444) If Armenians say “Yes”, Fanatic Diaspora will Empower

The Armenian Society heads towards voting ballots in order to vote for the Constitutional change package, which will determine the power balance between the Parliament and the President.

Ankara is concerned about the package, covering 107 of the 119 articles in the Armenian Constitution. . . . The reform package enables the fanatic Armenian Diaspora, which has a negative attitude towards Turkey, to have double citizenships. The diplomatic sources, which say Diaspora is influential on Armenia, said: “If these changes take place, the Armenian Diaspora will increase its influence on Armenian policy even more by gaining voting rights also. This will reflect a negative effect on Ankara-Yerevan relations.” The latest public opinion polls show slightly more than half of the registered voters will vote and about 45 percent of them will say “Yes” to the package. However, it is still not clear whether the reform package will or will not be accepted.

Armenian President Robert Kocharian called the citizens to say “Yes” for the constitution change; however, the opposition, which thinks the parliament is misused by Kocharian, calls the citizens to say “No” and to boycott the referendum. Kocharian defines the opposition’s call for boycott as incomprehensible. Kocharian talked to the state TV prior to the referendum and expressed: “People urging to boycott the referendum have in their time boycotted the Karabagh war. Today these people live rather well and moreover, they are going to boycott the future of our country and our children. I will vote for the reforms and I will do it openly.” Kocharian defended the opposition does not have any solid arguments to support their criticisms and added: “Their propagandas will not have a trace in history.” In order for the reforms to be accepted at least half of the participants have to vote yes and this rate should be equal to at least one third of 2.4 million registered voters. The package, which predicts important changes in the constitution accepted in 1995, had been accepted in the parliament with 89 votes against zero. The Constitutional reform had been presented to referendum in 2003 once more but, it was not accepted then. Speaker of the Armenian Parliament Tigran Torosian, also a supporter of the referendum, said the new constitution will make the parliament the most powerful institution in the country.

Opposition Opposes Immunity and Right to Dissolve

The opposition, however, refuses to approve the reforms. Eighteen parties united against the idea of making constitutional amendments. Those opposing the reforms package are split into two groups of “no” voters and “boycotters”. Aram Sarkisyan, the Respublika leader and Viktor Dallakyan, the leader of Justice Bloc, object to the idea of giving the president the right to dissolve the parliament if the president does not find the legislation term of two months approvable. Granting the president immunity valid during his term of service as well as after his resignation as the president of Armenia was strongly objected by the opposition. According to them, the idea of rejecting the package of constitutional reforms provides opposition parties an opportunity to make their position certain and to overthrow the Kocharian administration. Former Prime Minister Aram Sarkisyan is one of those who object to the constitutional amendments. Sarkisyan accuses the authorities of distorting referendum results, warning against the possibility of such plots leading to a surprise mutiny that might result in destroying the governmental structure. At any rate, “we will be living in a new Armenia,” said Sarkisyan. Raffi Hovannisan, another opposition leader, thinks the referendum is “illegal”.

‘Orange Revolution Far Away from Yerevan’

Political observers, on the other hand, regard the positive outcome of the referendum as being important for the political advancement of Armenia. The opposition parties may receive enough support from the public, asserted the experts, not crediting the possibility of a revolution of the kind that was experienced in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan. The opposition does not have the resources to have a revolution and there is no basis for the eruption of a possible rebellion, say the experts. Most of the people are confused about the constitutional amendments; however, they will vote for these amendments anyway partly because European experts have worked out such amendments. Some people believe the new constitution will not cause a worse situation than the current one. “It is not important what the legislations include, but it is important how these legislations are put into effect,” say the people discontent with the current situation. The European Council had a direct “intervention” in the process of constitutional amendments to express its support for the reforms.

The referendum witnessed many colorful campaigns in which many propaganda tools were used such as media, banners, short messages (SMS) and others. While those in favor of changes used colorful banners, the opposition preferred using white banners.

