Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

"insulting Turkish identity"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Turkish novelist faces jail for 'insulting national character'

    Turkish novelist faces jail for 'insulting national character'
    By Benjamin Harvey in Istanbul

    Published: 01 September 2005
    The Independent (UK)


    One of Turkey's best-known novelists has been charged with insulting
    the country's national character and could face a prison sentence.

    Orhan Pamuk is scheduled to go on trial on 16 December and could
    face up to three years in prison for comments on Turkey's killing of
    Armenians and Kurds, his publisher, Tugrul Pasaoglu, said yesterday.

    "Thirty thousand Kurds and one million Armenians were killed in these
    lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it," Pamuk said in an
    interview with a Swiss newspaper in February.

    The "one million" refers to Armenians killed by Ottoman Turks at about
    the time of the First World War, which Armenians and several nations
    recognise as the first genocide of the 20th century. Turkey vehemently
    denies that genocide took place, saying the death toll is inflated and
    Armenians were killed in a civil war as the Ottoman Empire collapsed,
    eventually giving way to the Turkish Republic in 1923.

    The "thirty thousand Kurds" mentioned by Pamuk refers to those
    killed since 1984 as Turkey fought a vicious war against armed
    Kurdish separatists.

    Turkey, which has been trying to improve its human rights record as
    it vies for membership of the EU, is extremely sensitive about both
    the Armenian and Kurdish issues, and its new penal code makes it a
    crime to denigrate Turkey's national identity.

    Pamuk's books, which include the internationally acclaimed Snow and
    My Name is Red, have been translated into more than 20 languages. His
    publisher said yesterday:"We have to wait for the court. Then he
    [Pamuk] will make his speech in the court."

    Comment


    • #32
      Fresh rows flare up in countdown to Turkey talks

      Fresh rows flare up in countdown to Turkey talks
      By Mark Beunderman

      euobserver.com
      02.09.2005 - 09:52 CET

      | EUOBSERVER / NEWPORT - The atmosphere between Brussels and Ankara is
      set to worsen following fresh rows over Cyprus and free speech, one
      month before accession talks with Turkey are scheduled to start. The
      Commission has drawn a "red line" on Cyprus.

      While EU foreign ministers were yesterday (1 September) at a meeting
      in Wales struggling to draft a counter-declaration to Turkey's
      non-recognition of Cyprus, Turkish foreign minister Abdullah Gul
      publicly took a defiant stance on the Cyprus issue.

      Mr Gul stated to the press that Turkey, as a non-EU member state,
      does not feel obliged to allow Cypriot planes and ships to enter
      its territory - something the EU says is against the spirit of the
      customs agreement that Ankara signed with the enlarged EU on 29 July.

      "Expectations from full members and expectations from candidate
      countries are quite different", the Turkish minister said according
      to the FT. "Everybody knows what the customs union means", he added.

      Enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn today (2 September) just before
      meeting Mr Gul in Newport rebuffed the Turkish stance, stating that the
      "full implementation" of the customs agreement represents a "red line
      for the European Union".

      "This is not a matter of negotiation but of commitment by Turkey",
      he added.

      "This issue is of extremely serious concern".

      EU foreign ministers yesterday tried to reach agreement on a
      "counter-declaration" to Ankara's unilateral declaration of 29 July,
      which says that it does not recognize the sovereignty of Cyprus
      despite extending its EU customs agreement to all new EU member states,
      including Cyprus.

      The UK presidency has striven to achieve general consensus on the EU
      counter-declaration at the Wales meeting.

      But Mr Straw told journalists that there was "broad, but not unanimous
      agreement" on the text.

      Diplomats indicated that there are substantial differences between
      member states over the toughness of the EU's "counter-declaration".

      Wrangling over words The text is set to contain a paragraph reiterating
      the status of Cyprus as a state under international law.

      But member states such as France, Austria, Greece and Cyprus itself
      want reassurance that Ankara will over time take concrete steps
      towards recognition.

      "They want the declaration to have a dynamic character and call for
      progress by Turkey", one council diplomat said.

      The counter declaration has now been referred back to member states'
      ambassadors in Brussels.

      In spite of the difficulties surrounding the Cyprus issue, Mr Straw
      stated that he is "reasonably confident" that the agreed deadline
      for opening the accession talks with Turkey, on 3 October, will be met.

      Free speech row On top of the Cyprus problem, a fresh row over freedom
      of speech emerged yesterday which looks set to dampen the atmosphere
      between Ankara and Brussels still further.

      The widely-read author Orhan Pamuk was charged by the Turkish public
      prosecutor with "denigrating" the nation through his comments about
      Turkish history, made to a Swiss paper a few months ago.

      Although the Turkish public prosecutor is independent from the
      government, the case has already become an issue interfering with
      Turkey's EU membership bid.

      A spokeswoman for Commissioner Rehn told the EUobserver that the case
      of Mr Pamuk raises "serious concerns" about the actual "implementation
      on the ground" of political reforms by Turkey.

      She added that the EU executive is also concerned about the
      "interpretation of certain provisions in the penal code by judges
      and prosecutors" in Turkey.

      Turkey had to adapt a new penal code in order to bring its laws in
      line with EU human rights standards.

      Denis MacShane, the UK's former Europe minister, said "It is a
      sickening blow to all pro-Turks in Britain and Europe ...to hear
      the news that the Turkish authorities seek to persecute this great
      European writer", the Independent reports.
      "All truth passes through three stages:
      First, it is ridiculed;
      Second, it is violently opposed; and
      Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

      Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

      Comment


      • #33
        Free speech an issue in Turkey`s EU bid

        NEWPORT, Wales (UPI) -- Turkey`s charges against a well-known novelist have become another obstacle to its membership in the European Union.

        Turkish membership is one of the major items on the table as the EU foreign ministers meet in Wales.

