FRANCE URGES TURKEY TO RECOGNIZE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

[MosJan]

Turkish Foreign Ministry: "We will continue to defend ourselves against unjust allegations"

http://hetq.am/static/news/b/2012/01/9611.jpg13:03, January 24, 2012

The following is the official Turkish response to last night's passage of a genocide denial bill in the French Senate. It appeared in today's Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs website.

 

The law proposal presented by deputies of the governing Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), aiming to penalize in France any challenge to genocide allegations regarding the events of 1915 was adopted by a vote in the General Assembly of the Senate today (23 January). We strongly condemn this decision, which is problematic in every aspect and constitutes an example of irresponsibility, and declare that we will express our reaction against it in every platform.

 

A similar law proposal was rejected earlier by the General Assembly of the Senate on 4 May 2011 by 196 votes against 74, in line with the opinion of the Commission of Laws of the Senate which had concluded that the proposed law was in breach of the Constitution. Although the Commission of Laws of the Senate once again concluded that the latest proposal was in breach of the Constitution, the Senate adopted it. Since there has not been a change in the substance of the matter in the meantime, this development is a blatant indication of how such a sensitive issue can be exploited for domestic political purposes in France. This has been an entirely unfortunate step for French politics. Politicization of the understanding of justice and history through other people's past and damaging freedom of expression in a tactless manner are first and foremost a loss for France.

 

It is obvious that the interpretation of historical events cannot be determined by the attitude of French politicians who see in themselves the right to judge other nations on the basis of one-sided views and declare a judgment on a serious allegation of crime such as genocide, thereby ignoring the principles of international law. In fact, no Parliament has such a right or such a competence. The decision in question goes further and delivers a blow against the freedom of expression and scholarly research. At a period when we need positive examples for the dissemination of universal values throughout the world, it is disconcerting to see narrow political calculations producing such a result even in a country which plays a role in the advancement of such values and which takes pride in rule of law.

 

It is further unfortunate that the historical and multi-dimensional relations between the Republic of Turkey and France have been sacrificed to considerations of political agenda in spite of all our initiatives and warnings, as well as the opinions of prominent French institutions and jurists. It is quite clear where the responsibility for this lies.

 

The circles which consider that Turkey has overreacted on this matter or think that its reaction will only remain in words neither comprehend the essence of the matter, nor understand Turkey and the Turkish people. We find it useful to remind all parties that, in case of the completion of the finalization process for the law, we will

not hesitate to implement, as we deem appropriate, the measures that we have considered in advance. Similarly, it must be also known that we will continue to strongly use our right to defend ourselves on a legitimate basis against unfair allegations. No one should doubt our Government's principled approach in this issue.

 

On the other hand, we share the calls for common sense of those who, during this process, have admitted the error being committed in French politics, appealed to return from this error and opposed to damaging relations with Turkey in such a tactless manner.

 

It is clear that all avenues need to be explored for the finalization of the present process in a way which will avoid this being recorded as part of France's political, legal and moral mistakes.

 

Turkey is determined to take every step required against this unjust action, which disregards basic human values and public conscience.

 

Home page

 

 

[MosJan]

 

Foreign Minister Nalbandian Thanks France for Genocide Bill Passage

http://hetq.am/static/news/b/2012/01/9602.jpg11:10, January 24, 2012

RA Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said that yesterday’s decision by France’s Senate to pass the genocide bill is the logical continuation of the law recognizing the Armenian Genocide adopted by France in 2001.

 

“This day will be written in gold not only in the history of friendship between the Armenian and French peoples, but also in the annals of the history of the protection of human rights worldwide, and will further consolidate the existing mechanisms of prevention of crimes against humanity. France re-affirmed its pivotal role as a genuine defender of universal human values,” FM Nalbandian stated

 

Nalbandian then conveyed his government’s thanks to the President of the French Republic, the Senate, the National Assembly, the Government and the friendly people of France.

 

[Yervant1]

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE DENIAL BECOMES INDUSTRY IN TURKEY - TANER AKCAM

 

news.am

January 21, 2012 | 03:49

 

Armenian News-NEWS.am publishes an extract from the interview of the

Turkish sociologist and historian Taner Akcam in the French blog of

Le Monde.

 

In response to the question what he thinks of France and the bill

criminalizing denial of genocides and, in particular, the Armenian

Genocide, he said that the bill was accepted in Turkey very negatively,

as it was a short term effect, while the long term effects will be

more positive. Turkey may try to prohibit and force to keep silent

on the truth within its borders, while the international agencies

will constantly remind it of the issue, which Turkey must face and

solve eventually.

 

Besides, the French initiative is not a law for France. To the joy

and sorrow, it has become a part of the international campaign for

the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

 

Turkey's hysteria, anger and negative events will soon be forgotten,

while heavy reality of the serious indecisiveness of the issue will

remain. It will, hence, strengthen positions of those who ascertain

confrontation with the historical memory is closely linked with the

creation of a democratic society in Turkey.

 

Regardless of France's final goal, Turkish society and elite are again

claimed the necessity to make a decision on the fundamental issue.

 

As for it is effectiveness, he said that everyone should acknowledge

the fact. Turkey is irritated by being reminded of its memory. The

memory, like a ghost, pursues it for decades.

 

"I have been discussing the Armenian Genocide issue for many years

and the truth is that I felt alone. I even had to explain my closest

relatives the meaning of the 1915," Akcam said.

 

To comprehend Turkey's denial policy, one should realize that denial

is a structure

 

Denying the 1915 events, Turkey reproduces institutes, public relations

and mentality. Denial also fuels the continuing policy of aggression

inside and outside Turkey towards anyone daring to speak against

mentality of denial.

 

Denial of genocide is an industry in Turkey and public policy of utmost

importance. As far as Turkey continues state policy of denial through

its institutes and mentality, Ankara will be sensitive to the outside

pressure, meantime, the pressure should be increased.

 

In response to what are Akcam's expectations of the pressure and where

it would lead to Turkey, he said that as far as the West allows Turkey

to run the policy of denial, it will go on.

 

"We must reach global comprehension of the Genocide and its prevention

equally. Struggle against Genocide denial is an issue of global

democracy and human rights. Recognition is essential for humanity,"

Akcam concluded.

[Yervant1]

FRENCH PUBLICIST CONSIDERS DENIAL DIRT OF SPIRIT

 

ARMENPRESS

JANUARY 24, 2012

YEREVAN

 

YEREVAN, JANUARY 24, ARMENPRESS: By passing of the Armenian Bill,

it will be easier for Turks to turn the page of the history, French

publicist, scientist Bernard-Henri Levy said in an interview with

Nouvelles d'Armenie, Armenpress reports.

 

"The memory of that horror can only impede self-recognition and

shaping the own destiny," Bernard-Henri Levy said, stressing that a

larger number of intellectuals, journalists and just ordinary people

already understand this in Turkey, but they are still a minority.

 

The intellectual expressed confidence that the passing of the bill

cannot impede historians in their work in any way, just that work

will be already without dirt. "Actually denial is dirt of spirit,"

the publicist underlined.

[Yervant1]

JEWISH ANALYST SAYS TURKEY'S THREATS WORTH NOTHING

 

ARMENPRESS

JANUARY 24, 2012

YEREVAN

 

YEREVAN, JANUARY 24, ARMENPRESS: There is nothing unexpected in the

adoption of the bill criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide

by France's Senate, it was an expected event, Alexander Tsinker,

director of East European States & CIS Institute in Tel Aviv, told

Armenpress. He said Turkey's threats worth nothing.

 

"These threats are of no danger for France. The same happened in

2001 when France officially recognized the Armenian Genocide. All

these threats lasted for one or two months. As to the opinion that

the adoption of the bill is a pre-electoral step, it is not serious

either. The number of Armenian and Turkish voters in France is almost

the same. You win half a million, you lose half a million. So, it

is not an explanation. It is another step toward the international

recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The recognition process, though,

moves forward slowly," Tsinker said.