Historical voting in Armenia

The constitutional amendments, which have been presented to voting today with a critical referendum, call for strict separation of judicial, legislative and executive bodies. The reform package envisaging the elimination of bans, which hinder the Armenian Diaspora to have dual citizenship, restricts the power of the president, increases the influence/power of the parliament and cabinet. The reform package entitles the parliament the right to appoint an ombudsman for human rights and to go for a vote of confidence in the parliament. The amendments foreseeing strengthening of human rights, pave the way for the citizens to apply to the Constitutional Court. Armenia witnessed many colorful scenes before the referendum.

‘Kocharian will benefit from it’

Armenian opposition objects the reform packages’ giving the authority to the president to dissolve the parliament if it does not support the government-supported laws for two months. In addition to this, it is noted giving a lifetime immunity right to the president will increase Kocharian’s power.


November 27, 2005
zaman.com

Read Full Post !

443) 'Turks and Armenians were Made Enemies'

Turkish Institute of History (TTK) President Professor Yusuf Halacoglu stated Turks and Armenians, who lived together in peace for 850 years, were made enemies of each other by internal and external powers. . .

Indicating a serious murder is being committed Halacoglu added:

“The committers of these murders are the imperialist powers which accept so called Armenian Genocide in their parliaments.”

Halacoglu gave a speech at a panel titled, “Loyal Nation: Armenians,” organized by the Federation to Fight Against the Unfounded Armenian Allegations (ASEF). He questioned the reasons why Turks and Armenians became enemies all of sudden after living in peace for 850 years and added the main problem was that Armenian organizations like Kipchak and Tashnak made the two countries enemies.

Halacoglu wanted to open cases against the countries which accept the so-called, Armenian Genocide claim and reminded he said three years agos, ‘If there is an Armenian Genocide and mass graves of Armenians show me and lets open them together.”

Halacoglu noted this kind of an offer has not reached him so far, however, they have opened two mass graves of Turks massacred by Armenians.

Armenian name the 1915 Events as 'genocide' while the Turkish side argue that more than 500,000 Turkish people were massacred by the Armenian forces.

21 November 2005
Zaman, JTW

Read Full Post !

442) In pursuit of Ottoman Turkish documents

A number of years ago, getting permission as a foreigner to see documents in the archives was lengthy and for a Ph.D. student or a scholar with a limited amount of time and money, a painful process… Today the process can be as short as half a day

NIKI GAMM-ISTANBUL - November 19, 2005
One hundred and fifty million documents they say ? many of which are catalogued, many of which are not. Just think of squirreling away everything a statistician could possibly want in order to crunch numbers in his computer throughout 600 years when there weren't any computers. . . . .

Read Full Post !

441) Will we ever know what actually happened?

November 19, 2005
Scholars spend two days debating at the International Turkish Archives Symposium in Istanbul

ISTANBUL
A two-day symposium that concentrated on the topic of what happened between the Armenians and the Turks in the two-year period of 1914-15 wrapped up yesterday with its participants agreeing that it is necessary to cast a critical eye over the sources available. . .
Turkish Historical Society Chairman Professor Yusuf Halacoglu pointed out at the conference that the number of people examining Turkey's archives for that period could be counted on one hand.

Archives in France, Britain and the United States covering the 1914-1918 period cite as many as 1.5 million Armenians killed in this span while Halacoglu brought forward a series of documents that showed that the number of Armenians living in the eastern part of Turkey at the time numbered 400,000 at the most. He also said the documentation indicated that these people were fed and housed while they were moved away from a war zone that included Russian, Armenian and Ottoman troops.

Backing up Halacoglu's presentation was Professor Justin McCarthy, an American who is internationally regarded as an expert on the Armenian/Turkish conflict and frequently threatened for his research that shows the Ottomans did not carry out a genocide.

McCarthy explained that recorded material produced by the Armenians in the early days after the mid-1910s were very pro-Armenian and aimed at influencing Armenian opinion. But he went on to say that the only way the issue can be settled was to look at what the Ottomans at the time had said, noting that the Armenians were always praising their side while the Ottoman documents show that some things were bad and some good. So perhaps one has to consider documentation that was more honest.

