"insulting Turkish identity"

[Gavur]

Now, Let’s Talk About the Conference

ETYEN MAHCUPYAN
10.22.2005 Saturday - ISTANBUL 12:03


The conference, “The Armenians During the Collapse of the Ottoman Empire,” which was banned, postponed and finally took place through an act of civil disobedience on the part of the three most prestigious universities in the country, has almost never been discussed since it materialized, compared to the row that erupted on the eve of the gathering.


The reason for this silence seems to be Turkey’s perception of the issue in question in an entirely political context and having no desire to understand its past. The ignorant, bigoted and ridiculous objection that the conference would advocate the genocide thesis was in fact a sign that discussions moved away from the so-called “national” view, and this could not be tolerated. Whereas the conference engendered a pluralistic platform that perhaps even went beyond the expectations of the organizers. We once again realized how prosaic, scrubby and superficial the Turkish and Armenian national views were in the face of the erudition that was manifested. Those who maintain that the conference was not scientific because the proponents of the Turkish view were not invited, appear to be altogether ignorant of what science is about. Because science is not an area for a clash of political positions, but an endeavor to grasp the truth in all aspects of its plurality. Above all, this in turn requires those who stand up and speak up in the name of science to present what they say within the criteria of scientific discipline and also respect scientific moral in the face of truth. To be more explicit, the spokespersons for both national views do not satisfy these criteria… Nationalism in its historical perspective that grants privileges to “national interest,” to the extent that it legitimizes the distortion of truth, does not develop the texts produced beyond mere brash demagogy. In other words, supporters of an ideology should change their attitudes in order to be regarded as “historians,” in a scientific sense.



The attitude of those who expected an “outcome” at the end of the conference was another proof of our inability to perceive history as a politics-free realm. Because scientific conferences do not produce “outcomes” as political ones do. On the contrary, if they are good ones, they bring the subject they are dealing with to the edge of new unknowns by deepening it. The Turkish society expecting an outcome is an indicator of how superficially we regard ourselves and our issues and how we are afraid to go deeper… On the other side, the conference in fact produced two outcomes. Firstly, it established that one section of the academic community and the intellectual circle in Turkey had the courage to openheartedly confront their past. This solemn and self-confident stance that emerged from a society that has not been speaking, that has regarded non-speaking as normal, and that has become timorous to speak for more than 80 years, is a move which would block low-level manipulations that would come from the West. Secondly, the high scientific level of the conference evinced Turkey was the right place to discuss this issue. The scientific content, which has been ignored so far because the public had not heard of it, has been discussed in an almost “ordinary” debate habitude with all the diversity and philosophical background that belong to it. Consequently, the conference established the differences in level between scientific people who respect their profession and the proponents of the official view, in a way that it cannot be ignored.


Finally a few words about the protesters… Naturally, there will be a few protesters in a country where the past is not known but is produced on the basis of an imaginary identity, and made the subject of “nationalism.”


What is surprising is the scantiness of their number… Maybe, even those who describe themselves as “nationalists” sense that what was experienced in the past is quite different from what we have been told. Otherwise, how we can explain the rumor that some of the protesters who throw eggs receive daily allowances.


October 21, 2005





10.22.2005


e-mail:[email protected]

[Gavur]

Jail Threat Not Deterring Novelist Pamuk

http://www.austin360.com/hp/content/shared-gen/ap/Other_Entertainment/People_Pamuk.html

[Gavur]

In Turkey, the Novelist as Lightning Rod

By STEPHEN KINZER
Published: October 23, 2005
ISTANBUL — AFTER years of waiting, Turkey was invited this month to begin discussions that may lead to membership in a very exclusive club: the European Union.

The stakes are high for Turkey and possibly even for relations between the Western and Islamic worlds. A legal fight between a Turkish prosecutor and the country's leading novelist, Orhan Pamuk, however, has complicated the talks.

Mr. Pamuk, who was scheduled to receive the Frankfurt Book Fair's prestigious peace prize Saturday, has been charged with making a statement that "explicitly insults" the Turkish state, a crime that carries a sentence of up to three years in prison.

The alleged insult was Mr. Pamuk's statement to a Swiss newspaper in February that "30,000 Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in these lands." He was referring to the civil that raged in Kurdish regions of Turkey in the 1980's and 1990's, and to the massacre of Armenians as the Ottoman Empire was collapsing during World War I. Most of the world considers this to have been a case of genocide, but Turkish leaders reject that label.