        Orhan Pamuk is in hiding after being charged with 'denigrating national identity' by saying that Turks are reluctant to admit the massacre of about 1 million Armenians during World War I.

        Former Europe Minister Dennis McShane, a Labor member of the British parliament, said he remains a strong supporter of Turkey, The Australian reported.

        'But if the authorities persist with this attack on a great European writer, then many of us who are strong supporters of Turkey will be forced to change our minds.'

        Turkey`s refusal, so far, to recognize Cyprus is also a problem, since Cyrpus is an EU member.

        Copyright 2005 by United Press International
        "All truth passes through three stages:
        First, it is ridiculed;
        Second, it is violently opposed; and
        Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

        Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

        Comment


        • #34
          EP to Watch Orhan Pamuk’s Trial

          By Anadolu News Agency (aa)
          Published: Thursday, September 08, 2005
          zaman.com


          The European Parliament (EP) is to form a committee to monitor the legal process launched against Turkish Novelist Orhan Pamuk.

          The presidential board did not oppose the proposal brought by the European wing of the Joint Parliamentary Commission, the consultative organ operating between the EP and the Turkish Parliament. The committee that will consist of European parliamentarians will follow the court hearings and report its assessments to the parliament.

          Sisli Prosecutor’s Office filed a suit against Pamuk for “openly denigrating the Turkish identity” in an interview Pamuk gave to a Swiss newspaper in 2004 regarding the so-called Armenia genocide. The prosecutor has demanded a three year of jail sentence for Pamuk.
          "All truth passes through three stages:
          First, it is ridiculed;
          Second, it is violently opposed; and
          Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

          Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

          Comment


          • #35
            Commentaries, Editorials And Analysis

            A Turkish author´s view of the role of the Turkish army in EU-bound Turkey

            Istanbul Radikal newspaper (05/09/05) publishes the following interview with author and Yeni Safak columnist Kursat Bumin by Nese Duzel under the title: The Army is not a Part of the Nation:

            It is impossible to understand Turkey's social and political fabric without clarifying the status of the army. In Turkey the armed forces exert a political influence that is not seen in developed countries. Indeed, as we progress toward membership in the EU our most fundamental political discourse is over the army's role in politics and the administration of the country, even if we refuse to admit it. Recently Chief of the General Staff Gen Hilmi Ozkok underscored the special status of the TAF [Turkish Armed Forces] in this country by saying that the Turkish army is "a part of the nation." He said that "although it is a universal rule that armies must be subordinate to civilian administrations, the Turkish army has a non-standard status." Kursat Bumin, a political philosopher and a writer, evaluated the relationship the army has with the nation and the state in Turkey in a recent series of articles. In these articles he shows how the words picked and the messages adopted can define relationships within society and what consequences they may have. He explains how the military terminology that a large portion of our society and media accept without questions signal the "special circumstances" of our society. We discussed the relationship between the army and the nation as well as the causes and effects of the terminology used with Bumin, author of the books "Civilian Society and the State," and "The State and the Child."

            Following are Mr Bumin´s replies to Nese Duzel´s questions:

            Question: Turkey is once again discussing the army and generals' comments. Land Forces Commander Gen Yasar Buyukanit told reporters that "there are attempts to turn Turkey into Palestine." Why do you think he made such a comparison? Which part of us resembles Palestine?

            Answer: There is no close or remote similarity between Turkey and Palestine either historically or today. I cannot see any relationship between the two. The commander himself probably failed to see any relationship because he could follow up this sentence with a second one.

            Question: There were also interpretations of the absence of the Land Forces Commander from among the protocol members standing under the arbor at the 30 August reception. Why do we draw conclusions from every action of the generals? Is Turkey, a nation of 70 million people, still a country whose destiny may change by whether a general stands a few steps this way or that way?

            Answer: Obviously it is not, but this country's interest in generals is not solely in their presence or absence under the arbor. This interest extends as far as the wives of retired force commanders. Tears shed by the wives of outgoing and incoming commanders at ceremonies marking command transfers are featured on the front pages of newspapers. Such reports are not newsworthy, and I do not think that readers are interested in them, but in this country the TAF has defined a role and status for itself. The media accept this role and status that the TAF has defined for itself, and this is why conclusions are drawn from every action of the generals. The truth is that in European countries people do not even notice where a general stands or sits at a reception.

            Question: You wrote a series of articles in response to and opposing Chief of the General Staff Gen Ozkok's comment that "the army is a part of the nation." Why do you disagree with the view that the army is a part of the nation?

            Answer: Describing the army with comments such as "the TAF is an inseparable part of the nation" is highly problematic and very dangerous. Institutionally the army is a part of the state--it is an instrument of the state. However the TAF does not like to define itself as an instrument of the state. It keeps going over to the side of the nation and saying that it is "an inseparable part of the nation."

            Question: What, in your opinion, are the political and social consequences of seeing the army as an inseparable part of the nation?

            Answer: That is a description that spoils everything. Many things change when you define yourself this way. Saying that they are "an inseparable part of the nation" legitimizes all the military declarations, interventions, memoranda, and coups. That argument makes everything done by the army to appear as if it was act performed by the nation, and consequently legitimizes everything. That implies that everything done by the army was done by the nation. When a group acts on behalf of the nation the need to comply with laws vanishes. For example the preamble of the 1961 Constitution begins with the phrase: "The 27 May [revolution] that the Turkish nation staged against a government that had lost its legitimacy."

            Question: What does that mean?

            Answer: It means that 27 May was staged not by the TAF but the nation. The same applies to 12 September. The truth is that the army is a part of the state, not the nation. If the army stages its intervention against the political administration as an instrument of the state then this would be called a coup. The issue of being "an inseparable part of the nation" is the most fundamental problem in the definition and status of the army and military-civilian relations in Turkey. The police has also tried to use this ideological definition occasionally but it has not worked. They also put up posters saying that they too are an "inseparable part of the nation" but those have not had much effect. Because everyone has a certain idea about the police, they are told: "No, you are an institution of the state; therefore you must comply with the laws."