Dr. Ilber Ortayli, who has recently taken over management of the Topkapi Palace Museum, chose to look at the issue from a different angle. He stressed the issue of the system by which religious groups were separated from each other. So the Greek Orthodox were with other Greek Orthodox and the Armenians with Armenians. According to Ortayli, the Athens Greek Orthodox Church broke off in 1831 because they wanted to get rid of Ottoman rule but not because they wanted to separate themselves from the Greek Orthodox leaders in Istanbul.

© 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc. www.turkishdailynews.com.tr

Read Full Post !

440) Kandilli Armenian Church Foundation: It Was Not Genocide. It Was Relocation

11/19/2005 AFP
ISTANBUL - ''It was not genocide. It was relocation which caused painful events,'' Dikran Kevorkyan, chairman of Kandilli Armenian Foundation, said on Saturday. . . .
Speaking at a conference in Istanbul on the Armenian issue, Kevorkyan said, ''it was not genocide. It was relocation which caused painful and tragic events. We should underline the fact that political, psychological and economic developments led to the relocation.''

Highlighting importance of mutual tolerance and understanding, Kevorkyan noted, ''several countries approved some resolutions about genocide in order to get votes of the Armenian diaspora. All those are political matters. France, Germany, Britain, Russia and indirectly the United States have always used the Armenians. Today, they are trying to pay its price. They approve those resolutions to cover their mistakes. I do not approve politicians' inciting hatred among people for their own political purposes.''

Read Full Post !

439) Genocide: New developments

We are so preoccupied with the Armenian genocide allegations made against us that we fail to follow developments taking place in the international arena on issues related to genocide. The genocide law began to take shape with the Nuremberg Tribunal (1945-46) and the trials held in a number of countries that had been occupied by the Nazis. Later in 1948 the U.N. Convention was signed. . . . During the 40 years that followed, no significant development took place except the Eichmann case in Jerusalem. The decisions made by the courts created in Arusha and The Hague due to the genocides that took place in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s and discussions held on the status of the “International Criminal Court” have put the genocide issue on the agenda of the international community.

When the genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina took place in the heart of Europe before the very eyes of the EU, it became all too obvious that the specter of genocide had come back despite the earlier conviction that after the Holocaust it would never recur. Priority was given to efforts aimed at understanding the phenomenon of genocide so that genocides could be prevented in the future. Thus widespread but somewhat undisciplined sociological studies began to appear on genocide.

Now philosophy, too, is becoming involved in this issue. Since, generally speaking, they tend to produce universal knowledge, philosophers refrain from analyzing specific events. A book edited by John K. Roth, “Genocide and Human Rights, a Philosophical Guide," Palgrave Macmillan, 2005 is probably the first of its kind in this regard. Roth has compiled in this book the articles written by 25 philosophers.

Genocide is an issue that goes well beyond the Armenian allegations. Turks now have an opportunity to study the genocide issue by taking the Armenian problem as a starting point and make a contribution to international efforts.

Judging by the news leaked to the press from the conference that was finally held at Bilgi University, many of the participants seem to have just been acquainted with the genocide issue. No one reportedly presented a paper on the judicial aspects of the issue though law is the area where the greatest knowledge on genocide has accumulated. Yet a significant number of philosophers are saying that the law is their guide, that it is the law that defines the highly important difference between “crimes against humanity” and “genocide” (Thomas W. Simon, p. 72).

The conference apparently subscribed to the idea that the Unity and Progress Party with its nascent Turkish nationalism had committed genocide against the Armenians. Many of the participants implied that the massacres in question were genocide while others openly said so. Yet no ruling power could possibly commit genocide out of the blue. For example, prior to the Holocaust, a number of philosophers and academics had -- wittingly or not -- paved the way for the Nazis to subject the Jews to genocide (Colin Tatz, p. 82). When they make an analysis of historical events, the aforementioned Turkish academics fail to determine whether a similar “intellectual preparation” prior to the 1915-16 events had taken place.

Among the philosophers who contributed to the book are those who oppose any attempt to hastily label atrocious events as “genocide” with a display of a “false sense of justice, false compassion” or a “false sense of the practical.” These philosophers carefully discriminate between massacre and genocide (Raimond Gaita, pp. 165-166).