The prosecution of Mr. Pamuk is intensely embarrassing to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and others who are eager to show Europeans that Turkey, long a conservative society dominated by the military, now embraces human rights and free speech.

"Our E.U. prospects will most likely be adversely affected by this lawsuit," Mehmet Ali Birand, one of Turkey's best-known journalists, warned in a recent column. "Anti-Turkish campaigners won't let it go. They will use it as fodder for one resolution after another. This will tarnish Turkey's already negative image."

Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, a leader of the ruling Justice and Development Party, suggested in an interview on Thursday that he disapproved of the indictment. "These are not good things," he said. "Free expression is guaranteed in Turkey. If a prosecutor opens a file, it doesn't mean the case is decided. Judges will decide."

Even a decade ago, it was considered taboo, and was often illegal, to express unorthodox views on sensitive matters like religion, ethnic rights and the fate of Ottoman Armenians. But Turkish society is now racing toward European-style democracy, and the new openness here alarms diehard defenders of the old order, known collectively here as "Deep State."

It is these old-line nationalists, said Mr. Pamuk in his sunny, book-cluttered studio overlooking the Bosporus, who are using his indictment as a desperate attempt to keep Turkey from modernizing.

"It's a scandal, a shame," Mr. Pamuk said of his indictment. He described laws like the one under which he is being prosecuted as "hidden hammers that prosecutors want to keep in the drawer so they can hit whenever they want." Their purpose, he said, is to prevent Turks from speaking out on sensitive subjects.

When such issues are brought up, he said, the debate is "exaggerated, because taboos are still legally protected here." He added: "When people comment about political Islam or the army's role in politics or what happened to Ottoman Armenians or the way Turkey should treat its Kurds, unfortunately the comment does not appear neatly on the letters page of the newspaper."

Mr. Pamuk said he did not believe that the prime minister, who is leading Turkey's campaign to join the European Union, was behind his indictment. But he did suggest that Mr. Erdogan helped create the climate that made it possible.

"I blame him for his weakness and lack of determination," Mr. Pamuk said. "At the beginning of this year we had a wave of nationalist incidents and attacks on the E.U. project, including some by members of his own party. He did not look the problem in the eye and draw a clear line between anti-E.U. nationalism and the attitude of tolerance. He tried to avoid the subject."

Mr. Pamuk, 53, is not fundamentally a political figure, but he is a stubbornly independent one. In 1999 he refused an offer from the government to become a "State Artist," and he has criticized the government's policies on free speech, minority rights and other matters.

After the international success of his recent books, including "Snow" and "Istanbul: Memoir of a City," Mr. Pamuk has become to many here and abroad a symbol of Turkey's Westernizing ambitions. Last year, for example, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a member of the European Parliament and a former French student leader, told The Guardian, the British daily, that Mr. Pamuk "was one of the intellectuals who made me understand the importance of Turkey joining the European Union. It is so important for democrats in that country. Orhan is not only one of the most important modern writers in Europe, he is one of the examples of the possible modernity of Turkey."

While Mr. Pamuk encourages Turkey's democratization and strongly supports its campaign to join the European Union, however, he also reveres its age-old traditions.

"I have always believed Turkey should be proud of its two spirits, and not try to impose one above the other," he said. "My novels are a combination of experimental, modern innovations that come from the West, and the traditionalism of Persian epics, Sufi allegories and 19th-century Ottoman poetry. We should enjoy the fact the we have these two spirits, and combine them to create something new and rich, something that has never been done before."

Mr. Pamuk said that recent turns of opinion in Europe, reflected by votes against the proposed European constitution in France and the Netherlands, complicate Turkey's prospects for union membership but do not necessarily doom them.

"The French and Dutch referendums showed that voters in E.U. nations are more and more nervous about this enlargement process," he said. "It means taking Turkish Muslims and treating them as brothers. They don't want to do that. Unfortunately, there is a lot of anti-Turkish resentment. And in Turkey, which is getting more nationalistic, people see this and react against it. It makes Turkey's prospects of joining seem harder and harder.

"The E.U. with Turkey is a good project, but both sides still need to be convinced. If we reach the criteria for human rights, democracy and business ethics, then we can join the E.U. with our mustaches and water pipes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/23/weekinreview/23word.html

[Hovik]

'i Stand By My Words. And Even More, I Stand By My Right To Say Them...'

