477) France, Armenians and Re-Writing History

* Will France apologize to Algeria for crimes it committed there?
* French Historians Protest Against "Genocide" Recognition
* French Historians 'Jointly' Ask Annulment of Armenian Genocide Law .
* France, Armenians and Re-Writing History...


Alerted by a friend to its existence, I visited the Islam-Online.net Web site for the first time the other day. O la la! The French conservatives will soon be up in arms upon seeing that the Algerians have a “tit” for their “tat,” namely, a bill criminalizing French colonialism in direct response to French legislation in February glorifying the colonial past of France.
Our readers will recall that when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo�an and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) government were considering earlier this year “retaliating in kind” against those countries whose governments or legislatures recognized Armenian charges of so-called genocide, we warned that this country would not get anywhere by adopting a “tit for tat” policy of revenge -- particularly if the present-day governments of the countries where such Western atrocities took place were not making any moves to condemn those countries for the crimes they had committed in the past. We defended that view at the time, not because we were trying to help French, German or other European nations, but because of our view that such a practice would serve no purpose other than to further strain this country's relationship with them.

Germany, as a consequence of World War II defeat, has undertaken the bitter task of condemning its own past, but other Western countries that “ruthlessly divided and ruled” their colonies, that usurped all their wealth, that cleansed magnificent civilizations in pursuing their conquest to satisfy their thirst for gold, jewels and land, that annexed local populations in settlements and brutally occupied all their living and hunting grounds have never, ever, accepted responsibility for their past actions or uttered a single word in condemnation.

But now, a group of Algerian Islamist deputies (of the National Reform Movement) have reportedly put together a new bill criminalizing France's colonial era in the Arab country that calls on the Algerian government to press that Paris be tried in an international court for its “crimes against humanity.”

“These crimes never fade in the passage of time, whether committed by settlers, collaborators or French nationals who settled in Algeria during the French colonial era and who left the country after independence,” the draft, as reported by the Islam-Online Web site, said.

The Algerian bill further urges France to apologize for its “crimes committed during the (1830-1962) French colonial era.”

The motion comes in response to a French law, ratified early this year, glorifying French colonial history. Passed through the National Assembly in February, the law aimed at improving the living conditions of French people repatriated from Algeria at the end of the country's war of independence more than 40 years ago. The controversial French legislation states that “school programs recognize, in particular, the positive role of France's presence overseas, most notably in North Africa, and give due prominence to the history and sacrifice of the French army in these territories.”

This development has shown, once again, that if France had not picked at some old wounds and tried to “glorify” the deplorable attacks of its army and mercenaries on Algerian resistance groups, Algeria would have preferred not to have opened these dark pages of history and ruin its present-day relations with France.

Not only did it stir up Algerian Islamists and provoke them to sponsor such a bill in Parliament, but ever since it passed almost unnoticed through the French Parliament the law has been loudly denounced by rights groups, historians and citizens of France's overseas territories who say it is a blatant attempt to whitewash France's colonial past.

Over the past few decades France has been championing the Armenian claims of genocide, notwithstanding the fact that they could not be substantiated. After Algeria legislates its bill, what will our French friends feel if Turkey adopts a similar law and condemns the colonial past of France in Algeria? The Armenian claims are unsubstantiated; nevertheless, France has been championing them. Regardless of how the French army acted in Algeria and under what conditions, over 3 million Algerians were registered as killed.

If and when Armenian genocide charges can be substantiated, Turkey must assume its responsibilities -- and start with an apology. Many years ago Turkey apologized to Algeria for remaining indifferent to their plight during colonial rule and for failing to immediately recognize the Algerian state. Will France act in the same way and at least apologize to Algeria for the crimes it committed there?

TDN.com.tr
Yusuf KANLI

---

French Historians Protest Against "Genocide" Recognition

The influential French newspaper “Le Monde” (December 14) has published an article signed by 19 known historians of country headed “Nineteen historians protest against disgraceful laws”. In this article, the authors have noted, that some accepted laws damage authority of France on international arena, and have expressed protest against these laws.

