"insulting Turkish identity"

[Gavur]

Ankara Urges Europe To Agree That Turkey’s EU Membership Is Inevitable

At the same time Turkey refuses to fulfill the two main conditions set by the European Parliament – recognition of Armenian genocide and united Cyprus.
06.10.2005 GMT+04:00

Immediately after the start of negotiations on the conditions of Turkey's EU membership in Luxemburg the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdullah Gul made quite an incorrect announcement which provoked the anger of many mass media resources. «Europeans have to resign themselves to the fact that their ears will hear the sound of Turkish language». These words of the Turkish politician would not sound so provocative if Europeans were not worried that much about the flow of uninvited guests from Anatolia.
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The absolute majority of Europeans are categorically against the membership of Turkey in the European Union. Even the Scandinavian countries, where emigrants from Asia were treated quite loyally, now say that Turkey’s EU membership is extremely undesirable. As for the so called “Old Europe”, here the attitude towards Turkey’s membership has always been negative. Only 10 percents of Austrians, 15 percents of Greeks, 20 percents of French, Germans and Danes are ready to meet Turks in the “Home of all Europeans”. Knowing this, Gul could not but realize the consequences of his careless announcement. Today Europeans are afraid of Turkish speech and there are real grounds for that. The results of recent public surveys show that 21 percent of Turkish citizens intend to move to some European country in case Turkey is accepted to the European Union. Another 30 percent of Turks say they do not exclude the possibility of immigrating to a European country. This means that a huge number of Turkey's population will move to Europe and eat European bread and receive European welfare payment which can bring to undesirable economic consequences.

In spite of the negative attitude of most of the Europeans, the foreign ministers of EU member states have agreed to start negotiations with Ankara. However, many European politicians disagree with this idea. A number of influential oppositionists from France, Germany, Austria and Netherlands have already expressed their negative attitude towards Turkey's full EU membership. The decision was harshly criticized by the former president of France Valery Jiskar D’Esten who is also the creator of the unified EU Constitution. “The great French project of creating political Europe has been rejected in favor of changing European Union to a simple zone of free trade. I am sorry about that”, Valery Jiskar D’Esten said. Even those who consider the decision on the start of negotiations reasonable, say that the reached agreement does not mean that Turkey will be accepted to the European Union. USA is perhaps the only country that is exclusively positive about Turkey's EU membership. It is known that the intervention of Condolisa Rice became a turning point in consultations held in Luxemburg. This is why European papers write that «Turkey has received a passport to EU with a US visa»...

The agreement to start negotiations is qualified as a compromise. Ankara did not value the good will of Vienna who withdrew the demand about the necessity to give Turkey the status of a privileged partner. (Abdullah Gul emphatically refused to shake hands with the Austrian minister.) However it is still unclear what compromise the Turks made in return. Rejeb Erdoghan still states that Ankara excludes the possibility of recognizing Cyprus and the fact of Armenian genocide. Then where is the compromise if Turkey rejects the two main conditions set by the European parliament?
«PanARMENIAN.Net» analytical department
! Reproduction in full or in part is prohibited without reference to «PanARMENIAN.Net».

[Gavur]

ANKARA: You Shouldn't Go Anywhere, Hrant Dink!

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg125770.html

[Hovik]

Gul Sure Court Will Justify Pamuk

GUL SURE COURT WILL JUSTIFY PAMUK

Pan Armenian
10.10.2005 19:23 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkish FM Abdullah Gul has stated he is sure
that the court will pass a sentence justifying the most famous
writer in contemporary Turkey - Orhan Pamuk for his statements on
the Armenian Genocide. "Trials of this kind were held in the past,
too - for the same statements, for the same words and courts passed
sentences, according to which everyone has a right to express his or
her opinion. I am sure the court will pronounce a similar decision in
Pamuk's case," A. Gul stated. It should be reminded that Orhan Pamuk's
February interview with the Tages-Anzeiger Swiss newspaper resulted in
instituting proceedings against him. In the interview Pamuk stated,
"One million Armenians were killed in these lands and no one except
me dares speak about it." Turkish court considered this part of the
statement as "public abasement of Turkish identity." According to
Turkish laws, Pamuk may face imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years. The
trial scheduled for December 16 has already been criticized by the
European society and EU officials.

They consider this as "a step backward in human rights and Turkey's
reforms." The other day EU Commissioner for Enlargement Olli Rehn
met with Orhan Pamuk. He expressed his support to the writer and
urged Ankara "to respect freedom of speech." On Friday Istanbul court
condemned the Agos Armenian newspaper editor Hrant Dink to 6 months'
suspended sentence "for insulting Turkish national identity." This
means "the ethnic Armenian journalist will not be imprisoned unless
he repeats his actions," reported RFE/RL.