'I STAND BY MY WORDS. AND EVEN MORE, I STAND BY MY RIGHT TO SAY THEM...'

The Observer
Sunday October 23, 2005

When the acclaimed Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk recalled his country's
mass killing of Armenians, he was forced to flee abroad. As he prepares
to accept a peace award in Frankfurt, he tells Maureen Freely why he
had to break his nation's biggest taboo

Five years ago, Orhan Pamuk wrote a novel about a poet who is snared
in a political intrigue from which there is no escape. Nine months ago,
Turkey's most famous novelist was pulled into just such an intrigue.

It began with an off-the-cuff remark in an interview with a Swiss
newspaper. While discussing curbs on freedom of expression in Turkey,
Pamuk said that 'a million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds were killed in
this country and I'm the only one who dares to talk about it'.

He was soon to be reminded why. Although most of the world acknowledges
the genocide as historical fact, the official Turkish line has
been that 'only' a few hundred thousand died during the internecine
conflicts of the First World War. To suggest otherwise - or even to
use the word genocide - is to insult the nation's founding myth and
therefore Turkey's honour.

So the day after his interview appeared, the Turkish press launched
a fierce attack on Pamuk, branding him a traitor, accusing him of
having used the virtually illegal word genocide (although he had not)
and inviting 'civil society' to 'silence' him. Following several death
threats, he went into hiding abroad. He returned to Turkey late last
spring, hoping it had all blown over. It had not. Last August, an
Istanbul public prosecutor charged him with the 'public denigration
of Turkish identity'. The trial is set for 16 December. If convicted,
Pamuk faces three years in prison.

When the story broke in early September, it made headlines all over
the world, with writers, politicians, academics and human rights groups
joining the writers' organisation PEN to condemn the prosecution. The
governments of Europe were aghast, with the case raising serious
questions about Turkey's attempt to join the EU. As his translator,
I was only too aware that this was a bitterly ironic twist for Pamuk,
who has long been a supporter of Turkey in Europe and European-style
social democracy in Turkey.

Like many of his friends, I suspected that his prosecution was the
work of nationalists in the judiciary who want neither. Thanks to
another law, Pamuk was obliged to keep his own views on the matter
private. He faces an even longer prison sentence if he talks about
his case before it comes to trial.

Meanwhile, all of Turkey is arguing about the Armenians. Last month a
group of Turkish scholars broke 90 years of official silence, braving
court orders, death threats and fierce condemnation in the right-wing
press to hold a conference in Istanbul. For the first time, Turks
dared to ask Turks what happened to the Ottoman Armenians. This had
a huge impact on public opinion. Although many maintain that the
genocide was a fiction created by the nation's enemies, it is at
least no longer dangerous to question the official line.

It was in this context that Pamuk decided a week ago to give his first
interview on Turkish television since his life became a novel. It
provoked strong and varied responses, with many applauding his defiance
and others wishing he had been more defiant still. In one right-wing
newspaper, selected quotes were rearranged to suggest that Pamuk had
retracted his original statement, although in fact he reiterated it.

In some reports, there was also the suggestion that he had softened
his statement in the hope it might lead the authorities to drop his
case. A similarly worded article that had no byline found its way
into the Guardian and other newspapers across Europe last Monday.

And so the noose tightens. What to do? Speak out and risk a longer
sentence? Or stay silent and let parties unknown feed the world
lies? When I met Pamuk yesterday in Frankfurt, where he is to be
awarded the German Peace Prize, he was in no doubt the time had come
to speak out - about the Armenians, about the law under which he has
been charged, about curbs on free expression in Turkey and, last but
not least, about his case.

'It goes without saying that I stand by my words,' he told me. 'And
even more, I stand by my right to say them.' He went on to point
out that the right to free speech was guaranteed by the Turkish
constitution and that more and more people in Turkey were keen to
exercise that right. 'I am very encouraged by this conference. I'm
very grateful to courageous scholars such as Halil Berktay, Murat Belge
and Taner Akcam who have been researching this subject thoroughly and
honestly for so many years and who spoke the unsayable truth. Most
of all, I'm pleased that the taboo - what happened to the Ottoman
Armenians - is beginning to crack.'