The French scientists also have expressed attitude to the law adopted on January 29, 2001, on recognition the far-fetched ”Genocide of Armenians”. Having noted, that the law on recognition the “Genocide of the Armenians”, accepted by the French state under pressure of strong Armenian lobby and the Armenians, got used to forge the historical truth and to carry out a two-faced policy, and not having under any legal bases, it is a graceful document for the country, scientists have demanded to repeal it.

The article emphasizes necessity of studying of the opinion of scientists - historians on adoption of any law concerning the history.

Copyright AZERTAG®
http://www.azertag.com/index_en.html
25 Dec 2005

---

Following comment added at 30 Apr 2007
Many thanks to Serap Balaman Morel for her comments. We are afraid we cannot get any other info on the subject. This article was from Azertac which is a State Body of Azerbaijan.

And we cannot locate the original post in Le Monde which doesn't seem to have an English Edition Online

---

French Parliamentarians Attempted to Write Turkish History Enacting 'Genocide' Law

Criticizing France’s recognition of the 1915 incidents as “Armenian Genocide” in 2001, French historian Françoise Chandernagor said the French parliamentarians “attempted to write the history of a foreign country” by enacting the genocide law at issue.

Claiming that the genocide law, which was enacted due to the pressure from the Armenian Diaspora in France, has no other example in France’s judicial history, Chanderganor said, “It is a single-line law, which neither states the identity of the criminal nor the place where the crime was committed, but just states the victims.” Chanderganor was among the 19 historians who released a notice early this week asking for the annulment of laws that the French Parliament enacted about historical issues. In the editorial that Chanderganor wrote for the French newspaper, Le Monde, titled,” Hell of Good Wills”, he criticized France, which has been enacting “memory laws” since the 1990s. Expressing “the box of Pandora was opened” with the “Gayssot Law” the French Parliament enacted in 1990 to punish those denying the existence of Jewish genocide, Chanderganor said after this time, every community in the society asked for enactment of memory laws to “sanctify their own pains”. Reminding the law related with the Jewish genocide at least relied on the verdict of an international court,” We did not need to take such measures for the next laws enacted. Our law-makers were so great in writing history alone,” Chanderganor criticized.

Dwelling particularly on the “Armenian genocide” issue in his editorial, the French historian told, ”Our parliamentarians attempted to write the history of not France but that of another country.”

“To please Asian origin French people, will we enact a law saying Minamotos massacred Tayras in the 12th century? There is nothing to laugh here. Enacting such laws is not difficult for the parliament both politically and financially; however, it costs too much for the historians who wonder around such painful periods of the history,” Chanderganor remarked. Explaining history is “a river of blood and mud”, he claimed the majority of those who sympathize with the “memory laws” today, did not read these laws; however, contrary to this, the judges know them very well and the historians have to bear the consequences of these laws.

Asking, “Is it necessary to mix history with justice, memory with history?” in his editorial, Chanderganor also addressed the following questions: “Will we follow these crimes, having no time limit in the history even in the pre-historic times? Will we have hearings with the cadavers remaining from the Middle Ages? Will we hang the skeletons? Will we open lawsuits against the historians who are interested in these periods of the history, where the criminals passed away a long time ago?”

Paris

By Ali Ihsan Aydin
December 18, 2005
zaman.com

---

French Historians 'Jointly' Ask Annulment of Armenian Genocide Law

The French historians issued a common declaration to annul all parliamentary historical decisions, including the Armenian genocide law.

French President Jacques Chirac’s previous support to pass the genocide allegations law in parliament and his current statement suggesting “Parliaments cannot take decisions on history,” when it comes to France’s colonial past, has been interpreted as contradiction.


The discussion on “rewriting history” that flared in France last week is gradually intensifying. Nineteen prominent French historians published a common declaration to annul the French Assembly’s decisions on history including the law about the so-called Armenian genocide. The declaration called “Freedom for history” emphasizes parliamentary decisions on historical issues “do not suit democratic regimes.”