In this context, almost all of the philosophers quoted in the said book indicate that Hume, Voltaire, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche and Heidegger had built a racial hierarchy according to the level of being civilized by referring to the “inferior” qualities of the blacks, the Tahitians, etc., that is, of the non-whites, implying the needlessness of backward and weak races to survive. Later, these ideas were supported by the scientific racism of Gobineau and his likes as well as social Darwinism theory.

It is undoubtedly important that philosophers tackle the genocide issue. However, as we see in their articles, they obviously have serious shortcomings on two points. These philosophers all seem to agree that the intellectual preparation for the Holocaust began 200 years ago when the age of “Enlightenment” had destroyed the religion that had been keeping human aggression in check. Yet, anti-Semitism, the basic cause of the Holocaust, dates back much earlier. In addition, they meet with various difficulties, hence their treatment of the Holocaust as a mystery, because they fail to understand the psychological mechanisms that lie beneath the acts of genocide.

Whether we like it or not, most of those who think and write in Turkey are liberal intellectuals. They are trying to make room for themselves between the genocide allegation, which is the official Armenian thesis, and the “denial” of the events, which they call the “official Turkish thesis.” They conveniently ignore the fact that in 1983 the late ambassador Kamuran Gurun, the then undersecretary of the ministry, had actually called the events a “tragedy,” giving a full and objective account of these events in his book titled "The Armenian File." Moreover, they do not have the slightest idea about the legal and psychological aspects of genocide. They could, at least, start with the philosophy of it.

From quotes in the book 'Genocide and Human Rights, A Philosophical Guide' from 25 modern philosophers, we can surmise important results in terms of our European Union membership. All of the philosophers show that the Enlightenment stands behind the Jewish genocide. This makes it clear that the European identity based on Christian and Enlightenment values as Jack Delors said and the objections made against Turkey’s membership on that ground should be reassessed


From quotes in the book “Genocide and Human Rights, A Philosophical Guide” from 25 modern philosophers, we can surmise important results in terms of our European Union membership. All of the philosophers show that the Enlightenment stands behind the Jewish genocide. This makes it clear that the European identity based on Christian and Enlightenment values as Jack Delors said and the objections made against Turkey's membership on that ground should be reassessed.

All of the articles in the book analyze the Holocaust. In the light of the opinions expressed in the book, it becomes apparent that the Armenian incidents were not genocide. Despite this fact, the Armenian genocide was scattered here and there, as if it was done on request. The same attitude can be seen in acclaimed international jurist William Shabas' book, “Genocide in International Law.” However, Shabas' legal perspective makes it certain that the Armenian incidents do not amount to genocide.

The Armenian's better communicating their thesis than us has a part to play in the current state of affairs, but it is not sufficient to explain it. Apparently Muslims committing genocide against Christians is important to Western authors. This way they are able to repudiate the fact that “Western Europe and its white colonies around the world” are responsible for the Holocaust and all the other genocides in history. (Encyclopedia Britannica, Macropaedia, v.15., pages. 360-66, 1984).

While there is no direct relation between the Armenian genocide allegations and Turkey's EU membership, this will probably be a harder obstacle to overcome than all the others. The negative repercussions of this problem may not be limited to pressures coming from the European Parliament and member countries or the possibility of the rejection of our accession treaty in the French referendum if we continued denying the Armenian genocide. Due to the fact that the genocide allegations are part of the historical prejudices against Turkey, it may also have a multiplication effect on smaller or bigger difficulties we may come across in the course of negotiations or on criticism directed against Turkey regarding the Copenhagen political criteria.

Dehumanization of one group by another is the psychological mechanism behind genocide. This is no ordinary denigration. It is a complex feeling that the other embodies all the negative qualities such as laziness, stupidity, ugliness, weakness; that these traits are biological hence impossible to change and that the group with its “sub-human” features is harmful to the society it is living in, even to the world and consequently needs to be eradicated.

