"insulting Turkish identity"

[Gavur]

Conference On Armenians During Collapse Of Ottoman Empire

Published: 9/24/2005
Latest wire from AFP



ISTANBUL - Associate professor Halil Berktay of Sabanci University said on Saturday that the word ''genocide'' should be left aside, and noted that everybody should try to understand what had happened in 1915 and 1916.

The Conference entitled ''The Armenians during the Collapse of the Ottoman Empire'' is being held at Istanbul's Bogazici University.

During the conference, professor Fikret Adanir of Faculty of History in German Ruhr University said, ''a Turkish government may have to accept genocide accusation one day due to impositions. This may please some circles. But, I don't think a concession made as a result of such impositions will be beneficial for the future of Turkish-Armenian relations.''

Adanir said that ''he was using the expression 'Armenian genocide' in his academic works'', and added, ''the dimension of the 1915-16 relocation is far beyond than mass killings. A whole nation, regardless of whether they were women, men, elderly or children, were relocated and died on the roads. Their properties were seized, while those who survived this incident were not allowed to return. There was an Armenian nationalism and a project to establish an Armenian state. Majority of the Ottoman Armenians might have a sympathy towards the enemies of the state (Ottoman Empire) those days. But, all these cannot compensate the tragedy which was intentionally caused by the Ottoman government and which it (the empire) ignored.''

On the other hand, associate professor Oktay Ozel of Bilkent University said that days between the War of 93 and 1923 was a period of tension and clashes. ''At the end of this period, the Black Sea region was purified from non-Muslim population,'' added Ozel.

[Gavur]

Legal complaints filed against speakers and supporters

27 September 2005-TURKEY /ISTANBUL
Cihan News Agency-National
Legal complaints filed against speakers and supporters of Armenian conference
The Turkish Judicial Officials Union have filed a complaint against 17 people for organizing last week's controversial conference on the Ottoman Armenians, and for making statements about the legal process regarding the suspension of conference.
The Chairman of the Judicial Union, Kemal Kerinçsiz and accompanying lawyers submitted their files to Beyoglu Public Prosecution Office on Tuesday.

The Judicial Union had blocked the organization of the conference at Bogazici University. The conference was later switched to Bilgi University.

Lawyer Kerincsiz told reporters on Tuesday in Istanbul that the organization of the conference despite the suspension decision of the Administrative Court was a "killing of the law".

The controversial conference was held at Bilgi University after a court suspended the conference to be held by the original hosts Bogazici and Sabancı Universities.

Prime Minister Erdoğan had said that the attempt to postpone the Armenian conference was provocative and deliberate.

Kerincsiz said that the comments on the suspension were an assault on the superiority of the law. He added that he opposed restrictions on the freedom of speech.

The persons targeted by the complaint include PM Erdogan, FM Gul, the rectors of the three universities in question, eight speakers, Istanbul governor Muammer Guler and Istanbul security chief Celalettin Cerrah

[Gavur]

Massacres of Armenians in 1915 nothing but Genocide, Turkish historian considers

Scientific conference titled “Ottoman Armenians During the Decline of the Empire: Issues of Scientific Responsibility and Democracy” was held in the Bilgi University last week. In the opinion of many exerts, it can give start to the discussion of the Armenian issue by the Turkish society. “We should try to realize what happened in 1915”, well known Turkish historian Halil Bektay stated adding that at the beginning of the World War I the leaders of the Ottoman Empire announced the hunting season against Armenians. In his turn historian Fikret Adanir stated that the carnages of Armenians at the beginning of the 20-th century are nothing but genocide. “It is my personal opinion”, he said. “This conference will surprise Armenians all over the world. Now some of them will have the courage to start dialogue with Turks”, Los Angeles Times writes citing editor-in-chief of Akos Armenian newspaper published in Istanbul. To remind, the conference has been twice postponed, last time on Thursday, September 22 by a resolution of a Turkish court. It should be also noted that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan condemned the court resolution and called it incompatible with the norms of democracy and civilized society. Spokesperson for the EU Commissioner for Enlargement Krisztina Nagy characterized the court decision as a «recurrent provocation».

