouragement and, above all, the uncovering of all hidden historic facts on the path to the creation of a common body of knowledge.

Turkey to Return Properties Confiscated from Christian, Jewish Minorities

2011-09-01T10:25:00.000-07:00

Turkey Decrees Partial Return of Confiscated Christian, Jewish Property (Update)

Hachikian: Erdogan’s decree would return less than one percent of the churches and church properties confiscated during the Armenian Genocide and the decades that followed it.

ANKARA, Turkey—Turkey’s government is returning hundreds of properties confiscated from the country’s Christian and Jewish minorities over the past 75 years in a gesture to religious groups over complaints of discrimination, and in a move likely to thwart possible court rulings against the country, reported the Associated Press (AP).

The Akhtamar Church
A government decree published on Aug. 27 returns assets that once belonged to Greek, Armenian, or Jewish trusts and makes provisions for the government to pay compensation for any confiscated property that has since been sold on.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced the decision formally on Aug. 28 when he hosted religious leaders and the heads of about 160 minority trusts, at a fast-breaking dinner for the holy Muslim month of Ramadan.
The properties include former hospital, orphanage or school buildings and cemeteries. Their return is a key European Union demand. A series of court cases has also been filed against primarily Muslim Turkey at the European Court of Human Rights. Last year, the court ordered Turkey to return an orphanage to the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate.
Some properties were seized when they fell into disuse over the years. Others were confiscated after 1974 when Turkey ruled that non-Muslim trusts could not own new property in addition to those that were already registered in their names in 1936. The 1974 decision came around the time of a Turkish invasion of Cyprus that followed a coup attempt by supporters of a union with Greece, when relations with that country were at an all time low.
Erdogan’s Islamic-rooted government, seeking to promote religious freedoms, has pledged to address the problems of the religious minorities. Over the past few years, it has amended laws to allow for the return of some of the properties, but restrictions remained and the issue of properties sold to third parties was left unsolved.
The decree overcomes those restrictions and helps scupper further court rulings.
“There was huge pressure from the European Court of Human Rights, which has already ruled against Turkey,” said Orhan Kemal Cengiz, a human rights activist and lawyer who specializes in minority issues. “It is nevertheless a very important development. With the return of properties and the compensations, the minority communities will be able to strengthen economically and their lives will be made easier.”
The country’s population of 74 million, mostly Muslim, includes an estimated 65,000 Armenian Orthodox Christians, 23,000 Jews, and fewer than 2,500 Greek Orthodox Christians.
Religious minorities have often complained of discrimination in Turkey, which had a history of conflict with Greece and with Armenians who accuse Turkish authorities of trying to exterminate them early in the last century. Turkey says the mass killings at that time were the result of the chaos of war, rather than a systematic campaign of genocide. Few minority members have been able to hold top positions in politics, the military, or the public service.
Turkey is also under intense pressure to reopen a seminary that trained generations of Greek Orthodox patriarchs. The Halki Theological School on Heybeliada Island, near Istanbul, was closed to new students in 1971 under a law that put religious and military training under state control. The school closed its doors in 1985, when the last five students graduated.
Pressure from the U.S.
As the Armenian Weekly has reported in recent months, there were more than 2,000 Armenian churches operating in what is today Turkey before the Armenian Genocide of 1915. Most of the churches were destroyed and their properties confiscated. The aforementioned decree does not include these church properties. It is only limited to properties confiscated over the past 75 years. Moreover, not only about ten percent properties confiscated after 1936 are being returned. (Read Armenian Weekly editorial on this issue here.)
“Erdogan’s decree, clearly prompted by increased Congressional scrutiny of Turkey’s repression of its Christian minority and successive losses at the European Court of Human Rights, would return less than one percent of the churches and church properties confiscated during the Armenian Genocide and the decades that followed it,” said ANCA Chairman Ken Hachikian. “Ninety-six years after the genocide perpetrated against the Armenians, Greeks, and Syriacs, this decree is a smokescreen to evade the much broader consequences of those brutal acts. The ANCA will expand its outreach to Congress and the [Obama] Administration to ensure that the Turkish government comes to terms with its brutal past, respects the religious freedom of surviving Christian communities, and returns the fruits of its crime.”
Last month, with a vote of 43-1, the House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted an amendment to the State Department Authorization bill, spearheaded by Ranking Democrat Howard Berman (D-Calif.) and Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), calling for the return of Christian churches confiscated by the Turkish government and an end to Turkey’s discrimination against its Christian communities. ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian welcomed that decision, stating, “The Turkish government has destroyed or confiscated the vast majority of their holy sites and places of worship. The Foreign Affairs Committee today sent a powerful message to Turkey that it must come to terms with this brutal legacy, respect religious freedom of surviving Christian communities, and return the fruits of its crimes.” The passage of the resolution was also hailed by Greek and Syriac American organizations, including the American Hellenic Educational and Public Affairs Association (AHEPA), American Hellenic Institute (AHI), American Hellenic Council (AHC), and the Syriac Universal Alliance, among many others.
The amendment is similar to a resolution (H.Res.306), introduced in June by Representatives Ed Royce (R-Calif.) and Howard Berman (D-Calif.), which has over 35 co-sponsors.
Turkey’s treatment of its Christian minority has also emerged as an issue of contention in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s consideration of U.S. ambassador to Turkey nominee Francis Ricciardone. In response to questions submitted by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Ricciardone erroneously asserted that a majority of Christian churches functioning in 1915 continue to operate as churches today. A revised response recently submitted to the key Senate panel continued to misrepresent the number of functioning churches. In response, Armenian American church leaders issued powerfully worded spiritual messages. In an Aug. 15 statement, Archbishop Oshagan Choloyan, Prelate of the Armenian Apostolic Church of Eastern U.S., stressed that the ambassador’s initial assertion was “so blatantly false that it cannot remain unchallenged.” He went on to explain that “the facts are quite clear. From the massacres of Armenians in 1895-96 and the Armenian Genocide in 1915, to the decades following the establishment of the Turkish republic, Christian houses of worship were systematically destroyed or confiscated. My own church’s hierarchal see, the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia, was a victim of this process, and today is exiled in Lebanon. The archives of the Catholicosate contain hundreds of original deeds and other documentation of churches and church owned property that was confiscated.”
The Primate of the Armenian Apostolic Church of Eastern U.S., Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, stated that Ricciardone’s response had “deeply offended Armenian Americans,” explaining that “the loss of these many hundreds of churches, their neglect, and outright destruction, and the conversion of many of our sanctuaries into mosques, is a matter of intense pain to Armenians: an ongoing reminder of the loss of life and the destruction that we suffered as a result of the 1915 genocide.”

Majority of Europeans are from Armenia - genetic conformation

2011-08-27T10:04:00.000-07:00

THE BRITISH & SPANISH ARE RELATED TO US ARMENIAN.

Majority of Europeans are from Armenia - genetic conformation

August 27, 2011 03:07

A recent study of the origin of the first Europeans recently published in the British monthly Proceedings of the Royal Society reveals that the first men came to Western Europe nearly 40,000 years ago, reports Nouvelles d’Arménie.
These people lived by hunting, fishing and gathering. These early Europeans were oppressed with the arrival of people from Anatolia (Armenian plateau), who were sedentary living people with very different lifestyle from economic and social respects. According to recent studies, characteristic features of these people from Anatolia were present in the chromosomes of 100 million Europeans, particularly those living in Spain, Ireland and Wales.
The researchers also found that the presence of these chromosomes were even stronger in populations of Eastern Europe, close to Anatolia. Thus there would be little difference in the genetic characteristics of populations in Eastern Europe and Middle East. Only downside to the study of British researchers is that they cannot say the precise date for the arrival of these chromosomes from Anatolia (the Armenian plateau) to Europe.
=

Archbishop Barsamian Responds to Ricciardone’s ‘Deeply Offensive’ Statement

2011-08-20T09:49:00.000-07:00

Primate Khajag Barsamian sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responding to assertions made by Ambassador Francis Ricciardone, President Barack Obama’s recess appointment to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey.

Primate Khajag Barsamian
Answering a question from New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez, Amb. Ricciardone had said, “Most of the Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 are still operating as churches. Some churches of significance operate as museums. The remaining have fallen into disrepair or were converted to mosques for lack of use.”
Barsamian said, “Ambassador Ricciardone deeply offended Armenian-Americans with his remarks, opening sensitive wounds and potentially setting back the gradual process of healing.” He added, “In all charity, perhaps the Ambassador is simply unaware of certain facts. But mastery of the history of a country, its dark as well as bright chapters, is essential to serving the United States effectively and diplomatically in this important and complex region.”
The full text of Archbishop Barsamian’s letter to Clinton appears below.
Dear Madame Secretary:
My kind greetings and blessings you, as you continue your service to our nation.
As Primate of the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church of America, I write regarding the statements made by Ambassador Francis Ricciardone, President Obama’s appointment as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Turkey, during his confirmation hearing.
Please know that we have been generally supportive of the efforts of the U.S. government to promote a more normal relationship between the republics of Turkey and Armenia. Likewise, we greatly respect and appreciate the productive role you personally have played in such initiatives.
With those efforts in mind, it is difficult to understand Ambassador Ricciardone’s assertions about the status of historic Armenian churches, and other Christian churches, in Turkey. The loss of these many hundreds of churches, their neglect and outright destruction, and the conversion of many of our sanctuaries into mosques, is a matter of intense pain to Armenians: an ongoing reminder of the loss of life and the destruction that we suffered as a result of the 1915 Genocide.
Ambassador Ricciardone deeply offended Armenian-Americans with his remarks, opening sensitive wounds and potentially setting back the gradual process of healing. In all charity, perhaps the Ambassador is simply unaware of certain facts. But mastery of the history of a country, its dark as well as bright chapters, is essential to serving the United States effectively and diplomatically in this important and complex region.
Again, it is our general support for your efforts, Madame Secretary, as well as our desire to see genuine progress made to benefit the entire region, that prompts this letter to you. I am confident that you will give these thoughts all due consideration, as you make decisions about the vital role America plays in Turkey, in Armenia, and throughout the world.
Madame Secretary, you have our great respect and support in all your undertakings. May our Lord strengthen and guide you in your service to our beloved country.
With prayers,Archbishop Khajag BarsamianPrimate

American Magic Jack views Karabakh as part of Armenia

2011-08-18T12:11:00.000-07:00

American Magic Jack Internet based telephone service company put Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh in one section, report Nouvelles dArménie.
This provoked the rage of Azerbaijani community in the U.S., whose members have expressed their anger in a letter to Magic Jack, asking “to correct their mistake as soon as possible.”
Earlier Google also drew wrath of the Azerbaijanis when a few weeks ago presented Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Armenia in its Google Voice service.
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, although not recognized by the international community, is a part of Armenia in its daily functions and committed relationship. Politicians in Baku have not yet grasped this fact. Private companies, on the other hand, went beyond political barriers and are not guided by politics.

Why aren’t you satisfied with your own lands? 13-year-old girl from Karabakh wrote letter to President of Azerbaijan

2011-08-15T13:07:00.000-07:00

STEPANAKERT. - Today Nagorno-Karabakh is inhabited either by participants of the Karabakh war, the elder generation, or by their descendants, who have inherited the same fervent blood that brought the nation to the victory twenty years ago. On August 8, 2011 a 13-year-old girl from Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR) Adeline Avakimyan wrote a letter to the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev.
The letter was also sent to Azerbaijani mass media but none of them dared to publish it.
Armenian News-NEWS.am presents unofficial translation of the full text of the letter.
“Mr. President,
My name is Adeline Avakimyan, I am a schoolgirl from Karabakh. I did not tell anybody about my intention to write to you. I have been thinking, should I write or should I not? Eventually I decided to write.
I was born and currently live in Stepanakert. I love my country because Karabakh is my homeland, I was born and I live here, my father and mother were born here, so were my grandfathers and grandmothers. Their grandmothers and grandfathers were also born here (perhaps you know that in the past, when our country was one of the provinces of Armenia, it was called Artsakh). I have a lot of friends and they also love our country… But that is not actually the point of my letter.
Just like many others, I also have problems, which I try to solve to the best of my abilities. When I have free time, I think about many things: about human life, about happiness, about my relatives living far away from me, about their country, which is different from ours. At nights I gaze upon the stars and think, whether there are people living on those far away planets. My grandpa says that in his childhood he also used to look on the starry sky and think about same things. Sometimes I think about people surrounding me, of those who have seen more grief than happiness. I really want everybody to live happily and never have any problems.
Mr. President, every time I watch TV, I read or listen to the stories of elders I get surprised: all the time you speak about Karabakh and war as if you have nothing else to think of. It seems you do not have any other problems or goals and no other issue actually troubles you.
I never saw an Azerbaijani. I do not think about you, about your country and neither do my parents. I do not really understand what you want from our country. I know that you have never been to Artsakh, you have never seen our Gandzasar, Dadivank, Amaras but you always think about capturing our country. Why can’t you be satisfied with your own lands? Why do you want Karabakh? Grandpa told me that before the war, even 50 or 100 years ago, when Azerbaijanis still lived here, they did not bury their deceased here, they took them to Azerbaijan, because people knew that this is not their motherland. That is why we have so few Azerbaijani cemeteries.
My father is a veteran of Karabakh war. I have not seen the war, but I learned from the stories of elders that it is something bad and terrible and I would never like to see it. I am sure that not a single Azerbaijani child would like to see war either. But adults always say that in case of war they will defend their country again. One of my peer friends said that if they do not allow him take arms, he will help the adults to protect our country like French Gavroche did. I will also help my parents as much as I can…
I have heard many stories of how it all happened. Our people went to a peaceful meeting and said that they want Artsakh to join Mother-Armenia, because Azerbaijan is not our country and 70 years ago a chief called Stalin gave our country to Azerbaijan on purpose. In response, your countrymen started killing Armenians in Sumgait, Kirovabad, Baku and other cities, driving them out of their homes. However that did not satisfy your father and he went to war against Artsakh but lost it, although he had much more soldiers and tanks.
I asked my parents, how come he lost being so strong and they said that we were defending our land, whereas Azerbaijanis attacked to capture it, take away our lives and liberty…
If you start new war, whole Armenian nation will rise to defend our land. But tell me, will your children, your relatives participate in this war? You will send ordinary Azerbaijani youth against us. I know that in case of war many of us might die, including women and children, many children might become orphans but many Azerbaijani youngsters will die as well and their children will also be orphans. Do you want this? Is this the reason why you think about war and Karabakh every day?
Why do you always buy guns? You could have used that money to build an easy and happy life for your people (especially those who became refugees after your father started the war). Isn’t it better than sending people to war?
I really want that you respond to my letter and tell me why you want to take my homeland, which does not belong to you. Why aren’t you satisfied with your own lands?
Adeline Avakimyan,
NKR, Stepanakert.
10.08.11

Armenians celebrate first victory over Turkish banks

2011-08-15T13:00:00.000-07:00

LOS ANGELES. - Los Angeles Federal Court made the first in history decision regarding the lawsuit of descendants of Armenians who lost their property during Armenian Genocide filed against Turkish government and two Turkish banks - the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey and T.C. Ziraat.
A group of pontiffs headed by Alex Bakalian accused Turkey of confiscating properties and illegal use of lands as a result of the Armenian Genocide, Nouvelles d’Armenie reported.
They demand return of territory which also includes the Incirlik Air Base – air base of US armed forces.
The court ruled that pontiffs’ lawyers were denied access to the bank Ziraat and were provided with false information. Security officials deliberately planned to thwart the process, the court ruled.
It was noted that Turkey was also recently informed of the trial through U.S. Embassy in Ankara and Foreign Ministry. Turkey must submit its conclusions by August 19.
“Banks are trying to complicate the process. Finally, after months of maneuvering and numerous attempts to escape the notification, the U.S. Federal Court demanded that the banks respond to inquiry of the Armenian side,” said Vartkes Yeghiayan, one of the lawyers involved in the case.
=

Did Clinton Discuss ‘Wilsonian Armenia’ in Turkey?