It is obvious that the Ottoman society had no such racial hatred towards the Armenians. However, it is no secret that the Armenian intellectuals of the time felt deep contempt for the Ottomans. The same contempt prevailed against the Ottomans during the independence wars of the Balkan Christians. These groups fully internalized anti-Turkish sentiment present in the West at the time. Maybe that's why the Turks who were massacred and expelled to Anatolia from the Balkans are so easily ignored. In this respect, one cannot assess the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire by Western Europe and the Christians groups it supported as merely a result of a politico-strategic struggle.

Turkey will join a group of countries that accuse her of having committed genocide. Almost all of these countries were involved at least in the gestation of the idea of Holocaust in the past two centuries. However, they put the blame on the Nazi regime. They believed that the Turks were racially inferior and were biologically unalterable as they crushed the Ottoman Empire.

Now these countries reversing this situation for their own internal psychological needs, say Turkey will not become an EU member if she does not recognize the Armenian genocide. As long as this attitude persists, it is very difficult for us to become an EU member.

On the other hand, a group of Turkish liberal intellectuals, just like the colonial intellectuals defined by Franz Fanon, accepts the allegation that we are guilty of committing genocide against the Armenians, in addition to every criticism voiced by the West. By accepting an incident that is not genocide, they do great disservice to humanity by confusing the concept of genocide.


© 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc. www.turkishdailynews.com.tr
November 1, 2005

Gündüz Aktan

Read Full Post !

438) Sarafian: UK to Give Unofficial Reply About Letter on Blue Book

British historian Ara Sarafian of Armenian descent, whose forefathers emigrated from Turkey, disclosed that British deputies will give an unofficial reply to the Turkish Parliament’s letter about the Blue Book. . .
Sarafian who in 2000 published the “Blue Book” written by James Bryce and Arnold Toynee in 1916 about the treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, will in the second edition reveal the names of those that had remained a secret in the first edition.

Sarafian, speaking to Zaman in London, said he had to deal with the issue again following the Turkish parliament’s letter, adding that he had found this letter to be “both strange and embarrassing” for Turkey. Sarafian, who had conducted a study in the Turkish prime ministry archives on three occasions, accepts that the British use the Blue Book for propaganda purposes; however, he says that the book’s claims is completely true. According to Sarafian, there are two issues on the agenda related to the letter. He claims that the first issue is an academic one and it has been solved with the latest edition published. The second issue relates to how the British parliament will respond to Turkey’s letter. Emphasizing that he is not involved in the political side of the issue, Sarafian said the British parliament will not give an official response to Turkey’s letter. Claiming that the British parliament wants to cover up the letter, noting that the letter was not even forwarded to British deputies, Sarafian defended that the letter had placed the UK in a difficult position, having worked to repair Turkey’s image in Europe. He thinks that some parliamentary members will offer an unofficial reply to Turkey’s letter about the Blue Book. “As far as I understand, both Turkish and British governments want the issue to be closed; however, at such a time, it is expected that some of Turkish deputies may show up and say, ‘you see, they could not give us an answer, we were right’”. I don’t think there will be an official reply on behalf of parliament, however a small group of deputies dealing with the issue will likely reply.”

Sarafian claims, the fact that the Blue Book is used for propaganda purposes, does not mean that it is fabrication. “You believe that Armenians carried out the Hocali massacre and Turkey uses this as a propaganda tool. Does this mean that the Hocali massacre did not happen?” Sarafian asks. He said that he was amazed by Turkey’s letter and suggested that Turkish deputies selected the wrong target. “These kinds of claims came to agenda in the US in 1980s. After which time, I published the Blue Book again, along with a criticism, and included the source of information clearly in the book’s footnotes. What amazes me most of all is the fact that Turkish deputies have returned to the claims of 20 years ago,” Sarafian acknowledged.

After Turkey sent the letter to the British parliament about the Blue Book, Lord Avebury, Sandwell Lord Archer and Lord Biffen from the House of the Lords along with British historian Ara Sarafian started a campaign on October 12 and defended that the letter should be responded to.

By Selcuk Gultasli
November 05, 2005
zaman.com
Brussels

Read Full Post !

437) Armenia: A Neighbor from Hell?