            Question: The TAF is said to have a different and special status compared to other armies. Do you agree with that view?

            Answer: No. The army played an important role and had a special status in the founding of the republic but now the republic is more than 80 years old. Eighty years is a long time for a republic to mature. Moreover a different society evolved over those 80 years. In any event Turkey must use the concept of "society" rather than "nation." The concepts of "nation, citizen, national" are historically the concepts of the turbulent periods when republics and nation-states were formed. During the French Revolution era the words "madame" and "monsieur" were banned. Everyone addressed each other as "Citizen Pierre" or "Citizen Pascal." The concepts of "nation, citizen, and national" contain within them national emotions and military and political overtones. The concept of nation immediately implies a homogeneous union and a national will. "Society," on the other hand, is a civilian concept and is comprised of many individuals. You cannot do anything that is on behalf of the society's will. In contrast many things can be done and legitimized "on behalf of the nation" or by saying "I am a part of the nation."

            Question: Our army feels itself responsible for the republic and the country because of its role in its founding. It is also not very willing to transfer this responsibility to the civilians. What is the role of the civilian administrators when the army is responsible for the country?

            Answer: The result is the history of the Turkish Republic thus far. Politics becomes insincere and devoid of seriousness, and a faulse way of life takes form. Nobody can speak what he really thinks. The politicians cannot bow fully [to the army's wishes] because they have their constituencies but they also try not to confront the soldiers. That relationship turns the politician into a spin artist. Even he does not believe half of what he is saying. Political thought cannot develop in a country like this.

            Question: The army is an institution that attaches importance to defense by its very nature. It is very natural that this institution should view all issues from a perspective of defense. What type of social structure is created when every problem is viewed from a perspective of defense?

            Answer: Ultimately this creates a country that cannot solve its problems, that cannot generate any ideas to solve its problems, and that cannot develop in secularism and democracy.

            Question: All armies in the world have to divide people as friends and foes by virtue of their responsibilities. In our country the army has assumed a political responsibility. Does this not lead to the use of concepts of "friend" and "foe" in domestic politics?

            Answer: Of course it does.

            Question: In such circumstances is it not likely that those who disagree with the army would be described as "internal enemies"?

            Answer: It is. They are already saying that some people are internal enemies. Former 1st Army Commander Hursit Tolon gave such a speech on his retirement and said that he is leaving an army that is full of hatred against some intellectuals. It is time for this military language, this ideological message, and this terminology to come to an end in Turkey. People must know what institution should stand where in democracies and Turkey's intellectual life must be translated into a civilian language. As of now this country does not have a civilian language; it has a military language. There is a republic and citizen as defined by the army. Anyone who fits their definition is described as a "good citizen," anyone who does not is described as a "bad or harmful citizen." What they call "national will" is actually the will of the "good citizens."

            Question: Can there be such a thing as an "internal enemy"?

            Answer: This is entirely the language of totalitarian systems. In democracies those who criticize the existing system are called "dissidents." In authoritarian and totalitarian countries dissidents are labelled "enemies of the regime" or "internal enemies." The best example of this was the Soviet Union. People who did not agree with the dominant ideology there were labelled "enemies of the regime." The terminology used in Turkey is similar. Anyone who does not agree with the dominant ideology is labelled an "internal enemy." For example, today liberals are considered "internal enemies" in this country. Countries where such terminologies exist and where such concepts are used are authoritarian or totalitarian. There can be no "enemies of the regime" or "internal enemies" in democracies. There can only be "dissidents" in democracies.

            Question: We know that several civilian parties support the special status of the army and that they want the status quo to remain. From a standpoint of political science how do you explain the desire of a civilian politician to turn over his responsibility to the army with his own will?

            Answer: First, this is not politics; it is the suicide of politics. Beyond the politicians, Turkey needs to undergo some extensive therapy as a whole. Dominant ideological concepts such as "the place of the army" and "national issues" must be debated extensively.

            Question: What do you think about relations between the media and the army?

            Answer: The media must stop being interested in the army. The [Turkish] media's interest in the army is a very pathological interest. If we look at newspaper archives, and if we look only at their 30 August issues, we can put together an anthology of arbor events. You can find in all of them stories about who came to the arbor, who came out of it, who sat how far away, and so forth. The media also have a habit of engaging in provocation by obtaining unnecessary statements from military officers and placing them in headlines in reports related to the army. This suggests that the media do not have a mature attitude in their relationship with the army. Turkey's media are unable to view military issues from a distance; they view them very emotionally. Reporters are too excited about meeting with commanders and interviewing them. Moreover the media are not too offended by the influence of the military on politics. They are not perturbed by the role of the soldiers in politics. It is from this standpoint that society needs to undergo some therapy.

            Question: How will this happen?

            Answer: It is time to have an in-depth discussion about the army's ties and relationship with politics and civilians and its responsibilities. Turkey has a highly militarist state of mind and, as a consequence, the army is assigned a role that goes beyond defending the country. The truth is that we have to view the army with a cool head as an instrument that every country needs. The military must be brought out from its mystical status. Our civilians, in their turn, must not have their hearts in the barracks by saying: "We wish that there was no need for the army but every country has one. We will go and do what is incumbent on us when necessary." People must place their hearts in civilian life and values and must see the army as the institution that defends the country.

            Question: How would other EU members react to our membership in the Union if we continue to accept the special status of the army as a political reality?

            Answer: That is a somewhat complicated issue. Some formal improvements may be sufficient for the EU because the EU finds issues such as secularism very beneficial. It believes that the Kemalist ideology which has infiltrated all Turkish institutions is a guarantee of secularism. After all what is our army saying? It is saying that it is "the guardian of secularism." Europe is saying that "secularism is very good for Turkey." The EU obviously wants the army to be subject to the Ministry of National Defense and to stop issuing political statements. These would be enough for the West. However if these goals are realized it would not mean the army's influence in Turkey's politics would have come to an end.