2011-08-12T13:12:00.000-07:00

MOSCOW—“We—the United States and Turkey—owe Armenia what was promised them by President Woodrow Wilson,” the Moscow-based Regnum news agency quoted Secretary Hillary Clinton as saying during her meetings last month in Turkey, according to the news agency’s “source in the region.”
According to the same Regnum source, during her meetings with Turkish officials last month, Clinton also allegedly outlined a new Middle East and Caucasus map after an envisioned end to the Karabakh conflict. This map, which supposedly not only includes the deployment of peace-keeping forces to the Karabakh conflict zone, also envisions exchange of territories and transport routes.
The Regnum source indicated that aforementioned discussion was about granting Armenia a corridor to the port of Trabizon, following a possible ratification of the Turkey-Armenia protocols.
Regnum also discussed a possible territorial exchange with Azerbaijan, to be overseen by US Ambassador to Baku, Matthew Bryza. The Regnum source said that process would be the creation of a “Greater Azerbaijan.”
Essentially, what this anonymous Regnum news agency source if saying, is that Karabakh would be given back to Azerbaijan, with a guarantee that Armenia would have access to a sea port.
Fact or fiction? It’s food for thought.

Israel’s Knesset to consider Armenian Genocide resolutions in October

2011-08-12T13:00:00.000-07:00

Israel’s Knesset to consider Armenian Genocide resolutions in October
August 12, 2011 08:11
YEREVAN.- Discussion of two resolutions on the Armenian Genocide in Israeli parliament (Knesset), is postponed until October after parliamentary recess, coordinator of Jerusalem Armenian Cause (Hay Dat) group Hagop Sevan told Armenian News-NEWS.am.
“We have strong support in the Knesset on behalf of the parliament speaker, leader of the ruling coalition and many of its members. Many are well aware of this issue. The damaged relations between Israel and Turkey also play an important role. In general, we hope that we will succeed, and justice will prevail,” he said.
Asked about the actions that Armenian community of Israel and Hay Dat intend to carry out, Sevan noted a lot of work had been done.
“There were meetings, discussions, agreement was reached. For obvious reasons, I would not like to disclose the details right now,” he added.
The issue on recognition of the Armenian Genocide was introduced in the Knesset Committee on Education, Culture and Sport in May this year by “leftist” party “Meretz” with the support of the “Likud” party, led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Before sending it to the Commission on Education, Culture and Sports MPs approved the decision to continue the discussion. They stressed that the relations between Israel and Turkey should not become an obstacle to Israel’s recognition of Armenian Genocide.
A resolution dealing with assigning a memorial day for the Genocide will be considered as well.
=

Ricciardone Claims Most Pre-1915 Christian Churches in Turkey are Still Operating

2011-08-12T11:34:00.000-07:00

Ambassadorial Nominee’s False Statement Comes in Response to Written Question from Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey

WASHINGTON—Ambassador Francis Ricciardone, President Obama’s “recess” appointee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey, in a written response to questions submitted to him by Senator Robert Menendez (R-N.J.), made the patently incorrect claim that “most of the Christian churches functioning [on the territory of present-day Turkey] prior to 1915 are still operating as churches,” reported the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

Ricciardone
“Ambassador Ricciardone’s demonstrably false assertion betrays a callous disregard for Ottoman Turkey’s wholesale destruction of Christian churches, and for the fate of the millions of Christian faithful, who worshipped in their homeland within these holy sites until their genocidal annihilation,” said Aram Hamparian, Executive Director of the ANCA. “Whether his response is due to a truly remarkable lack of awareness or, instead, to a willful distortion of the facts of history to fit Ankara’s genocide denial narrative, this nominee has clearly shown he’s unable to effectively advance U.S. interests or American values as our nation’s representative in Ankara.”

The historical record shows that of the over 2000 Armenian Churches that were functioning on the territory of present-day Turkey in 1915, less than 50 operate today.

Whitewashing Religious Freedom Abuses in Turkey

Ambassador Ricciardone’s response fits into a pattern of statements glossing over well-documented and far-reaching religious freedom abuses in Turkey. Earlier this year, during his July confirmation hearing, in response to Delaware Senator Chris Coons’ question as to what steps he had taken to promote religious freedom in Turkey, Amb. Ricciardone offered this evasive answer: “…very interestingly, they [the Turkish Government] follow our debates about personal freedom and religious freedom and they say ‘Here is how you can understand this, American Ambassador. In your country, you have in recent years made a distinction between freedom of religion and the concept of freedom from religion. For too long in our modern republic we focused on preventing the intrusion of religion in our national life and political life. We are quite comfortable to be observant Muslims, please don’t call us Islamists, by the way,’ they tell us, ‘but to the extent someone is praying as a Christian or a Jew, it really doesn’t bother us at all – why should it? It’s no threat to the state, on the contrary, we are rather proud of our diversity and we happy to have them do it. As to their property issues, let us take a fresh look at this and make sure they get justice.’”

This assessment is sharply at odds with reports by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which raised the following alarm in its 2011 report: “The Turkish government continues to impose serious limitations on freedom of religion or belief, thereby threatening the continued vitality and survival of minority religious communities in Turkey.”

Reservations about the Ambassador’s willingness to accept the Turkish government’s talking points on religious tolerance at face value echo concerns expressed last fall by then Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS), who, during the last session of Congress, placed a hold on Ambassador Ricciardone’s nomination to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. In an August 16, 2010, letter to Secretary Clinton, Sen. Brownback voiced disapproval of Ricciardone’s tenure as U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, noting, among other things, that “he quickly adopted the positions and arguments of his Egyptian diplomatic counterparts.”

In the wake of Senator Brownback’s hold, President Obama circumvented Senate objections by issuing a “recess appointment” of Amb. Ricciardone. The Senate must approve his nomination in the upcoming months, if Ambassador Ricciardone is to continue to serve in Turkey for more than one year, of the usual three-year ambassadorial term. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will likely take up his nomination upon their return from the August Congressional recess.

The written exchange on this subject between Senator Menendez and Ambassador Ricciardone is provided below:

Sen. Menendez: “To the best of your knowledge, approximately how many of the more than 2,000 Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 on the territory of present-day Turkey are still operating today as churches?”

Amb. Ricciardone: “Most of the Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 are still operating as churches. Some churches of significance operate as museums. The remaining have fallen into disrepair or were converted to mosques for lack of use.”

Jeffrey: Protocols to Have ‘Profound Effect’ on Turkey-US Relations

2011-08-11T11:00:00.000-07:00

The fate of the Turkey-Armenia protocols will have the most “profound effect” on the Turkey-US relations, said former US Ambassador to Turkey James Jeffrey in a 2010 State Department cable released by WikiLeaks.

The fate of the Turkey-Armenia protocols will have the most “profound effect” on the Turkey-US relations, said former US Ambassador to Turkey James Jeffrey in a 2010 State Department cable released by WikiLeaks.
In discussing US expectations vis-à-vis Turkey’s follow through on the UN or US-imposed sanctions on Iran, Jeffrey, in a January 2010 cable said: “This [the Iran issue] will have a profound effect on [US-Turkey] relations second only to the fate of the Armenian protocols over the next year.”
After Turkey refused to sign the dangerous Turkey-Armenia Protocols, the US was quick to say that the proverbial ball was now in Turkey’s court. That statement first received much attention, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Armenia and made the statement at a press conference there.
State Department circles and officials have publicly, and privately, reiterated that point, firmly believing that the ill-conceived protocols were—and are—the only way to address the centuries-old Turkish-Armenian question, including the Armenian Genocide.
Jeffrey also says that “Major challenges with us [the US] in the coming months include the direction of Turkish-Israeli relations, the fate of the Protocols with Armenia, and the Turkish posture vis-à-vis Iran.”
In a very frank tone, Jeffrey delineates the obstacles and challenges facing US-Turkey relations as the AKP party fortifies its positions and lever within the Turkish government and society.
Jeffrey acknowledges that Turkey is pursuing “Neo-Ottoman” policy and cites a speech delivered by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu in Sarajevo at the end of 2009, in which Davutoglu claimed that the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East were better off under Ottoman rule.
“We will re-establish this (Ottoman) Balkan,” Jeffrey quotes Davutoglu from his Sarajevo speech.

Cafesjian Family Foundation to continue construction of Armenian Genocide Memorial Museum in Washington

2011-08-03T11:03:00.000-07:00

Armenian News-NEWS.am presents a short version of the article by Appo Jabarian, published in Nouvelles d`Arménie.
Cafesjian Family Foundation (CFF) announced its decision to finish the laudable project of construction of Armenian Genocide Memorial Museum (MMGA), three blocks from the White House by April 24, 2015, the day of the 100th commemoration of the Armenian Genocide, says a press release dated July 26.
The project was previously put on hold because of legal battle between former partners, the FFC and the Armenian Assembly. The court issued its decision in January.
In February, Harut Sassounian, publisher of the California Courier, wrote:
"The most important result of this long process is the decision of Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly to say ‘valid and applicable’ to the clause for the return of the assignment agreement. This means that CFF is entitled to repossess the property previously given to the Armenian Assembly. In addition, the Court decided that the CFF reserves the right to designate one of the four directors to the Board of Directors the MMGA. "
Sassounian noted that for the first time in a federal court history Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly began the 190 pages of her trial with the frightening words of Adolf Hitler, "Who, after all, still speaks of the extermination the Armenians?" She continued by explaining that Hitler referred to "largely successful efforts of the Ottoman Turkish government to eliminate the Armenian population living on its land during the historic First World War, an event known today as the Armenian Genocide." The Judge further added: "The Armenian Genocide is widely known for being the first genocide of the twentieth century. From an estimated 2.1 million living in the Ottoman Empire on the eve of World War I, nearly one and a half million were killed and hundreds of thousands deported. During this period, Armenian people were subject to deportation, expropriation, forced conversions, abduction, torture, massacre and starvation."
I join therefore to the members of the Armenian American community to call Hovnanian, Mathevosian and Krikorian, the leaders of the Armenian Assembly, to hear the voice of tortured victims of the Armenian Genocide, put aside their dispute with Cafesjian and to unite with the rest of the community in realizing this project. Otherwise, their stubborn opposition to this project of full merit, driven by petty vengeance against Cafesjian and the FFC could one day come back to haunt them.”

Sassounian: Erdogan Inadvertently Publicizes Armenian Territorial Claims from Turkey

2011-08-02T14:42:00.000-07:00

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan’s hysterical outburst at Armenia’s President last week had the salutary effect of publicizing to a worldwide audience Armenian territorial demands from Turkey!
By distorting and exaggerating Pres. Serge Sarkisian’s remarks to a group of schoolchildren in Dsaghgatsor, Armenia, on July 23, Erdogan created a gigantic mountain out of a molehill! Anyone who reads the Armenian President’s actual words would find it hard to believe that they could be the cause of Erdogan’s foaming at the mouth!
Krikor Hampartsumian, a Shahumian Middle School student from the Ararat Region, asked Pres. Sarkisian: “…I would be interested in knowing whether our future would be reminiscent of a German diplomat’s description of the Batum Agreement—they gave us enough room to swim in Lake Sevan, but not enough room to dry up—or a future that would see the return of Western Armenia along with Ararat?”
Pres. Sarkisian calmly responded: “It all depends on you and your generation. I believe my generation fulfilled its task when it was necessary in the early 1990’s to defend a part of our homeland—Karabagh—from enemies. We were able to do that…. My point is that each generation has its own task, and it must be able to carry it out, and carry it out well. If you and your peers spare no effort, and if those older and younger than you act the same way, we will have one of the best countries in the world. Trust me, a country’s clout is not always measured by its land mass. The country should be modern, secure, and prosperous. These are prerequisites that allow a nation to sit along with prominent, strong, and reputed nations of the world. We should all fulfill our duties, be active, industrious, and engage in good deeds. And we can accomplish that very easily. It would not be the first time in our history that we achieve it. I have no doubts about it, and I don’t want you to have any doubts either. We are a nation like a Phoenix that always rises from the ashes.”
This simple exchange between the President and the young student was blown out of all proportion by Azeri and Turkish officials. Journalists in both countries tried to outdo each other in their hysterical attacks on Armenia, accusing Pres. Sarkisian of “urging Armenian youth to occupy Mt. Ararat and Eastern Turkey.” Insulting adjectives were hurled at Armenia’s President by Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan, Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinch, Minister Egemen Bagis, Pres. Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan, and the Foreign Ministries of both countries. To incite the masses, protests were organized in Turkish cities where photographs of Pres. Sarkisian were burned!
Incredibly, Erdogan had the audacity of demanding an apology from Pres. Sarkisian. The Turkish Prime Minister’s score on failed demands for apology from the leaders of Israel, Germany, and Armenia now stands at 3 to 0. Erdogan should not hold his breath waiting for Armenia to apologize! Before making such an outrageous demand, Turkish leaders must first apologize for the 1.5 million victims of the Armenian Genocide, and return all confiscated Armenian properties, including Western Armenia and Mt. Ararat, as suggested by this erudite student who deserves to be honored by Armenian organizations as a role model for the young generation.
What was the real cause of the Turkish and Azeri hysteria? Did Erdogan have a bad translator or simply bad intentions? It is probably the latter. He delivered his outrageous remarks while standing next to Pres. Aliyev during a press conference in Baku last week. Erdogan may have wanted to impress his “junior brother” with his anti-Armenian zeal and provide a false justification to the international community for not keeping his word on the Armenia-Turkey Protocols and refusing to open the border with Armenia. He may have also intended to be excessively harsh so that no Armenian official would ever again hint at territorial claims from Turkey.
This episode demonstrates that papering over historical injustices by pressuring Armenia to sign defeatist Protocols will not eliminate the deeply-held grievances of a victimized people. The Armenian-Turkish confrontation will not be resolved until justice is done to the Armenian nation. Pursuing justice is the task of all Armenians, this generation and the next. There will be no peace for Turkey without justice for Armenians!
In addition to their gratitude to the impressive youngster and Pres. Sarkisian, Armenians should be thankful to Prime Minister Erdogan for his hysterical overreaction which helped bring Armenian territorial demands to the attention of the international media and the world community!

Turkish Embassy in Washington Counsels ‘Civility’

2011-07-22T11:26:00.000-07:00

fyi
Edmond Azadian
From the Armenian Mirror Spectator

Turkish Embassy in Washington Counsels ‘Civility’
to the Armenian Mirror-Spectator

The Turks may regret that Mazamanian was left alive....