Armenian President Robert Kocharian was on a two-day visit to Brussels. Mr. Kocharian met many European leaders and important EU figures including Guy Verhofstad (Belgium Prime Minister), Jozep Borell-Fontels (President of the European Parliament), Javier Solana (EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy), Jose Manuel Barroso (European Commission President), Jaap de Hoop Scheffer (NATO Secretary-General). Mr. Armenian President ‘squealed’ on Turkey. . . . He complained about Turkey everywhere in Brussels. According to Kocharian Turkey is the only one who is responsible for everything goes bad in Armenia and in Caucasus: Turkey caused democracy and human rights problems in Armenia; Turkey undermined Armenian economy; Turkey does not open its borders for the poor Armenians; Turkey does not recognise what the Ottomans did in 1918; Turkey helps Azerbaijanis against Armenians; Turkey constructs a railway with Georgia and Azerbaijan etc. Turkey did bad this, Turkey did bad that…

No one asked Kocharian why Armenian forces occupied about 20 percent of neighboring Azerbaijan? No European leader questioned why about 1 million Azerbaijanis from occupied territories are still refugees? Neither Barroso nor Scheffer urged Armenian President to recognise Turkey’s and Azerbaijan’s national borders immediately? And none of them asked Mr. Kocharian why he is obsessed with the events happened almost 100 years ago instead of studying the current problems in the region? Armenia has nuclear reactor with very old technology, but there is no real pressure on Armenians to renew it!... Strange, but Armenia seems the golden child of the West. They can do anything they wish, and no one criticizes Armenians even they threaten their almost all neighbors.

When the Soviet Union collapsed Georgia and Azerbaijan realized that the only way to become a really independent state is to escape the Russian influence. Both countries first tried to remove the Russian bases from their territories. Second they established close relations with the United States, EU, Israel and other regional states including Turkey. Russia punished both of them for this. The ethnic clashes have never ended in Georgia and Tbilisi still suffers from the Russian involvement in the country. The bloody riots and instability in Azerbaijan were also Russia-made. Russian military openly supported the Armenian occupying forces in Karabakh against Azerbaijan. Both Georgia and Azerbaijan publicly declared that they seek to become NATO and EU members in near future. Georgia opened its territories to the US soldiers and Azerbaijan made any possible co-operation with the NATO and US in Iraq and Afghanistan operations. Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan with the Western countries searched the regional integration ways and they mainly used the economic instruments to integrate the region into the rest of the world. The most significant step in these efforts was the BTC (Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan) Pipeline Project.

The BTC pipeline will run through Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan on the Mediterranean coast. The project, led by British oil giant BP with the support of the US government, covers 1,760 km (1,094 miles). All of these countries have great hopes regarding the project. The project will mostly put an end to the economic problems and will provide a environment suitable for open societies. The project will affect the region in political ways as well. Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili said "I have no false illusions that this one pipe will be able to solve all our problems, but this is a start. This pipeline marks a major step toward the independence of both Georgia and Azerbaijan." However Saakashvili also warned about the obstacles: he said that “some forces had tried to stop the project but had failed”. It is obvious that these some forces were Russia and Armenia. Armenian diaspora in Europe and North America did anything to sabotage the Project. Thanks God, they failed and the BTC will guarantee the stability and economic development in the region. Similarly Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan started a trans-Caucasus railway project to integrate three countries and Caucasus to Europe. Normally Turkey wants to include Armenia to this project, yet the Armenian forces still occupy the Azerbaijani territories. As expected the Armenian Diaspora and Armenia again opposed the railway project and claimed the project was against Armenian interests.

Contrary to the Azerbaijani and Georgian policies, Yerevan chose a different path after the collapse of the Soviet Union: Armenia strangely approached the Russians to become independent because Armenians thought that independence equals more territories. Nationalist Armenians dreamed to establish a greater Armenia. Jevahiti (Georgia), Nakhcivan and Karabakh (Azerbaijan) were the first to be conquered. Armenia opened more and more its territories to the Russian forces. Russia’s economic, military and political influence rocketed in Armenia, possibly became higher than the Soviet period. Armenians found another friend in time: Iran. The so-called Islamist Iran supported Armenia in many ways instead of Muslim Azerbaijan in many areas including Karabakh issue.