            Question: Opinion polls suggest that our people see the army as one of the most trustworthy institutions in the country. Could this be viewed as a factor that legitimizes the army's special status?

            Answer: It could. The soldiers are also saying that "look, the people trust the army most." The truth is that such questions cannot be asked in democracies. You ask the people: "Whom do you trust most?" Then you list the army as one of the five possible answers. A country where such questions are asked is not in good shape from a standpoint of democracy.

            Question: Recently [Hurriyet columnist and former foreign minister] Ilter Turkmen wrote an article that enumerated the military mistakes that led to the Treaty of Sevres [of 1918]. In a society that hates Sevres so much and that is so afraid of it military mistakes that led to it are not frequently discussed. To what do you attribute this?

            Answer: This is the consequence of the perception that the army never makes mistakes. There is a concern that eroding the reputation of the army may lead to distrust. Indeed the military never makes mistakes in Turkey; it is only the administrators, the politicians, and the civilians who make mistakes. This is the image that has been projected in our recent past. It is always the civilians who are short-sighted in this country. In truth armies also make mistakes and are defeated but this never happens here; mistakes are never discussed. For example, our society remembers even Enver Pasha's Sarikamis disaster by marking its anniversary with a military ceremony as if it was the celebration of a military operation.

            Question: It is evident that Sevres was the consequence of the mistakes of members of the Union and Progress Party. Do you think that our society has criticized the Union and Progress Party sufficiently?

            Answer: No, it has not because this is an unknown history. Turkey is one of the least knowledgeable countries about its recent past. Our society knows its war of liberation only in the way it is taught. It does not know about the years of the Second Constitution [ 1908-1918] and what was said at that time. I do not know of any other people on earth whose collective memory has been disrupted like ours. It is this lack of memory that is the root cause of the failure of society to develop and to mature--it is the reason why our society has remained childish. The truth is that a person grows and matures with memory. The alphabet reform has played a great role in this. We cannot read the newspapers of the Second Constitution period. This is one of the greatest evils that could be perpetrated on a society.

            Question: Is it not odd and contradictory to be afraid of Sevres but not to discuss the mistakes of the Union and Progress Party that led to Sevres?

            Answer: It is not because Sevres is being used as an ideological tool. Sevres is a historical event that developed and ended in its own circumstances. It has nothing to do with today's Turkey; it is not comparable to anything in today's Turkey. However one can easily turn Sevres into something that causes fear. If you do not explain it Sevres can become something to fear. Society fears what it does not know; it does not fear what it understands. You recall how people were swept with fear when the Armenian issue began to be discussed a little in the media. You know, they keep telling us that they "created a brand new society" .

            Question: Yes?

            Answer: Creating a brand new society is not such a good thing. It is actually harmful because a brand new society is a society without memory. Creating a brand new nation is a totalitarian concept. A new set of furniture or a new refrigerator are nice, but a new society is not. This is a country that was left over from an empire. Its intellectual life and language should have advanced much more, but this is how far we could go because the republic has portrayed it as having been created from scratch. However, society now realizes that the official ideology does not meet its needs and that this ideology is a bland and shallow repetitive cliché. As a result of the emerging democracy and freedoms in the current EU process, society has begun to ask fundamental questions about its own identity, values, and past.

            EG/

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Cyprus Press and Information Office: Turkish Cypriot Press Review
            "All truth passes through three stages:
            First, it is ridiculed;
            Second, it is violently opposed; and
            Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

            Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

            Comment


            • #36
              Turkish sensitivity towards their history

              BBC World Service - Turkish sensitivity towards their history

              You can listen to the program feature on the Turkish sensitivity towards
              their history by Dorian Jones is "hidden"
              in the BBC World Service Outlook program until Thursday on
              True stories of ordinary people and the extraordinary events that have shaped their lives

              (broadband connection needed)

              Otherwise there follows the main points from this program
              (some of the spellings of Turkish names may be suspect as it is taken
              from an audio report)

              Thousands of Armenian orphan children were "saved" and brought up as
              Turkish Muslims during the Armenian Genocide (these specific words are
              used in the broadcast).
              Fethiye Cetin's book (now in its fifth reprint) reveals her grandmother
              was one such child prepared after extensive research into one of
              Turkey's darkest chapters.
              Armenians are routinely described in Turkey as enemies and spies and the
              genocide is "hidden" from the population.
              Fethiye decided to write the book after feeling pain reading about
              conflicting statistics on the number of deaths: each victim in her view
              was an individual human tragedy.

              Prof Selim Deringi mentioned that there were intractable problems, and
              the wounds from the past have not healed.
              The opposite views (genocide of civilians v 5th column collaborators
              with enemy in wartime conditions) show that there is not a state of
              dialogue.
              A Turkish conference on the genocide (the professor was one of the
              organisers) was deferred after "intense government pressure".
              European and other external pressure has resulted in the conference
              being reorganised.

              There is very strong opposition to any change to the official position
              on this issue.
              Shukri Elekdar believes that recognition of the genocide is a threat to
              Turkey's future, particularly as he sees it as part of a wider policy to
              seize Turkish territory
              (this is demonstrated by Armenians referring to Eastern Turkey as
              Western Armenia.
              All Turkish political parties are united behind the government on this
              despite the Armenian benefit from the support received from the USA.

              Nevertheless, more and more people are delving into Turkey's past.
              Berkiye Pars is editing her film on her grandparent's adopted child.
              She wants Turks to have a chance to learn about their own past.
              Many families have Armenian or Greek members - but they keep this a
              secret, even denounce it though their own neighbours know this.