The Armenian Mirror-Spectator has received a protest letter from the Turkish Embassy, dated June 28, 2011, regarding the publication of the obituary of the late Vergin Mazmanian, who was a vocal witness of the Armenian Genocide until her last breath at the age of 103.
It seems that one statement in that obituary has touched some raw nerves at the Turkish Embassy, as evidenced in the letter, which we have reproduced here below. Rauf Alp. R. Denktas, counselor and spokesman for the embassy, finds “reckless and irresponsible” the statement in the obituary that at one point Ms. Mazmanian had been harassed by the Turkish Embassy.
It is very good news that Turkish Embassy monitors Armenian publications by paid staff members and reacts immediately to statements which contain “falsehoods” in their judgment.
Ms. Mazmanian is no longer alive. Common sense dictates that criminals have more reason to falsify facts than their victims. But, Mr. Denktas goes further to counsel us “to promote civility.” Turning back the tables, we are entitled to ask how much of that “civility” did the Turks exercise in murdering Ms. Mazmanian’s parents, along with 1.5 million Armenians? They certainly may regret that Vergin was left alive to embarrass the Turks for the rest of her long life.
Counselor Denktas goes one step further from “educating” us on “civility” and opens a more
loaded issue by stating: “It [the statement] could further frustrate efforts by Turks and Armenians to reconcile their complex relationships and reignite the open hostilities some Armenian activists committed in the past against Turks and their representatives in Massachusetts and around the US.”
The reference is transparently directed to some frustrated Armenian youth who had taken the law in their hands to avenge the Genocide through some individual acts of violence.
We stand far from endorsing terrorism in civilized countries, but on balance, what the Turks
committed against Armenians in murdering an entire nation and usurping its historic homeland, far outweighs the understandable acts of some young people.
Thirty five nations and counting have hurled the accusation at present-day Turkey. “That you
committed a genocide against Armenians and there is still blood on your hands.”
President Barack Obama himself advised Turkey, right in the Ankara Parliament, that it has
to face its dark pages of history.
Therefore, rather than dispensing “civility” advice to us, it is incumbent upon official representatives of Turkey to initiate the promotion of “civility” themselves by admitting the heinous crime that they perpetrated against Armenians.

Below is Mr. Denktas’ letter, reproduced verbatim, in tradition with the Mirror-Spectator’s
tone of civility.

The Armenian Mirror-Spectator

TURKISH EMBASSY
WASHINGTON, D.C.

June 28, 2011

Alin K. Gregorian, Editor
Armenian Mirror-Spectator
755 Mt. Auburn St.
Watertown, MA 02472-1509

Dear Mr. Gregorian,

Your June 23 obituary of Vergin Mazmanian paints a vivid picture of a w"man, bom in Amasya. Turkey, who was obviously vibrant and much-loved by her familv and community. Turkey is also saddened by her passing.

I was struck that the obituary offered an utterly false accusation that the Turkish Embassy had once harassed Ms. Mazmanian. Including this falsehood in the story is reckless and irresponsible. It could further frustrate efforts by Turks and Armenians to reconcile their complex relationship and reignite the open hostilities some Armenian activists committed in the past against Turks and their representatives in Massachusetts and around the U.S.

The best way to honor the memory of remarkable people lile Ms. Mazmanian is to promote
civility. Unfortunately, this article falls short of that principle.

Sincerely,

Rauf Alp. R. Denktas
Counselor, Spoke,sman.
Embassy of the Republic of Turkey
Washington D.C.

Turkey doubling its military size:

2011-07-11T14:29:00.000-07:00

Turkey doubling its military size:

With Prime Minister Erdogan's Islamist AK party having seized its third landslide election victory in Turkey, many throughout the international community have been watching to see what will be next on the Turkish agenda.

Now there are strong indicators in the Turkish media that Turkey is planning on literally doubling the size of its army – this coming from the nation that already has the largest army in Middle East and the second-largest army in NATO, second only to the United States. Presently, Turkey's army has over 500,000 troops. Its army is larger than France, Germany and England combined. And now Turkish media are reporting that they are planning on adding another 500,000 paid soldiers.

According to Egemen Baðýþ, a state minister and Turkey's chief EU negotiator, the purpose of the army is to kill two birds with one stone, overcoming two of Turkey's biggest challenges: terrorism and unemployment. This move would create half a million new jobs for Turkey while answering once and for all Turkey's problem with Kurdish separatist terrorists in the southeast.

Baðýþ spoke to journalists at the Turkish ambassador's office in Brussels. "The government is prepared to hire 500,000 people. ... This structural change will also contribute to our struggle with unemployment," he said.

Turkey's nation defense minister, Vedci Gonul, stated that the new army is "the future of Turkey." But he also said that the actual number of paid soldiers is yet to be determined pending a government study. According to Gonul, the creation of such a large army could take several years to complete.

A poll conducted shows that 80 percent of Turks support the idea while only 9 percent are opposed.

Despite the government's claims that the purpose of the army would be to address terrorism, skepticism concerning such a massive force is well-deserved. First of all, creating an army this size merely to address Turkey's terrorism problem, primarily from the PKK, a Kurdish separatist group in the southeast, would be like trying to kill an ant using a nuclear warhead. Secondly, such a move certainly will only reinforce the concerns of those who believe that Turkey has broad-ranging neo-Ottoman regional aspirations.

The silence of the Western media has been surprising. Imagine Israel announcing an expansion of its forces by 500,000 men to address its Palestinian terrorism problem. Yet the Western media has yet to comment regarding Turkey's grandiose plans.

Such an expansion would be particularly concerning in light of the Turkish government's recent swing toward Islamist political alliances. They have worked to significantly reinforce strategic alliances with both Iran and Syria, two of the most well-established state sponsors of terrorism globally, while significantly cooling its relationship with Israel and the United States. Despite this, the Obama administration this past January, sold the Turkish Air Force 100 F-35 Lightning II fighter jets. Turkey already manufactures it's own F-16s.

It is also essential to once again remind ourselves of the recent accomplishments of the Islamist AK party under Prime Minister Erdogan's leadership. In just the past several years, the AK party has edged ever closer to establishing a full-blown dictatorship, all in the name of democracy. Since 2002, they have managed to accomplish the following:

•occupy the presidency;
•occupy the seat of prime minister;
•gain a large majority of seats in the parliament;
•fill the judiciary with Islamist-leaning judges;
•behead the top echelons of the military;
•infiltrate the police force (over 70 percent of officers are members the Islamist Gulen movement);
•intimidate and imprison Turkish journalists (there are more Turkish journalists in prison than any other nation in the world – more than China or Iran).

The nation's leadership is now working toward a bill authorizing them to rewrite the Turkish Constitution, giving them far more sweeping powers over the military and judiciary.

In last month's victory speech, Prime Minister Erdogan couldn't have made his regional ambitions any clearer:

"Believe me, Sarajevo won today as much as Istanbul, Beirut won as much as Izmir, Damascus won as much as Ankara, Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin, the West Bank, Jerusalem won as much as Diyarbakir."

In a follow up commentary piece, J.E. Dyer, a retired U.S. Naval intelligence officer asked how the world would take it if Nicolas Sarkozy had proclaimed that a victory for him was a victory for Moscow as much as Paris, for Washington as much as Lyon, for Ankara as much as Marseilles. Dyer then very appropriately reminded us that such comments are, "imperialist at worst, absurdly arrogant at best – to speak of your electoral victories as conferring benefits on foreign humanity – especially on those once occupied by your nation in its days of empire."

For years, several others and I have been warning of Turkey's neo-Ottoman dreams and regional ambitions. And for just as many years, the compliant left-wing media has mocked the notion. Within the next several years, with doubling of the Turkish army, it appears as though there will be 500,000 more reasons to worry about Turkey's regional ascension.

Vatican to co-publish a book on Armenian Genocide

2011-07-06T10:04:00.000-07:00

Vatican to co-publish a book on Armenian Genocide

July 6, 2011 - 10:04 AMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - The Vatican will co-publish a book with documents and information about the Armenian Genocide.
According to Agenzia Giornalistica Italia, the papers are from the Vatican Secret Archives, and, to quote Monsignor Sergio Pagano, the clergyman who runs the archives, “they make me feel ashamed to be a man. Without faith, they’d make me see only darkness.”
Pagano’s announcement was made during the presentation of the “Lux in Arcane” exhibition, which opens next February in Rome to show one of the world’s most important collections of papers, with documents from the 8th century to the 20th century. Lined-up, they would cover 85 kilometers.
With regards to the Armenian Genocide, “when I read documents about the torture practices used by the Turks against the Armenians, I feel an irrepressible sense of pain and horror,” Pagano said.
According to the prefect, some of the papers describe how Turkish soldiers “bet and played dice to guess the sex of a child before stabbing him or her with a bayonet after extracting them out of the womb.”
During the presentation, Pagano, the prefect of the Vatican Secret Archives, also announced that within two or three years, the papers concerning World War II and the pontificate of Pius XII will be ready. The current pope will then be able to decide whether to release them to the public, as many expect, or not.
The exhibition will also present less traumatic but equally relevant historic documents, including the Letter of the Peers of England to Clement VII on the matrimonial cause of Henry VIII (1530), the codex of the trial of Galileo Galilei (1616-1633), the Letter of Empress Helena of China on silk and the Letter of American Indians to Leo XIII on birch bark.

Azeri letter to UN: Baku lays its fault at Armenia's door

2011-07-02T11:03:00.000-07:00

Azeri letter to UN: Baku lays its fault at Armenia's door

July 2, 2011 - 19:07 AMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - Ambassador Agshin Mehdiyev, Permanent Representative of Azerbaijan to the UN, has submitted neither more nor less than a 10-page letter to the UN Secretary-General and the Security Council.
In his letter, Mehdiev attempted to shift Azerbaijan's fault for permanent ceasefire violations on Armenia and Karabakh. However, Mehdiyev failed to mention that it's Azeri military units that permanently violate ceasefire, leaving soldiers and peaceful inhabitants dead and injured. For example, over the last week, about 200 instances of ceasefire violation by the Azerbaijani armed forces were reported, with 900 shots fired.
Moreover, it’s no secret who the Deauville statement of OSCE MG co-chairs on unacceptability of the use of force was addressed to, warning that the international community will strictly condemn any use of force.
Azeri representative is also accusing Armenia of ''having the sole purpose of misleading the international community'' of the main issue. One may infer the main issue to be a Karabakh conflict settlement, with Azeri authorities taking every effort to prevent it, lest they might lose their authority. A failure of Kazan meeting was an illustration of Azerbaijan's stalling for time. While many structures and organisations predicted a conclusive document to be signed at the meeting, Baku advanced a dozen of new suggestions reducing urges and demands of superpowers to nothing.
Another subject of complaint in Mehdiyev's letter was that of ''Karabakh being a historic part of Azerbaijan.'' ''From ancient times up to now, Karabakh was an inalienable part of Azerbaijan,'' the letter says, bearing no mention of the fact that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Azerbaijan announced itself as a legal successor to Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, but not to Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic.
Specifically, Article 2 of Constitutional Act of Azerbaijan Republic on independent statehood of Azerbaijan Republic says, “Azerbaijan Republic is a legal successor of the Azerbaijan Republic dating back to the period of May 28,1918 – April 28, 1920.” Nagorno Karabakh, with 94% of Armenian population, by the decision of the Caucasus Bureau was included in Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic in a capacity of autonomy in 1921. Which means Karabakh has no bearing on modern Azerbaijan.
Thus, Mehdiyev's letter to UN suggests official Baku's continued attempts to misinform both Azerbaijani people and the international community, so as to disallow a rapid settlement of Karabakh issue, which brings Azeri authorities some certainty of future. However it's harldy likely for Azerbaijan to keep misleadign the international community without having to bear the consequences.

Distinguished Jewelers Speak at Diocese

2011-06-28T12:57:00.000-07:00

Three prominent Armenian jewelers spoke about their trade and the jewelry industry on Wed., March 10 at the Armenian Diocese in New York. Hosted by the Zohrab Center and the Armenian Network of New York, this unique event allowed participants to get an inside look into the jewelry industry and how it pertains to Armenians, who are leading forces in the field.

In the jewelry business since the age of 10, Hirant Gulian, who has a degree in accounting from Queens College, said Armenian jewelers have been active in the industry in many different ways.
“We have talent, knowledge, and creativity, and this is why we have survived,” said Gulian, who immigrated to the U.S. from Turkey when he was 18. He also noted that the owner of the largest jewelry manufacturer in the world is an Armenian from Moscow by the name of Gagik Gevorkyan, the president of Estet Jewelry. Gevorkyan, who employs 1,000, close to half of which are Armenian, donated a pure gold croisier (pastoral staff) to His Holiness Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians, which is worth $1.5 million.
Gulian also said that jewelers have to expand on their knowledge of the industry. “You have to learn what’s around you and what the market is. It’s important to educate yourself within the industry so you can use your talent and advance.”
Born and raised in Damascus, Syria, Hagop Baghdadlian moved to the U.S. in 1977 and started his own business as a diamond dealer. He was president of Cora International, which specializes in diamond manufacturing, from 2003-09. For the past seven years Baghdadlian has served as an executive board member of the International Armenian Jewelers Association and executive member in the Armenian Jewelers Association for the East Coast.
Baghdadlian talked about the four C’s of diamond quality: clarity, cut, color, and carat. He said that diamonds are a $140 billion industry and also discussed the origin of the rough diamond—a diamond which has not yet been cut—which comes mainly from Africa, Brazil, and Australia. In 2005, Baghdadlian and his partner Ara Arslanian purchased a 570 carat diamond and manufactured it, selling it for $36 million to Dr. Stanley Ho, who named it the “Star of Macau Diamond.” According to the Gemological Institute of America (GIA), the 218 carat, “internally flawless” diamond is the largest of its kind in the world.
Berge Abajian, the founder, CEO, and designer for Bergio International, was born in Lebanon and immigrated to the U.S. in 1976. An aspiring entrepreneur, he attended Fairleigh Dickinson University as a business administration major, receiving his bachelor of science degree in 1982. Imbued with the spirit of adventure, he traveled to Brazil, where he became fascinated with the unusual stones that would ultimately become his specialty—yellow and pink colored (“fancy”) diamonds. He started his own company in 1995.
Abajian talked about his experiences in the jewelry industry. “I was always looking outside of the box and wanted to be in the business of jewelry.” In November 2009, he became the first Armenian jeweler to go public, when Bergio International became a publicly traded company under the symbol BRGO.
“I want Armenians in the jewelry business to get involved in the financial aspect of the jewelry industry,” said Abajian, who has served as president of the Armenian Jewelers Association. “My dream is to get Armenians to think out of the box and get off the bench because we are leaders in this industry.”
A question and answer session followed in which the topics of the future of Armenian jewelers was discussed. Paul Minoyan, the current president of the Armenian Jewelers Association, said it’s important to bring Armenian jewelers together on both a regional and international level. “The idea of the Armenian Jewelers Association is to help jewelers. We can be stronger and more powerful together,” said Minoyan, who is a pearl wholesaler.
A wine and cheese reception followed the event, during which attendants had the opportunity to talk to the speakers.
“It was inspiring to see such successful Armenian jewelers and how they have left their mark on the jewelry industry in the U.S. and also around the world,” said Levon Vrtanesyan, a student at NYU’s Stern School of Business.
Another attendee, Karen Minasian, said, “The speakers’ inspiring stories really epitomized the tireless efforts, determined spirit, and resourcefulness which contributed to their rise and success as Armenian immigrants, and their encouraging words to the audience to strive for the same levels of accomplishment were particularly meaningful.”