 

He also noted that in Israel the process of recognition of genocide

moves slower. "We should have been among the first to recognize this

crime committed in the Ottoman Empire. But we are going to it very

slowly. But I am an optimist, and I think that this year certain

changes will be registered in the process of recognition of the

Armenian Genocide by the Jewish state," Alexander Tsinker said.

[Yervant1]

WILL TURKS LEAVE FRANCE?

Naira Hayrumyan

 

Story from Lragir.am News:

http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments24901.html

Published: 13:15:12 - 24/01/2012

 

Evidently, the penalization of public negation of the Armenian

genocide is France's affair rather than Armenia's. What does France

want? Experts already say that Turkey is thus turned out of the "world

government". Turkey has recently displayed too much initiative. It

interfered and tried to mediate in every issue, though no one agrees,

the Turkish press has been writing that Turkey holds a key role in

world politics. The great powers which are reluctant to share power,

especially with Turkey which lives according to different civil rules

would hardly like this.

 

There is one more reason which is hidden in the complicated knot of

the Western "multiculturalism". Last year, the leaders of leading

European countries announced about the failure of multiculturalism.

 

They were worried about the increasing population of non-Europeans in

Europe rather than rejection of local laws and values by migrants. The

issue of demographic expansion is brought up more and more frequently.

 

Perhaps, by passing the law, France hopes that the angry Turks will

recall not only their ambassador but also their numerous citizens

living in ghettos in France and Germany. Not only Turks but also many

other non-Europeans.

 

This is a very difficult process, no universal approaches to the

ethnic issue has ever been worked out in the world. Multiculturalism

was considered progressive, that is the existence of all nations but

on the condition that the "guests" will accept their rules. However,

such elementary quotas as certain percentage of migration of people

of one country or another can be acceptable and which is the limit

beyond which it is considered as demographic expansion.

 

These issues are especially urgent in Russia and Vladimir Putin

included the national issue as a key one in his election program. In

his article in the Izvestiya, he speaks about the national issues,

accusing Western "multiculturalists" of attempts to enable assimilation

of migrants. At the same time, he notes that 80% of the population

of Russia are Russians, apparently hinting that other peoples cannot

exceed 20% of the population of a country.

 

This is a very difficult issue which requires a non-ordinary solution.

 

Certainly, it is possible to carry out an ethnic cleansing, like Turkey

and Azerbaijan did, it is also possible to apply "ethnic divorce"

during military conflicts, like it happened in Armenia and in Karabakh

from where the entire Turkic-speaking population left. It is possible

to live in different quarters of the city, like in European Bosnia.

 

But such methods cannot be applied everywhere. Multiculturalism

will be substituted by new instruments. The adoption of the law on

the Armenian genocide can be considered as the first application of

these instruments. By the way, in this connection, after the Arab

revolutions, an opinion was expressed that the Arab population of

Europe received the right to return to their homeland. However,

after the revolutions, no flow of Arab migrants has been noticed.

 

Judging by all, the demographic expansion, though not voiced yet,

is a serious issue for the European countries and Russia.

[Yervant1]

MICHAEL KAMBECK: ERDOGAN HYSTERIC - SHOULD HE RESIGN?

by Michael Kambeck

 

Noyan Tapan

2012-01-25

 

The hysteria in Turkey over the French bill prohibiting the denial

of the Armenian Genocide could hardly be more self-damaging or more

revealing. Readers of the official Turkish official statement of 24

January will be struck by a tone unworthy of a strong and mature nation

and rather be reminded of speeches of some of those Arabic leaders,

who have recently been ousted by their people.

 

France is allegedly "damaging the freedom of expression in a tactless

manner", says Turkey, which has just today (25 January 2012) received

another condemning report from Reporters Without Borders for its

further weakening media freedom, dropping down to place 148 out of 178

(France is on 38, Armenia on 75, Azerbaijan on 162). The French law

does the opposite of what the Turkish government claims. It protects

freedom. France has, together with the country I know best, Germany,

for many years had such laws against the denial of the Holocaust..

 

This has neither stopped researchers on this issue nor journalistic

freedom, even where journalists took views which I personally would

find inappropriate. But such laws DO protect against blatant hardliners

and their propaganda, who generally practice the politisation that

Prime Minister Erdogan so loudly condemns these days. He accuses

Sarkozy of fishing for Armenian votes, while omitting the large

number of voters with a Turkish background but a French passport. The

Armenian Genocide has long been recognised by France, as by many other

European states and the European Parliament. This has been done in

view of overwhelming evidence, while in Turkey archives still remain

closed, documents still disappear and journalists writing about 1915,

like Hrant Dink, face the opposite of freedom. The new French law

simply brings the prosecution in line with the earlier recognition

decision. The German Bundestag is allegedly considering a similar move

and should do so. The European ideal of tolerance needs intolerance

vis-Á-vis intolerance. Genocide is the ultimate intolerance. Free

democracies need to be strong in their defence against those who seek

to undermine that freedom.

 

While the law does not mention Turkey and President Sarkozy even sent

a conciliatory letter to the Turkish government, Erdogan's reaction

was a whole list of threats, calling the law "an unjust action,

which disregards human values and public conscience"... "No one

should doubt our Government's principled approach in this issue"

the MFA refers to the announced retaliation measures. Such words

do not sound like the communication of a mature and proud nation,

it sounds like a vexed child in a sand box, saying "He started

first!". Turkey kills its relations with France and blames France

for it. Instead, Turkey would have had the chance to run a different

policy, even a very nationalistic one (which I would deem wrong but

at least clever): Turkey could have opened the border with Armenia

and with that started a process of debating the issue, which no

international player would have liked to interfere with. Turkey

could state, how ever they classify the "events of 1915", that this

was during the Ottoman Empire and hence only indirectly concerns

modern Turkey. Turkey could have focussed on its national interests

by gaining support from the international community for securing a

deal which limits possible Armenian damage claims and embarking on a

course of a genuine zero-problem-policy with its neighbours. Instead,

that zero-problem-policy has visibly failed all around and Turkey

is today mainly known for being "loud". It destroyed its interests

with the EU and sends enraging and mobilising signals to the Armenian

Diaspora around the world and to its own minorities, especially to

the Kurds in its poorer East.

 

All this has a high price for Turkey and all this has been dominated

neither by Turkey's Foreign Minister nor by the President. In the

interest of the Turkish nation, you would have to call upon Prime

Minister Erdogan to resign. And as even long-standing friends of

Turkey, like MEP and Turkey rapporteur Oomen-Ruijten, become publicly

more and more frustrated and critical, France and the EU seem to

have little to lose, as long as Mr Erdogan is in power. The only

light comes from the Turkish intelligentsia, which means that civil

society is today our best hope for saving Turkey's modernisation.

 

*Dr Michael Kambeck is Secretary General of the Brussels based NGO

European Friends of Armenia (www.EuFoA.org). These views represent

his own.

[Yervant1]

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE: DANGEROUS PITY

 

Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-badinter/armenian-genocide-dangero_b_1231888.html

Jan 26 2012

 

BY Robert Badinter.Ancien senateur et Garde des sceaux

 

The law punishing the denial or outrageous minimization of the Armenian

genocide of 1915 has been adopted by the French parliament.

 

In this pre-electoral period, the Senate has decided to reconsider

its earlier rejection of a text whose purpose was identical. Let us

hope that the passage of this law by the French parliament will soothe

the moral wounds that the Turkish authorities' obstinate refusal to

recognize the Armenian genocide of 1915 has caused the victims. I

know, from my own personal experience, how cruel negationism is for

the descendants of the victims of a genocide. But apart from this

therapeutic function, I believe this law will bring only difficulties,

including those that will afflict the Armenian community itself.