“The duty of rewriting history in a free country does not belong to the parliament or any legal authorities,” the French historians stated. Parliamentary decisions, they defended, make it difficult to conduct research on history and education.

Historians criticizing the French Assembly asked the following laws to be annulled: “The law dated 23 February 2005 on imparting the good sides of France’s colonial past, the law dated 29 January 2001 on recognizing the “Armenian genocide”, the law dated 21 May 2001 on slavery, the law dated 13 July 1990 concerning the punishment of anti-Semitic and racist activities.”

The joint declaration also states these laws restrict the freedom of historians and impose what subjects can be discussed and which result can be concluded.

Four years ago, the French Parliament recognized the incidents of 1915 as the “Armenian genocide” despite Turkey’s harsh objections. In the single-paragraph law passed with pressure from the Armenian Diaspora in France, the statement “France clearly recognizes the 1915 Armenian genocide,” is noted. Turkey on the other hand put forward the thesis that “taking decisions on historical issues is not the role of parliaments.” However, the French Parliament upheld its decision.

A Paris Court ruled against famous French encyclopedia, The Quid, for printing the Turkish view on the so-called Armenian genocide last July. The same court had previously ruled against famous historian Bernard Lewis for a relevant article he published in the newspaper Le Monde and ordered him to pay a symbolic sum in compensation of one euro. Although several historians in France do not agree with the allegations of the Armenian genocide, they avoid expressing their views because of the threat of court action. Armenian organizations keep in close check scholars expressing opposing views.

Tension mounts over the motion suggesting that school textbooks “should particularly teach the positive sides of French colonialism,” which was adopted in the French parliament in February; a decision that shocked French historians.

Despite both French President Chirac and French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin declaring that writing history is not the role of parliament and that the Republic does not have an official history, the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) sends out different messages.

“Will we apologize for being a French one day?” asks Nicolas Sarkozy, UMP leader and Interior Minister, in reaction to the ongoing debates.

In an interview with Journal du Dimanche, Sarkozy pointed out “the tendency toward systematic compunction that is impossible to stop.” He said the French society is under the threat from an unfortunate tendency towards self-denial.

One of the leading names in the UMP, Lionnel Duca, expressed his outrage against the historians saying that without colonialism, neither Leon Bertrand (of Guyana origin) nor Aziz Begag (of Algerian origin) could have become ministers.

Duca’s statements provoked a widespread reaction. Sarkozy cancelled his visit to the overseas French territories of Martinique and Guadeloupe, on the grounds of demonstrations and widespread reactions against the Duca’s motion.

The UMP rejected the amendment proposal opposition parties put forward last month.

In response to the reactions, the president informed that a pluralist commission would be established to handle the way the parliament tended to treat historical issues. Although Chirac embraces French historians today, he did not raise any objections at the time of approving either the Act of Armenian genocide or the Act of colonialism.

Paris
By Ali Ihsan Aydin
December 15, 2005
zaman.com

---

France, Armenians and Re-Writing History
No nation is innocent. All nations have some dark pages in their past. The Western history in particular is full of massacres, genocides, human rights abuses and violence. Though the West has always accused the rest of the world of not being civilized enough, no other nations can be compared with the Germans, French or Americans if we are talking about racism, fascism and genocide. The only nation who used the nuclear weapons against civilian targets is the Americans. No nation had destroyed more than 5 million civilian Jews before Nazi Germany. The American Indians vanished under the ‘civilized’ American civilization. The French in Africa was like a horror film. Thousands of Algerians and other Africans were massacred with no mercy. ‘National interest’ has always been a magical word. It has justified anything in the past and today. . .