WEBSITE QGOLD.COM

ACCT # 23547 USER ID: guest PASSWORD: top

RAFI TOPALIAN ,OWNER............"THE SINGING JEWELER"

TOP CUSTOM JEWELERS INC.
"YOUR TOP DIAMOND AND GOLD SOURCE"

HILLTOP PLAZA #4
143 TROY-SCHENECTADY ROAD
WATERVLIET NEWYORK 12189

WORK: 518-272-2000
CELL : 518-810-5018

Rhode Island Governor signs a law on genocide education

2011-06-23T10:34:00.000-07:00

Rhode Island Governor signs a law on genocide education
Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee signed a new law encouraging state department on education to help local schools to teach students about genocide, which is supposed to be a part of civil education, “wpri.com” website writes.
The legislation, signed into law Wednesday by Chafee, directs state education officials to create online curricular materials dealing with past genocides.
“Stamfordadvocate.com” writes the material will be designed to help local middle and high schools create lesson plans on the Holocaust and genocides in Armenia, Cambodia, Iraq, Rwanda and Darfur.
The bill was sponsored by state Rep. Anastasia Williams, a Providence Democrat, and state Sen. Joshua Miller, a Cranston Democrat.
Source: Panorama.am

Armenian Church Slams Georgian Patriarch

2011-06-22T14:46:00.000-07:00

IN ENGLISH
Armenian Church Slams Georgian Patriarch
Armenia - High-level representatives of the Armenian Apostolic Church hold a news conference in Echmiadzin, 21Jun2011.
21.06.2011
Karine Simonian
The Armenian Apostolic Church hit out at Georgia’s Catholicos-Patriarch Ilia II on Tuesday for making what it called “inappropriate” references to its supreme head, Catholicos Garegin II, just days after his visit to Georgia.

Speaking in Tbilisi’s St. Trinity Cathedral on Sunday, Ilia attributed the failure of the two pontiffs to settle disputes between their churches to Garegin’s perceived young age.

“Garegin is young and apparently lacks experience,” the 78-year-old head of the Georgian Orthodox Church was reported to say. “He is intelligent but wants to do things quickly, which will not work. I told him that I have a 30-year experience and that staying calm is the best thing.”

Senior clerics at the Armenian Church’s Mother See in Echmiadzin, a town 20 kilometers south of Yerevan, denounced these remarks.

“Considering the logic of the ethics of relations between church heads, it is inappropriate to make such statements,” said Bishop Arshak Khachatrian, the Mother See chancellor. “I will refrain from making further comments.”

Georgia -- Catholicos of All Armenians Garegin II (R) and Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia Ilia II meet in Tbilisi, 11Jun2011
The bitter exchange highlights lingering tensions between the two churches that center on ownership of Christian worship sites located in Georgia and Armenia. Garegin, who has headed the Armenian Church 1999 and will turn 60 in August, hoped to ease those tensions when he began a weeklong visit to Georgia on June 10. But he and Ilia failed to reach any concrete agreements.

Ilia insisted last week that the Armenian Church should gain official recognition in Georgia only if the Georgian Church is granted the same status in Armenia. He also effectively dismissed Armenian demands for the unconditional return of six mostly derelict churches in and outside Tbilisi that used to belong to Echmiadzin. He said they should be repaired only “in case of the restoration of Georgian churches in Armenia.”

The Georgian patriarch referred to several medieval and mostly abandoned churches located in Armenia’s northern Lori province. The Armenian Church disputes Georgian claims to these churches, saying that they were built and always used by Armenian adherents of the Greek Orthodox denomination.

Archbishop Yeznik Petrosian, another senior Echmiadzin cleric, claimed that the Georgian side is exploiting the uncertain status of the Lori churches as a bargaining chip in the long-running negotiations on Armenian religious heritage in Georgia. “This is an artificially created situation,” he said at a joint news conference with Bishop Khachatrian.

“My impression is that there is too much intolerance and manifestations of extremism in the Georgian Church,” Khachatrian charged for his part. “I cannot explain the reasons for that.”

Resolutions Demanding Return of Confiscated Churches, Genocide Recognition to be Introduced

2011-06-14T14:18:00.000-07:00

By: Weekly Staff

WASHINGTON—A bipartisan group of U.S. legislators are set to introduce two resolutions in support of a truthful and just resolution of the Armenian Genocide, including a new measure specifically pressing Turkey to fully respect the rights of Christians to practice their faith in freedom, including through the rightful return of confiscated churches to Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, Pontians, Syriacs and other Christians communities, reported the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

The Return of Churches resolution, spearheaded by senior House Foreign Affairs Committee member Ed Royce (R-Calif.) and the panel’s Ranking Democrat Howard Berman (D-Calif.), calls upon the government of Turkey to honor its international obligations to end all forms of religious persecution and to protect the rights and religious freedoms of Christians. The measure specifically calls upon Turkey to return confiscated Christian church properties.
The Armenian Genocide Resolution, introduced by Congressmen Robert Dold (R-Ill.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), calls upon the President to recognize the Armenian Genocide and encourages the U.S. government to apply the lessons of this tragedy to prevent future crimes against humanity. This measure, identical to H.Res.252 during the previous session of Congress, has been adopted by the Foreign Affairs Committee four times over the past eleven years, but has yet to reach the floor for an up-or-down vote of the full U.S. House of Representatives.
“We want to thank Congressmen Royce, Berman, Dold, and Schiff for their leadership in working toward a truthful and just resolution of the Armenian Genocide,” said ANCA chairman Ken Hachikian.
Commenting specifically on the measure safeguarding Christian heritage introduced by Reps. Royce and Berman, Hachikian noted: “The respect for Christian rights legislation reflects and reaffirms the long and proud history of principled leadership by the U.S. Congress in protecting religious freedom abroad—for Christians and for peoples of all faiths. In calling upon Turkey to end restrictions on freedom of worship and restore the rights of Christians to their stolen places of worship, the Congress will, with the full moral authority of the American people, add its voice to the international effort to morally defend and materially protect the rights and religious freedoms of Christians inside Turkey’s present-day borders.”
This religious freedom measure represents an effort to highlight, confront, and eventually reverse decades of official Turkish policy of destroying Christian church properties, desecrating holy sites, discriminating against Christian communities, and denying of the right of Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Pontians, Arameans (Syriacs), and others to practice their faith in freedom. The measure is consistent with many other resolutions adopted by the U.S. House over the past several decades defending religious freedom and protecting sacred sites and places of worship, as well as with the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 and America’s longstanding leadership in supporting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Reps. Royce and Berman Speak out on Turkey’s Confiscation of Churches; Crackdown on Religious Freedom
Return of Churches resolution lead sponsors Reps. Ed Royce and Howard Berman speak out on the importance of immediate action to address Turkey’s repression of its religious minorities and the confiscation of churches.

Source on Capitol Hill report that both resolution are supported by a broad bi-partisan group of original cosponsors.
“Conditions in Turkey have deteriorated with violent hate crimes increasingly linked to religion,” explained Rep. Royce. “My resolution urges Turkey to protect its vulnerable religious minorities. They should be able to freely practice, worship and study their faith without fear of discrimination or violence. We expect Turkey to make good on its obligation to provide this protection.”
Rep. Berman concurred, noting, “By expropriating church properties, harassing worshippers, and refusing to grant full legal status to some Christian groups, Turkey has failed to fulfill its obligation as a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which requires ‘freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.’ Turkey must end its deeply disturbing practice of religious discrimination, cease all restrictions on gatherings for religious prayer and education, and return stolen church property.”
The territory of present-day Turkey, home to many of the most important centers of early Christianity—most notably Nicaea, Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Constantinople—contains, to this day, a rich legacy of Christian heritage, including thousands of religious sites and properties. Source on Capitol Hill report that both measures are supported by a broad bi-partisan group of original cosponsors.
To learn more about the Return of Christian Churches Resolution and to ask your U.S. Representatives to cosponsor this measure, visit: www.anca.org/return
To learn more about the Armenian Genocide Resolution and to ask your U.S. Representatives to cosponsor this genocide prevention measure, visit: www.anca.org/endthegagrule

Until recently, Israel chose to ignore the genocide in the Ottoman empire.

2011-05-28T10:19:00.000-07:00

Armenians, the Jews and Israel
By S. H. ROLEF The Jerusalem Post
Until recently, Israel chose to ignore the genocide in the Ottoman empire.

In 1915-16, during World War I, the Turks were responsible for the massacre of as many as 1.5 million Armenian inhabitants of the Ottoman Empire. Among the first to warn about the nature and scope of the atrocity was Aaron Aaronsohn – the renowned agronomist from Zichron Ya’acov who established the Nili spy ring, which in the course of the war collected information about Ottoman military movements and other strategic issues and passed it on to the British authorities.
Several of Aaronsohn’s relatives and colleagues actually witnessed the bloody manifestations of the massacre. In November 1916, Aaronsohn sent the British authorities a memorandum entitled “Pro Armenia,” in which he described the atrocities.
The previous month, he had sent a long letter to Judge Julian Mack – a leading American Zionist – in which he tried to convince him to adopt a pro-British position, inter alia describing the massacre of the Armenians and claiming that the Ottoman policy against both the Armenians and the Jews (who he feared might suffer a similar plight) had “made in Germany” written all over it. The Ottoman Empire, it may be recalled, was an ally of Germany in the war, and at the time Aaronsohn was writing, many Jews held pro-German or neutral positions. The Jewish yishuv in Palestine, the Zionist Organization and the State of Israel since 1948 could not claim ignorance of what happened to the Armenians.
And yet until recently, Israel has chosen to ignore the event, with numerous excuses, each of which is shameful in its own right.
The first is that since Turkey denies that a systematic massacre of Armenians ever took place, as well as minimizing the numbers involved (a number that justifies the term genocide), and since for years Israel regarded Turkey as a strategic ally – one of the few Muslim states it could regard as such – Israel would do well not to “let sleeping dogs lie.”
The fact that other states, including the US, adopted a similar policy seemed to justify Israel’s position.
The second excuse was that referring to the massacre of the Armenians as genocide might belittle the enormity of the Holocaust – an Israeli attitude that applies to other cases of genocide as well (and is, in my opinion, not just unjustified, but disgraceful). The Jewish Holocaust – in terms of both its circumstances and its manifestations – is without doubt unique. Nevertheless, this does not justify our belittling or ignoring the horrors that have occurred to other peoples.
The third excuse is that since we do not like others criticizing our treatment of the Palestinians, we should avoid criticizing other states for the way they treat their minorities. This excuse is simply foolish, and may easily boomerang, because no matter how problematic our record of treating our Arab citizens (and the Palestinians in general) might be, it bears no resemblance to the sorts of acts we are talking about. On the contrary, given the nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict, our record – though certainly not free of blemish – cannot be described as involving massacres or acts of genocide at all, as some, including the Turks, can. The Turks are the first who should be confronted with the difference, and it is a shame that only now, when Israel’s relations with Turkey have deteriorated to unprecedented levels due to unbridled Turkish attacks, Israel has finally decided to have its public say on the Armenian genocide.
For years, various MKs from Meretz have tried to get the Knesset to hold a public debate on the subject. Until last week, the only sort of debate to which the Foreign Ministry, speaking in the name of the government, would consent was one in the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, whose proceedings are confidential and whose minutes are not published.
On May 18, the plenum finally decided, following a motion brought forth by MK Zehava Gal-On, to hold an open debate on the subject in the Education, Culture and Sports Committee – the proceedings of which are public, with full minutes published on the Knesset website.
No one opposed the subject’s being referred to the committee, and all the speakers, from Right and Left, religious and secular, spoke in its favor. All one can say is: “better late than never,” but what a shame it took so long.
The writer is a former Knesset employee.=

Postal Stamp for Genocide Cenntenial

2011-05-28T10:12:00.001-07:00

With the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide coming up in the year 2015, I thought it would be appropriate for all Armenian organizations and church groups to unite in getting the US Postal Service to issue a US commemorative stamp on the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923.
The US Postal Service usually requires at least two to three years notice to issue a commemorative stamp.
The United Nations Postal System should also be notified and possibly do a joint issue with the Republic of Armenia. An appropriate design should be forwarded with possibly a picture of Mt. Ararat in the background with the inscription: “The First Genocide of the 20th Century—1915 Genocide of the Armenian Nation.”
It also could be suggested to have it in a form of a souvenir sheet instead of a stamp.
Stephen T. DulgarianChelmsford, Mass.

Woodrow Wilson’s Complete Arbitral Award to be Released Monday

2011-05-27T11:31:00.000-07:00

YEREVAN—President Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award, which defined the borders between Armenia and Turkey, has been published in full and will be released on Monday, announced Ara Papian, the director of the Modus Vivendi Center, which has been compiling the more than 240-page document.
“On November 22, 1920, Woodrow Wilson signed the Arbitral Award, which defined the border between Armenia and Turkey. However, that important document was kept secret for a long time,” added Papian during a press conference to announce the unveiling.
Papian has managed to restore the 245-page document and the attached maps, which clearly depict that not only Nagorno Karabakh, but also Lower Karabakh belongs to Armenia as delineated by President Wilson.
The never-before-published compilation will appear in two volumes. An Armenian translation is already in the works and will be available in two years.
Papian said that this comprehensive compilation will allow for the document to be presented to international legal experts and its conclusion be applied the International Court for a ruling on the matter.
On April 23, Papian was the keynote speaker at an Armenian Genocide commemoration vigil at the Montebello Martyrs’ Monument, organized by the San Gabriel Valley Armenian National Committee chapter.
“Armenian territorial rights are based upon several international instruments. The most important of them is the Arbitral Award by the United States President Woodrow Wilson, done on November 22, 1920, which by a binding decision and conclusively defined the boundary between Armenia and Turkey,” Papian said in his presentation.
“The main basis for the lawful solution of long-standing Armenian- Turkish problem are not the infamous Armenian-Turkish protocols, but the Arbitral Award, done over 90 years ago in the capital city of this country by the 28th President of the United States of America Woodrow Thomas Wilson,” added Papian.

When Telling the Truth is a Firing Offense (and Supporting Genocide Denial gets You Promoted)

2011-05-25T14:28:00.000-07:00

By: Aram Hamparian

So, what exactly are the rules governing the U.S. government’s gag rule prohibiting mention of the Armenian Genocide?
What precisely are the details and dictates of our own American version of Turkey’s Article 301?