© PanArmenian

[Gavur]

Too soon for Turkish delight

Sep 29th 2005
The Economist Global Agenda


Formal talks are about to begin on Turkish membership of the European
Union. Within Turkey and outside it, there are questions about the
predominantly Muslim country's readiness for Europe-but also encouraging
signs


BARRING last-minute upsets, never to be ruled out as the diplomats
continued haggling this week, Turkey is on the brink of realising its
fondest national dream: on Monday October 3rd, formal talks will begin
on Turkish membership of a European Union at whose gate it has been
waiting for 40 years.

But as so often happens, the settlement of one question-should Turkey
step all the way into the EU's ante-room?-has quickly given rise to a
host of others. People are already asking how long rapprochement with
the EU can be sustained, in the face of opposition in Europe to
Turkey-and in Turkey to Europe.

Scepticism over the Turks surfaced again this week in the European
Parliament. The legislators, while endorsing the start of talks with the
government in Ankara, balked at ratifying Turkey's inclusion in a
customs protocol-on the grounds that the ships and aircraft of Cyprus,
an EU member, are still barred from Turkish ports. Dominique de
Villepin, the French prime minister, had earlier said that Turkey must
recognise Cyprus in order to join the EU. Nicolas Sarkozy, a popular
Gaullist who is well placed to win the French presidency in 2007,
opposes Turkish membership. So does Angela Merkel, who is favourite to
take Germany's chancellorship following its recent elections, which
ended in a hung parliament. Overall, just 35% of EU citizens support
Turkish membership, according to a recent poll by Eurobarometer.
Europeans are queasy about the idea of taking in a big Muslim member,
and of hordes of Turkish job-seekers overwhelming the EU's current
members.

But the other part of Turkey's Euro-question is even harder: how much
resistance will there be among the Turks to the changes-legal, economic,
and above all cultural-that the EU is demanding?

For Turks who want a European future, there was a dollop of hope last
weekend, when brave historians managed to hold a conference in Istanbul
to discuss the fate of the Ottoman Armenians. It was the first time
Turkish pundits were permitted to challenge publicly the official line,
holding that the mass deportation of Armenians in 1915 did not amount to
a conspiracy to kill them. As participants read out letters between the
"Young Turks" then ruling the empire, a rapt audience was left with no
doubt that hundreds of thousands of Armenians were deliberately slain.

Planned originally for May, the Armenian forum was called off then at
the behest of Cemil Cicek, the justice minister. It was nearly scuppered
anew last week, when an Istanbul court used a technicality to order its
cancellation. This time Mr Cicek offered a way out-changing the venue.
And Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, condemned the court
ruling: the first time an elected leader had so publicly rebuked
Turkey's courts. It was also the first time that Mr Erdogan had so
clearly given a lead to public opinion instead of pandering to populism.
The establishment media fell in behind him, decrying the noisy
nationalists who pelted the conference delegates with eggs.

Cynics, who recall Mr Erdogan's earlier moves to appease conservatives
by criminalising adultery, see his recent outburst of liberalism as a
last-ditch effort to clinch the October 3rd date. Be that as it may,
people close to the prime minister insist he has pinned his political
fortunes on further reforms, with or without the EU. "He can't compete
on nationalism with the ultra-nationalists, so it's in his interest to
keep on reforming," says a western diplomat.

This may explain some other recent moves by Mr Erdogan: he dared to
admit, in a speech in the Kurdish stronghold of Diyarbakir, that Turkey
had erred in its dealings with the Kurds. These frank words enraged
nationalists, including some members of his own party. In the country as
a whole, nationalism has been bubbling: it has been rising since June
2004, when the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) ended a five-year
truce.

Chauvinism has surfaced in ugly ways. There have been attempted
lynchings of Kurdish civilians outside their native south-east region. A
recent poll shows the jingoistic Nationalist Action Party, which failed
to enter parliament in the 2002 elections, would gain seats today.

As well as countering this dark mood, Mr Erdogan must cope with foes in
the army who fear that rapprochement with Europe will reduce their
power-and who see in Turkey's internal conflicts a chance to restore
that influence. But Mr Erdogan has rebuffed army demands to re-introduce
a draconian anti-terror law. Solving the Kurdish problem requires more
democracy, not repression, he insists. He may have to take further
risks-for example by endorsing, despite army opposition, a deal that
would coax 5,000 PKK fighters from their mountain strongholds, both in
northern Iraq and within Turkey.