Of course the Turks are not innocents too. However it is impossible to compare the Turkish past with the French past in terms of genocide and civilian massacres. Turks did a lot of wars, they conquered countries, occupied lands. However the Bulgarians, Greeks, Hungarians, Romanians, Arabs or Armenians were not assimilated. When the Ottoman Empire was collapsed, the Armenians were speaking Armenian, the Kurds were speaking Kurdish, the Greeks were speaking Greek. The Ottoman Sultans never attempted to destroy a race or a nation. Sultan Mahmud the Second declared “I want to see my Jewish citizens in the Synagogues, my Christian citizens in the Churches and my Muslim citizens in the Mosques”. Under Ottoman legal system, each Ottoman religious community (millets) was responsible for its own institutions, including schools and legal courts. However the Ottomans never isolated the ethnic and religious groups or force them to live in ghettos. The Sultans granted key posts to the Jewish and Christians. Most of the court physicians for instance were Jews. Ottoman diplomacy was often carried out by Jews, Greeks and Armenians.

The Jews and Greeks dominated the Ottoman financial system. In the free air of the Ottoman Empire, the ethnic and religious groups’ literature flourished, and the Ottoman Empire became a safe haven for the oppressed ethnic and religious groups in Europe and Middle East. The expulsion of the Jews from Spain is a vivid example: In the spring of 1492, shortly after the Moors were driven out of Granada, Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain expelled all the Jews from their lands and thus, put an end to the largest and most distinguished Jewish settlement in Europe. Many Jewish were tortured, raped, wounded or killed in Spain and in many other European countries. The Ottoman Sultan Bayazid II's offer of refuge gave new hope to the persecuted Sephardim. In 1492, the Sultan ordered the governors of the provinces of the Ottoman Empire "not to refuse the Jews entry or cause them difficulties, but to receive them cordially". According to Bernard Lewis, "the Jews were not just permitted to settle in the Ottoman lands, but were encouraged, assisted and sometimes even compelled". Immanual Aboab attributes to Bayazid II the famous remark that "the Catholic monarch Ferdinand was wrongly considered as wise, since he impoverished Spain by the expulsion of the Jews, and enriched Turkey".

Over the centuries an increasing number of European Jews, escaping persecution in their native countries, settled in the Ottoman Empire. In 1537 the Jews expelled from Italy (Apulla) after the city fell under Papal control, in 1542 those expelled from Bohemia by King Ferdinand found a safe haven in the Ottoman Empire.(1) In March of 1556, Sultan Suleyman "the Magnificent" wrote a letter to Pope Paul IV asking for the immediate release of the Ancona Marranos, which he declared to be Ottoman citizens. The Pope had no other alternative than to release them, the Ottoman Empire being the "Super Power" of those days. (2)

Not only the Jews but the Greeks and Armenians were also under the Ottoman protection, and many Christian nations preferred the Turkish rule to the Greek or other Christian rule.

It can be argued that no racist or anti-Semitic attack originated among the Ottoman Turkish people during the Ottoman years. Many communal clashes experienced but none of them was actually racist. Even after the separation of Greece, Bulgaria and other Balkan countries, Istanbul was still a multi-national capital. When the Ottoman Empire was collapsing, most of its ambassadors were Armenian or Jewish. The Ottoman Ambassador to Washington during the Great War time for instance was an Ottoman Armenian. The head of the National Stats Office was also an Armenian.

The Ottoman tolerant minority understanding continued during the Republican era. As Shaw put it “just as important as providing a haven for Jews who had lived in the Ottoman Empire for centuries was Turkey’s role in helping rescue many Jewish Turks who were resident in Nazi-occupied western Europe during the Holocaust”(3) The Turkish government not only refused German demands that it turn over the Jewish refugees for internment in the death camps but instead it went out of its way to assist passage into its territory of Jews fleeing from Nazi persecution in Poland, Greece and Yugoslavia as well as in Western and Central Europe.(4) As Kirisci put it “there are no definite figures for the number of Jews that benefited from temporary asylum in Turkey until their resettlement… However, it is estimated that around 100,000 Jews may have used Turkey as their first country of asylum.”(5) During the Second World War, Turkey was the only continental European country that refused to turn Jews over to Nazi Germany and understandably prides itself with this heritage.(6)