A recently released cable reveals that Matt Bryza met with senior Turkish government official in March of 2004 and discussed the defeat of the Armenian Genocide Resolution.
President Obama, as a Senator, called President Bush’s refusal to recognize the Armenian Genocide “inexcusable,” and sharply criticized Secretary of State Rice for recalling Ambassador John Evans from Yerevan for speaking honestly about this genocidal atrocity. Yet President Obama today presides over a government that, by all accounts, would fire any of its diplomats who told the truth about this crime, by for example reading aloud the President’s own campaign statements promising to recognize the Armenian Genocide.
Consider the rich and profoundly painful irony: President Obama came into office on a bold pledge of truth-telling, but once in the White House—having pocketed the votes of the Armenian American community in a series of tightly contested primary races—turned his back on his promise, effectively threatening to fire any diplomat or other government employee who actually lived up to his own campaign commitment.
Adding to the dramatic disconnect between this and past Administrations’ words and actions on the Armenian Genocide is the new revelation (via Wikileaks) that, despite all the hollow rhetoric about U.S. leaders pressing Turkey to genuinely accept the truth of its own history, behind closed doors, State Department officials are secretly sharing ideas with the Turkish government about how to most effectively prevent the elected representatives of the American people from speaking openly and honestly about this human rights issue. A recently released cable reveals that Matt Bryza—who was then the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and has since been given a recess appointment as Ambassador to Azerbaijan—met with senior Turkish government official in March of 2004 and discussed the defeat of the Armenian Genocide Resolution. Click here for the link to a story on this morally shocking, but—sadly—not very surprising revelation:
Which brings us back to the question: What exactly are the rules?
Who can get fired for mentioning the Armenian Genocide? An Ambassador, a lower level State Department employee, a top White House political or policy aide, or a simple entry-level administrative clerk? What about a contract employee?
What about an Armenian national who works for the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan? Would he or she be obliged to refrain from a truthful accounting of their own history?
Would a public reading by human rights advocate Samantha Power, who now works for the National Security Council, of her Pulitzer Prize-winning book, A Problem from Hell, be a firing offense?
Would it be cause for termination for an Administration official to acknowledge that the Armenian Genocide is a fact, during a private meeting with Armenian Americans (as dozens have done in meetings I’ve attended)?
What about officials writing honestly about the Armenian Genocide in internal government memos and cables? What happens if Wikileaks makes them public?
Would a Facebook or Twitter post of the term “Armenian Genocide” get an Administration official fired? What if it’s on their own time? What if they don’t work for the Department of State, but the Department of Agriculture?
The questions go on and on, getting more and more ridiculous, all pointing to the inevitable conclusion that—for our self-respect as Americans, as much as for anybody else—we must, at long last, reject Turkey’s shameful veto on U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

Sassounian: Council of Europe not Deceived by Erdogan’s Double-Talk

2011-05-24T14:37:00.000-07:00

By: Harut Sassounian

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan made an embarrassing appearance before the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) last month.
Erdogan was invited to the podium after lavish praise by Mevlut Cavusoglu, who was acting more like a Turkish lobbyist than president of PACE. Cavusoglu is a founding member of the ruling AKP and member of the Turkish Parliament.
In his lengthy speech, the prime minister shamelessly lectured European parliamentarians about democracy and freedom. Given his country’s dismal human rights record, Erdogan should not have raised such issues! Claiming that Turkey’s accession was “vital to the European Union,” he described as “foolish” those who opposed Turkey’s EU membership “for populist or artificial reasons.”
Making a series of dubious and inflated claims about his government’s accomplishments, Erdogan asserted: “Turkey has achieved historic reforms, especially in the area of democratization… The government has also worked to lift restrictions on freedom. Freedoms have been strengthened in the last decade, and many issues are now discussed freely that could not have been discussed a decade ago. There is zero tolerance of torture, and barriers to freedom of expression have been removed. Some have alleged that there are restrictions on freedom of expression, but this is wrong… The press is free, and freely criticizes anyone and everyone… In Turkey, 26 journalists have been detained or arrested because they are criminals, not because they are journalists.”
These incredible words are uttered by a prime minister who does not hesitate to sue newspapers simply for publishing a cartoon likeness of him.
When Erdogan finished his speech, Cavusoglu shielded him from further embarrassment by allowing only a handful of parliamentarians to ask 30-second questions.
Erdogan was displeased when Swiss Parliamentarian Andreas Gross reminded him about “the dark side of Turkish history,” asking him why Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk was being persecuted for exercising his right to free speech.
In response to Parliamentarian Anne Brasseur’s (Luxembourg) question about censorship in Turkey, Erdogan claimed that the Turkish “judiciary is independent and is entitled to conduct its investigations as it saw fit.”
Armen Rustamyan, the chairman of the Armenian Parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee, asked Erdogan what the point was of signing the Armenia-Turkey protocols if Turkey is not going to open its border with Armenia until the Karabagh (Artsakh) conflict is resolved. The prime minister responded that Turkey could not let Armenia “usurp the rights of Azerbaijan” and would indeed keep the border closed until the Karabagh issue is resolved.
Erdogan then made a series of outlandish statements. He inadvertently reminded his European audience of the Turkish deportations of Armenians during the 1915 genocide by stating that even though Turkey could, it would not deport the 40,000 undocumented Armenian workers currently in the country. He also complained that Armenia is not sufficiently pressuring its diaspora. The prime minister seems to have forgotten that millions of Turks living illegally in Europe can also be deported.
Erdogan also carefully avoided responding to Rustamyan’s question about his personal order to dismantle the “Armenian-Turkish Friendship Statue” in Kars.
The most embarrassing part of the PACE meeting was Erdogan’s rude answer to French Parliamentarian Muriel Marland-Militello, who asked about the protection of religious minorities in Turkey. Erdogan insulted her by pointing out that in the Turkish language, an ignorant person is described as someone from France, which she clearly happens to be. He invited her to Turkey, so she could learn about his country. To Erdogan’s chagrin, Marland-Militello turned out to know much more about Turkey’s minorities than the prime minister himself. As she disclosed during a subsequent press conference, Marland-Militello is a descendant of an Armenian family that escaped from Turkey during the genocide!
Erdogan also falsely claimed that the Armenian Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar Island is “now open for worship.” The fact is that the Turkish government converted the church into a state museum, allowing Divine Liturgy to be performed there only once.
Another member of PACE, Naira Zohrabyan, having been blocked by Cavusoglu from asking a question, chased Erdogan down the corridor after the session and pushed her way past his bodyguards to hand him a photo album of murdered Armenian children during the genocide.
While the prime minister may easily impress his devout followers at home, he completely embarrassed himself during his appearance at PACE in Strasbourg. In view of his blatantly deceptive statements, one would hope that Erdogan appears more frequently in front of European audiences, to help convince them that Turkey does not belong in Europe.

90% of Israeli citizens stand for Armenian Genocide recognition

2011-05-24T11:02:00.000-07:00

90% of Israeli citizens stand for Armenian Genocide recognition
May 24, 2011 16:38
Ninety percent of Israeli citizens speak for recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Tel-Aviv.
News.co.il website conducted a survey among Israeli citizens to reveal whether the country should recognize the Armenian Genocide. A total of 1886 respondents out of 2000 said Armenian Genocide should be recognized.
Last week Committee on Education, Culture and Sports of the Israeli Knesset accepted the demand to discuss the Armenian Genocide recognition in the parliament.
Meanwhile, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said there is no chance that Israel will recognize the Armenian Genocide.
“We cannot afford damaging relations with our main strategic partner Azerbaijan because of some controversial historical issues relating to the events which happened a century ago,” IzRus website quotes Ayalon.
Knesset’s education committee is headed by Alex Miller, member of Israel is Our Home parliamentary group and Ayalon’s party fellow.
News from Armenia - NEWS.am

Gunaysu: Snapshots from the Fragmented Landscape of Turkey

2011-05-19T12:15:00.000-07:00

By: Ayse Gunaysu

This time my column will have no structural integrity. It will be fragmented just like life itself and just like my thoughts wandering around, coming and going at unexpected times, intertwined to form strange, disconnected images in my mind, culminating in absurd dreams at night.

Sevag Sahin Balikci

Yesterday, on the 13th of May, a very young, very intelligent, bright-eyed, energetic, and warm-hearted journalist from Yerevan interviewed me. While talking, I suddenly found myself wishing I had a daughter like her. She asked me questions about the prospects of normalization between Turkey and Armenia. I told her what I think very briefly: How can anyone believe Turkey really wants friendly relations with Armenia while it, at the same time, displays such an unreservedly aggressive denial of the genocide (I mean, not just saying “We didn’t do it,” but saying “They deserved it”)? Official statements about taking steps for good relations with Armenia were all part of a marketing campaign to sell the “Turkey” brand to the world, as a country evolving into a more democratic system, eliminating its taboos, and seeking good relations with its neighbors. Among thousands, I gave only one very recent example.
That same day, journalist Ozgur Gundem reported how in Diyarbakir’s Dicle University, the history exam included the question: “The Ottoman state did not commit Armenian genocide. Deportations took place on the suggestion of Germany because of the treachery of Armenians who stabbed the Ottoman army in the back. During deportations some of them died of hunger, diseases, and cold weather. True or False?” Gundem called the professor who had prepared the exam question, and the latter confirmed he had prepared it knowingly, to ensure that his students learned the truth and were not mislead by unfounded allegations.[1] This is the country that is supposedly taking steps towards good relations with Armenia.
While we sat and talked in Uskudar by the sea, convoys of political parties were campaigning for the upcoming general elections with their unbearably high-volume songs and slogans filling the air, making it difficult for us to hear each other. At the same time, mass arrests were happening in the cities against Kurdish students, activists, and their supporters; military operations were intensifying in the Kurdistan mountains, with an unprecedented number of Kurds joining the funerals of guerillas; and nationalist mobs were attacking the Kurds’ Peace and Democracy Party offices in the west before the eyes of security forces.
That same day, on the 13th of May, before I met the young journalist, an e-mail had reminded me that it was also the day when Armenak Bakirciyan, the legendary guerilla leader of one of the oldest Marxist-Leninist armed movements in Turkey, was shot dead in an ambush by the military in Elazig (the old Armenian city of Harpert) in 1980.
Armenak, the son of an Armenian family from Diyarbakir, was named after Armenak Ghazarian, popularly known as Hrayr Tjhokhk, one of the heroes of the second Sasun resistance in 1904. More than a century later and carrying his name, Armenak Bakirciyan was Hrant Dink’s close friend at the Surp Hac Tibrevank Armenian School in Uskudar. He and Hrant Dink, together with other schoolmates, worked selflessly to find Armenian children in the remote villages of Anatolia, the grandchildren of genocide survivors who were unable to learn their mother tongue, and bring them to Istanbul to attend Armenian schools, where they could study in their own language. Some of these volunteer teachers of the Armenian language and culture joined the armed revolutionary organization TKP/ML-TIKKO in Turkey, waging an armed struggle, mainly in the southeast of Turkey, especially Dersim. Armenak was one of them, like Hayrabet Hancer, Nubar Yalimyan, and Manuel Demir, hiding in the mountains and punishing merciless army officers who made life hell to the villagers with arbitrary arrests and beatings in the village squares and market places, terrorizing them in every way. Armenak became a hero in the eyes of the local Kurds. He was caught wounded in a raid to the house he was hiding in and taken to prison in Izmir. Two years after his arrest, he managed to escape with the help of his comrades, fleeing to the mountains once again. On May 13, 1980, he was shot dead in an ambush in Elazig, Karakocan. The military, refusing to return his body to his family, buried him in the cemetery of the nameless. His comrades managed to secretly take his dead body out and bury him in the village of Farach, in the Mezgert (Mazgirt) District of Dersim to fulfill his last wish. During the small ceremony, the imam—in fact a secret Armenian—read lines from a poem written for Armenak: “Sing songs to me Armenak! / Let the darkness fall apart with your melody / Let your voice wake up mountains from sleep / And let life keep going with you.”
Armenak, despite his admirers and followers for more than 30 years now, was just as lonely as the others that Armenian Weekly contributors Talin Suciyan and Ayda Erbal referred to in their recent article “One Hundred Years of Abandonment.”[2] The armed illegal organization he joined as an Armenian communist was the most radical movement of its time, refusing to abide by the laws of the Republic of Turkey and waging an armed struggle against its security forces. However, the movement was also part of Turkish Marxism-Leninism, according to which Turkey’s historical backwardness was due to imperialism (that evil responsible for everything awful in Turkey) and not the Armenian Genocide which, alongside the ethnic cleansing of the Greeks, fatally destroyed the newly developing commercial bourgeoisie and the flourishing economic infrastructure, with its entire system of production and trade relations, thus putting the country 100 years back economically as well. Directing one’s anger to another, to a common enemy, to the wicked imperialism, rather than directing it to one’s self, has always been much more convenient and relieving.
Thirty years after Armenak’s death, on April 24, 2011, a young Armenian man, Sevag Sahin Balikci, not fighting against the Turkish Army—on the contrary, doing his military service for Turkey—was shot dead on the 96th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. The military authorities issued an official statement saying that he was shot while joking around with his “close friend” in the same unit.[3] The “close friend” however, proved to be a Turkish ultra-nationalist, evident from his likes and dislikes on his Facebook page, which were soon removed.
The Human Rights Organization of Turkey has filed a complaint with the court demanding that legal action be taken against the Turkish General Staff for misleading the public and attempting to cover up the crime.
Sevag’s funeral was turned into a military show and ceremony of Turkification, with such a high number of army officers and government officials that they filled up the Surp Vartanants Church and left others in the garden, unable to go in. The soldiers loudly warned people to “step back” for the army generals to pass, and the coffin was adorned by the Turkish flag that, hours later, was held out to Sevag’s father by an army officer to kiss.
Now I take the liberty to quote in full what Talin Suciyan wrote in the May 6th issue of Agos, in response to the Turkish minister of EU affairs’ words about Sevag’s “representing the colors of Anatolia,” because nothing can express better what Armenians in Turkey were subjected to with the whole affair:
“First you made me into a tessera in your mosaic of cultures just to be able to put up with me. But soon you found that too static and resorted to the image of ebru.[4] Whether an ebru or a tessera, you all agreed that I was ‘a color of Anatolia.’ Yet, I’m neither your ebru nor your tessera, nor am I a color of your Anatolia. I know that I can acquire a color only if I’m dead and gone, mute and traceless; more colorful I become as you further destroy my history.” ‘What are you then?’ you might ask. I’m the child of the remnants of sword; the daughter of women whose bodies have been ravaged; the daughter of a people that many times have been forced to exile and whose traces have been erased throughout the last century from the land it lived on for millennia. I’m the daughter of a people that has been captivated, alienated from itself, subjugated, and whose existence as well as extermination have been denied, and temples, schools, foundations, even the hearts and minds of its members have been turned inside out. They call me a Turkish Armenian.”
“On April 24th, an Armenian died (shot dead) in barracks. The Armenians knew from their guts what that meant. But the minister for EU Affairs, Egemen Bagis, says that ‘our brother Sevag represents the colors of Anatolia.’ Bagis is right: A dead Armenian is always ‘our brother’! And yes, we do represent a color: A deep, bottomless black. An infinite black!”
“Sevag’s pitch-black eyes are staring at us; Sevag is draped in the blackest of all colors. Will you be able to look into those eyes without that gibberish about food, folk songs, and brotherhood? Don’t try to feel the suffering that has lasted a century. But you can understand the oppression we were subjected to at Sevag’s funeral ceremony; how the church has been taken away from its congregation and the funeral from its rightful owners. And just by looking at the archbishop’s post-service speech, you can understand how the Armenians remaining in Turkey have been sentenced to pay a perennial price for their survival. Don’t expect us to talk any longer, for words stand in front of us and laugh mockingly as we try harder to tell. Share in this loneliness.”[5]
The young journalist from Yerevan was looking at me sadly. She had just finished the frustrating story of her days in Turkey, contacting various people from all walks of life. “I will not come to Turkey again, I don’t want to,” she said, lowering her eyes. “Maybe I would as a journalist for professional reasons, but not as a visitor.”
“Then I will come to Yerevan,” I said, “we will meet there.”