[Hovik]

Pamuk Divides Nobel Jury

PAMUK DIVIDES NOBEL JURY

Turkish Daily News
Oct 11 2005

Turkish press yesterday
Tuesday, October 11, 2005

PRESS SCANNER
Turkish press yesterday:

Turkish newspapers yesterday wrote about a split between the Nobel
Academy over a prominent Turkish novelist; initial reports of bird
flu at a farm in Turkey; the devastating earthquake that rocked
Pakistan and the views of an ambassador concerning Turkey's European
Union aspirations.

Prominent Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk lies behind the five-day delay
in the delivery of the Nobel Prize for literature, according to the
U.K.'s Observer newspaper, Hurriyet reported.

"The secretive group of intellectuals who award the Nobel Prize
for literature have delayed their decision for at least a week amid
reports of a split over honoring the controversial Turkish author,
Pamuk," said the Observer, noting that for the first time in at least
10 years the prize for literature was announced neither in the run-up
to, nor in the same week as, the four other main Nobel awards, namely,
medicine, physics, chemistry and peace.

"Pamuk's latest novel, 'Snow,' has been widely acclaimed for
addressing Turkey's internal clash of cultures. His earlier work,
'My Name is Red,' established his literary prowess. However, the
author is controversial for an assertion he made in a newspaper
interview earlier this year that the Turkish state was guilty of an
alleged 20th century genocide against Armenians and Kurds. He faces
trial for the comments on Dec. 16," said the Observer.

The newspaper also covered why there was a split in the academy over
Pamuk and why the academy was reluctant to award him.

It said the academy had concerns that literature might be overshadowed
by politics since the Turkish author has recently caused a stir. It
went on to say that a split in the academy over the Turkish author
could be based on a long-entrenched principle of avoiding fashions
and fads. Finally, it said that Pamuk is widely acclaimed but at the
age of 53 is considered on the young side.

"The Nobel Prize must never go to a 'flavor of the month' book,
as the prize exists to reward a body of work," the newspaper concluded.

[Hovik]

Hrant Dink Sentenced To 6 Months' Conditional Imprisonment

HRANT DINK SENTENCED TO 6 MONTHS' CONDITIONAL IMPRISONMENT

AZG Armenian Daily #182
11/10/2005

Concern

On October 8, the court of Istanbul sentenced Hrant Dink,
editor-in-chief of Agos newspaper, to 6 months' conditional
imprisonment on charge of "insulting Turkish national identity". "The
journalist of Armenian descent will be sent to prison if he repeats
his words", the Associated Press explains. In an article published in
early 2004 Dink called for Armenians to "renounce the hatred towards
the Turks that poisons your blood". Agos employer Karin Karakashli
thinks that the court misinterpreted his words concluding that Dink
considers Turkish blood poisonous.

In an interview to radio Liberty, Dink refused the charge labeling it
political. He is going to appeal against the charge at the Supreme
Court of the country and in case of no results he will apply to the
European Court of Human Rights. "If the accusations are not lifted
from me I will leave Turkey where I have live all my life", Dink said.

[Hovik]

TURKEY: Journalist convicted on charge of ‘insulting Turkish identity'



New York, October 12, 2005—The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the conviction of a Turkish-Armenian journalist on a charge of "insulting and weakening Turkish identity through the media" An Istanbul court on Friday sentenced Hrant Dink, 52, editor-in-chief of the bilingual Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos, to a six-month suspended term. Dink and his lawyer, Fethiye Cetin, plan to appeal.

The charges stemmed from a series of articles Dink wrote in early 2004 dealing with the collective memory of the Armenian massacres of 1915-1917 under the Ottoman Empire. He called on Armenians to move beyond historical anger toward Turks and "turn to the new blood of independent Armenia."

Turkish law, even under recent legal reforms, allows for journalists to be criminally prosecuted and imprisoned for their work. Dink was prosecuted under a provision of the new penal code that states: "A person who insults Turkishness, the Republic, or the Turkish Parliament will be punished with imprisonment ranging from six months to three years." Turkish authorities did not elaborate on what they considered insulting in Dink's work.

Dink, who founded Agos in 1996, was sentenced the same week talks began on Turkey's application to join the European Union.

"This is a political decision because I wrote about the Armenian genocide and they detest that, so they found a way to accuse me of insulting Turks," Dink told CPJ. He said he is prepared to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights to clear his name.