Armenian Riots And The 1915 Campaign
The Russian and French separatist encouragements, Armenian terrorism and the economic catastrophe caused Armenian riots in the Eastern provinces of the Empire. First the Armenian terrorists killed many Armenians. The Tashnaks and other terror organizations murdered more Armenians than the Turks. It can be argued that the Armenian terrorism is the father of the modern terrorism. The Tashnak terrorists attacked the banks, tried to assassinate the head of the State and put bombs to the official targets. The beginning of the First World War rocketed the riots and attacks. The Ottomans were now in war against the Russians, French and British. The Allied Forces encouraged and supported the Armenian riots and the Armenian bands captured the Van province by force. Thousands of Muslims were killed, tortured or forced to live the province. Thousands of Turkish people now in Turkey do not want to remember those days.

The Armenians declared their own state in Van and they invited the Russian forces. When the Russians entered the city, all Muslims had been swept away by the Armenians. The Armenian separatist forces also organized attacks against the Ottoman forces when they were in bloody conflicts against the Russians. Now the Turks were between two enemies: Russians and the Armenian nationalists. The Armenian gangs destroyed the Kurdish and Turkish villages who could help the Ottoman soldiers and they started an endless communal hatred. The Ottoman Archives show that at least 520,000 Turkish and Kurdish people were massacred by the Armenian armed groups. The Ottoman forces recaptured the Van province, yet the Istanbul Government had to do something to prevent the Armenian attacks. The Tehcir (Relocation) Campaign was considered the lesser of two evils. According to the Decision the Armenians who lived in Eastern provinces or near to the War theatres like the Armenians in Canakkale (Gallipoli) were forced to immigrate to another Ottoman province, Syria. The State was not ready for such a great campaign though the law was perfectly written. Many Armenians died during the campaign.

Many more were killed by the Kurdish and Turkish bandits. The Kurdish tribes tried to take revenge from the Armenians during the Relocation Campaign. Epidemic diseases and the hunger were other reasons for the mass loses. Some Turkish historians argue that more than 100,000 Armenians died or killed during the First World War. The Istanbul was not happy with the Governors’ performance during the Campaign and many officers and governors were put on trial and some of them were sentenced to capital punishment. Some of the Armenian immigrants returned to Istanbul or other Western provinces, yet many more immigrated to Europe or North America. The main motive was economic.

The Ottomans lost the FWW and the country was occupied by the Allied forces. The Armenian separatists were again in collaboration with the French, British, Greek and Russian occupiers. That is why they were accused of betraying their country. Some of the Armenian separatists tortured their Turkish and Kurdish neighbors, even many Muslims were killed by these armed groups. When the Republic of Turkey was founded at the end of a bloody national war, most of the Armenians in the Eastern provinces left Anatolia with the occupiers. Ten thousands of them immigrated to France and organized a strong Armenian diaspora in France. About 1 million Armenians from the Ottoman territories formed strong diaspora communities in the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Russia, Caucasia and the Middle East, though the Istanbul Armenians preferred to live in new Turkey. Turkish Armenians were well integrated to the rest of the community. There are many famous Armenian names in Turkish art, media, music, architecture, business world and literature. There are many Armenian schools and churches in Turkey right now and the number of Armenians in Turkey is over 100,000.

After the Jewish example, the Armenian diaspora organizations started to argue that the 1915 Relocation Campaign was actually a genocide campaign. Even the term of ‘genocide’ was first used during the 1960s. The basic aims were 1) to prevent Armenian assimilation and cement all Armenians in diaspora around a common national cause, 2) to enjoy the advantages of being victims of genocide. The ultra-nationalist Armenians aimed to establish a greater Armenia from Mediterranean to Caspian Sea. Thus millions of Armenians were encouraged to hate from the Turks though most of them had never been to Turkey and had never met a Turkish. In fact Genocide Legacy was artificially created by the Armenian Diaspora organizations and the Armenian Church supported the legacy.