Sarkisian: No Reconciliation Without Recognition

2011-05-17T12:32:00.000-07:00

YEREVAN—”There can be no reconciliation without genocide recognition. Those who are trying to present attempts to establish relations with Turkey as reconciliation efforts are mistaken. Real reconciliation can be achieved only after repentance,” said President Serge Sarkisian this week, when speaking to Russian media.

Serge Sarkisian
In response to whether real economic growth could take place in Armenia without normalizing relations with Turkey, Sarkisian said that Armenia would not die of starvation, adding that for the past two decades it has in fact managed to grow.
Economic growth is not the motivating factor for normalizing relations, he said, but the geography that has been fated to Armenia.
“The fact of the Armenian Genocide is indisputable and we must spare no effort for Turkey to finally recognize the genocide,” he said, according to News.am. “It is a struggle for justice and for security. It is eventually a struggle for the inadmissibility of such crimes not only in our region, but throughout the world

Kevorkian Discusses Monumental Genocide Book in NY

2011-05-17T11:55:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK (A.W.)—On May 13, Prof. Raymond Kevorkian of the University of Paris presented a lecture on his research on the Armenian Genocide at the AGBU Central Office in New York.

Kevorkian and the jacket of his groundbreaking book on the Armenian genocide.
The event, organized by the AGBU’s online publication Ararat Magazine, was held on the occasion of the English translation publication of Kevorkian’s monumental 1,000-page book titled The Armenian Genocide: A Complete History (I.B. Tauris, 2011).
Kevorkian began with an overview of his methodology, noting that in the book he zooms in on the micro-histories of Armenian villages and towns during the genocide, in order to come up with overarching conclusions on the process of the destruction of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.
Kevorkian then elaborated on what he referred to as the “two phases of the genocide.” The first, beginning with the deportations of Armenians in March 1915, resulted in the destruction of 80 percent of the deportees from the Armenian provinces, on the way to their “destination” in Syria. The Armenians who were deported from Cilicia, on the other hand, had a relatively safer trek, and almost 90 percent of them reached the areas designated for them.
The second phase of the genocide began in March 1916, and was characterized by a complete overhaul of top Ottoman officials in Syria, the emptying of the concentration camps around Aleppo, and the pushing of the survivors mainly in two directions: towards Iraq and to the south alongside the Euphrates River.
The Young Turk leadership was surprised that nearly 500,000 Armenians survived the initial phase of the deportation and destruction, Kevorkian noted. And thus a second wave of massacres began, with almost 200,000 Armenians being massacred, for example, in Der Zor.
Speaking about the Special Organization that carried out massacres across the empire, Kevorkian said Turkish historiography had led us to believe that it was the Kurds who were heavily involved in the atrocities. He noted that material on the perpetrators from the archives of the Armenian Patriarchate demonstrates that most of the leading figures of the Special organization were, in fact, Circassians.
Kevorkian also discussed the fate of what is euphemistically referred to as the “abandoned property” of the Armenians. Providing examples from different regions of the Empire, he demonstrated how the state and local Young Turk cadres confiscated and transferred Armenian wealth to Turks.
The event concluded with a lively question and answer session.
Prior to New York, Kevorkian’s book tour of North America took him to several venues in Toronto, Montreal, California, and Michigan.
Kevorkian is a lecturer at the University of Paris and director of the AGBU Nubarian library in Paris. He is the author of several book on the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and the genocide.

Azerbaijan will lose more of its lands in case of new war in Karabakh, expert says

2011-05-16T10:21:00.000-07:00

Azerbaijan will lose more of its lands in case of new war in Karabakh, expert says
May 16, 2011 - 16:47 AMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - The president of Far Centre, the centre for political and economic studies, former ambassador of Azerbaijan to Russia presented his vision of the development of events in case of a new war in Karabakh.
''Should Azeri authorities start a new war in Karabakh, the events will probably follow 2008 Russian-Georgian war scenario. Russia will interfere at once, with planes without distinguishing signs flying all over us. Azerbaijan will lose even more lands, TNs, ets. However, I do not see this happening,'' Hikmet Hajizadeh stated.
As he noted, increased incidents of ceasefire violation is part of Azeri strategy. ''An actual war would become a tragedy to Baku,'' he remarked.
''The probability of Moscow's supporting Armenia's passing some of territories over to Azerbaijan is inexistent. Perhaps, western mediators pressured Yerevan into ceding territories; still, Moscow has never attempted it. As far as I know, Moscow has always forbidden Armenia to make such steps,'' newcaucasus.com cited the expert as saying.

Turkish human right activists demand investigation into Armenian soldier’s killing

2011-05-09T11:36:00.000-07:00

Turkish union on human right protection convened a conference regarding the April 24 killing of an Armenian soldier Sevak Sahin.
Human right activists demanded that his death circumstances should be thoroughly investigated, Turkish Bianet website reported. The participants stressed that there is no evidence that murderer, Kvanc Agaoglu, was Sevak’s close friend as Turkish armed forces were trying to present. It is also unclear why Agaoglu’s gun was loaded.
At a press conference lawyer of Sevak’s relatives said nationalists were disturbing Sevak during his service. The lawyer also noted that Kvanc Agaoglu is a nationalist and the evidence thereof is his remarks on Facebook account.
Earlier mother of killed Armenian soldier was taken to the military unit where the tragic incident occurred.
25-year-old Sevak graduated from Faculty of Fine Arts, IstanbulTechnicalUniversity. He served in the military unit of the gendarmerie in Kozluk district of Batman province. He would have discharged from the army in 23 days. Gendarmerie stated he was killed from gunshot wounds, while playing with a gun with his friend on April 24 However, Sevak’s parents do not believe in it and demand a thorough investigation of his death.
One of witnesses Fazla Keskin told that hearing the shot Sevak said: “What have you done? Kvanc, help me.”
News from Armenia - NEWS.am

The forgotten genocide-96 YEARS OF CRIMINAL DENIAL BY TURKEY

2011-05-09T10:39:00.000-07:00

The forgotten genocide
Margaret Brearley uncovers the little-explored links between the Armenian massacres, antisemitism and the Holocaust
Margaret Brearley Summer 2006 - Number 202