              Yshim Fsoghlu is preparing a new film (Waiting for Clouds) on the
              expulsion of 1 million Greeks as part of the population exchange.
              This is another taboo in Turkey's many dark chapters in its past.
              She too has been threatened with legal prosecution as has Orhan Pamuk
              but feels that artists must challenge historical taboos.
              People can be reactive with such material but they must think and feel
              "All truth passes through three stages:
              First, it is ridiculed;
              Second, it is violently opposed; and
              Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

              Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

              Comment


              • #37
                "public denigration" of Turkish identity.

                The Turkish identity
                The New York Times

                SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2005

                Next week, the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, will
                address the United Nations on one of the issues threatening to slow
                down negotiations to admit Turkey into the European Union -
                recognizing Cyprus. But he should also address the question of Orhan
                Pamuk, the pre-eminent Turkish novelist who has been charged with


                In February, a Swiss newspaper quoted Pamuk on Turkey's long-standing
                refusal to discuss the Armenian genocide and the deaths of 30,000
                separatist Kurds more recently. Pamuk's remarks inflamed Turkish
                nationalists, and he left the country. He faces the possibility of
                three years in jail.

                The charges against Pamuk violate the standards of free speech, one of
                the prerequisites to Turkey's admission to the European Union. The
                charges also cut to the heart of Pamuk's writing. The question of
                Turkish identity informs his work. In "My Name Is Red," Pamuk never
                lets the reader forget the ethnic and cultural diversity of Turkey's
                past. Nor does he flinch, in "Istanbul," from reminding readers of the
                "deliberately provoked" 1955 riots that destroyed several non-Muslim
                neighborhoods in that city. Beneath the notion of a Turkish identity
                lies a tension, still noticeable today, that has nourished Pamuk's
                writing.

                It has been about six months since Pamuk's comments were published, so
                it is unclear why the charges are being brought just now. Whatever
                the motive, they are a reminder that one of Turkey's biggest obstacles
                in dealing with the West is the way it chooses to patrol its own
                history.
                "All truth passes through three stages:
                First, it is ridiculed;
                Second, it is violently opposed; and
                Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                Comment


                • #38
                  Turkey Must Relent

                  The Spectator, UK
                  September 10, 2005

                  The issue of how best to approach a friend who has badly let you
                  down is one more commonly dealt with at the back of this magazine,
                  by our agony aunt on etiquette, Mary Killen. But this week it is one
                  that needs to be addressed here. Over the past years this magazine
                  has been a staunch defender of Turkey and its right to join the
                  European Union, negotiations for which begin on 3 October. We have
                  praised its economy, its founder-membership of Nato, and condemned
                  the many Turkophobes within the EU most notably Frits Bolkestein,
                  the EU internal market commissioner, who last year fatuously claimed
                  that the liberation of Vienna from the Ottoman Turks in 1683 'would
                  have been in vain' were Turkey allowed to join the EU.

                  Our point is that while Turkey is far from a perfect democracy, and
                  still falls short of the standards we have come to expect of Western
                  European nations, it is essentially a benign country travelling in
                  the right direction.

                  Alone among nations with Muslim majorities, it holds proper elections
                  and, for the most part, maintains a legal system which Britons would
                  regard as fair. It has 70 million industrious citizens who are keen
                  to trade with us on equal terms. Moreover, as we have argued before,
                  admitting Turkey to the EU would make it perfectly clear that, contrary
                  to what some imams may say, the West has no desire to suppress Islam,
                  only the malignant regimes which co-exist with it in the Middle East.

                  It would be a tragedy, therefore, if Turkish membership of the
                  EU were to be jeopardised by Turkey's ugly treatment of its most
                  prominent novelist, Orhan Pamuk. Last week Mr Pamuk was charged under
                  Article 301/1 of the Turkish penal code, which makes it an offence to
                  insult the Republic of Turkey, punishable with between six months'
                  and three years' imprisonment increased by a third if the offence
                  was committed abroad.

                  Mr Pamuk's crime was to make reference, in an interview with Swiss
                  newspaper Tagesanzeiger in February, to Turkey's ethnic cleansing
                  of Armenians between 1915 and 1917 and to its ill-treatment of Kurds
                  since 1984. 'Thirty thousand Kurds and a million Armenians were killed
                  in these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it, ' he said.

                  It goes without saying that jailing people for raising such issues is
                  unacceptable in a modern democracy. Orhan Pamuk is no traitor. On the
                  contrary, he is seen in the literary world as a great ambassador for
                  his homeland, whose work shows a deep love of his country and who has
                  been able to straddle the gap between East and West. He simply wishes
                  to be free to discuss a couple of dark episodes in Turkey's history.

                  To jail him for doing so would be akin to our own courts sending down
                  a novelist who dared to mention the Irish potato famine.

                  To give it some credit, the Turkish government does not entirely deny
                  that a large number of Armenians came to a sticky end around 1915.

                  The prime minister, Tayyip Erdogan, recently announced his desire to
                  establish a commission of historians to judge whether or not genocide
                  took place. Yet no properly functioning democracy seeks to legislate
                  in favour of one official version of history.

                  Rather it tolerates a free market in ideas, knowing full well that
                  it is lively debate which best ensures that the truth eventually
                  seeps out.

                  Orhan Pamuk's accusations of the scale of Turkish maltreatment of
                  Armenians and Kurds are supported by eyewitness accounts.

                  An American diplomat filed a report at the time speaking of Ottoman
                  soldiers, aided by Kurdish tribesmen, 'sweeping the countryside,
                  massacring men, women and children and burning their homes. Babies were
                  shot in their mothers' arms, small children were horribly mutilated,
                  women were stripped and beaten.' Pamuk's accusations are supported,
                  too, by Halil Berktay, a professor at Sabanci University, who puts
                  the numbers of dead at between 800,000 and one million.