The coming year will be a big test of Mr Erdogan's leadership. Austria,
a sceptic on Turkish entry, takes over the presidency of the EU in
January. The Austrians will doubtless promote their idea of a
"privileged partnership" between Turkey and Europe, instead of full
membership. Next year will also see the retirement of General Hilmi
Ozkok, a liberal chief of the general staff. His likely successor is the
land-forces commander, Yasar Buyukanit, a more old-fashioned type of
soldier. It is to keep such secularist hawks at bay that Mr Erdogan has
ignored some demands from his pious voters, such as boosting religious
education and easing curbs on the headscarf.

Another challenge, in his dealings both with sceptical Europeans and his
own voters, is to honour his claim to be giving Turkey its first clean
government. Charges of irregularity in the sale of shares in the state
refinery, Tupras-and also in a tender for the operation of Istanbul's
Galata port-have weakened that claim. Unless he deals with sleaze, Mr
Erdogan may lose the trust of his own citizens and his European
partners. That would be a pity, when the prime minister has risked so
much for Turkey's European future.

[Gavur]

Turkey sentences Armenian writer

BBC NEWS
7 October 2005
Turkey sentences Armenian writer

Journalists have raised concerns about aspects of the penal reforms
A journalist in Turkey has been found guilty of insulting Turkish identity
and given a suspended six-month jail sentence by a court in Istanbul.
Hrant Dink, of Armenian-Turkish descent, wrote a newspaper column which he
argued was aimed at improving relations between Turkey and Armenia.
The prosecution interpreted one part as an insult, but Mr Dink has said he
will appeal against the ruling.
The verdict follows criminal code reforms as Turkey seeks to join the EU.
The reforms were intended to improve freedom of speech in Turkey.
The article written by Mr Dink addressed the killings of hundreds of
thousands of Armenians during Ottoman rule in 1917.
Armenians, supported by several countries, want Turkey to recognise the
events as a genocide. Turkey rejects that description, saying the deaths
occurred in a civil war in which many Turks were also killed.
Humiliation
A paragraph in the article calling on Armenians to symbolically reject "the
adulterated part of their Turkish blood" was taken as offensive.
" If I'm guilty of insulting a nation then it's a matter of honour not to
live here" Hrant Dink.
The judge ruled that Mr Dink's newspaper column implied that Turkish blood
was dirty.
He is the editor of a bilingual Armenian-Turkish newspaper, Agos.
The BBC's Sarah Rainsford said the judge ordered a suspended sentence as it
was Mr Dink's first offence.
But the nationalist lawyers who brought the case were disappointed.
"There was an obvious humiliation and result of this case should be at least
two and a half years or three years criminal charge," one said.
"But I think that Turkish courts are under big pressure due to these
European Union accession talks."
'No crime'
Mr Dink's lawyer Fethiye Cetin said the ruling showed how little had changed
under Turkey's new criminal code, despite international and internal
pressure.
"There was no crime here," she told the BBC. "We expected our client to get
off."
Our correspondent says human rights lawyers believe his case shows there are
still no-go areas for discussion here and the new laws leave substantial
room for interpretation.
Mr Dink says he will appeal against the ruling. But if he cannot clear his
name, he will leave the country.
"If I'm guilty of insulting a nation," he told the BBC, "then it's a matter
of honour not to live here."

[Gavur]

Go Dink!

[Gavur]

Armenian Journalist Gets Six Months For 'Insulting Turkish Identity'

(AFP, AP) - An Istanbul court on Friday sentenced Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink to a six-month suspended sentence for "insult to the Turkish national identity." Both Dink and his lawyer, Fethiye Cetin, and said they would appeal the decision.

Dink, editor of the bilingual Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos, was on trial for a February 2004 article calling on Armenians to "turn to the new blood of independent Armenia, which alone can free them of the burden of the Diaspora." In the article, which dealt with the collective memory of the Armenian massacres of 1915-1917 under the Ottoman Empire, Dink also called on Armenians to symbolically reject "the adulterated part of their Turkish blood."