It is obvious that Armenia is like a ‘neighbor from hell’ in the Caucasus for almost all Caucasian states. However Armenia criticizes Turkey and other neighbors. The Armenian leader argues that “Turkey is not true European”. He asks the EU leaders not to accept Turkey till it recognises the Armenian ‘genocide’ allegations. It is really difficult to understand. How a leader could be so obsessive with the past while the current problems are growing and growing. Armenian politicians should understand that they are not history lecturer or a priest. Real world needs real leaders. All we respect the tragedy Armenians experienced and we expect the same respect for our tragedies. But past is past and we should not sacrifice today for the past or politicians obsessions. Turkey is ready to discuss the historical disputes with Armenia. Ankara declared that it is ready to open the borders with Armenia. However Armenians have taken no concrete step. They just insist on the well-known allegations.

Turkey says ‘economy’, Yerevan says ‘genocide’…

Turkey says ‘security’, Yerevan says ‘genocide’…

Turkey says ‘Karabakh’, Yerevan says ‘genocide’…

Turkey says ‘regional integration’, Armenia says ‘genocide’…

Turkey says ‘co-operation’; Armenia says ‘genocide’…

What Turkey says or makes is not important for the Armenians. Their answer has always been the same: “genocide, genocide, genocide”…

Armenia pushes Turkey’s patient limits. Armenia more needs Turkey and the other neighbors than the region needs Armenia. However the EU leaders strangely and dangerously encourage the Armenians in wrong policies for their short-term interests. The European Parliament President for instance said yesterday that Turkey's recognition of the so-called Armenian genocide and opening of borders with Armenia should become a topic of discussions in Turkey's EU accession talks. There is a strong resistance against Turkey’s full-membership in the EU states and this anti-Turkish groups abuse the Armenian issue to prevent Turkey’s membership. Armenians provide the prefect tool to them, because the Armenian issue has no solution. It is really satisfy Armenian obsessions with the past.

Brussels should to decide whether Armenia or the whole Caucasus is more important for the EU… And Armenia should give up the childish policies like preventing pipeline projects or railways. Armenia should focus on constriction peace, stability and regional economy instead of obsession of prevention or de-constructing.

24 October 2005

Dr. Sedat LACINER
Copyright © 2005 Journal of Turkish Weekly turkishweekly.net

Read Full Post !

436) PKK-Armenian Relations

Changing their tactics after the '80s as they encountered adverse reactions from the world. Now, it was time for PKK to carry on the mission. Their first terrorist act started at Eruh and Semdimli in 1984 while the ASALA-Armenian terror receded to the background. Some of the tangible proofs of the ties between Armenians and PKK are the following: . . .

The terrorist organisation PKK announced the period from 21 to 28 April 1980 as the "Red Week" and started to organise meetings on April 24 as the anniversary of the alleged genocide against Armenians.

The PKK and ASALA terror organisations held a joint press conference on 8 April 1980 at the City of Sidon in Lebanon where they issued a declaration. Since this drew a considerable reaction, they decided that their relations should be maintained on a clandestine basis. The responsibility of the attacks launched against the Turkish Consulate General in Strasbourg on 9 November 1980 and the Turkish Airline office in Rome on 19 November 1980 were undertaken jointly by the ASALA and PKK.

Abdullah Öcalan, leader of the separatist terror organisation, was elected to the honorary membership of the Armenian Authors' Association for "his contributions to the idea of Greater Armenia".

A Kurdistan Committee was formed within the Armenian Popular Movement like in many European countries.

On 4 June 1993, a meeting was held at the headquarters of PKK terrorist organisation at West Beyrouth with the participation of representatives from the Armenian Hinchak Party, ASALA and PKK.

Another striking example of the Armenian-PKK ties are the following resolutions adopted in meetings held at two separate churches from 6 to 9 September 1993 with the participation of Lebanese Armenian Orthodox Archbishop, officials of the Armenian Party and about 150 youth leaders:

A somewhat sedate attitude should be reserved toward Turkey for the time being.

The Armenian community is on the way to growth and better economic strength.

The propaganda activities have started to make the genocide claims better understood in the rest of the world.