Turkey does not acknowledge as genocide the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the beginning of the 20th century. The European Parliament has conditioned Turkey's entry to the EU on its formal recognition of the killings as genocide.

"Despite official promises, Turkish journalists continue to be criminally prosecuted for their work," CPJ Executive Director Ann Cooper said. "At the heart of this case are the dozens of laws in Turkey that can make free expression a crime. Free expression will remain limited in Turkey as long as these laws are on the books."

Award-winning Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk was indicted in September under the same penal code provision after an interview he gave to a Swiss magazine earlier this year in which he said, "one million Armenians were killed in Turkey." His trial is set for December 17.

Dink faces additional charges for making critical comments at a 2002 human rights conference about Turkey's national anthem and a daily oath taken by Turkish schoolchildren 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 will appear in court in February for those remarks.

[Gavur]

Let Their Be Such Cases So All Is Exposed

Opinion by Semih İDİZ

Turkish Daily News
Oct 13 2005

Anti-EU forces that are using the legal system to hound people like
Orhan Pamuk and Hrant Dink may believe they are doing a great service
to the country. They don't realize, however, that they are doing the
opposite. All they are doing in the end is blemishing the good name
of their country. Whether they have the capacity to understand this
is another question, of course.

Looked at from another, and somewhat perverse, perspective, what they
are doing could actually be considered as being beneficial for the
country, albeit inadvertently. They are exposing an outmoded system of
thought for what it is and forcing progressive Turks to rally around
principles like respect for freedom of thought.

Take the case of Dink, who received a suspended six-month prison
sentence for allegedly insulting Turkey. His paper Agos, one of
Turkey's few Armenian newspapers, has become something of a shrine
for Turkish intellectuals. A large group of them visited Dink this
week to express their support for him and to condemn, through their
show of solidarity, the process under which he and those like him
can be convicted.

Of course, such cases are bad for Turkey's EU prospects, as one after
another of my diplomat friends from Europe like to point out.

That goes without saying. But it is also a fact that the change in
mood that has come with this EU perspective -- especially now that
membership talks are to start -- is helping to separate the good from
the bad and the ugly in the country.

Both Pamuk and Dink know that there is little chance of them actually
being incarcerated at this stage. Even Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul
thinks as much. Instead, they stand to become folk heroes of another
kind, which we have always had in this country.

Take, for example, Atilla Ilhan, the renowned poet and playwright
who died at the ripe age of 80 on Monday.

Apart from his literary genius, which touched the hearts of millions of
Turks from different generations, his claim to fame included being sent
to prison as a young lad of 16 and being banned -- on the orders of
the minister for education -- from enrolling in any school in Turkey
after serving his sentence. What is it that enables a system to do
this? In Ilhan's case it was that he had sent a poem by Turkey's
"outlawed poet laureate" -- the determined and unrepentant Marxist
Nazim Hikmet -- to his girlfriend. Ilhan was sent to prison and banned
from school for this all those decades ago.

So Pamuk and Dink join a long list of "literati" who have trodden
this path, and under much worse circumstances. This is a list that
includes names such as Kemal Tahir, Fakir Baykurt, Sabahattin Ali
and, of course, the great Yasar Kemal. In fact, being hounded by the
system has always been a seal of approval for Turkish intellectuals,
be they writers, musicians, philosophers or otherwise.

It is the tradition of these great intellectuals that Turkey has
as a cultural reservoir that it can tap into in order to show the
country's best face to the world. Many Turks are engaged in doing
just that. There is a great explosion in the arts in Turkey today,
and much of it is not going unnoticed.

But there also appears to be those who are embedded in the system
who insist on showing the country's ugly, instead of delightful,
face to the world. They do so in the name of a nationalism that has
little to do with true patriotism. So, in a perverse way, one says,
"Let there be cases like Pamuk and Dink's so that all is exposed."

Provided, of course, that no one gets hurt -- which certainly was
not always the case in the past.

[Gavur]

Point Of No Return?

Turkish Daily News
Oct 13 2005

TDN editorial by Yusuf KANLI

Turkey's chief negotiator in the European Union accession process,
State Minister Ali Babacan, proudly declared on Wednesday that Turkey
has reached a point of no return in its bid for EU membership.

At a time when a leading writer and newspaper editor could face
charges -- even sentenced -- for "insulting the Turkish identity" by
expressing opinions that might not be shared by the majority people
in this country, it is of course difficult to say that Turkey has
reached a point of no return in its well over 200-year effort to
integrate with the West.