The court said Dink's article "was not an expression of opinion with the aim of criticizing, but was intended to be insulting and offensive," the semiofficial Anatolia news agency said.

"Our client has done absolutely nothing wrong," Cetin told AFP, but said she would not comment further without seeing the minutes of the hearing.

Dink, who did not attend the hearing, told AFP that he would appeal "to the full extent of the law." "If the sentence is confirmed, it will mean I have insulted these people (the Turks) and it would be great dishonor for me to live on the same street, in the same neighborhood, in the same country as them," he said.

"Such a thing would be impossible for me... If I cannot explain to this (Turkish) society that I had no such intentions, I'll leave the country, I'll go away."

Armenians have long demanded that Turkey and other nations recognize the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the beginning of the 20th century as genocide. In the past, Turks could be prosecuted for agreeing, and a clause in the new penal code allows prosecutors to interpret statements harmful to Turkish identity as a crime. The EU has asked Turkey to change the clause or risk endangering its EU bid. Turkey officially opened EU membership negotiations early Tuesday, but its bid is opposed by a majority of Europeans.

Dink, speaking in Turkish, told the Associated Press that the sentence was an attempt to silence him. "But I will not be silent," he said. "As long as I live here, I will go on telling the truth, just as I always have." Dink said he would bring the case to Turkey's Supreme Court and to the European Court of Human Rights if necessary.

"If it is a day or six months or six years it is unacceptable to me," he said. "If I am unable to come up with a positive result, it will be honorable for me to leave this country."

Dink is also facing charges for remarks he made at a human rights conference in 2002 criticizing Turkey's national anthem and an oath taken by Turkish schoolchildren each day in which they say, "Happy is the one who says, 'I am a Turk."'

Dink said then that he did not feel like a Turk, but like an Armenian who is a citizen of Turkey. He also objected at the time to a line in the national anthem that says "smile upon my heroic race," saying the emphasis on race was a form of discrimination. Dink will go to trial for those comments in February.

Award-winning Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk has been indicted under the same accusation as Dink for saying in an interview with a Swiss magazine that "one million Armenians were killed in Turkey." His trial opens on December 17.

In a meeting in Ankara Thursday, EU Commissioner for Enlargement Ollie Rehn urged Turkey to amend the law on national identity in the penal code and said the EU would be watching Pamuk's trial closely. The cases highlight the challenges still facing Turkey as it tries to enact reforms to harmonize with EU norms. The government has promised to lift restrictions on freedom of expression, and has also committed to improving its treatment of minorities under its agreement with the EU.

(Photolur photo: Hrant Dink.)

[Gavur]

EU official meets Turkish novelist who faces prison

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg125530.html

[Gavur]

Rehn lends support to Orhan Pamuk

ISTANBUL - Turkish Daily News

Sunday, October 9, 2005
The official responsible for European Union enlargement met Saturday with prominent Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk , who faces trial in December over controversial remarks about the Armenian massacres and could end up serving three years in jail.

"I was glad to meet with my friend Orhan Pamuk," EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said afterwards. "We discussed about Turkish literature, history and society."

Both men said they had not talked about Pamuk's forthcoming trial, but Rehn stressed, "Freedom of expression is a core European value. Any country who wants to enter the EU has to share this value."

[Hovik]

Turkish delight?

EducationGuardian.co.uk, UK
Oct 8 2005

Turkish delight?

Chris Morris's The New Turkey is a brave attempt to chart the
challenges facing the EU's new applicant, says Andrew Finkel

Saturday October 8, 2005
The Guardian


The New Turkey: The Quiet Revolution on the Edge of Europe?
by Chris Morris
288pp, Granta, £17.99


"Happy is the one who says 'I am a Turk'," is the much quoted maxim
of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. What sweet agony, by contrast, for the rest
of us trying to follow the corkscrew path to modernity taken by the
republic he founded. Ask the Pentagon, which confidently expected the
cash-strapped Turkish government to accept the multi-billion dollar
inducement to support the war in Iraq; or the Turco-sceptics in
Europe who never believed the ultra-nationalists would reprieve the
convicted leader of the PKK by voting to abolish the death penalty;
or Turkish liberals who still support a prime minister who, as a
youthful radical, sat at the feet of the proto al-Qaida warlord
Gulbeddin Hekmatyar, as the best way of safeguarding the country's
secular democracy. Getting at the heart of contemporary Turkey is a
bit like peeling an onion modified by Escher.