                  But even if Pamuk's charges were nonsense, it would be no excuse
                  for jailing him. A confident nation has no need to suppress free
                  speech, knowing that anyone who makes false accusations against their
                  country's past for political reasons will rapidly be crushed beneath
                  the weight of counter-evidence. It is very irritating when some
                  left-wing firebrand pops up blaming the British empire for Aids,
                  using the tortuous argument that the buggery of black slaves by
                  their British masters induced Afro-Caribbeans to violent homophobia,
                  thereby suppressing condom-use in latterday Africa. But to bung them
                  behind bars? Apart from the abuse of the firebrand's human rights,
                  it would merely serve to suggest that Britain had never got over its
                  loss of empire.

                  Admittedly, Turkey's problem over Armenia and the Kurds is not
                  limited to the government: 80 per cent of respondents to a recent
                  opinion poll said they could do without EU membership if it meant
                  having to admit to past genocide. But if Turkey wants to join the EU,
                  and become a full member of the wider club of Western democracies,
                  it simply has to face up to its past, and to its present democratic
                  failings. Article 301/1 of its penal code must go.
                  "All truth passes through three stages:
                  First, it is ridiculed;
                  Second, it is violently opposed; and
                  Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                  Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    EU official accuses Turkey of provocation

                    EU official accuses Turkey of provocation

                    By JAN SLIVA
                    ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

                    BRUSSELS, Belgium -- The official in charge of European Union expansion accused Turkey of provocation on Tuesday, saying it was no coincidence that the trial of a Turkish novelist would clash with a EU summit.

                    Olli Rehn, the EU commissioner overseeing expansion plans, said the prosecution of author Orhan Pamuk violated a human rights convention.

                    He also said it would take at least 10-15 years to finish negotiations with Turkey on its possible accession to the bloc, and warned Ankara that the pace of the talks will depend on how quickly it recognizes Cyprus.

                    "The Pamuk case raises serious questions about the interpretation of Turkey's new penal code. The Dec. 16 date can't be just a coincidence, it has to be a provocation," Rehn told the European Parliament's foreign affairs committee. Dec. 16 is also the date of an EU summit.

                    Rehn added that the case violated the European Convention on Human Rights.

                    Pamuk has been charged with insulting Turkey's national character and could face prison for his comments on Turkey's killing of Armenians and Kurds.

                    "Thirty-thousand Kurds and one million Armenians were killed in these lands and nobody but me dares to talk about it," Pamuk was quoted as saying in an interview with a Swiss newspaper magazine in February.

                    The "one million Armenians" refers to Armenians killed by Ottoman Turks around the time of World War I, which Armenians and several other nations recognize as the first genocide of the 20th century.

                    Turkey vehemently denies that a genocide took place, saying the death toll is inflated and Armenians were killed in a civil war as the Ottoman Empire collapsed, eventually giving way to the Turkish Republic in 1923.

                    Turkey, which has been trying to improve its human rights record as it vies for EU membership, is extremely sensitive about both the Armenian and Kurdish issues, and the new Turkish penal code makes it a crime to denigrate Turkey's national identity.

                    The code - adopted at the EU's insistence - was debated earlier this year and freedom of speech advocates said the clause on national identity was too vague and could lead to the imprisonment of artists, scholars and journalists.

                    Rehn said the European Commission will continue to closely monitor human rights issues in Turkey, but still expects the accession negotiations to start on Oct. 3 as scheduled, despite EU government grumbling over Turkey's refusal to recognize Cyprus.

                    In August, Turkey signed a customs protocol extending its existing customs arrangements with the 25-member EU to the 10 new members including Cyprus. But it accompanied its signature with a separate declaration saying this did not mean it was formally recognizing the divided Mediterranean island.

                    Rehn said formal recognition "was not a precondition" to start the Oct. 3 talks. "However, it is regrettable that Turkey had to issue a declaration accompanying the protocol," he said.

                    The European Court of Human Rights - based in Strasbourg, France - ordered Turkey on Tuesday to pay more than $85,932 to the relatives of two suspected members of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party who were killed in a police raid in 1996.

                    An anti-terrorist squad shot Omer Bayram and Ridvan Altun in an operation which the court said violated three articles of the human rights convention.
                    "All truth passes through three stages:
                    First, it is ridiculed;
                    Second, it is violently opposed; and
                    Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                    Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Schedule of the Istanbul Conference [Sept. 23-24-25,2005]

                      Ottoman Armenians during the Demise of the Empire:
                      Issues of Democracy and Scientific Responsibility

                      23 - 24 - 25 September 2005

                      Boًaziçi University
                      Garanti Cultural Center
                      Ayhan قahenk Conference Room

                      Organizing Committee


                      Murat Belge (Professor and Chair, Bilgi University Department of
                      Comparative Literature),

                      Halil Berktay (Associate Professor and Coordinator, Sabanc‎ University
                      History Program),

                      Selim Deringil (Professor and Chair, Boًaziçi University History
                      Department),

                      Edhem Eldem (Professor, Boًaziçi University History Department),

                      اaًlar Keyder (Professor, Boًaziçi University Sociology Department),

                      Cemil Koçak (Associate Professor, Sabanc‎ University History Program),

                      Nükhet Sirman (Professor, Boًaziçi University Sociology Department)

                      Ak‏in Somel (Assistant Professor, Sabanc‎ University History Program)


                      Advisory Committee

                      Fikret Adan‎r (Professor, Bochum Ruhr University, Germany)

                      Engin Akarl‎ (Professor, Brown University, USA),

                      Taner Akçam (Associate Professor, University of Minnesota, USA),

                      Ayhan Aktar (Professor, Marmara University),

                      قeyla Benhabib (Professor, Yale University, USA),

                      ـstün Ergüder (Professor and Director, Sabanc‎ University, فstanbul
                      Policy Center),

                      Fatma Müge Gِçek (Associate Professor, University of Michigan, USA)

                      Nilüfer Gِle (Professor, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales,
                      France),

                      Cemal Kafadar (Professor, Harvard University, USA),

                      Metin Kunt (Professor, Sabanc‎ University),

                      قerif Mardin (Professor, Sabanc‎ University),

                      Oktay ضzel (Assistant Professor, Bilkent University),

                      فlhan Tekeli (Professor, Middle East Technical University),

                      Mete Tunçay (Professor, Bilgi University),

                      Stefan Yerasimos (Professor, Paris VIII University, France)



                      23 September Friday



                      Registration 08:30 a.m.