The Armenian genocide is the ‘forgotten genocide’, writes Leo Kuper. ‘Contemporary indifference is in sharp contrast to the deep international concern at the time’ (Genocide [London: Penguin Books, 1981]). Yet the genocide was not only terrible in itself but an important precursor of the Holocaust, of later Holocaust denial - and even, I want to argue, of Palestinian intransigence and violence. This essay sets out the basic events and then explores some of these wider links.
Massacres of Armenians began in 1894, and ended in 1923. Over 1,500,000 were killed, most during the genocide of 1915-16. Virtually all the survivors were driven from Turkey. Between half and three-quarters of all Ottoman Armenians died.
Already in 1894-6, 250,000-300,000 unarmed Armenian civilians were brutally murdered at the instigation of the Turkish authorities, slaughtered by soldiers, irregulars and locals. Innumerable women were raped. Such wholesale slaughter of civilians seemed unprecedented and horrifying. Gladstone believed that the Ottoman government had determined ‘to exterminate the Christians’ within the Empire. Western eyewitnesses noted a religious dimension to the slaughter. Crying ‘Allahu Akhbar!’ Muslim clerics rallied mobs - especially in mosques at Friday prayers - to kill Armenians. There was public outcry in Europe and America, where large sums were raised to support survivors, many starving and mutilated. Sultan Abdul Hamid was pressured to stop the slaughter. But one British ethnographer noted prophetically in 1897 that most Armenians would probably be exterminated, except the remnant which escaped to other lands.
In 1908 the Young Turks’ seizure of power initially offered hope to Armenians and their newly created political parties, which had been agitating, sometimes through revolutionary means, for better treatment. (Western nations had exerted pressure on the Ottomans through international treaties of 1856 and 1878, in Paris and Berlin, to ameliorate conditions for their non-Muslims minorities, particularly the Armenians.) The future War Minister, Enver Pasha, declared:
arbitrary government [has] disappeared . . . We are all brothers . . . There are no longer Bulgars, Greeks . . . Jews, Mussulmans: under the same blue sky we are all equal, we glory in being Ottomans (quoted in Peter Balakian, The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America’s Response [London: HarperCollins, 2003]).
An apparently liberal Constitution was granted, but was short-lived.
Young Turk (Ittihadist) military leaders proved fiercely nationalistic, dedicated to the pan-Turkic ideal of a revitalized Ottoman Empire expanded eastwards to Turkmenistan, and determined to eradicate non-Turkish minorities. They abandoned the Constitution and planned, through a policy of repressing minorities, to create a homogeneous Turkey. An ethnically - and religiously - pure Turkish state would counter-weigh traumatic nineteenth-century losses of Ottoman territories and Muslim domination, and Russia’s threat on Turkey’s eastern flank. Armenians again became victims of Muslim fanaticism and the Turkish army; around Adana in 1909 20,000-30,000 were slaughtered. The Central Conference of American Rabbis urged European powers to protect Armenians from Turkish barbarism. They did not. Warships of seven western countries stood by during the massacres; none intervened. The vicious Balkan War (1912-13), which saw brutal ethnic cleansing by both Christians and Muslims and caused the influx of one million Muslim refugees into Anatolia, put the nail in the coffin of Ittihadist pluralism. From summer 1914 until late 1916, 1.15 million Greek Christians were violently deported from Thrace and western Anatolia, resulting in 500,000-550,000 deaths.
Then, during the First World War, came full systematic genocide of Armenian Christians, deliberately planned before the war and executed by the Young Turk government in political crisis following early military defeats. Armenians, labelled (like Greeks and Jews) by Young Turk spokesmen ‘a foreign body’ in the national state and stigmatized as ‘dogs’, ‘pigs’, even ‘food for the dogs’, were a convenient scapegoat, as Balakian notes in The Burning Tigris. Ziya Gokalp, the Committee of Union and Progress’s (CUP) chief propagandist and an admirer of Genghis Khan, had argued that Turkey must rid itself of non-Muslim elements to revitalize itself, encouraging people to ‘Turkicize’, ‘Islamize’ and modernize themselves. Following its virtual coup d’etat in January 1913, the CUP had launched a programme of nationalistic indoctrination and paramilitary training for Turkish youth. Its Ministry of the Interior orchestrated the programme of genocide. Early in the war its propaganda portrayed Armenians as internal foes, in league with the enemy, who were about to rebel. The Armenian genocide became a central aim of government policy.
On Christmas Day 1914 War Minister Enver Pasha invaded Russia at Germany’s suggestion. His army, unprepared for the harsh winter conditions, was disastrously defeated. Of 90,000 Turkish soldiers, only 12,000 survived. As if to avenge this defeat, in early 1915 nearly all able-bodied Armenian men aged between from 18 and 60 who had been conscripted into the Turkish army in 1914 were disarmed, reduced to forced labourers and massacred or worked to death. (Some Armenian conscripts had already been disarmed in October 1914, several weeks before Turkey entered the war.) In April 1915 most Armenian leaders, senior clergy and intellectuals were seized, tortured and killed. In systematic deportation programmes organized by the Interior Ministry and designed to facilitate mass slaughter, nearly all other Armenians were forcibly evicted from their homes and towns. The men were generally immediately tortured and killed, the women and children either brutally slaughtered, enslaved or sent walking eastwards into the desert without food or water, where most were murdered or died of starvation, multiple rape, disease or abuse. At least 85 per cent of those sent into the desert perished. Virtually all were stripped naked before their death, since Islam considers clothes stolen from a corpse unclean. Henry Morgenthau, American Ambassador to Constantinople, estimated in 1920 that 250,000 Armenian Christian women had been enslaved in harems, with another 250,000 children orphaned and starving. Massacres continued until 1923, including 100,000 slaughtered and starved by Turkish troops in 1918, and another 200,000 killed in 1920. Estimated Armenian deaths from 1915-16 alone are as many as 1,000,000 or more.
International responses
The genocide was regarded as unprecedented. Lord Bryce, noting in October 1915 that 800,000 Armenians had been killed since April, argued that never in history had there been so hideous and large-scale a crime. Others called it ‘a massacre to end all massacres’. It was unparalleled in gruesomeness. Most deaths were slow and excruciatingly painful - often to save money on ammunition. Torture was deliberate and practised as official policy. Hundreds of thousands were brutally killed in or near their towns, the majority by drowning, being burnt alive or killed with daggers or blunt instruments. Some were crucified, others impaled. Vast numbers were sexually mutilated, either after or commonly before death. Morgenthau wrote:
Whatever crimes the most perverted instincts of the human mind can devise, and whatever refinements of persecution the most debased imagination can conceive, became the daily misfortunes of this devoted people . . . I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this. The great massacres of the past seem almost insignificant when compared with the sufferings of the Armenian race in 1915 (www.gendercide.org/case_armenian.html.6).
On leaving his post in 1916, Morgenthau wrote: ‘My failure to stop the destruction of the Armenians had made Turkey for me a place of horror’ (quoted in Balakian, The Burning Tigris).
Contemporary Western diplomats, receiving secret reports from consuls in Ottoman territories, believed that the genocide was ‘a war of extermination’ (US State Department), planned and organized by the core leadership within the Turkish government.
Lord Bryce, whose 677-page The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915-1916, edited by Arnold Toynbee, was printed by HMSO in 1916 (new edition, edited by Ara Sarafian [London: Gomidas Institute, 2005]), described the massacres as ‘an absolutely premeditated policy elaborately pursued by the gang now in control of Turkey’ (The Times, 7 October 1915); he argued that orders for the massacres came in every case direct from Constantinople. Secret cipher telegrams indicated to Turkish officials that the term ‘deportation’ actually meant ‘annihilation’; Armenians were not intended to survive deportation into the deserts.
Turkish troops carried out some killings, Kurdish irregulars also slaughtered and helped distribute the booty of Armenian property. Buildings and institutions became state property, valuables were seized by local notables, moveable goods generally given to the local population. Special killing squads were organized by a secret arm of government, the Special Organization, which included high-ranking CUP officials (Ziya Gokalp, Talaat Pasha and others), and was used to deflect responsibility for the massacres away from state government. It directed groups of killing squads, formed of 30-33,000 criminals released from prison specifically for the purpose of killing, and organized an entire hierarchy of bureaucrats dedicated to carrying out the genocide.
The foreign press highlighted the massacres from April 1915; from March until December 1915 TheNew York Times alone carried 145 articles on the Armenian massacres. The major powers received hundreds of detailed reports on the atrocities from consuls, diplomats, missionaries and, in Germany’s case, senior military officers stationed in Turkey. Yet although America protested strongly, Germany - which might have halted the genocide - did not.
The German connection
It is well known and documented that on 22 August 1939, at a meeting of SS units in Obersalzberg, Hitler praised Genghis Khan and urged the SS ‘to be brutal and merciless . . . To kill, without pity, men, women and children’ in their march against Poland. He predicted the imminent annihilation of the Jewish people, adding that there would be no long-term repercussions: ‘Who after all is today speaking of the Armenians? . . . The world believes only in success.’ Less well known is probable German complicity in the Armenian genocide, argued for strongly by Wolfgang Gust, Christoph Dinkel, Artem Ohandjanian, Vahakn Dadrian and others:
a central feature of German complicity [was] . . . the willingness of a number of German officials, civilian and military, to aid and abet the Turks in their drive to liquidate the Armenians (Vahakn Dadrian, The History of the Armenian Genocide ([Oxford: Berghahn Books, revised edition, 1997]).
After Turkey’s disastrous war with Russia in 1877, Sultan Abdul Hamid II turned from Britain, Turkey’s traditional ally, to Germany. He placed responsibility for Turkey’s precarious finances in Germany’s hands in return for rich concessions, including building the Baghdad Railway. German banks, companies and specialists became deeply involved with the Ottoman government; by the 1890s Germany was the leading economic power in Turkey.
Military involvement was even greater. The Turkish army, already organized by Helmuth von Moltke in the 1830s as a ‘total war’ army, was trained and led by German officers. (In the early 1880s Bismarck had sent a Military Mission to Constantinople in order to achieve increased influence on Turkey. From then until 1918, German officers lectured at the Military Academy and advised the Turkish General Staff.) In December 1913 the high-powered German Military Mission, including 70 marshals, admirals, generals and other officers, took responsibility for operative command of the Turkish Army. (They later numbered 7-800, with 32,000 German troops – see Isabel V. Hull, Absolute Destruction: Military Culture and the Practices of War in Imperial Germany [London: Cornell University Press, 2005]). This was highly significant. For not only had Germany tacitly supported the Hamidian massacres of Armenians in the 1890s, but German soldiers had recently practised genocide.
Ruthlessness as German military strategy
In 1904, German troops had destroyed virtually entire African tribes, the Christian Hereros and the Nama, during their rebellion in the German colony of South-West Africa (SWA). To quell poorly armed blacks, Berlin sent massive armaments, troops and General Lothar von Trotha, a known racist. Kaiser Wilhelm II told von Trotha to crush the revolt by fair means or foul. Von Trotha determined on a plan explicitly ‘to annihilate these masses’. He encircled them, and attacked them with artillery pieces and machine guns. His troops deliberately drove the survivors into the waterless Omaheke desert, fenced them in and sealed the wells bordering the desert. Von Trotha ordered the extermination of all Hereros within the colony: ‘Within the German boundaries, every Herero, whether found armed or unarmed . . . will be shot.’ Thus those who managed to flee starvation in the desert were automatically shot or killed through imprisonment, ‘a continuation of annihilation by other means’ (to cite Isabel V. Hull’s Absolute Destruction again). The death rate among Hereros was probably 66-75 per cent, among the Nama some 50 per cent. (Such brutality was not unprecedented: in German East Africa in 1891-4, total destruction of dwellings, food stores, crops and domestic animals had led to an estimated 250,000-300,000 African deaths, one third of the population, when Germans crushed a revolt which cost only fifteen European lives (Hull, Absolute Destruction). Despite protests in the German press and parliament at von Trotha’s inhumanity, Kaiser Wilhelm awarded him the Order of Merit. Many German commentators praised Von Trotha’s actions, expressing racist contempt for blacks and greater concern for dying cattle than for human victims.
Significantly, the German ethos, already tainted in the 1890s with colonialist racism, had been recently injected with a heavy dose of Nietzsche’s elitism, contempt for the weak and ideological fervour for war. In 1908 a writer on the cult of Nietzsche noted that ‘a whole row of German colonial officials in Africa’ had adopted Nietzsche’s Herrenmoral ideal as perfectly suited to colonial rule - it sanctioned the ruthless domination by the elite Ubermenschen and ruthless treatment of non-members of the elite. The German state disseminated among schools and army officers copies of Houston Stewart Chamberlain’s Foundations of the Nineteenth Century. This rabidly hate-filled book popularized Richard Wagner’s Aryanism, racism and antisemitism, demanding that those not of the Germanic race be ‘mercilessly struck down’. Not surprisingly, one German marine who had taken part in the extermination of the Hereros commented: ‘Our password was and remained: “No mercy!”’ Some scholars have argued that in this German genocide of vulnerable black Africans lay some of the seeds of the future Holocaust - and it almost certainly contributed to the 1915 genocide of Armenians.
Moreover, Isabel Hull’s Absolute Destruction has shown that, from the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71 onwards, Germany’s military culture was predicated on ‘military necessity’ overriding all normal law and humanity: ‘war is in its essence violence, [and] the violent force of the conqueror in the conquered land is completely unlimited’ (to cite Philipp Zorn, a German military historian of the time). Hull demonstrates that German military strategy, focused exclusively on delivering crushing offensives, inevitably led to mass rape and sexual coercion of women (eg in SWA and in the China Boxer Uprising), violent mass deportations of civilians (Belgium from 1914 onwards) and huge death rates. At the Military Academy in Constantinople, precisely this strategy of absolute, unlimited aggression would have been taught as total war doctrine, an ideology conducive to genocide.
German complicity in the Armenian genocide
During the Great War, Germany deliberately gained hegemony within Turkey to promote its policy of Drang nach Osten, expansion eastwards. General Limen von Sanders had been granted full powers by Kaiser Wilhelm, and German generals and advisers exerted strong pressure on the Turkish authorities.
Western eyewitnesses, including Morgenthau, suggested at the time that there was German involvement in some of the massacres. The German government, Turkey’s wartime ally and the supreme influence in Constantinople, did nothing to stop the massacres, of which they were fully aware. The German ambassador refused to intervene, on the spurious grounds that Armenians were enemies of Turks: ‘It is quite apparent that the two peoples can never live together in the same country’ (Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, 1918:www.cilicia.com/morgenthau/Morgen27.htm 5). In May 1915, Ambassador von Wangenheim telegraphed Berlin: ‘I think we ought to mitigate the form the hardships take, but not to attempt to prevent them on principle’. He stated elsewhere:
I think the Turks are entirely justified. The weaker nation must succumb . . . I do not blame the Turks for what they are doing to the Armenians . . . They are entirely justified’ (quoted in Saul Friedman, A History of the Holocaust, London: Valentine Mitchell, 2004).
Hans von Humann, the German naval attaché in Constantinople, personal emissary of the Kaiser, rabid antisemite and pan-German expansionist, echoed this view. A close friend of Enver Pasha, a key architect of the genocide, he absolved Turks of all blame for the massacres:
One of these races has got to go . . . I think the Turks are entirely justified. The weaker nation must succumb. The Armenians desire to dismember Turkey; they are against the Turks and the Germans in this war, and they therefore have no right to exist here (Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, 27.6).
Many deportation orders, which resulted in almost certain death, were signed by German officers. Lieutenant Colonel Sievert directed Department II, in charge of the Special Organization’s brigand units, while another officer was in charge of a Special Organization squad. Berlin refused to allow western missionaries to protest or to protect Armenian victims. Wilhelm Souchon, German head of the Ottoman navy, ruthlessly crushed Armenian resistance in Van. TheTimes described the Germans as ‘masters of the Central Ottoman Administration’ and accused the Germans of having ‘to their everlasting shame not only permitted, but rather encouraged these horrors’ (6 August 1915).
Admiral Usedom, inspector general of fortifications in Turkey, later suggested that Germany itself had proposed forcible deportation - a measure brutally used against the Hereros - as a way of dealing with the Armenian problem. Talaat Pasha also asserted that the Germans had urged anti-Armenian measures. Ambassador Morgenthau was convinced that the entire concept of forcible mass deportation was German in origin. He cited the pan-Germanist journalist Paul Rohrbach, who had argued, well before the First World War, that Anatolia should be evacuated of the Armenians and their places taken by Turks. Usedom himself told Morgenthau that the Armenians had been in the way, an obstacle to German success, and that it had therefore been necessary to remove them, like so much useless lumber (Dadrian, History).
While all this may partly be explained by Germany’s fear of Russia and alliance with Turkey, there was an ideological component. For the bellicose Kaiser Wilhelm II, convinced of his own divine right to rule, saw the Turkish Sultan as ‘a ruler whose power emanated from and was preordained by God’ (Dadrian, History). Wilhelm idealized Islam as a unifying force, seeing Turkey as the Prussia of the Orient and Islamic self-denial as equivalent to Prussian puritanism. Kaiser Wilhelm had visited Sultan Abdul Hamid II twice, in 1889 and 1898, although the latter visit was highly criticized by Western powers shocked at the recent butchery of Armenians in 1894-6 instigated by Abdul Hamid, now called ‘the Red Sultan’ on account of the bloodshed.
Friedrich Naumann, a theologian accompanying Wilhelm in 1898 to Turkey, justified Turkish mass murder. He ‘presented the Armenian massacres as an act of understandable imperial self-defense’ (Hilmar Kaiser, Imperialism, Racism, and Development Theories: The Construction of a Dominant Paradigm on Ottoman Armenians [Ann Arbor, Michigan: Gomidas Institute, 1998]). Turkey was aiming, he believed, to save itself from extinction by bloodshed:
In spite of the displeasure which the German Christian feels at these accomplished facts, he has nothing to do except . . . to let matters take their course. The Nationalist position meant following Bismarck’s path, even if it is merciless in its sentiments . . . National policy: that is the profound moral reason why we . . . must show ourselves indifferent to the sufferings of the Christian peoples of Turkey, however painful that may be to our moral feelings (quoted in Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, 27.2-3).
Naumann claimed ‘deep moral grounds’ for his influential views.
In 1898, visiting Damascus, Kaiser Wilhelm II declared himself to be the protector of the cause of 300 million Muslims worldwide. Wilhelm was passionately convinced by the teachings of Baron Max von Oppenheim, who championed Islam as an ideology and a socio-political system experiencing a renaissance of power and vitality. In Wilhelmine Germany with its cult of Nietzsche, Christianity was widely perceived as soft, needing to be liberated from effeminate Judaism with its weak values of compassion. Germany had a commitment ‘to arouse the fanaticism of Islam’ and ‘panislamic sentiment against England’. Some thinkers, including von Oppenheim, looked east to Islam as a more masculine model of power. This pro-Muslim bias reinforced ‘a tradition of German anti-Armenian propaganda that emerged in response to German foreign-policy needs after the 1880s’ and which endured until after World War I (quoted in Hilmar Kaiser’s Imperialism, Racism, and Development Theories). Unsurprisingly, von Oppenheim supported the liquidation of the Christian Armenians. Moreover, General Bronsart von Schellendorff, Chief of the Turkish General Staff, forbade German consuls from helping Armenian refugees during the massacres and in 1921 blamed Armenians themselves for the genocide which he had failed to prevent:
The Armenian is like the Jew, a parasite outside his homeland, who sponges off the wealth of another country . . . Hence, the hate that discharges itself in mediaeval style through the murder of disagreeable Armenians (quoted in Peter Stine, ‘German Complicity in the Armenian Genocide’, Witness VI, 1992).
In 1915 Morgenthau told the German Ambassador:
You are a Christian people and the time will come when Germans realize that you have let a Mohammedan people destroy another Christian nation . . . The world will always hold Germany responsible; the guilt of these crimes will be your inheritance forever (Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, 28.8).
International amnesia and immunity
The world soon forgot Germany’s complicity, and neither the Turkish instigators nor the perpetrators of genocide were punished. On the contrary, those Turks primarily responsible were given asylum and military honours in Berlin in 1918, although senior German military were fully aware of Turkey’s continuing intention to annihilate all remaining Armenians. America’s threats to punish Turkey and promises to create an Armenian homeland went unfulfilled following the post-war discovery of oil in Mesopotamia and realization of Turkey’s strategic position. Mark Bristol, America’s Ambassador to Turkey from 1920, was committed to promoting America’s oil interests and contemptuous of Armenians, ‘a race like the Jews; they have little or no national spirit and have poor moral character’ (quoted in Balakian, The Burning Tigris).
The Armenian genocide as precursor of the Shoah
The Armenian genocide did not directly involve Jewish deaths, despite occasional humiliation (in some cities Jews were forced to gather up the Armenian bodies) and threats. Morgenthau warned that ‘Jews also are marked out for slaughter or expulsion’ (TheNew York Times, 14 September 1915). At the outbreak of war, fearing violence against Jews in Ottoman Palestine, Morgenthau had arranged for $50,000 in gold to be sent to Jaffa, and for David Ben-Gurion and others to be evacuated to Egypt. Jews in the Yishuv, including Avshalom Feinberg and Aaron Aaronson, both of the Nili spy group, knew in 1915 of the genocide and lobbied British intelligence and the War Office on behalf of the Armenians. In 1917, as British troops approached Jerusalem, the Turkish governor of Syria-Palestine ordered the immediate deportation of three hundred Jerusalem Jews, threatening them with the same fate as the Armenians.
Although the link has hardly been explored, the successful Armenian genocide must have influenced the killings of Jews by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini. The Grand Mufti used his supreme authority in Palestine and vast unsupervised funds to oppose Jewish settlement and to foment mass violence against Jews from 1920, culminating in the Great Revolt of 1936-9. He also used ruthless terror against his Palestinian opponents. In 1938 alone, 69 British, 292 Jews and at least 1,600 Arabs were killed, often with extreme brutality.
Hajj Amin was close to the Armenian genocide and clearly knew of the deportations and mass murders both in Constantinople and within the army itself. He was already a radical Islamist when in Constantinople from late 1914 to mid-1915, training in the Ottoman Military Academy. He served at least until November 1916 as a junior officer in the Ottoman army, including on the Black Sea coast, the scene of major atrocities against Armenians. In 1919 he spent several months in Damascus, where hundreds of thousands of deported Armenians had died in the previous three years. So Hajj Amin was aware that a hated dhimmi people can be eradicated and that violence can be rewarded politically.
Robert Wistrich, Professor of Jewish History at the Hebrew University, today talks of ‘Islamo-fascism’, the current ‘remarkable degree of ideological rapprochement between Islamic antisemitism and National Socialism’. Hajj Amin was a rabid antisemite and Nazi sympathizer, receiving Nazi weapons and funds and meeting Eichmann in 1937. He was in Berlin from 1941 to 1945, supervising Nazi propaganda broadcasts to the Middle East. He met Hitler on 28 November 1941 and created an Arab legion which became an SS unit. As an ally of Himmler, he fully endorsed the genocide of Jews, declaring in March 1944: ‘Kill the Jews wherever you find them - this pleases God, history and religion.’ He was close to Eichmann, probably visiting Auschwitz in his company. He recruited Bosnian Muslims in 1943 into a Waffen SS company which killed 90 per cent of Bosnia’s Jews, and lobbied Hitler to prevent Jews escaping from Hungary. Moreover, Hajj Amin’s unwavering opposition to Zionism and Jewish settlement exerted enduring influence on later Palestinian policy. His negationism influenced both the Muslim Brotherhood and his younger kinsman, Yassir Arafat.
Vahakn Dadrian is among those scholars who also see the Armenian genocide as a ‘precedent and a precursor of the Holocaust’ (‘From Impunity to Retributive Justice’, Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 25.2, 1998). He argues that, just as international failure to punish Turkey for the massacres of Armenians in the 1890s (termed at the time 'crimes against humanity') lent immunity to the Armenian genocide in 1915, so Turkey's impunity following the 1915 genocide may well have encouraged Hitler.
Hitler was familiar with the Armenian genocide and probably knew about it in detail by 1920, when he was already making speeches about annihilating the Jews. One of his closest friends and collaborators from 1920 was Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter. Arm in arm with Hitler during the 1923 Munich Putsch, he was shot by his side. Scheubner-Richter, extreme antisemite, anti-Bolshevik and follower of Friedrich Naumann, was well-connected, acting as Hitler’s liaison to Ludendorff and providing Hitler with an entrée into aristocratic White Russian circles. He had immense influence on Hitler, who described his loss as ‘irreplaceable’. Significantly, he had been German Vice-Consul in Erzerum in Turkish Armenia during the genocide. He filed to Berlin 15 major reports of the atrocities, some of which he personally witnessed. In his final report, in November 1915, he stated that ‘except for a few hundred thousand survivors, the Armenians of Turkey for all practical purposes have been exterminated ausgerottet]’ (quoted in Dadrian, ‘From Impunity to Retributive Justice’). He also referred to the Armenians as ‘these Jews of the orient, these wily businessmen’. Yet Scheubner-Richter himself in 1923 urged ‘the ruthless cleansing of Germany’ in a relentless campaign. He wrote of ‘the necessity . . . to eradicate ruthlessly all elements foreign to the body national of the Germans’ (quoted in Peter Stine, ‘German Complicity’). It seems highly likely that he told Hitler about the practicalities of genocide. Moreover, leading early supporters of Nazism had served in Turkey during the genocide - notably Franz von Papen and Konstantin von Neurath. Many high-ranking officers first served in Turkey and then in the Wehrmacht or SS, including General von Seeckt and Admiral von Doenitz. The SS military governor of Budapest, the military governor of Belgium and Rudolf Hoess, commandant of Auschwitz, had served in Turkey during the genocide, together with other key Nazis (Dadrian, History).
There exist, despite significant differences, plentiful parallels between the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide. They include: wholesale state expropriation of victims; annihilatory use of deportation, famine, disease, forced labour, torture and harsh climate; concentration camps and death marches. Lethal medical experiments were carried out on hundreds of Armenian children and military cadets. Armenians, like Jews, were described in propaganda as a cancer and bacillus. As in the Holocaust, many male victims had to dig their graves themselves, and were marched to die in groups of four. Tens of thousands of Armenians were transported to their deaths packed in cattle trucks without water or sanitation. They were charged first-class rail fares. Many suffocated, many were murdered en route, the rest mostly perished in their desert destinations. As in the Holocaust, techniques of deception were used to lull the victims in the early stages and to deflect responsibility for the genocide away from the key instigators. Most orders for killings were given orally (commonly by Dr Behaeddin Shakir, head of the Special Organization)or in cipher.
Many eyewitnesses noted that the general Turkish population witnessed and participated in the torture and massacres of Armenians, and plundered their corpses and property, paralleling the behaviour of Poles, Ukrainians and other non-German populations during the Holocaust.
Religion was used to justify both the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide. Just as some Christians believed that Hitler was doing God’s will in eradicating Jews, so too some Kurdish and Turkish Muslims participated in brutal killings out of contempt for non-Muslim gavours (infidels). Nazism co-opted religion as a tool of antisemitism and genocide. Hitler famously argued that Martin Luther would have approved of his actions towards the Jews. Although a self-confessed pagan at heart, Hitler skilfully used Christian vocabulary to seduce his listeners and readers, arguing that in defending himself against the Jew, he was doing the work of the Almighty himself.
Similarly, Turkish ideologues argued that Islam ‘mandates dominion’ and that those who were not Muslim were destined to be ‘servile peoples’. Even the genocide was undertaken in the name of Islam: jihad had been officially declared by the Sheikh-ul-Islam in Constantinople on 14 November 1914. This jihad resulted in all Ottoman Christians being identified as belonging to the dar al-harb, the abode of war, ‘the sphere of the enemy’, and thus becoming justified targets for murder. One contemporary Turkish pamphlet read: ‘He who kills even one unbeliever . . . whether he does it openly or secretly, shall be rewarded by Allah’ (quoted in Balakian, The Burning Tigris). Within five days of the jihad declaration there were mass public executions of Armenian soldiers in the Turkish army and orders sent from Constantinople ousting all Armenian functionaries in the Ottoman government.
One other parallel between the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide is striking. The key ideologue of genocide, Ziya Gokalp, was profoundly inspired by Richard Wagner’s German nationalism, which was also a key influence on Nazi Aryan ideology. Wagner’s ideology of awakening Germany to its greatness by destroying the Jews may have inspired both Hitler and the Turkish leaders; both claimed that their nation’s salvation lay in destroying a hated minority. Gokalp was also influenced by Nietzsche; he wrote in 1911 in the Yeni Hayat journal:
the ‘super’ men imagined by the German philosopher Nietzsche are the Turks. They are the new men [who appear] every century. Therefore, new life will spring forth from Turkishness, which is the source of all their youthfulness’ (quoted in Taner Akcam, From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide, London/New York: Zed Books, 2004).
Similarly, Talaat Pasha wrote that ‘the salvation of the country requires the elimination of the Armenians’.
Genocide denial
Finally, there are parallels between subsequent denial of the Armenian genocide and Holocaust denial (see Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide, edited by Richard G. Hovannisian, Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1999).Germany engaged in denial of the Armenian genocide even while it was happening. Count von Bernstorff, German Ambassador to the US, stated in September 1915 that atrocities against Armenians were ‘pure inventions’, then dismissed them as ‘the Armenians’ own fault’. Early in the First World War, Turkey fabricated claims of rebellion and treason against the Armenians, and has since dedicated millions of dollars to promoting international denial of the Armenian genocide. (‘Their Holocaust is now to be airbrushed from history,’ Robert Fisk wrote in the Independent on 17 November 2000.) Turkey’s archives, emptied of many incriminating documents by Lieutenant-General Hans von Seeckt, Chief of the Ottoman General Staff (1917-18) and other German military officers after the First World War, have remained closed to independent scholars. Turkey has funded many Turkish scholars who have written the genocide out of history or blamed any violence on the Armenians themselves. Yair Auron is among scholars who argue that several of the Turkish-funded Chairs of Ottoman Studies in America have been used for promoting strongly pro-Turkish accounts of events or outright genocide denial; even the director of the Turkish archive himself recently described the genocide as ‘Armenian fantasy’ (see The Banality of Denial: Israel and the Armenian genocide (London: Transaction, 2003).
The final stage of any genocide is for perpetrators to deny the genocide and to portray victims as guilty. (For example, 55,000 Armenian corpses were described by Turkish authorities at the time as 55,000 Muslims killed by Christians.) Many lies have since been fabricated, claiming large-scale massacres of Turks by Armenians. With notable exceptions, such as the maverick Taner Akcam, who uses Ottoman sources to document the reality of the Armenian genocide, most Turkish historians deny that it happened, arguing at most that a mass ‘relocation’ occurred with regrettable, unforeseen consequences. Some have even claimed, without evidence, that Ottoman Armenians killed 1.1 million Muslims and 100,000 Jews (Auron). Denial and obfuscation continue; most recently, in The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2005), Günter Lewy has minimized Armenian suffering by highlighting, for example, the huge death toll among Turkish soldiers (1.1 million) from neglect and starvation. Far-right websites linked to the Schiller Institute repeat bizarre Turkish claims that core genocidaires - Talaat, Enver, Jemal and Shakir - were actually displaced Balkan Jews masquerading as Muslims.
Israel and the Armenian genocide
Early on, Jews played a disproportionate role in drawing attention to the genocide. Ambassador Morgenthau proudly declared to a German agent threatening to have him recalled:
I can think of no greater honour than to be recalled because I, a Jew, have been exerting all my powers to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Christians (Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, 27.7).
The Jewish author, Franz Werfel, wrote in 1933 a highly influential novel on the genocide, The Forty Days of Musa Dagh.
But Israel, for pragmatic reasons of Realpolitik, has kept understandably silent. Since 1948, Turkey has been one of few Muslim countries to recognize Israel, and memories persist of the relatively benign Ottoman treatment of Jews. Yair Auron has shown how successive Israeli governments remained silent about the Armenian genocide until 1994, when Yossi Beilin, then Deputy Foreign Minister, informally recognized that the Armenian tragedy was ‘not war . . . but certainly massacre and genocide, something the world must remember’. In November 2005 Israel’s Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi declared in Russian Armenia that ‘Nobody can feel the pain of the Armenians more deeply than the Jews’, and announced that he would use the term ‘genocide’. Yet officially Israel does not use the word ‘genocide’. Shimon Peres said:
We reject attempts to create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian allegations. Nothing similar to the Holocaust occurred. It is a tragedy what the Armenians went through, but not a genocide (Turkish Daily News, 10 April 2001).
This remains Israeli government policy. One consequence is that historians who deny the Armenian genocide, such as Sedat Laciner and Ibrahim Kaya, claim that Israel has ‘clearly rejected all Armenian attempts to present the Relocation as “genocide”’ (The Armenian Issue and the Jews, [Ankara/New York: Institute for Armenian Research, 2002). Moreover, although in 1994 the European and Russian Parliaments both officially recognized the Armenian genocide, the British Home Office continued to remain silent. The Armenian genocide was excluded from the official commemorative events for Holocaust Memorial Day from 2001 onwards, due to pressure from Turkey. In contrast to twenty other countries, the USA has never recognized the Armenian genocide, despite lobbying from Armenians and American Jews, and pleas from over 125 Holocaust scholars, including Elie Wiesel, Deborah Lipstadt and Yehuda Bauer.
The genocides of Christian Hereros and Armenians and of Europe’s Jews were a kind of reverse Exodus. Hereros, Armenians and Jews were stripped of all valuables before and during deportation. They were sent east not to encounter God but to encounter violent death. I believe that at the deepest level all three genocides have their root in Nietzsche’s self-proclaimed ‘murder of God’ in 1881. To replace the Judaeo-Christian God, Nietzsche - and Wagner - resurrected the pagan god Dionysus, god of ecstasy, terror, cruelty and death, as ‘the spirit of Germany’ (Margaret Brearley, ‘The “Tempter-God”, Evil, and the Shoah’ in Fire in the Ashes: God, Evil and the Holocaust, edited by David Patterson and John Roth [Seattle; University of Washington Press, 2005]). Tragically, that Dionysian spirit of frenzy, of delight in annihilation, unleashes and feeds genocide. I believe it to be no coincidence that, in the sixty-five years after 1881, Germany was complicit, directly or indirectly, in the murder of some two million African and Armenian Christians and six million Jews, all of whom represented that God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob whom Nietzsche had sought to destroy.
Margaret Brearley has been a Lecturer in Mediaeval and Renaissance German Literature at Birmingham University and Honorary Holocaust Adviser to the Archbishops’ Council, and held academic posts at Selly Oak Colleges and the Institute of Jewish Affairs, London. She is currently on the National Executive of WIZO.