On the one hand, the legal Armenian organizations did anything possible to undermine Turkish interests around the world. On the other hand the Armenian terrorist organizations attacked the Turkish diplomats and businessmen in Europe and in North America. More than 40 Turkish diplomats were murdered by the ASALA terrorists. The Western Government did not take enough measures against the Armenians terrorism considering the Armenian votes in the elections. Another reason was religious biases. Armenians were the ‘martyred Christian nation’ for many people in Europe and US. There was no dialogue between the Turks and Armenians during these years despite of all these hate, violence and terrorism. France in particular did not capture the Armenian terrorists and even the French media supported the terrorists by justifying the cause of terrorism. For the French, there were good and bad terrorists. When the Armenian terrorism hit the Western targets as well, the Armenian terrorism ended surprisingly. Many people in Turkey now believe in that the Armenian terrorism was created by the Western capitals and it was ended by these countries when they simply did not need it anymore.

Armenian diaspora organization organized anti-Turkish campaigns in the ‘post-terrorism era’. They particularly put pressure on the political parties and governments to recognise the 1915 Campaign as the first genocide of the 20th century. The Armenian organizations said nothing about the genocide French committed in Algeria, or about the Bosnia Massacres. When the Armenian Forces committed one of the bloodiest genocides in Hocali (Azerbaijan), no Armenian human rights associations issued any condemnation. Politics is a dirty business. Some of the politicians could do anything for a vote in election. And the Armenians have more than 150,000 votes in France alone. The Armenians are well organized and they are strong enough to manipulate the French media and politics in specific issues, like the Armenian Problem. As a result of all these efforts, the French Assembly took a decision to recognize the so-called Armenian genocide. Turkey protested and condemned the Paris. However, the Paris Government was saying that Turkey should face with its past. Turkish Primes Minister declared that writing history is not business of a parliament, and no parliament could judge another nation. The decision has not been changed, and the Turkish-French relations entered its most thorny era. France has given vivid supports to any side against Turkey, including the Greeks, Greek Cypriots, Armenians and Kurdist separatists. Even the PKK’s TV channel MEDYA TV broadcasted from France for a while, although the PKK was a terrorist organization according to the French laws.

Last year and in 2005 the Algerians called Paris to recognise the Algerian Massacres and Genocide committed by the French soldiers. The French occupied Algeria and killed ten thousands of Algerian civilians, including men, women, children and old people.
In May 1945 French soldiers killed thousands of Algerians around the eastern town of Setif, after celebrations to mark the defeat of Nazi Germany turned into pro-independence protests. More than 45,000 Algerian people died, though French historians reduce the number to 15,000. (7)

Algeria is not an exception. Genocide, massacre and human rights abuses, unfortunately, one of the oldest Western habits. Cameroon, Senegal and Madagascar for instance experienced periods of harsh repression in the 1940s, little of which is taught in French schools today. In 1947, for example, French troops massacred thousands of people in Madagascar in order to quell a rebellion. (8)

Many in Africa believes in that the French rule in Africa has been characterized by brutality and the use of unequal power against those unable to defend themselves; in Rwanda, the Congo, Cameroon, Algeria, Chad; the Ivory Coast; the massacre of the Senegalese riflemen at Thiaroye; the brutal and barbaric repression of the insurrection in Madagascar; the shooting of Dimbokro etc.

‘The forgotten problem’ between Algeria and France came back to the political agenda with the speech of the Algerian President Bouteflika after the demonstration during the celebration of the end of World War II on May 8, 1945. Bouteflika, in his long speech, asked Paris “to make a gesture to erase this black stain”. Bouteflika said his country had waited for years for France to acknowledge acts committed during its occupation. And he shocked many in France when he drew a direct comparison between the burning of thousands of Algerian bodies after the massacres with "the ovens of the Nazis." Another senior official - Mohamed El Korso, president of the May 1945 Foundation - said that French "repentance is seen by the Algerian people as a sine qua non before any Franco-Algerian friendship treaty can be concluded." "French and international public opinion must know that France committed a real act of genocide in May 1945," he said.

Facing the past is a really difficult job. It is always easier to examine the others’ mistakes. If it is Turkey to be criticized it has been always easiest one. But now time to face the real life.