The newly founded Armenian State with a constantly growing territory will definitely avenge the ancestors of its citizens.

The Western powers and particularly the United States side with and favour the Armenians in the combat for Nagorno Karabakh. This opportunity should be well exploited as more and more Armenian young men join the ranks in this fight.

The perpetual terrorist attacks in Turkey (meaning the PKK's actions) will continue and eventually collapse the country's economy, leading to an uprising by the entire population.

Turkey will be abolish and a Kurdish State will be formed.

Armenians will hold good relations with the Kurds and support their fight.

Territories presently held by the Turks will the Armenian's tomorrow.

PUBLICATION ORGANS OF TERRORIST ORGANISATION PKK IN ARMENIA

The newspapers Reya Taze and Bota Redaksiyon are published in Armenia in Cyrillic alphabet under the control of terrorist organisation PKK with the help of PKK members coming from Turkey and Europe and carries out propaganda for the PKK.

PKK-ASALA RELATIONS

The Armenian terrorism at international first started basis in 1973 and began to gain impetus after the 1974 Cyprus Peace Operation with attacks or terrorist nature against Turks and Turkish representations abroad with sabotages and outright assaults.

Upon resurrection of the Kurdish terrorist movement that began to show itself in a variety of legal political entities from '70s onward, the Armenian terror organisation ASALA ceded its place in 1984 to the PKK that killed without distinction of Turk or Kurd in a bloodthirsty manner under the guidance of Abdullah Öcalan.

Yet in prior to that date, of the co-operation between terrorist organisations ASALA and PKK was known manifesting in the training of ASALA militants at PKK's trannie camps, the joint operations and declamations by them both and training support provided at the PKK camps by Armenian experts, not to mention the organic ties between the terrorist organisation PKK and Armenian Tashnak Sutyun Party.

The common goal of the co-operation between the terrorist organisations PKK and ASALA is to establish States in Turkey's Southeastern and Eastern under the Marxist-Leninist ideology. Since, however, an overview of the areas on which both organisations had schemes, it may be deduced that one of these organisations acts as the other's mercenaries.

An examination of the discovered documents revealed that the militants of ASALA and PKK terrorist organisations underwent training at the Bekaa and Zeli camps.

1987 AGREEMENT BETWEEN PKK AND ARMENIANS

An agreement was concluded between the separatist terror organisation PKK and Armenians in 1987. Following are the highlights of this agreement:

1. Armenians will be involved in training activities within the PKK terror organisation.

2. Five thousand American Dollars per annum will be paid to the PKK terror organisation per capita by the Armenian side.

3. The Armenians will participate in the small-scale operations.

As the Armenian component began to acquire a significantly elevated position within the organisation as a result of this agreement, the following resolutions were adopted in a meeting held on 18 April 1990 with a person named Hermes Samurai, reported to be the official responsible for the PKK-ASALA relations:

1. The PKK and ASALA terrorist organisations will be under a joint command from that date on.

2. The Armenians will undertake intelligence work on the Turkish security forces.

3. Territories gained through the expected revolution will be equally shared between the parties.

4. Seventy-five percent of training camp expenses will be borne by the Armenians.

5. Operations will be conducted at the metropolitan cities in Turkey.

The terrorist organisation PKK that moved its bases into Northern Iraq after because of very heavy blows dealt in the transborder operations and lost all possibilities of sheltering there is known to have entered into arrangements for shifting some of its cadres to Iran and Armenia where it started an active subversive operation toward Turkey.

It has also been learned that a group of European representatives of the terrorist organisation PKK paid a visit to Armenia where they concluded an agreement with the Armenian leaders for the unhindered ingress to and egress from Kars region by their militants, that Armenia offered sheltering, monetary and equipment support to the Kurdish settlements in that country following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the formal proclamation of the Armenian Republic. Similarly, a group of militants of the terrorist organisation PKK left Urmiah for Armenia on three vehicles on 19 and 20 May 1992 for fighting against Azerite Turks together with the Armenians.


ARMENIAN ALLEGATIONS: Myth and Reality

karabakh.gen.az

Read Full Post !