Happy we all are, therefore, to have a new Turkish primer by Chris
Morris which cuts a brisk and lucid way through the great themes of
Turkish life today, from the army's shrinking role in public life to
the dynamism of a business community that works hard and avoids
paying taxes. The eponymous New Turkey might even be able to come to
terms with its past. Morris is full of affection for his former beat
as BBC correspondent, but he enjoys poking the scars left by the
ancien régime. Why does Turkey find it hard to look at the Ottoman
empire's treatment of its Armenian population in 1915 and treat even
the cultural expression of Kurdishness as subversive? "You never ask
the questions we want to answer," one officer tells him, providing
him with an epiphany on a plate.

Morris has served in Brussels and is therefore better placed than
most to answer the most complicated question of all: can a
fast-evolving Turkey soft-land in 10 or 15 years' time inside a
European Union whose institutions are also in a state of flux? This
really is rocket science and, not surprisingly, Morris hedges a few
bets.

He is unequivocal, however, in believing that the prospect of EU
membership has already prompted a "quiet revolution on the edge of
Europe". Like other nations that stood in the enlargement queue,
Turkey is undergoing regime change by consent. The other factor in
this revolution is that the old system quite literally collapsed. The
1999 earthquake, not unlike the natural disaster in New Orleans,
sought out not just the fault lines in the Earth but in society as
well. Ordinary people, already impatient with a self-seeking
political class, discovered that the bureaucracy and military too
were late in helping them in their hour of need. The government kept
sawing away at reforms, never believing the branch on which it sat
would finally collapse. The twin financial crises of 2000 and 2001
sealed the politicians' fate. The post-war political machine they
created had simply run out of fuel.

Morris describes the slow transfer of power from a democratically
elected but Soviet-style state to the institutions of civil society.
We are reminded of an attempt by military intelligence in January
2004 to collect information on "divisive" trouble makers, including
Satanists, ethnic minorities and "individuals known to support the
United States and the European Union" (ie the armed forces
themselves). It doesn't pay to underestimate the professionalism of
the Turkish army - a mainstay of Nato which has polished its
peacekeeping skills in Somalia, Bosnia and Afghanistan, but every now
and then it shoots itself in the foot.

Yet another lesson of the earthquake was that Turkey needed not just
a less heavy-handed government but a more efficient and transparent
one. It was civil society itself that defied planning procedures and
building codes and nurtured corrupt politicians. It will come as a
rude shock to those who rant against the tyranny of Brussels that to
many Turks, EU membership holds out the promise of being better
ruled.

Europe is more inclined to see Turkey as a challenge to its entire
civilisation - one which many conservative parties in Europe balk at
but which the left is more eager to accept. Morris quotes Joschka
Fischer: "To modernise an Islamic country based on the shared values
of Europe would be almost a D-Day for Europe in the war against
terror." This is not an argument that appeals to Turks, who feel
patronised by attempts to depict them as the well-behaved Muslim
nation. They already see themselves as an important part of the
European economic zone. Many, frankly, are less bothered about being
a full member than with the immediate rewards that simply being a
candidate can bring. Europe means stability and as the Turkish
economy grows so too will the demand for European goods and services.
At present Turkey consumes at the level of Belgium; in 15 years the
population will exceed that of Germany. Think about it, Turks tell
their European friends. It's win-win.

And if it goes wrong? Morris recognises that Turks would be more
likely to react to a European rebuff with an excess of nationalism
rather than a retreat into religious fundamentalism. A Turkey in
isolationist mood would be more dangerous to regional stability than
a nation absorbed in its own piety.

In some ways Turks now have the advantage. They have long realised
there is no alternative to change. For those who still think Europe
should define itself by whom it can exclude, not whom it can embrace,
The New Turkey is an eloquent nudge in the ribs.

· Andrew Finkel was a correspondent in Istanbul for many years and
has just completed a fellowship at the National Endowment for
Democracy in Washington DC. To order The New Turkey for £16.99 with
free UK p&p go to guardian.co.uk/bookshop.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/books/story/0,10595,1587422,00.html