 

Let us suppose, for example, that a Turkish high official or specialist

of public law questioned, in France, about the Armenian genocide

should offer the official Turkish version of events. The Armenian

associations will file suit in the French courts. The individual

prosecuted will not fail to point out that the law is unconstitutional

as it conflicts with his liberty of opinion and expression, as based

upon the QPC (Priority Question of Constitutionality). In the debate,

the Constitutional Council will necessarily be obliged to consider

the question of the constitutionality of the memorial law of 2001

recognizing the Armenian genocide, as it has never been compelled

to do so before. If, as a number of jurists, particularly the doyen

Vedel, who expressed his viewpoint in 2002, believe this law of

2001 is tainted with unconstitutionality, both the memorial law of

2001 and the current repressive law will disappear from our legal

statutes at the same time. This judicial boomerang will turn against

its authors. Law will prevail and take vengeance on politics.

 

II.

 

Parliament does not have the competence to dictate history, as was

excellently expressed by Pierre Nora and the members of the Liberte

pour l'histoire association. Only totalitarian regimes accept

an official line of history, determined by the powers that be and

imposed by the judge. French justice offers others means of condemning

those who would forge history, who fail in their scientific duty to

intellectual honesty, rigor, and objectivity in their work. But it

is not up to French legislators to put themselves in the place of

historians and judges by proclaiming, in a French law, that a crime

of genocide was committed in Asia Minor a century ago.

 

Judicial authority is the only one competent to declare if a crime

has been committed and who its perpetrators are. Thus the Jewish

genocide by the Nazis was established by the International Military

Tribunal at Nuremberg. This tribunal, in which French magistrates

participated, was the result of the London Accords, signed by France

in 1944. The judgments of Nuremberg were considered res judicata,

hence authoritative, in France. The same is true of crimes against

humanity that occurred in ex-Yugoslavia and Rwanda and were judged by

international criminal courts. No such thing exists for the Armenian

genocide of 1915, committed before the international community became

conscious of the moral imperative that butchers of humanity should

not go unpunished. But this mission is the duty of international

jurisdictions, first of all the International Criminal Court. The

French parliament has no competence whatsoever in this respect and

cannot set itself up as a universal judge, capable of proclaiming

by French law the existence of crimes that, since they are historic,

are in no way within the realm of their competence.

 

III.

 

This hubris on the part of the French parliament shall not fail to

inspire reactions against France. First of all, in the international

domain. The Turks are a great people who play a great role,

particularly in the Middle East. They are proud of their history,

even though it bears the stains of crimes and exactions of all kinds,

just like that of all conquering peoples. We can call upon the Turkish

authorities to go back over their history, as other European states

have done. But to condemn (for that is the implicit meaning of the

law of 2001) the Ottoman predecessors of a Turkish state that is

our friend, to register this condemnation in our laws, this measure

intended to soothe the pain of one will inevitably cause the furor of

others. Since we're talking especially about Franco-Turk cooperation

that currently flourishes in university and cultural spheres, we are

bound to feel the weight of Turkish resentment against this legislative

intrusion into an already long ago past.

 

I do not know if the Turkish constitution allows the parliament to

vote on laws concerning history, including that of foreign nations. If

such is the case, we should prepare ourselves for a rejoinder on

the part of Turkish nationalist legislators proclaiming that France

is the author of crimes against humanity committed in its former

colonies, especially in Algeria during the war of independence. Will

we protest that these tragic events do not concern Turkey? But what

did the French parliament do with regard to her yesterday? Our long

and tragic history should place us today on the side of international

justice. It does not qualify us to appoint ourselves the judge of

universal history and the moral conscience of the world.

[Yervant1]

'SPOTLIGHT' ON OBAMA

By James Morrison

 

The Washington Times

January 25, 2012 Wednesday

 

Armenian-Americans predict that Washington will be the next diplomatic

battlefield after the French Parliament approved a bill that would

make it a crime to deny that the Turkish massacre of Armenians during

World War I was genocide.

 

"The spotlight is on President Obama," said Aram S. Hamparian,

executive director of the Washington office of the Armenian National

Committee of America.

 

Turkish-Americans, however, say the French bill will have no impact

on the U.S. debate because France is "criminalizing thought," said

Gunay Evinch, a former president of the Assembly of Turkish American

Associations.

 

The bill would impose a penalty of up to a year in jail and a fine

of $57,000 for denying that the killings amounted to genocide -

the deliberate attempt to eliminate an entire people.

 

Mr. Hamparian criticized Mr. Obama Enhanced Coverage LinkingObama

-Search using:Biographies Plus NewsNews, Most Recent 60 Daysfor

failing to recognize the massacre of 1.5 million Armenians in the

Ottoman Empire as genocide.

 

When he was a U.S. senator, Mr. Obama supported congressional

resolutions on the Armenian issue. As a presidential candidate in 2008,

he promised Armenian-Americans, a small but powerful bloc, that he

would declare the massacre a genocide if he won the White House.

 

"He supported legislation as a senator that he opposes as president,"

said Mr. Hamparian, adding that Armenian-Americans will use the French

action as leverage to get Congress to adopt an Armenian resolution.

 

A House resolution is awaiting action in the House Foreign Affairs

Committee. A Senate resolution was sent to the Foreign Relations

Committee last year, but Chairman John F. Kerry, Massachusetts

Democrat, took no action.

 

Mr. Hamparian said he hopes that the Senate sponsors, Democrats Barbara

Boxer of California and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, will introduce

another resolution this year.

 

He praised the French bill as a "very principled stand."

 

Mr. Evinch said that Turkish-Americans see the French bill as an

attempt to prohibit any independent research into the facts about

the Armenian massacre.

 

Turkey disputes Armenian claims of 1.5 million deaths. It insists

that about 500,000 Armenians were killed in an uprising during and

after World War I and that Turks and Kurds died at the hands of

Armenian rebels.

 

Asked whether the French action would affect the debate in Washington,

Mr. Evinch said, "I don't think so. ... It puts the issue in a

negative light."

 

"As an American," he added, "I can't envision criminalizing thought."

 

In Turkey on Tuesday, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan denounced

the French bill as "discriminatory and racist."

 

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu over the weekend threatened

France with "permanent sanctions" if the assembly adopted the bill.

 

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which represents 57

Muslim-majority nations, accused the French of approving the bill for

"political and electoral gain" to win support from some 500,000 ethnic

Armenians in France.

 

"We reject this law and consider it to be inconsistent with historical

fact," the group said.

 

French President Nicolas Sarkozy plans to sign the bill within two

weeks, his office announced in Paris on Tuesday, while Foreign Minister

Alain Juppe appealed to France's "Turkish friends" to stay calm.

[Yervant1]

This is the answer to these hypocrite articles by James Morrison in "The Washington Times" and "ARMENIAN GENOCIDE: DANGEROUS PITY" by Robert Badinter in "Huffington Post". The above two posts by me!

Why is it that these SOB's don't write about the freedom of speech in turkey?

 

 

LET GO OF FRANCE, WRITER IS TRIED IN TURKEY FOR SAYING "GENOCIDE" - TURKISH DAILY

 

news.am

January 26, 2012 | 11:14

 

Turkey is accusing France for its bill that criminalizes the denial

of genocides, including the Armenian Genocide, stressing that this

is a violation of the freedom of speech, but it disregards the fact

that renowned Turkish writer Temel Demirer is currently being tried

for saying "genocide" in Turkey.

 

In its article entitled, "Let go of France, look at Turkey," Taraf

daily of Turkey informs that the trial of Demirer is still continuing,

and that he is being tried with the Turkish Criminal Code's infamous

Article 301.

 

On the first-year anniversary of the murder of Hrant Dink-the founder

and former chief editor of Istanbul's Agos Armenian weekly, who was

killed in 2007-Temel Demirer had stated that Dink was killed because

he had said genocide was committed in this country (Turkey).

 

"Yes, genocide was committed in this country," the Turkish writer

had said, and subsequently Prosecutor Levent Savas brought a case

against him on charges of "denying Turkish arguments."