                      Opening Statements 09:15


                      Selim Deringil (Boًaziçi University History Department Chair)


                      Session 1 09:30-10:40
                      A Collective View of the Issues



                      قerif Mardin
                      Session Chair



                      Halil Berktay
                      What Does the Official Narrative Comprise?

                      Selim Deringil
                      Archives and the Armenian Question: 'Grabbing the Document by the Throat'

                      Murat Belge
                      The Armenian Problem from the Standpoint of Democracy



                      Coffee Break 10:40-11:10



                      Session 2 11:10-13:00
                      Differences in Knowledge and Perception between Turkey and the World


                      ـstün Ergüder
                      Session Chair


                      Osman Kِker
                      Armenian Presence in the Ottoman State before the Deportation

                      Fikret Adan‎r
                      Massacre, Genocide and the Historical Profession

                      Fatma Müge Gِçek
                      What the World Knows but Turkey Does Not:

                      The Chicago-Salzburg Turkish-Armenian Workshop Process as an
                      Accumulation of Knowledge

                      Nazan Maksudyan
                      The 1915-1916 Events according to the Historians of the 20th century and
                      the world



                      Lunch 13:00-14:00



                      Session 3. 14:00-15:40
                      The 'Old Order' before the Balkan Wars



                      Hakan Erdem
                      Session Chair



                      Ak‏in Somel
                      Armenian Schools and the Regime of Abdülhamid (1876-1908)

                      Oktay ضzel
                      Locals, Refugees and non-Muslims: some observations on the boundaries

                      of social harmony in the Black Sea Region during the late Ottoman period

                      Edhem Eldem
                      The Istanbul Armenian Incidents of 1895-96

                      Meltem Toksِz
                      Adana Armenians and the 1909 "Disturbance"



                      Coffee Break 15:40-16:10



                      Session 4. 16:10-18:00
                      The Point of Rupture: 1912-1915



                      Mete Tunçay
                      Session Chair



                      Stefan Yerasimos
                      Approaching
                      1915: Armenian Autonomy and the Zeytun and Van Incidents

                      Nesim قeker
                      The Armenian Question and 'Demographic Engineering'

                      Rober Kopta‏
                      The Unionist-Dashnak Negotiations and the 1914 Armenian Reform from
                      the pens of Krikor Zohrab, Vahan Papazyan and Karekin Past‎rmac‎yan

                      Elif قafak
                      Zabel Yesayan and the list of 'marked Armenian intellectuals'



                      24 September 2005 Saturday


                      Registration 09:00

                      Session 5. 09:30-11:00
                      The Deportation and its Aftermath

                      Taha Parla
                      Session Chair

                      Fuat Dündar
                      The
                      Settlement Policy of the Union and Progress (1913-1918)

                      Taner Akçam
                      The Intent and Organization of Genocide, with both the survivors and the
                      destroyed, among the leaders of the Union and Progress in light of the
                      Ottoman documents

                      Cemil Koçak
                      How Do You Know of the Special Secret Organization (Te‏kilt-‎ Mahsusa)?

                      Coffee Break 11:00-11:30



                      Session 6. 11:30-13:20
                      Tales of Tragedy and Escape



                      Ferhunde ضzbay
                      Session Chair



                      Sarkis Seropyan
                      Landscapes of conscience from within a Painful History

                      Fethiye اetin
                      >From Heranu‏ to Seher, the tale of a 'liberation'

                      فrfan Palal‎
                      Fatma Ane, the Child of Deportation


                      Aykut Kansu
                      Thinking through the Tales of Those Who Survived the Deportation



                      Lunch 13:20-14:20



                      Session 7. 14:20-16:00
                      Witnesses and Memories



                      Ay‏e ضncü
                      Session Chair



                      Hülya Adak
                      The Armenian Question in Memoirs

                      Ahmet Kuya‏
                      What Do the Unionists Say?

                      Gündüz Vassaf
                      Armenians in the Educational Calendar (Saatli Maarif Takvimi)

                      Cevdet Aykan
                      The Meaning of Memories and The Responsibility of Politics and the Times



                      Coffee Break 16:00-16:30



                      Session 8. 16:30-18:00
                      >From the Threshold of Confrontation to the Formation of Taboos

                      Selçuk Esenbel
                      Session Chair


                      Ayhan Aktar
                      The Armenian Question in the Ottoman Assembly, November-December 1918

                      Erol Kِroًlu
                      Examples of Remembrance and Forgetting in Turkish Literature:

                      the Different Breaking Points of Taciturnity

                      Bask‎n Oran
                      The
                      Roots of a Taboo: the Historical-Psychological Suffication of

                      Turkish Public Opinion on the Armenian Problem



                      25 September Sunday



                      Registratio 09:00



                      Session 9. 09:30-11:30
                      The States of Armenianhood



                      Nükhet Sirman
                      Session Chair



                      Hrant Dink
                      The New Sentences of Armenian Identity in Turkey and the World

                      Ferhat Kentel
                      Turkish and Republican Armenian Societies: Boundaries and Prejudice

                      Karin Karaka‏l‎,
                      To Be an Armenian in Turkey: community, individual, citizen