It was, he warned, going to be a long and painful process. 'We are
confronted with an immense human tragedy and immense human suffering
we did not learn about at school. So it is a fragile subject.'

Which brings us to the word genocide. It is, he reminded me, a
contentious subject even among the Turkish historians who believe
there was planned and systematic slaughter. Those whose primary aim
is to educate the Turkish public point out that to use the word is
to shut down any possibility of a national debate.

'I said loud and clear that one million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds were
killed in Turkey, and I stand by that. For me, these are scholarly
issues,' said Pamuk. 'I am a novelist. I address human suffering and
pain and it is obvious, even in Turkey, that there was an immense
hidden pain which we now have to face.' He went on to remind me that
the biggest obstacle right now was Article 301. This is a new law
and how it found its way into Turkey's new and supposedly EU-friendly
penal code is a subject of heated speculation.

Earlier this month, Turkish Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was tried
under the same article by the same public prosecutor who brought the
case against Pamuk. He was found guilty and given a suspended sentence.

'Dink is the most prominent representative of Istanbul's Armenians
and after his case and mine it is obvious that if we are going
to enjoy freedom of expression in Turkey, Article 301 should be
reconsidered,' said Pamuk. 'This law and another law about "general
national interests" were put into the new penal code as secret
guns. They were not displayed to the international community but
nicely kept in a drawer, ready for action in case they decided to hit
someone in the head. These laws should be changed, and changed fast,
before the EU and the international community puts pressure on Turkey
to do so. We have to learn to reform before others warn us.'

But what has Pamuk himself learned from the last nine months? 'In
the beginning I felt very isolated,' he admitted. 'But I've seen so
many people back me, in Turkey and in the international community. I
am flattered and honoured to be the focus of all this concern. It is
thanks to their support that I can defend freedom of speech.'

This, he said, was the burning issue in Turkey, and it was, and would
continue to be, a subject dear to his heart. In his speech today
he will be arguing that the novelist's most important political act
is the imaginative exploration of the 'other', the 'stranger', the
'enemy who resides in all our minds'. Politics in the art of the
novel is the author's identification with the downtrodden and the
marginalised. The Kurd in Turkey and the Turk in Germany.

And the prize? 'I hope it is not just a political gesture but
also a celebration of my years of humble and devoted service to the
novel. I have been writing novels for 30 years, like a clerk. Though,
unfortunately, not in the last month. I hope I can return to my desk
soon.' But Pamuk is not looking for a pardon: 'I'm going to face
this case.'

In this regard, at least, he hopes to part ways with Kar, the poet
in his novel Snow. Pulled into a political intrigue and feeling
'trapped on all sides', Kar's response was to try to run away. 'He
was an unhappy person who was forced to be cynical,' Pamuk said. 'But
I am a happier person. I embrace the responsibility that has fallen
on me and will pursue this to the end.'

Pamuk: a life in writing

Orhan Pamuk was born in Istanbul on 7 June 1952 and, apart from two
years in New York, he has spent his life in the same district of the
city and now lives in the building where he was brought up.

His first novel to appear in English was called The White Castle,
about an Ottoman astrologer who buys a Venetian astronomer as a slave.

His novel My Name is Red, set in the 16th century, tells of murder
and artistic intrigues among the Islamic miniaturists in the Ottoman
court. Its success, by Turkish standards, was astronomic and his
publishers opened a court action against a newspaper which refused
to believe published sales figures of 100,000 copies. The book sold
half as many again.

His sveventh and most critically acclaimed novel is Snow. It deals with
what happens in the margins of the Western world.The Canadian author
Margaret Atwood called Snow 'an engrossing feat of tale-spinning and
essential reading for our times'.

His books have been burned at a nationalist demonstration, and
his photograph was shredded at a rally. Hurriyet, Turkey's largest
newspaper, called Pamuk an 'abject creature'.

[Gavur]

Orhan Pamuk Accused Once Again

10.26.2005 Wednesday - ISTANBUL 12:17

By Anadolu News Agency (aa)
Published: Wednesday, October 26, 2005
zaman.com


Chairman of the Turkish Lawyers Association Kemal Kerincsiz brought a lawsuit against Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk accusing him of speaking to German newspaper Die Welt in a particular manner that degraded the Turkish soldier.

Kerincsiz brought a case against the “Armenian Conference” that was arranged to be held at Bogazici University.