 

What is more, Turkey's Justice Minister asserted that Demirer will

continue to be tried with Article 301, on charges of "degrading the

Republic of Turkey."

[Yervant1]

Little long but it's a good read! Taner Akcam's interview where he gives very clear cut answers to very difficult questions.

 

 

 

AKCAM: GENOCIDE RECOGNITION IS ABOUT JUSTICE, NOT FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

by Taner Akcam

 

http://www.armenianweekly.com/2012/01/25/akcam-genocide-recognition-is-about-justice-not-freedom-of-thought/

January 25, 2012

 

The following interview with Prof. Taner Akcam, the Robert Aram,

Marianne Kaloosdian and Stephen and Marion Mugar Chair in Armenian

Genocide Studies at Clark University, appeared in Le Monde on Jan. 7.

 

The interview was conducted by Guillaume Perrier. Below is the

interview in English.

 

Taner Akcam Q. What is your opinion, not about the genocide denial

law itself, but about the effects it can have on the debate among

intellectuals and civil society in Turkey?

 

A. As the saying goes, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

 

Although, in the short run, the French law has been very negatively

received in Turkey, I believe that in the long run, the effect will

be positive. Within its own borders, Turkey can try and continue to

suppress, and muzzle, and deny the truth, but internationally there

will be continual reminders (such as the French law) of an issue that

Turkey must confront and ultimately resolve.

 

Even if one opposes this legal initiative, it shows that Turkey cannot

escape by sticking its head in the sand. For this reason, the French

initiative cannot be considered as a simple "law" in the technical

sense of the term for France. For better or worse, it has become part

of the international campaign to recognize the Armenian Genocide.

 

Turkey's hysteria, and anger, and temper tantrums will pass and

some of the negative developments that have occurred will be quickly

forgotten. What will remain is the heavy reality of a very serious

unresolved problem. Such an outcome will, I expect, support the

position of those intellectuals who assert that confronting and

remembering history is strongly connected to the creation of a

democratic society.

 

Regardless of France's ultimate aims or intentions, Turkish society and

its educated classes are once again reminded that we need to resolve

this very fundamental issue. Some may object that "this should have

happened some other way," but if you don't solve your problems on

your own, often enough someone else will force a solution on you.

 

That's the way it's always been in this world.

 

Everyone has to realize this basic fact: On the subject of 1915,

Turkey has followed a politics of purposeful amnesia and delaying

tactics. Turkey has swept the issue under the rug, buried it and

pretended it didn't exist, all in the hopes that everyone's memory

would be short and the whole thing would be forgotten. This is what

they've been doing for about a hundred years.

 

Every year after April 24th, the commentary in most of the daily

newspapers is something along the lines of "Whew, great, we got

through another year of this." With 2015 approaching, the tactic is

the same. They know the subject is going to be brought up, especially

abroad, and everything is geared towards getting through 2015 with

the least amount of damage. That's why there's so much anger towards

France's law. Turkey is angry at being reminded. Such memory is a

ghost that has haunted them for decades.

 

I've been dealing with the Armenian Genocide topic for many years now,

but when it comes up with other Turkish intellectuals, I've always

sensed a certain lack of interest, as if to say, "Where'd you come up

with this problem, anyway? Don't we have enough issues to deal with?"

 

For them the subject has always seemed a bit unreal, inauthentic,

and imposed from the outside.

 

My international colleagues speak of my "courage" to pursue this

subject in the face of "threats and dangers" from Turkey. However,

that has never really been my problem. My biggest challenge was

loneliness. I have had a hard time trying to explain the significance

of 1915 even to my closest friends in Turkey. In 1997, I wrote an

essay titled, "Walking around like a leper in my own country." That's

how I felt-like a leper, a pariah. It wasn't a matter of "fear" and

"courage." What bothered me the most was their indifference, their

lack of interest, and the resulting alienation and loneliness I felt.

 

When I'd depart from Turkey, since my flight usually took off at

around 5 a.m., I would stay up all night talking with Hrant Dink.

 

Every one of those conversations revolved around our loneliness. We

felt that no one seemed really interested in understanding and

listening to us. The question that we most often struggled with was,

"How can we reach our friends and acquaintances so that they see

just how important this subject really is?" One of Hrant's biggest

challenges was isolation. In the end, his alienation by and from us,

Turkish intellectuals, was a contributing factor in his murder.

 

Hrant's death was a turning point. Turkish intellectuals took more

interest in the events of 1915. We began to understand that 1915

has even more to do with today than with the past. Gradually, the

connection between democracy-building and human rights, on the one

hand, and remembering and confronting history, on the other, became

clearer and more acceptable across a broader swath of Turkish society.

 

The civil-democratic activism that coalesced after Hrant's death played

an important role in this change. However, this emergent opposition

is still lacking in strength. I believe that we still need much more

external pressure. That is where the French law comes in.

 

Q. Do you think international pressure is positive or negative on

Turkey? Don't you fear it will lead Turkey to a more nationalist,

defensive approach?

 

A. I am reminded of an incident on Jan. 4 or 5, 2007. The prosecutor's

office at Sisli, in an effort to put pressure on Hrant's legal defense,

had targeted me for investigation because of an article in which I'd

used the word "genocide." After giving the prosecutor my statement, I

headed over to the Agos newspaper office. Hrant and I were chatting. As

in the past, he was criticizing France's initiatives.

 

"Stop, Hrant," I told him. "If France weren't taking this initiative,

no one here would be holding a microphone to your mouth. Don't forget,"

I added, "the only reason people know who you are is because France

keeps up this business with the law. If people outside the country

weren't doing this you'd have a lot of trouble finding anyone willing

to listen to you."

 

"You're right," he admitted. "The only time it's remembered is when

there is outside pressure."

 

This is something that the West needs to realize. It just isn't

possible to change Turkey's position regarding the subject of 1915

based solely on internal democratic opposition. Turkish democratic

and civil society activists don't possess that kind of strength. The

assassination of Hrant Dink is evidence of this weakness. Today,

there's a very genuine activist movement that goes by the name

"Friends of Hrant" that has gained significant public support in

Turkey, yet Hrant's real murderers still roam the country freely.

 

Those countries that condone and enable Turkey's politics of denial

for their own economic, political, and strategic advantage should

understand one thing: "Denial" is a structure. To understand why

Turkey continues to deny what happened in 1915, you should compare

it with the racist regime of South Africa. The institutions, system,

and mindset of apartheid were established upon racial differences, and

the denial of genocide is similar. By denying what happened in 1915,

Turkey reproduces the institutions, social relations, and mindset

that created 1915.

 

Genocide denial goes beyond the defense of a former regime whose

institutions and mindset were realized as genocide in the past. Denial

also fuels a politics of continuing aggression, both inside and

outside Turkey, against anyone who opposes the denialist mentality.

 

This is why Hrant Dink's actual murderers are still at large. This

is why attacks are organized against Armenians and their memorials

in Europe. This is why in America campaigns of hate and hostility

are organized against me and other intellectuals.

 

What should be clear to everyone is this: In Turkey, genocide denial

is an industry. It is also a state policy of primary importance. The

National Security Council, Turkey's highest constitutional authority,

established in 2001 a Coordinating Committee for the Fight Against

Baseless Claims of Genocide. All of the important ministries, including

the Armed Forces, are represented on this committee, which is chaired

by the vice prime minister. I repeat: Denying the genocide is one of

the most important national policies of the Turkish state.

 

You need to realize that you aren't just confronting a simple "denial,"

but you're up against a "denialist regime."

 

As long as Turkey continues this state policy of genocide denial

through its institutions, relations, and mentality, Ankara will be

sensitive to external pressure. In fact, this pressure should be

increased. What happened in Libya and Syria needs to happen in Turkey

also, with regard to genocide denial, even if the content and scope

of the pressure are different.