I could not finish any of the novels by Orhan Pamuk. I tried hard,
but I just couldn't. Perhaps I do not have the minimal intellect
required to understand what he was trying to say, but still, if many
people in this country and abroad love reading his works, I feel
proud that we have a writer of his calibre.

As someone who possibly believes "there is no good or bad advertising,"
he might even have intentionally mentioned in that controversial
newspaper interview that although many Kurds and Armenians had
been killed in this country nobody was talking about it, except
himself. I might not understand his prose, at least thus far, but I am
confident that he knew what reactions his words would stir up in this
country. If he was testing the limits of freedom of expression here,
I must confess it was a clever ploy and he successfully demonstrated
that we have not yet reached the "point of no return" in that sphere.

Pamuk will appear in court on Dec. 16, and we shall see whether
he will face a similar sentence to that meted out to Hrant Dink --
the Armenian-Turkish editor of the bi-lingual Agos weekly newspaper
published in Istanbul -- on Oct. 7 only four days after the official
start of the accession talks process on the grounds that he insulted
Turks and "Turkishness."

Of course, as we keep stressing at every opportunity, legislating
reform is one thing, but implementing that reform is something
else altogether. If the ruling party has sufficient parliamentary
strength, it can even change the Constitution in a very short period
of time. However, when it comes to the implementation of those reforms
and the human factor enters onto the scene, no country can wave a
magic wand to transform the mindset of its people overnight.

Time is needed, and intense efforts are required to achieve the mindset
revolution required to bring into force the required legislation.

The basis of democracy is an awareness that there may be truths other
than your own. Democracy is not just confined to a number of seats in
Parliament. Unless an awareness that governments elected to office
with a majority are primarily entitled to safeguard the minority
views cannot be nurtured, then that regime cannot be a democracy,
but an elected dictatorship.

But simply by witnessing some bad examples, however, we should not give
up. The EU perspective of this country -- even if it may not take us
to membership of the bloc one day -- is a must in order to sustain
reforms for a better governed, more democratic and more prosperous
Turkey. When all 35 chapters of the accession talk's process are
completed successfully, we fully agree with Babacan that we will have
a much different Turkey than the one we have today.

The Pamuk and Dink cases will all be forgotten as nasty developments
that happened during the transformation period of Turkey while a new
era of understanding, brotherhood, nationhood and citizenship emerged.

On Wednesday, an Ankara prosecutor further boosted our belief in
the "reform absorption capacity" of this country and nation when
he decided to reject an official demand by the governor's office in
Ankara to ban gay and lesbian associations.

Yes, unlike many Muslim countries, homosexuality has never been
illegal or criminalized in Turkey, but there is no legislation to
protect gay men and lesbians from discrimination or hostility.

The decision of the prosecutor that the American Psychiatric
Association did not rate homosexuality as a disorder and the words
"gay" and "lesbian" were widely used in daily life and scientific
research, was therefore a landmark move for individual and civil
liberties here.

Have we reached the "point of no return," as Babacan proudly declared
on Wednesday? I am afraid not. A lot has been done but we still have
a long way to go before we can make such a bold statement.

[Gavur]

U.s. Helsinki Commission Blasts Turkey

Armenian National Committee of America
888 17th St., NW Suite 904
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (202) 775-1918
Fax: (202) 775-5648
E-mail: [email protected]
Internet: www.anca.org

PRESS RELEASE
October 13, 2005
Contact: Elizabeth S. Chouldjian
Tel: (202) 775-1918

U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION BLASTS TURKEY

-- Congressional Panel Calls on Turkey to Face its History;
Drop Charges Against Writer for Armenian Genocide Remarks

WASHINGTON, DC - The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA)
today welcomed efforts by leaders of the U.S. Helsinki Commission
to press Turkey to end the prosecution of noted Turkish writer
Orhan Pamuk for speaking openly about the Armenian Genocide in
violation of the Turkish penal code, which criminalizes public
discourse about this crime against humanity.

In a letter sent this week to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, Helsinki Commissioners encouraged him to authorize the
removal of charges against Pamuk, who was charged with "public
denigration of the Turkish identity," for comments made in
Switzerland about the Armenian Genocide.

"We appreciate all that Congressman Smith and Senator Brownback are
doing to encourage Turkey to honestly face its history and come to
terms with the Armenian Genocide," said ANCA Executive Director
Aram Hamparian. "Their efforts are in the best tradition of
America's proud leadership on human rights, and reflect the growing
Congressional consensus that Turkey - at long last - must
immediately end its hateful campaign of genocide denial."