Kerincsiz filed a case against Orhan Pamuk to the Office of Chief Prosecutor in Fatih district, Istanbul. The case focuses on a statement that Pamuk made on 20 October 2005 to German newspaper Die Welt: “I do not think that the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party is a threat to Turkish democracy. The threat is unfortunately more closely related to the military.”


A statement such as this, Kerincsiz argues should be considered within the scope of article 301 of the new Turkish Criminal Code (TCK), which stipulates “the crime of degrading the quality of Turkish nation, the Republic and official institutions and organizations”. He also stressed the fact that although the failure to observe the specified rule occurred in Germany, the statement was also published in a variety of Turkish publications. A further case was brought against Pamuk in the Sisli 2nd First Instance Criminal Court, the notification document read. The following statement about this particular case was included in the document as well: “However, it is clear from the case brought against him that the suspect has got into the habit of committing similar crimes; although Pamuk is actually a man of literature, he continues to interfere in political and historical matters on which he is not officially authorized to speak, and thus demeans the Turkish people, Turkish values as well as the Turkish military as a short cut to receive the Nobel and similar prizes.” The EU had discussed the case brought against Pamuk, accusing him of “obviously demeaning the quality of being Turkish”.

[Gavur]

Turkey 98th in Press Freedom Ranking

Turkey 98th in Press Freedom Ranking



26.10.2005 Bia.Net-Reporters Without Borders has released the 2005 World Press Freedom Index report ranking 167 countries according to the level of freedom of the press. Turkey has been ranked 98th, fifteen places higher than last year.

Erol ONDEROGLU
The Paris-based international organization Reporters Without Borders has released its annual report ranking countries according to the level of freedom of the press.

Of the 167 countries ranked in the2005 World Press Freedom Index, Turkey has risen to 98th place, 15 places higher than its ranking last year of 113. In 2003, it ranked 116th.

In spite of the new Penal Law that went into effect on 1 June, which has been criticized by many journalists, Turkey's position in the rankings has improved because of a reduction in the number of infringements of press freedom since last year.

However, prosecutions of journalists and publishers continue, as recent court decisions against journalist Hrant Dink and the staff of the newspaper Cumhuriyet demonstrate.

The report noted that although the top ten countries are in Europe, some Western democracies have slid backwards in the arena of press freedom.

The United States fell more than twenty places due to the imprisonment of New York Times journalist Judith Miller and the increasing judicial pressure on confidentiality of sources.

The US is ranked 44th overall, but US authorities in Iraq received a much lower ranking of 137th. Canada also moved downwards due to similar judicial decisions infringing on confidentiality.

Poland (53rd), Spain (40th), and Italy (42nd) had much lower rankings than many other EU members, many of which were in the top twenty places. Among other countries that are candidates for European Union membership, Croatia ranked 56th and Romania 70th.

The report named North Korea, Turkmenistan, and Eritrea as the three worst countries for press freedom, and noted that on a regional scale, East Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East had the lowest press freedom rankings.

However, it applauded the fact that many countries in Africa and Latin America were rising in the index, such as Benin and Namibia, both at 25th place, and Trinidad and Tobago at 12th place.

The index also shows that many countries that have recently won independence from freedom or authoritarian government are high in the rankings, as are many impoverished countries, making it clear that a long history of democracy and a high level of economic wealth are not necessary conditions for press freedom.

[Gavur]

Turkish, Armenian and International Intellectuals Unite to Condemn

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg127359.html

[Gavur]

'rector Asken Should Be Proud Of His Armenian Origin'

'RECTOR ASKEN SHOULD BE PROUD OF HIS ARMENIAN ORIGIN'

Because He is the Grandson of Hakob Vardovian

Commenting on the detention of Prof. Yujel Asken, rector of Van University, on charge of forming a gang Ramazan Toprak, deputy from Justice and Prosperity Party of Turkey, disclosed the rector's Armenian origin instead of disclosing the cause of the arrest.

As an act of solidarity rectors of all 77 universities functioning in Turkey marched to Van headed by Erdogan Tezic, chairman of the Council for Higher Education. On his part, Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople Mesrop Mutafian condemned Toprak for his behavior.

Though Toprak made an attempt to justify himself that very day on NTV saying that he did not touch upon the rector's national identity but the journalist distorted his words, nevertheless Eyup Fatsa, deputy chair of the Justice and Prosperity, condemned him as well.