French President Jacques Chirac, upon harsh reactions to the law encouraging the good sides of the French colonial history, made the statement, "Writing history is the job of the historians, not of the laws." France will set up a commission that will include historians, too, in order to overcome the crisis.

Chirac had urged Turkey to face the past when Turkey was arguing that writing history is job of the historians, not the parliaments. But now Mr Chirac says “writing history is not the job of the laws. Writing history is the job of the historians." According to Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, "speaking about the past or writing history is not the job of the parliament."

No one is innocent, particularly the EU members. No one has forgotten the colonial (exploitation) period, racist years of the Second World War etc. Turkey should face with its past, like any other country. However forcing Turkey to recognise Armenian allegations is a blackmail to prevent Turkey’s EU membership and to hide Europe’s racist tendencies. Those who are very keen on discussing the events happened almost a century ago should also discuss the Armenian occupation in 20 percent of Azerbaijan territories. French Parliament should also be aware of that the Armenian Constitution does not recognise Turkey’s and Azerbaijan’s national borders. Turkish PM Erdogan made many calls to Armenia to open all the archives and to establish a joint history commission to discuss the disputed issues. Erdogan also invited the Armenian President Kocharian to Istanbul two year ago. However all of these gestures were refused by Yerevan. For the Armenians, all of these peace efforts are simply propaganda tactics, because the Turks cannot be good to want a real peace.

There is no link between Turkey’s EU membership and the Armenian issue in fact. And EU and Armenia, both of them will benefit a lot from Turkey’s EU membership. However the biases prevent Yerevan and Brussels from acting justly and wisely.

Remember, Turks are not sinful than the French or Armenians are.

(1) Abraham Danon, in the Review Yossef Daath No. 4; Immanual Aboab, "A Consolacam as Tribulacoes de Israel, III Israel"; H. Graetz, "History of the Jews"
(2) http://www.mersina.com/lib/turkish_jews/history/haven.htm
(3) Shaw, Turkey…, p. 46.
(4) Stanford Shaw, The Jews of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republics, (New York: New York University Press, 1991), p. 2; Kemal Kiri�çi, Justice and Home Affairs Issues in Turkish-EU Relations, (�stanbul: TESEV Publications, 2002), p. 13.
(5) Kiri�çi, Justice…, p. 13.
(6) Of course, there were exceptional instances of xenophobia and misguided policies in Turkish history. However, these examples never reached the point of racism. For the details see: Arslan Baser Kafaoglu, Varlik Vergisi Gercegi, (Istanbul: Kaynak Yayinlari, 2002); Ayhan Aktar, Varlik Vergisi ve Türklestirme Politikalari, (Istanbul: �letisim, 2000).
(7) Hugh Schofield, ‘Colonial Abuses Haunt France’, BBC News, 16 May 2005.
(8) Hugh Schofield, ‘Colonial Abuses Haunt France’, BBC News, 16 May 2005.

Sedat LACINER
Copyright © 2005 Journal of Turkish Weekly http://www.turkishweekly.net/

Hypocrite French 'active' in Rwanda genocide

ONE of the most controversial episodes in France's recent history is to come under legal scrutiny after a judge opened a formal inquiry into allegations that the French Army conspired in the Rwandan genocide of 1994.

The move, which will renew debate over the actions of Francois Mitterrand, France's late president, is embarrassing for Paris at a time when it is struggling to maintain its influence in Africa.
Despite attempts by the French Defence Ministry to block the case, Jacques Baillet, the prosecutor at the army tribunal, has begun an investigation into the role of France's troops during the massacres.

An estimated 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the violence that followed the death of then Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana in an aircraft crash.

Most of the victims were Tutsis, slaughtered by the rival Hutu tribe.

The 2500-strong French peacekeeping force sent to Rwanda by Mitterrand is accused not only of failing to stop the genocide, but also of actively participating in it.

The accusations are contained in a lawsuit filed by six survivors who say they saw atrocities committed with the complicity of the French Army.

Mr Baillet rejected four of the plaintiffs on the ground that they had not suffered personally.