 

If the West is serious about democracy in the Middle East, it cannot

build democracy by supporting a denialist regime. Historical denial,

both as institution and mindset, is probably the greatest stumbling

block to peace and democracy in the Middle East. Why do Christians,

Kurds, and Arabs in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq feel intimidated by

Turkey? Why aren't they keen on Turkey's intervention for democracy

and human rights? Because they see, in today's denialist regime of

Turkey, the Unionists' mentality that committed crimes against them

in the past.

 

The South African regime didn't collapse from internal pressure alone.

 

The support of international public opinion was also very important.

 

As long as the West allows Turkey's denialist politics to continue,

genocide denial will go on.

 

We are faced with the huge issue of how to prevent mass murders

and genocides in today's global community. To that end, the space

for genocide denial in the international arena must be narrowed and

ultimately eliminated. Turkey's denial policy should be reconsidered

within this perspective of prevention of genocide in the global world.

 

Yes, it's always possible that external pressure may have negative

consequences. History provides examples of this. We must remember not

to go to extremes. If we take the position that external pressure

is always bad, we play into the hands of dictators who would like

nothing better than to perpetuate their crimes with impunity. The

apartheid regime of South Africa, Latin American dictatorships, and

the repressive Arab regimes have all taken this attitude. On the other

hand, if we say, "It doesn't matter what's going on internally, we're

going to impose change from the outside," the most disgraceful example

is the invasion of Iraq. So we need to stay away from either extreme.

 

Instead of asking, "Yes or no to external pressure?", we should be

asking, "What kind of external pressure?"

 

The refusal to exert pressure is another position to be avoided. For

example, the West (especially the U.S. and UK) have created their own

kind of "external pressure" model based on their own calculations. For

the sake of perceived economic, political, and military strategic

interests, they turn a blind eye to a denialist regime. Their refusal

enables Turkey to swagger, bully, and threaten other countries. This

must stop. Turkey will not give up its denial policy without external

pressure.

 

Actually, what I want is in Turkey's best interest. In the end,

what outcome could be better than the creation of a society that

respects democracy and human rights and that confronts its history

without shame? I have a hard time understanding what could possibly

be negative about creating external pressure towards this end.

 

Opponents will counter that external pressure is not motivated by a

desire to bring democracy to Turkey. They will say that the West exerts

pressure in order to limit Turkey's power. Is there a grain of truth in

this outlook? Of course there is, but the remedy is simple: Don't let

others limit you. If you don't want them to use your faults against

you, then correct those faults so they can't. Do your homework. No

country has ever been hurt by democracy or respect for human rights.

 

I'm pushing 60 years of age, and by now, I'm sick and tired of these

"external pressure" arguments. In the 1980's, Turkey's military

regime was supported for the same reason and thousands of people were

killed, tortured, or thrown in jail. Turkish generals were like the

West's spoiled brats, killing as they pleased. They hated any kind of

pressure, didn't want anyone "meddling in their internal affairs." The

same game is being played over the "denial of history."

 

Moreover, the really important question isn't even "What kind

of external pressure?" We must ask how this external pressure

will establish a healthy and positive relationship with the

internal democratization process. The biggest problem right now is

incompatibility and lack of harmony. Positive communication channels

must be created between Turkey's domestic, democratic opposition and

the world beyond its borders. Real dialogue has yet to be established

between internal and external activist groups that must unite in

order to change the denialist regime. Looking at France, I can say

that what we have here is a dialogue of the deaf.

 

I can't say whether France's indifference to Turkey's democratic

opposition has anything to do with it, but the nationalist leanings of

Turkish intellectuals definitely play a role in this futile dialogue

between parties who cannot hear each other. A very significant majority

of Turkish intellectuals still views any foreign initiative with a

great deal of suspicion and doubt. This attitude feels so natural to

them that unfortunately they have no idea that it springs from a deep

well of nationalist tendencies.

 

Turkish national identity has from the beginning been defined in

opposition to the "terrible West that wants to meddle with our internal

affairs from outside." Undoubtedly, when one looks at the history of

Ottoman Turks, one can hardly claim that the West played a positive

role. However, the damage done by the West was not limited to meddling

with the Ottomans for colonialist self-interest. On the contrary,

the West committed a great error in not having interfered enough. A

whole series of Western interventions against the Ottomans throughout

the 19th century were critically important in the formulation of what

we now call international law. In other words, we need to re-examine

the idea that "all external pressure is wrong."

 

During Turkey's bid for European Union membership, Turkish

intellectuals and the society, in general, softened their stance

against "foreign interference." Turkish society understood that

outside pressure, especially by the European Greens or some of the

other left wing parties, was not motivated solely by malice. In fact,

it was accepted as a positive influence. The same kind of acceptance

must be generated towards the concept of genocide recognition.

 

In today's globally connected world, the whole idea of "external" and

"internal" is very problematic. We must create a global awareness of

genocides and their prevention without making these distinctions of

"external" and "internal." Genocide denial and the struggle against

it are part of global democracy and human rights. You can't speak of

it as "external." Recognition is an issue relevant to all of humanity.

 

Q. Since you published a Shameful Act, it opened a door in Turkey,

there's been an evolution on the 1915 issue in Turkey. How do you

see the debate in Turkey? What's your opinion about the different

initiatives that have appeared recently [April 24 commemorations,

the ozur diliyoruz campaign, the conference in Diyarbakir]? Do you

hope for eventual recognition of the genocide from Turkey?

 

A. Turkey's domestic opposition should be taken more seriously. A group

of individuals are in the thick of an honorable struggle that truly

deserves more respect. Although Hrant Dink's death was a turning point

of sorts, they still don't receive enough international support or

interest. No one's asking them, "How are you doing? What do you need?"

 

Even if the draft bill in France came to be as the product of differing

interests, even if it is disregarded, I wish those working for the

law in France would ask Turkish grassroots activists what they think

of such an initiative. I would like to see this as a starting point

for dialogue. This channel of communication hasn't been opened and

should be built as soon as possible.

 

A major reason the "bridge" hasn't been built is the complete lack

of interest outside of Turkey, particularly by the Armenian Diaspora,

in Turkey's growing democratization. Indeed, despite the pro-democracy

movement's positive aspects and successes, the struggle within Turkey

will get nowhere on its own. The "denial coalition and industry"

can't be changed by domestic pressure alone, but it can be defeated

if-and only if-the internal opposition joins forces with a harmonious

and balanced external pressure.

 

Dialogue between Turkey's civil activists and the worldwide struggle

for "genocide recognition" is urgently needed. One reason it has yet to

be initiated is the decades-old mutual prejudices about ethno-religious

and other social attributes. Also, Turkey's civil activists have yet

to appreciate the significance of genocide recognition within their

own democracy struggles. While Turkish activists perceive international

demands for genocide recognition as distractions or obstacles to their

own agenda, a large portion of the diaspora fails to appreciate the

strong bond between genocide recognition and democracy-building in

Turkey. If anything, they tend to belittle and underestimate this

process.

 

However, I don't want to lay too much blame on either side. In truth,

the issue goes beyond mutual perceptions of malice or benevolence. An

even deeper problem is actually that the sides are struggling for

disparate goals.

 

Genocide recognition, in essence, is about justice, not freedom of

expression or thought. A democratic or free society, such as France

or the U.S., may still have unresolved historical injustices, for

example towards Algeria or Native Americans. Turkish civil society

still believes that its own problems are due to limitations on the

freedom of thought. Other goals, such as justice and confronting

history, are dismissed as unaffordable luxuries or deferred to some

imaginary future. Hence the negative reaction to demands for simple

truth and justice.

 

This is the dilemma that must be surmounted. Justice and confronting

history can be achieved only with the establishment of a free and

democratic society. The campaign for "truth and justice" and the

movement for "freedom and democracy" are not mutually exclusive, nor

should they result in confrontation. Quite the contrary, they are, and

ought to be, inseparable goals. The demands of the diaspora and Turkish

society must be brought together. The duty to build bridges between

foreign and domestic civil activism is the most urgent thing right now.