In a remark earlier today, Commission Chairman Senator Sam
Brownback (R-KS) stressed that "Dropping the charges against Orhan
Pamuk is not sufficient for Turkey to come to grips with its past,
but it is necessary," commented Brownback. "If nothing else, the
prosecution of Pamuk feeds the worst fears of those who are
skeptical about Turkey's commitment to freedom and democracy."

Co-Chairman Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) noted today that, "A
stable democracy cannot blossom until the government ends the
practice of stifling free speech and removes the clouds of
deception and censorship from a true telling of history." He added
that, "Turkey has barely taken the first steps toward coming to
terms with its history. Until the Turks honestly and openly
discuss their history, their democracy will never be on a firm
foundation."

The U.S. Helsinki Commission, also known as Commission on Security
and Cooperation in Europe, is a U.S. Government agency that
monitors progress in the implementation of the 1975 Helsinki
Accords. The Commission consists of nine members from the United
States Senate, nine from the House of Representatives, and one each
from the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce.

[Gavur]

Orhan Pamuk Affair Worse Than 'midnight Express'

Mehmet Ali Birand

Turkish Daily News
Oct 14 2005

An article in our law books and a prosecutor's reference to it have
caused incredible trouble for Turkey. The article and the resulting
lawsuit will harm our country more than the film 'Midnight Express.'
We will regret it later and it will be very hard to make amends

Just remember the 1970s and 80s.

A single film ruined our image: "Midnight Express" told the story of a
U.S. citizen who was mistreated and tortured in a Turkish prison. When
Turkey came up in discussions everyone would say, "Ah, the country
that tortures people." "Midnight Express" caused incredible harm to
the country.

At first, we just ignored it, we said: "At the end of the day, it's
just a film. What harm can it do?" But it caused immense harm. Our
image abroad was not that good to begin with, moreover, everyone
watched the film as if it was a documentary and believed it to be
the truth.

Today, we face a similar threat even though it comes from a different
source.

Most of us don't take the charges filed against author Orhan Pamuk
too seriously. However, this lawsuit will cause more damage to our
interests than people think.

Freedom of speech is the most important issue in the eyes of the
civilized world. It is the basis of democracies. Those who criticized
us in the past will see us as a country that can't tolerate freedom
of expression.

Orhan Pamuk was charged at very a sensitive time.

Pamuk told a foreign journalist: "30,000 Kurds and 1 million Armenians
were killed in this land. No one but me has the courage to speak
about it." All hell subsequently broke lose.

Pamuk was expressing his personal opinion. He utilized his most basic
right, but reaction were severe. The debate grew and some even dressed
the matter up as treason. On the other hand, some said although they
didn't agree with Pamuk, they believed he had the right to express
his opinion.

While the debates were a little exaggerated, it occurred within the
public domain.

Weeks passed and just when everyone believed the debate to be over,
Prosecutor Turgay Evsen filed charges against Pamuk based on article
301 of the new Turkish Penal Code (TCK). The prosecutor's opinion was
that Pamuk's statements should not be viewed as freedom of expression
because he had to be punished for "insulting 'Turkishness'."

Let's wait and see what the court thinks about that .

If it rejects the charges, everyone will understand that the court
doesn't agree with the prosecutor and the judiciary will fine tune its
attitude. If not, a long, arduous and daunting process will begin. We
will start hurting ourselves for no reason.

The campaign has already begun:

Orhan Pamuk is an international institution. He is very respected
and much-loved. Any act that could be perceived as silencing him will
cause serious reaction.

Just take a look at what's happening in the international media.

Even the prosecutor filing charges against him caused uproar.

A New York Times opinion piece, European Union Commissioner for
Enlargement Olli Rehn's visit to Pamuk and the matter being cited
in the EU progress report gives us a clue of what we can expect in
the future.

As of late, we have started to hear the reactions of famous authors
and potential Nobel laureates. Soon we will see them walking hand in
hand in support of Pamuk.

Our EU prospects will most likely be adversely affected by the
lawsuit. The anti-Turkish campaigners won't let this opportunity go
and will pass resolution after resolution.

This campaign will tarnish Turkey's already negative image.

You may say: "Why are they so sensitive about this? Our laws say
Pamuk is guilty."

But that's exactly what the problem is.

In the West, criticizing or even insulting the state or its leader(s)
is not seen as a crime. It is described as freedom of expression. In
our country, the state is still a taboo issue. For some, the need to
respect and even worship it is tantamount.

In the West, when people say such things as Pamuk did, there is a
public debate and the debate takes place publicly. The state never
gets involved, unlike in Turkey.

If the court agrees to look into the Pamuk case, it is we who will
get into serious trouble.