Although French Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie described the claims as outlandish, the prosecutor decided two witnesses were sufficiently credible to warrant an inquiry.

One is Aurea Mukakalisa, who was raped by Hutu militia in a refugee camp set up and controlled by the French Army.

"The Hutu militiamen entered the camp and designated the Tutsis, who were forced to leave the camp by French soldiers," says Ms Mukakalisa, who was 27 at the time.

"I saw the militia kill the Tutsis who had left the camp. I saw French soldiers themselves kill Tutsis using knives."

Her brother, Felicien, was a victim at the Murambi camp. Hisbody has never been found.

The second witness, Innocent Gisanura, who was 14 at the time, was among thousands of Tutsis who fled into the Biserero forests in the hope of escaping the violence.

"We were attacked and chased by militiamen," he says in his statement. "French soldiers watched what happened from their vehicles without doing anything."

The claims have revived the debate over France's ambition to retain influence in Africa - an ambition that shaped much of Mitterrand's foreign policy.

Under his presidency, France armed and trained Habyarimana's forces, which critics say formed the backbone of the Hutu militia during the genocide.

Mitterrand then authorised the French peacekeeping mission, known as Operation Turquoise.

Rwandan Tutsis say French troops first failed to stop the killings, and then established a buffer zone that enabled the killers to escape. These claims have poisoned relations between Paris and Kigali.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame has accused France of failing to tell the truth about Operation Turquoise.

In 1998, a French parliamentary committee attempted to investigate France's role in the genocide. But most of the evidence it sought was classified as a state secret.

The French Army is already facing a legal inquiry into allegations that soldiers killed an injured rebel during a peacekeeping mission in Ivory Coast in May.

The Times

Adam Sage, Paris
December 27, 2005

---

France Finds The Quid Guilty of Turkish Propaganda upon The French Armenian Case Defense Committee (CDCA) pressure

A Paris court found the famous French encyclopedia The Quid guilty of printing the Turkish view on the so-called "Armenian genocide".




The court fined The Quid encyclopedias a symbolic indemnity payment of one euro. According to the court decision the 2003 and 2004 editions of the encyclopedia, the Turkish version of events were presented on the Armenian claim and the opinions mentioned by the 'denying historians' were given as if they were definite information. The court concluded that the Turkish opinion was handled more extensively in the encyclopedia.




The Quid was also found guilty of supporting the thesis claiming that Armenians were deported since they cooperated with Russians against Turks. The Robert Laffont Publishing, which published the encyclopedia, will announce the court decision in three newspapers and three magazines. The publishing company had made a change in its 2005 edition upon Armenian pressure. The French Armenian Case Defense Committee (CDCA) appealed to a Paris court in 2003 to launch an investigation against The Quid on the grounds of publishing the Turkish version of the 1915 incidents. Commenting on the court decision, CDCA President Harout Mardirossian said, "it is a great victory for the memory of our grandmothers and grandfathers"' adding that with this decision France sent a significant messeage to Turkey to end its 'denial propoganda'. Stressing that the fight against denial would continue, Mardirossian said they would try for France's enacting a law to punish those denying the Armenian genocide. Four law drafts about this issue are waiting to come to the agenda in the French Parliament.




A Paris court heard the case in May. Armenian organizations had claimed that the genocide is a reality accepted by everyone and there cannot be a "Turkish opinion" and "Armenian opinion". Accusing The Quid of propaganda in favor of Turkey, CDCA claimed that the viewpoint shown as scientific was in fact Turkey's official stance and to question the "Armenian genocide". Refuting the accusations, Robert Laffront Publishing said they had handled the genocide issue taking all its aspects into consideration and that they mentioned Armenian opinions in the section about Armenia. Formerly, the court had convicted famous historian Bernard Lewis to a symbolic payment of one euro for indemnity in 1995 after he spoke to French newspaper Le Monde against the so-called "Armenian genocide".




By Ali Ihsan Aydin Published: Thursday July 07, 2005 zaman.com



Paris