French Armenians demand explanation from Senators who blocked Genocide bill

2011-05-07T09:42:00.001-07:00

French Armenians demand explanation from Senators who blocked Genocide bill
May 7, 2011 - 10:45 AMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - The Coordination Council of Armenian Organizations of France (CCAF) has condemned the French Senate’s failure to pass the bill on criminalization of the Armenian Genocide denial.
“No legal remedy was found to stop the policy of denial which is fervently spread by Turkish websites. The result of May 4 hypocritical vote was achieved through efforts of the majority party,” the CCAF said in a statement.
“To favor Turkey, the government and President of France infringed the interests of French Armenians, who are mostly heirs of the Armenian Genocide survivors. The CCAF calls on all French citizens of Armenian descent to make relevant conclusions after such perfidious behavior,” it said.

Armenia Welcomes Bin Laden's Killing

2011-05-06T12:39:00.000-07:00

Armenia on Friday joined world leaders in welcoming the killing of Osama Bin Laden and reaffirmed its support for the U.S. war against his Al-Qaeda terror network.
“Being involved in the international community’s fight against terrorism, on Bin Laden’s extermination we share the feelings of the Americans and all those who fight against terrorism,” Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesman Tigran Balayan said in written comments to the official Armenpress news agency.“Those feelings are particularly close to us, because people linked with this terrorist organization were in the past involved in the aggression against Nagorno-Karabakh,” Balayan said, alluding to the reported participation of Afghan and other Islamist militants in the 1991-1994 Armenian-Azerbaijani war on Azerbaijan’s side.
Armenia -- Defense Minister Seyran Ohanian inspects Armenian troops in Afghanistan, 24July 2010.Armenia has backed U.S. military action in Afghanistan and Washington’s broader campaign against Al-Qaeda over the past decade. Shortly after the September 2011 terrorist attacks in the United States, it granted overflight and landing rights to U.S. military aircraft involved in the effort.Yerevan also sent a 40-strong Armenian army unit in Afghanistan last year. It was deployed near the northern Afghan city of Kunduz.In addition, the Armenian authorities have enacted in recent years laws aimed at preventing terrorism financing and money laundering. The U.S. State Department has praised these contributions in its annual reports on international terrorism. The most recent report released last August also noted the South Caucasus state’s “measured progress in implementing border security and combating trafficking in persons, drugs, and [weapons of mass destruction] materials.”“Widespread corruption, however, continued to hamper full implementation and enforcement of laws that would improve Armenia’s counterterrorism posture and response capability,” cautioned the State Department.

It is time to recognize Armenian Genocide – Israeli MP Armenia News

2011-04-29T11:25:00.000-07:00

April 29, 2011 13:30
Israeli Foreign Minister must review its position on recognition of the Armenian Genocide, said Ze’ev Elkin member of the Knesset for Likud party.
Foreign Ministry should not adhere to non-recognition position which once was introduced by Shimon Peres in favor of Turkey, he said at a conference dedicated to the 96th anniversary of the tragic events in Armenia, reported the press service of the Likud party.
“The State of Israel, calling on the world to accept historical justice and observe moral norms, can not act on the contrary being guided by narrow political views only. It’s time to stop policy of indulging Turkey introduced by Shimon Peres. The Jewish state should have been among the first to declare an official recognition. Unfortunately, Israel is one of the last Western countries which has not done so. Better late than never,” he said.
Elkin also urged his fellow MPs to vote for the adoption of a resolution recognizing the Armenian Genocide. He appealed to the chairman of the Knesset Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense, Shaul Mofaz, requesting to conclude consideration of this matter and submit it for Knesset’s approval.
Many states have recognized the Armenian Genocide. Uruguay was the first to do it in 1965. The Armenian Genocide has since been recognized by Russia, France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, Lithuania, Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, Greece, Cyprus, Lebanon, Canada, Venezuela, Argentina, as well as by 42 of the U.S. states. The Armenian Genocide has also been recognized by Vatican, the European Parliament, and World Church Council.