                      Ferhat Kentel,

                      Günay Gِksu ضzdoًan,

                      Füsun ـstel

                      Melissa Bilal
                      An Identity Trapped In Between the Past and Present:

                      the Experience of Being an Armenian in Turkey

                      Ay‏e Gül Alt‎nay
                      Two Books and an Exhibit: The Rediscovery of Turkish Armenians



                      Coffee Break 11:30-12:00



                      Session 10. 12:00-13:40
                      Turkish Democracy and the Armenian Question



                      Murat Belge
                      Session Chair




                      Ali Bayramoًlu
                      Views and Approaches to the Armenian Question in Turkish Society

                      Etyen Mahcupyan
                      The Relationship between Historical Perception and Mentality as

                      Founding Principle of National Identity in Turkey

                      Ahmet فnsel
                      The Armenian Question and the Concept of the Enemy Within in Turkish
                      Politics

                      Murat Paker
                      Turkish Armenian Issue in the Context of a Psychoanalytic Evaluation of
                      Turkey's Dominant Political Culture

                      قahin Alpay
                      What Can Be Done to Reinstitute Turkish-Armenian Friendship?"



                      Lunch 13:40-14:40



                      Session 11. 14:30-16:00
                      Panel: Armenian Question and the Freedom of the Press



                      فsmet Berkan
                      Session Chair



                      Yavuz Baydar
                      (Sabah) newspaper


                      Kür‏at Bumin
                      (Yeni قafak)

                      Oral اal‎‏lar
                      (Cumhuriyet)

                      Ahmet Hakan
                      (Hürriyet)

                      Fehmi Koru
                      (Yeni قafak)



                      Coffee Break 16:00-16:30



                      Session 12. 16:30-18:30
                      Panel: Today and the Future



                      Halil Berktay
                      Session Chair




                      A diplomat :
                      Temel فskit


                      A lawyer:
                      Turgut Tarhanl‎

                      A publisher:
                      Rag‎p Zarakolu

                      A politician:
                      Cem ضzdemir


                      A historian:
                      Mete Tunçay





                      Participants other than those on the Organizing and Advisory Committees



                      Hülya Adak
                      Sabanc‎ University:
                      Assistant Professor (Comparative Literature, Cultural Studies)

                      قahin Alpay
                      Bahçe‏ehir University:
                      Assistant Professor (Political Science); Zaman newspaper

                      Ay‏e Gül Alt‎nay
                      Sabanc‎ University :
                      Assistant Professor (Comparative Literature, Cultural Studies)

                      Cevdet Aykan
                      Mediical doctor; former deputy of Tokat and Minister of Health

                      Ali Bayramoًlu
                      Yeni قafak newspaper

                      Yavuz Baydar
                      Sabah newspaper

                      فsmet Berkan
                      Radikal newspaper

                      Melissa Bilal
                      Chicago University Ph.D. student (ethnomusicology)

                      Kür‏at Bumin
                      Yeni قafak newspaper

                      Ahmet Hakan Co‏kun
                      Hürriyet newspaper

                      Oral اal‎‏lar
                      Cumhuriyet newspaper

                      Fethiye اetin
                      lawyer, author of the book entitled Anneannem (My Grandmother)

                      Hrant Dink
                      Agos newspaper

                      Fuat Dündar
                      Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (Paris) : Ph.D. student

                      Hakan Erdem
                      Sabanc‎ University: Assistant Professor (History)

                      Selçuk Esenbel
                      Boًaziçi University: Professor (History)

                      Ahmet فnsel
                      Galatasaray University: Professor (Economics)

                      Temel فskit
                      retired ambassador

                      Aykut Kansu
                      Bilgi University: Associate Professor (History)

                      Karin Karaka‏l‎
                      Agos newspaper

                      Ferhat Kentel
                      Bilgi University: Assistant Professor (Sociology)

                      BRober Kopta‏
                      Boًaziçi University: Ph.D. student (Atatürk Institute)

                      Fehmi Koru
                      Yeni قafak newspaper

                      Osman Kِker
                      editor in chief, Birzamanlar Publications

                      Erol Kِroًlu
                      Sabanc‎ University:
                      Assistant Professor (History of Literature, Cultural Studies)

                      Ahmet Kuya‏
                      Galatasaray University: Assistant Professor (History, Political Science)

                      Etyen Mahcupyan
                      Zaman newspaper

                      Nazan Maksudyan
                      Sabanc‎ University: Ph.D. student (History)

                      Bask‎n Oran
                      Ankara University: Professor (Political Science)

                      Ay‏e ضncü
                      Sabanc‎ University: Professor (Comparative Literature, Cultural Studies)

                      Ferhunde ضzbay
                      Boًaziçi University: Professor (Sociology)

                      Cem ضzdemir
                      Deputy of the Green Party, Germany

                      Günay Gِksu ضzdoًan
                      Marmara University: Professor (Political Science and International Relations)

                      Murat Paker
                      Bilgi University: Assistant Professor (Psychology)

                      فrfan Palal‎
                      Ege University: Associate Professor (Neurophysiology)

                      Taha Parla
                      Boًaziçi University:
                      Professor (Political Science and International Relations)

                      Sarkis Seropyan
                      Agos newspaper

                      Elif قafak
                      writer, literary person; University of Arizona (USA) : Assistant Professor
                      (Near Eastern Studies)

                      Nesim قeker
                      Middle East Technical University: Assistant Professor (History)

                      Turgut Tarhanl‎
                      Bilgi University: Professor (Comparative Law)

                      Meltem Toksِz
                      Boًaziçi University: Assistant Professor (History)

                      Füsun ـstel
                      Marmara University: Professor (Public Administration)

                      Gündüz Vassaf
                      Associate Professor (Psychology); Radikal columnist

                      Rag‎p Zarakolu
                      editor in chief, Belge Publications
                      "All truth passes through three stages:
                      First, it is ridiculed;
                      Second, it is violently opposed; and
                      Third, it is accepted as self-evident."

                      Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X