Rebuking Toprak for his words that "the Diaspora Armenians claim Van and we appoint a rector with Armenian roots," Fatsa said according to Milliyet: "People may have different ethnic background. Especially in our country where we have Armenian citizens. It should be natural that as citizens they get various positions. We used to have deputies with Jewish origin. I think democracy in Turkey is mature enough to stomach this."

The June 10 issue of Islamic Vakit newspaper answers the question why Toprak indicated the Armenian origin of the rector. The paper wrote that Asken is the grandson of Armenian theatre worker Hakob Vardovian, a.k.a. Gyulli Hakob. The paper also trumpets that during his two-day visit in Van the rector distributed New Testaments to students at the university.

Turkish theatre workers opposed this playing upon kinship of Hakob Vardovian and Asken. One of them, Metin And told Milliyet on October 26: "Gyulli Hakob did more for the Turkish theater than Muhsin Ertugrul (founder of Turkish theatre). Despite the lack of playwrights in Turkey, he created a theatre that outfights present-day state-run Turkish theatres. Gyulli Hakob occupies a unique place in the history of Turkish theatre. We should erect his monument."

Theatre critic Aysegyul Yuksel added: "Prof. Yujel Asken is a scientist that well deserved a rector's position in Turkey. Gyulli Hakob is a theatre worker who did invaluable service in streamlining the Turkish theatre. Ethnic background can never play down his service." Stage director Dimken Gyurun said, on his part, that it is impossible to express in a nutshell what Gyulli Hakob did and if rector Asken is his grandson he is sure to be proud of his grandfather. Actor Nedred Gyuvenc emphasized his attraction to Asken linking it to the kinship with Hakob Vardovian.

Presenting the views of these theatre workers, Milliyet writes: "Actor and stage director Hakob Vardovian lived in Istanbul in 1840-1902. His debut on the stage was in 1861 at the Eastern Theatre that used to stage Armenian plays and was headed by Naum Efendi. Though not a brilliant actor, he created and ran a number of theatres that brought him fame. By a decree of Abdul Hamid he was included in the palace orchestra in 1882. He converted into Islam and was named 'Gyulli Hakob Efendi'. Gyulli Hakob resided at Yildiz Palace until his death and is buried at Yahya Efendi cemetery of Besiktas."

It must be noted that Hakob Vardovian accepted Islam not deliberately but as a requirement to enter the sultan's palace. Yet, Vardovian was Muslim only outwardly. He never cut off his connection with the Armenian community of Istanbul and after 8 years in the band united with an Armenian in his second marriage. His second marriage gave birth to his son Nejip, famous violinist, director of the Turkish Symphonic Orchestra, who received the last name Asken in accordance with laws in republican Turkey.

In 1962, Turkey marked 50 years of creative work of Nejip Asken. Yujel Asken is the son of Nejip Asken. As to the fact that his origin is turning into blame against himself we should note that though the removal of taboo on Armenian Genocide does not assume recognition of the historic fact, it opens doors for various people to speak out about their ethnic background. Hopefully, the incident with Asken will bring out new people with Armenian origin.

By Hakob Chakrian

[Gavur]

Turkish Campus Wars

Turkish Campus Wars
Professor’s arrest seen as sign of conflict between gov’t and secular rivals
2005-10-28 13:43:26



Turkey’s universities are the new arena for violent battles between a government that has its roots in political Islam and a staunchly secular state establishment.
The latest casualty in the war is the president of a university in eastern Turkey, Professor Yucel Askin, the first Turk holding this academic title to have been put behind bars. Prosecutors say the man was involved in corruption. The independent board that appoints university presidents says he is a victim of a conspiracy.
When Askin took over in 2002, the university in the province of Van had already turned into a stronghold of radical Islamists, religious sects and political Islam — with Islamists ruling almost every administrative office and most academic departments and students who do not fast during Ramadan being beaten and stoned and all the usual scenes of Islamist infiltration into higher education.

The battles between the Islamists/conservatives and the secularists will no longer remain silent following the arrest of Askin for improper proceedings in a $25 million contract for the procurement of medical equipment for the university. The universities are a critical bastion for controlling the ideologues from both sides.