[MosJan]

Թուրքիայի առաջին տիկնոջ՝ Հայրունիսա Գյուլի կողմից Թուրքիայում օտարերկրյա դեսպանների կանանց պատվին տված ճաշկերույթին ներկա չի եղել միայն Թուրքիայում Ֆրանսիայի դեսպանի կինը։

 

Թուրքական Milliyet-ի փոխանցմամբ՝ Թուրքիայի նախագահի կինը չի հրավիրել Ֆրանսիայի դեսպանի կնոջը՝ արտահայտելով իր վերաբերմունքը Ֆրանսիայի Սենատի կողմից ցեղասպանությունների ժխտումը քրեականացնող օրինագծի ընդունման հետ կապված։

 

 

[MosJan]

Things start moving: French genocide bill changes reality around Turkey

 

 

By NAIRA HAYRUMYAN

ArmeniaNow correspondent

urkey is not in a hurry to materialize its threats of economic sanctions against France, as it deems the law passed by the Senate of France criminalizing the public denial of the Armenian genocide is not yet a final decision by Paris. So says Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan.Turkey has so far limited its actions to some demonstrative steps, showing what it can do if French President Nicolas Sarkozy signs the law, which is expected in the coming days. Immediately after the January 23 adoption of the law in the senate, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu went to Moscow, after earlier canceling his trip to Brussels. In the Russian capital, the top Turkish diplomat made a number of remarkable statements. First, it was stated there that trade between Russia and Turkey may reach a $100 billion mark over the next five years. Secondly, Davutoglu said that Turkey will not become a springboard for attacks on Iran. And before that, a Turkish minister who visited Moscow said that, along with Russia, Turkey is in favor of non-interference in Syrian affairs. Besides, an unprecedented joint statement was issued by the foreign ministers of Russia and Turkey on the Karabakh problem.Therefore Turkey tried to show that if pressure continues it will form an alliance with Russia and Iran, refusing to cooperate with the West. But, apparently, the West has not been deterred by this either. Experts do not even rule out that France is intentionally provoking Turkey into taking some drastic steps to abandon its allied services.Apparently, Turkey is also aware that her being an Islamic country and simultaneously a member of NATO sometimes does not satisfy the Western community. With the adoption of a bill criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide France's Sarkozy, who is running for a second presidential term in spring, hopes to gain the support of not only ethnic Armenian voters, but also those of the far-right circles that suffer from Islamophobia and oppose Turkey's membership in the European Union, claimed Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu.The French Senate law criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide, the discussions of an Armenian Genocide recognition bill in the Knesset of Israel and a possible adoption of such a law in the German Parliament show that the process of international affirmation of the 1915 Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire is unstoppable, said director of the Yerevan-based Center for Regional Studies Richard Giragosian. The Armenian genocide issue has been considered by Israeli parliamentarians for quite some time now. And recently a German parliamentarian said that discussions of the issue might soon begin also at the Bundestag. Director of the Yerevan-based Caucasus Institute Alexander Iskandaryan also believes that "the train of the Armenian Genocide recognition in the world has set off and it cannot be stopped." According to him, this event has changed the reality around Turkey and Europe's attitude towards Turkey.Director of the Institute of Political and Social Studies of the Black Sea-Caspian region Vladimir Zakharov said: "Now it is impossible to say that there was no Armenian Genocide as Turkey and Azerbaijan have tried to do it." He added that the adoption of such a law by one of the most influential countries will inevitably lead to a wave of other recognitions of the Armenian Genocide.The Armenian Genocide is, indeed, a subject being discussed internationally. Thus, British Prime Minister David Cameron, recently replying to the question of a Turkish delegate at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe regarding the French criminalization of the Armenian genocide denial, said that appalling things were happening to Armenians and atrocities were committed against them. "Our position on the issue raised is clear. Appalling things happened to the Armenian people; appalling atrocities were committed. It is important to state that, but we have to live in the present," said the British prime minister, adding that the UK has a legislation making it possible to prosecute people for appalling war crimes.The French Senate's passage of the bill also appears to have inspired Armenian American lobby groups with greater optimism for a genocide resolution in the United States. Aram Hamparian, the Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of America, the largest of such groups, earlier this week again urged U.S. President Barack Obama to honor his pledge to recognize the mass killings and deportations of 1.5 million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as genocide. "The courageous vote by the French Senate shines the spotlight across the Atlantic, on American policymakers, who, for far too long, have let Ankara block U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide," said Hamparian

 

http://armenianow.co...y_around_turkey

[MosJan]

 

Difference of Opinion: Clinton says US never to follow France’s example

 

 

United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says her country will never do as France did on Monday, and criminalize genocide denial.“One of our great strengths is we do not criminalize speech,” the secretary told a public meeting on Thursday. “People can say nearly anything they choose, and they do, in our country. And so other countries, including close friends and allies like France, have different standards, different histories, but we are, I hope, never going to go down that path to criminalize speech.” Clinton also said the United States should not recognize the Armenian Genocide, explaining that it is a “historical” issue, rather than “political”.As Asbarez news points out, four years ago this week – while campaigning for president – Clinton called the 1915-23 history of events in Ottoman Turkey, “a clear case of genocide.”

 

 

[Yervant1]

ANALYSTS SAY TURKEY ON WRONG TRACK OVER ARMENIA GENOCIDE

 

Ahram Online

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/32964/World/Region/Analysts-say-Turkey-on-wrong-track-over-Armenia-ge.aspx

Jan 27 2012

Egypt

 

Analysts believe that Turkey can no longer escape its duty of

contrition for the genocide, especially with the French Senate's

legislation for criminalising the denial of the 1915 massacre

 

Turkey's attempts to intimidate France and other countries over the

question of the Armenian genocide are bound to backfire, analysts

said as the 100th anniversary of the bloodshed approaches.

 

"This negative and reactive strategy has failed, and no one is ready

to admit it," said Cengiz Aktar of Istanbul's Bahcesehir University.

 

"I hope that the authorities will think about it and come up with a

different tack by the time of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian

genocide that is coming up" in 2015, said Aktar, an international

relations professor, using the term Ankara condemns.

 

Hugh Pope of the International Crisis Group agreed, saying: "There

are many people in Turkey that are worried about how Turkey is going

to handle the situation in 2015."

 

He said Ankara should "get on a path of reconciliation with the

Armenians so that they can be on the side of the people who are

going to be remembering the lost communities of Armenians" in the

anniversary year.

 

The French Senate on Monday approved legislation under which anyone

in France who denies that the 1915 massacre of Armenians by Ottoman

Turk forces amounted to genocide could face imprisonment.

 

On Tuesday, Paris brushed off angry threats of retaliation by Turkey

and said the bill would become law in two weeks.

 

Ankara has already halted political amd military cooperation and is

threatening to cut off economic and cultural ties. Bilateral trade

totalled some 11.7 billion euros ($15.4 billion) in 2010.

 

The French chamber of commerce in Turkey, which has some 400 members,

on Thursday expressed "great disappointment" over the bill, and called

on France's constitutional council to nix it.

 

"Turkey is making more and more threats against France," wrote

editorialist Semih Idiz in the Milliyet daily. "But in a few weeks the

issue will rear its head again in the US Congress. There are other

countries waiting in the wings. Will Turkey recall its ambassador

each time?" he asked. "It's an absurd situation."

 

Armenia and its diaspora in countries around the world have long

campaigned for international recognition of the killings as genocide,

despite strong denials from Turkey.

 

Armenians says that planned massacres and deportations left more than

1.5 million people dead, but Turkey puts the number at up to 500,000,

describing the bloodshed as civil strife stemming from the conflict

with Russia in World War I.

 

Around 20 countries have officially recognised the killings as

genocide.

 

The dispute is in addition to the conflict between Armenia and

Azerbaijan, an ally of Turkey, over the Nagorny-Karabakh enclave.

 

Ankara and Yerevan signed a historic protocol in 2009 to normalise

relations, but it was never ratified as Turkey demanded a resolution

to the Nagorny-Karabakh dispute .