In fact, the contract for the medical equipment had been sealed long before Askin took office, and the president was the first university official to appeal to the judiciary for an examination of the proceedings. However, he ignored the fact that he had made too many dangerous enemies within the opposite flank by sacking scholars and officials for their alleged links with radical Islam.
Earlier this year, Askin’s residence was searched by the police on orders from a public prosecutor and a penal case was launched against him on charges of corruption — and for a contract he himself had complained about.

Last week, the court hearing the case ordered his arrest based on an expert report that says Askin was guilty. The trouble is, the expert report had been written up by a former university official sacked by Askin. Conflict of interest? Apparently this was never heard of by the court in Van. There are other suspicious aspects to the legal proceedings against Askin. When the prosecutor launched the penal case against the man, he announced his evidence in a most unusual way: at a press conference. Under Turkish law, making evidence public is an offense. Come to think of it, are Turkey’s prosecutors immune to prosecution when they offend?

And of course, if Askin is guilty he must be punished by law enforcement. But there is too much to suspect, whether his case smells of politics, especially when one recalls that a government-controlled board decides the promotions and postings of all judges and prosecutors.

Opposition lawmakers and over 70 university presidents rushed to poverty-stricken Van in a show of support for Askin as his case is already viewed by many as a sign of war between the government and its secularist opponents in the state establishment. There are all kinds of sauces on this spicy meal.
One government MP bizarrely defended the arrest of Askin. He accused the university president of being of “Armenian descent.” Since when, in this country, does being of “Armenian descent” prove guilt? In fact, that particular MP should be prosecuted for “inciting public hatred along ethnic lines,” which is a serious offense in Turkey. But he has the parliamentary shield that protects him from prosecution.

In any case, Askin’s family had to prove the man was not of “Armenian descent.” The next day, when university presidents arrived in Van, they were attacked by groups of Islamists who chanted pro-Shariah slogans. Idiocy must be too light a word to describe the new swirls around the Askin case.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who does not hide his dislike of the monolithically secular higher education system, initially advised the university presidents “to mind their own business.” Then he used the cliched rhetoric a politician invariably opts for when there is a court verdict that smells of politics: The judiciary is independent, so everyone must respect every court decision. Finally, he asked the university presidents where they had been when he was sent to jail “for just reciting a poem.”
True, Erdogan served four months in prison for reciting a poem which, under the particular conditions, the judges deemed “inciting public hatred along religious lines.”

But is Erdogan not contradicting himself when he says: “everyone must respect every court decision”?

Could his own verdict be spared as an exception to this rule? If everyone must respect every court decision, why did he fiercely oppose another court decision recently, which banned a conference on Armenian genocide claims? Or others that blocked some of his hastily devised privatization plans?

One can sadly see the same hypocrisy in the EU territory too. Turkey’s EU mentors, as a matter of course, always tend to quickly denounce Turkish courts for verdicts concerning politically sensitive matters like the prosecution of novelist Orhan Pamuk or the Turkish Armenian journalist Hrant Dink (both have been prosecuted for insulting the Turkish identity). They, however, remain silent when the issue is not “minority-related.” Are human rights not indivisible in the EU?

The Turkish public is certainly not at ease — except for the Islamists, of course — over the way Askin is being tried under arrest, especially when notoriously corrupt men close to Erdogan’s government are free as birds.


By Burak Bekdil - Kathimerini English Edition

https://www.seeurope.net

[Gavur]

Pamuk: I Will Flee In Case Of Military Intervention

Published: 10/31/2005
Latest wire from AFP




I WILL FLEE IN CASE OF MILITARY INTERVENTION OR EXTREME NATIONALISM AND/OR FUNDAMENTALISM PREVAIL


Orhan Pamuk, who promoted his book titled ''Istanbul'' which was translated into Dutch, in Amsterdam, criticized EU's stance against Turkey, and said, ''if this stance goes on, or if extreme nationalism or fundamentalism climbs in Turkey, or there is a military intervention, I will ran abroad.''

According to a report published in today's edition of Hurriyet daily, Pamuk criticized EU's stance against Turkey in an interview and said, ''continuation of this stance of the EU will boost nationalist feelings of Turkish people. And, I consider this as a negative development.''

''If there is extreme nationalism or fundamentalism, or a military intervention in Turkey, I will flee to another city (abroad), which is my second favorite following Istanbul,'' said Pamuk, but refrained from naming this city.

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=77269