 

Armenian separatists backed by Yerevan seized Nagorny-Karabakh from

Azerbaijan in a war in the 1990s that left some 30,000 people dead,

and the two sides have not signed a final peace deal since a 1994

ceasefire.

 

Turkey can no longer escape its duty of contrition for the genocide,

said Soli Ozel of Istanbul's Kadir Has University

 

"First and foremost it must express chagrin, and the Turkish state

has never done that," the international relations professor wrote in

the daily HaberTurk.

[Yervant1]

Holocaust would not take place if Armenian Genocide was prevented:

Jewish human rights defender

 

17:28, 28 January, 2012

 

YEREVAN, JANUARY 28, ARMENPRESS: The Holocaust would not take place if

the Armenian Genocide was prevented, Jewish ombudsman, co-author of

"Respect for Memory of Armenian Genocide Victims" book Serge Klarsfeld

said in an interview with La Liberation French newspaper, citing

Hitler's well-known phrase - "Who remembers the Armenians now?"

 

According to the scientist, only the fact that denial of the Holocaust

is criminally punishable in France obligates to do the same in the

issue of the Armenian genocide, Armenpress reports.

 

In answer to the newspaper's question that, nevertheless, there are

historians who do not consider the Armenian pogroms a genocide, Serge

Klarsfeld said: "Very often historians themselves do not want to face

the history, but in this case nothing impedes to carry out serious

studies."

 

According to the human rights defender, in this way the French

Parliament indicates a moral landmark in the field of politics.

"Hereafter judges will do their work not on the basis of history but

law," said Serge Klarsfeld.

[Yervant1]

Armenians in Russia should sign for State Duma to adopt bill

criminalizing denial of Armenian Genocide

 

news.am

January 28, 2012 | 22:50

 

 

MOSCOW. - Duty of every citizen of Russia of the Armenian descent is

to sign under the call for the Russian State Duma to adopt a bill

criminalizing denial of Nazi crimes and the Armenian Genocide in

1915-22 in Turkey, head of Hamshen Armenian scientific information

-cultural center Artavazd Tulumjyan said.

 

`We had to raise the issue sooner or later,' he told Yerkramas

Russia-based Armenian newspaper. `We, as one of the hugest Armenian

communities in the world, cannot stay aside. Since the process started

and increases, I believe it is the duty of every Armenian in Russia to

sign under the call.'

 

To note, the action was initiated by the Union of Armenians in Sochi

and supported by Assyrians, Kazaks and Greeks in Russia.

[Yervant1]

Ukrainian writer deems Genocide motion vital to justice restoration

 

January 28, 2012 - 13:35 AMT

 

 

PanARMENIAN.Net - French Senate's adoption of the bill criminalizing

the Armenian Genocide denial is a vital step towards restoring

historical justice, a prominent Ukrainian author said.

 

`France always showed proper respect for the Armenians and the

Armenian Diaspora played a crucial role in the country. Hopefully,

many states will follow France's suit,' Vasily Shklyar told

Analitika.at.ua.

 

On January 23, the French Senate passed the bill criminalizing the

Armenian Genocide denial with 127 votes for and 86 against. To be

signed into law within 14 days, the bill will impose a 45,000 euro

fine and a year in prison for anyone in France who denies this crime

against humanity committed by the Ottoman Empire.

[Yervant1]

SUPPORTERS OF ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI, IDIOT ARMENIAN GENOCIDE-DENIER, THREATEN TO PROTEST OUTSIDE WEEKLY OFFICES!

By Gustavo Arellano

 

OC Weekly

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2012/01/ataa_ergun_kirlikovali.php

Feb 1 2012

CA

 

You can write all sorts of damning things against individuals, yet

it's the most innocuous words that hurt. I'll never forget last year,

when I got a call from none other than Mark Weber, the head of the

Holocaust-denying Institute for Historical Review, all upset that

I called him a "cockroach" in a post. I talked him down by pointing

out that, like those insects, his kind had to hide from the public,

a point he didn't dispute but then blamed on the Jews--kidding.

 

(About the Jews part, at least. I think)

 

Something must be in the water that denialists drink, because now

the genocide deniers all bent out of shape are supporters of Ergun

Kirlikovali, current president of the Assembly of Turkish American

Associations and the idiot who insists the Armenian genocide never

happened.

 

Any sane person would agree anyone who willfully denies the Armenian

genocide is an idiot--but it's that simple insight that has me in

hot water with Kirlikovali's fans.

 

Last Thursday, our receptionist told me that someone called threatening

to occupy the Weekly's offices unless I met with them--something

about me insulting their leader. It finally dawned on me that they

were referring to this post, where I noted Kirlikovali was an idiot,

mostly for having the ATAA whine that genocides should only be deemed

as such by historians...then claiming France committed genocide

against Algerians.

 

Yesterday, Taylor found the angry message--roll the tape!

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE HILARITY!

 

Yes, angry man: Kirlikovali is an idiot. If you think the Armenian

genocide didn't happen, then you're an idiot, too. So is anyone who

denies it. Idiot. Idiot. Idiot.

 

Feel free to protest outside our offices--just make sure to bring the

raki and iskender kabob, as you might as well make yourself useful

for something.

[Yervant1]

TOP FRENCH COURT ASKED TO WEIGH IN ON BILL MAKING IT A CRIME TO DENY ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

 

Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/top-french-court-asked-to-weigh-in-on-bill-making-it-a-crime-to-deny-armenian-genocide/2012/01/31/gIQA3wjeeQ_story.html

Jan 31 2012

 

PARIS - France's Constitutional Council has been asked on Tuesday to

determine whether a bill concerning the mass killings of Armenians

a century ago violates the constitution.

 

The bill makes it a crime to deny that the killings of some 1.5

million Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915 constituted genocide.

 

Turkey, which says there was no systematic campaign against Armenians,

is strongly opposed to the bill and says relations with France will

suffer as a result.

 

Turkey suspended military and economic cooperation after the lower

house approval of the measure in December. The Senate gave it the

green light in late January.

 

President Nicolas Sarkozy - who personally backed the bill - must sign

the legislation for it to become law. However, the latest action will

delay the process.

 

The Constitutional Council said groups of legislators have submitted

a formal request that the body rule on the measure's constitutionality.

 

It has up to a month to do so.

 

Turkish officials welcomed the move. President Abdullah Gul said,

"I hope the French court makes the right decision."

 

Even within the French mainstream, the measure sowed divisions on

Sarkozy's right and on the rival left with some lawmakers expressing

some of the same concerns as Ankara, notably that denying the mass

killings of Armenians nearly a century ago impinges on freedom of

expression and legislates in a domain better left to historians.

 

France's relations with Turkey are already strained, in large part

because Sarkozy opposes Turkey's entry into the European Union.

[Yervant1]

THE POLITICS OF GENOCIDE

 

Cleveland Jewish News

http://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/opinion/op-eds/article_864aaf50-4de5-11e1-a807-0019bb2963f4.html

Feb 2 2012

 

ALAN S. ROSENBAUM

 

Larry Derfner argues in an article in the Forward last month, with

some logical force, that for the Israeli Knesset at this time to

suddenly recognize the 1915-16 Armenian genocide at the hands of the

Ottoman Turks is inconsistent with Israel's past silence and smacks

of political expediency.

 

He suggests the government of Israel should continue its silence on

the death of over 1 million Armenians to avoid further antagonizing

Turkey's Islamist government.

 

The problem: If a calamitous truth like genocide is the truth, it

should always be officially acknowledged, especially by the Jewish

state of Israel, given the latter's intimate link to the genocide of

the Holocaust.

 

Many Israelis and other Jews would be incensed if a government

or people were to be denied public validation of the historical

atrocities committed against them. They would likely insist on its

official recognition and mount a challenge to those who would deny

such clear, basic and important historical truths.

 

Even the U.S. government has not been immune to political

considerations often trumping momentous historical truths. For

example, 126 Holocaust scholars, including this writer, placed a

full-page ad in The New York Times (June 9, 2000) calling on Congress

and Western democracies to officially resolve that the Armenian

genocide is incontestably true and that, as a successor government,

the present government of Turkey ought to take moral responsibility

for the genocide.

 

To this appeal the Turks gave a decisive counterargument: that to

do so would compel, among other things, Turkey's reconsideration of

America's use of the Incirlik Air Base close to its border with Iraq.

 

Congress and other countries caved to political or pragmatic pressure.

 

Despite the then-candidate for president Obama's campaign pledge to

the contrary, the president continues the practice of non-recognition

in order not to disturb America's political relations with Turkey.

 

To bolster Turkey's position, its penal code stipulates that

"insults to Turkishness" will not be tolerated. This obviously

elastic provision allows for the prosecution of individuals who

"insult Turkishness" by publicly affirming that Turkey was to blame

for the Armenian genocide. Turkey's position is that what happened to

the Armenians was nothing more than a tragic massacre in the context

of the collapsing Ottoman Empire.

 

Although many countries like Canada, Germany and Belgium have laws

against Holocaust denial, these laws are designed to prevent public

expressions of anti-Semitism and divisive threats to Jews and to

societal stability. Such laws tend to further affirm historical truth

and universal respect for persons and are not used to deny historical

truth, as is the case with Turkey.

 

However, some argue that criminalizing "genocide denial," a move that

France may also soon take, is a step in the wrong direction. They

claim that it tends to short-circuit discussion and debate.

 

Indeed, judicial findings may sometimes be used to advance certain

historical truths and to apportion individual culpability. But the

difficulty with this argument is that some "issues" are, on principle,

never open to debate. Namely, the victims of racism or anti-Semitism

should never be expected to defend their own moral equality as

persons. The persistent derogatory references to Jews in European

countries was a major contributing factor to the Holocaust. It is

simply morally offensive to allow legitimacy of such talk.

 

On the other hand, to place a mass atrocity's reality beyond legitimate

debate, it needs only good, sufficient evidence by authoritative

sources, including trustworthy legal ones, like the findings of

the Nuremberg Trials after World War II. Whether mass killings

amount to genocide is open for legitimate discussion. The identity

of the perpetrators, the means used, body counts, where ultimate

responsibility lies, and context are all variables that should always

be in play as freedom of expression should permit. That particular

mass killings or genocidal events once established have occurred,

as in the instance of the Armenians or the Jews, is not subject to

legitimate debate.

 

Important historical realities like genocide should always be

officially respected so that moral and financial accountability and

the process of restorative justice are possible. To deny such history

only invites repetition. It also serves to encourage the subversion

of the truth in the name of pragmatic or political expediency.

 

Alan S. Rosenbaum is a professor of philosophy at Cleveland State

University and editor of the Third Edition of Is the Holocaust Unique?

[MosJan]

 

Turkey bans French military aircrafts to enter its air space

After French Senate passed a bill criminalizing the denial of Armenian Genocide, France started to carry out those sanctions declared earlier.

Source: “Turkiyegazetesi.com”

 

[MosJan]

 

Azerbaijan’s FM meets French senators opposing Genocide bill

http://media.pn.am/media/issue/92/245/photo/92245.jpgFebruary 7, 2012 - 19:33 AMTPanARMENIAN.Net - Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov met with delegation of French senators headed by Nathalie Goulet. The delegation comprises senators having appealed to the Constitutional Court with a demand to abolish the bill criminalizing the Armenian Genocide denial.

 

The delegation consist of senators Nathalie Goulet, Sylvie Goy-Chavent, Jean-Marie Bockel, Hervé Maurey, André Reichardt and Jeanny Lorgeoux.

 

FM Mammadyarov stressed the importance of the visit for development of bilateral ties, noting that Azerbaijanis showed emotional approach to the Genocide bill passed by the French Senate, Azerbaijan Press Agency (APA) reported.

 

On January 23, the French Senate passed the bill criminalizing the Armenian Genocide denial with 127 votes for and 86 against. Expected to be signed into law by President within 14 days, the bill will impose a 45,000 euro fine and a year in prison for anyone in France who denies this crime against humanity committed by the Ottoman Empire.

 

Two separate groups of French politicians who oppose the legislation - from both the Senate and the lower house - said they had formally requested the constitutional council examine the law. The groups said they each had gathered more than the minimum 60 signatures required to ask the council to test the law's constitutionality. The council is obliged to deliver its judgment within a month, but this can be reduced to eight days if the government deems the matter urgent.

 

 

[Yervant1]

MORE TURKISH FREE SPEECH HYPOCRISY

by Michael Rubin

 

Commentary Magazine

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/02/07/turkish-free-speech-hypocrisy/

Feb 7 2012

 

The Swiss government has started an inquiry into a statement by Egemen

BagıÅ~_, Turkey's minister for European Union affairs, in which

BagıÅ~_ stated that the Armenians suffered no genocide. According to

a report in the Turkish press, BagıÅ~_ said, "There is no Armenian

genocide. Let them arrest me." Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag

commented on the incident, "Can't a minister of a country express

his views speaking in another country? It's ridiculous."

 

While I'm not in favor of laws restricting the speech, no matter how

wrong the speaker, BagıÅ~_ and Bozdag's stand is rich considering

that BagıÅ~_ - with the apparent blessing of Namik Tan, the Turkish

ambassador in Washington - tried to sue me into silence after I wrote

a series of articles criticizing Turkish government policies. Turkish

officials believe in free speech for themselves, but seek to censor

when speech is used to challenge their ideas.

 

The reality today is that, despite BagıÅ~_ and Tan's best efforts,

the only place Turks or Turkish analysts enjoy free speech is outside

of Turkey. Hence, as Jonathan noted yesterday, in order to defend

free speech, Kemal Kılıcdaroglu, the chairman of the Republican

Peoples Party, the largest secular party in Turkey, took to the pages

of The Washington Post rather than a Turkish outlet. As Kılıcdaroglu

explained:

 

Turkey today is a country where people live in fear and are divided

politically, economically and socially. Our democracy is regressing

in terms of the separation of powers, basic human rights and freedoms

and social development and justice. Citizens worry deeply about their

future. These points are, sadly, reflected in most major international

indexes, such as Human Rights Watch, which rank Turkey quite low in

terms of human rights, democracy, freedoms and equality.

 

Just as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton embarrassed herself by

labeling Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad a reformer, President Obama

embarrasses himself by calling Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan

a friend. Should Obama and Clinton embrace Turkey as a model for

the Arab Spring, then he is condemning another generation of Arabs

to repression.

[MosJan]

 

SARKOZY URGES TURKEY TO RESPECT ITS PARTNERS

• http://www.armtown.com/img/photo/pan_en_20120208_92294.jpgFrench President Nicolas Sarkozy said that he shows great respect for Turkey, which should, in return, respect its partners. Meanwhile, the Armenian Diaspora has expressed discontent with some of the French ruling party members opposing the bill penalizing the Armenian Genocide denial, according to Turkish media outlets.
   
  "Some members of the ruling party demonstrate weird conduct on the threshold of the elections. It will become clear in the future whether they tricked us or not," one of the heads of the Armenian community in France Jules Harounian said.
   
  On January 23, the French Senate passed the bill criminalizing the Armenian Genocide denial with 127 votes for and 86 against. Expected to be signed into law by President within 14 days, the bill will impose a 45,000 euro fine and a year in prison for anyone in France who denies this crime against humanity committed by the Ottoman Empire.
   
  Two separate groups of French politicians who oppose the legislation - from both the Senate and the lower house - said they had formally requested the constitutional council examine the law. The groups said they each had gathered more than the minimum 60 signatures required to ask the council to test the law's constitutionality. The council is obliged to deliver its judgment within a month, but this can be reduced to eight days if the government deems the matter urgent.