"insulting Turkish identity"

[Hovik]

U.S. Welcomes Decision To Drop Case Against Turkish Novelist

Washington File, DC
Jan 28 2006

U.S. Welcomes Decision To Drop Case Against Turkish Novelist

Finley at OSCE sees positive development for free expression in Turkey

By Jeffrey Thomas
Washington File Staff Writer



Washington -- An American diplomat has welcomed a Turkish court's
decision to drop the prosecution of internationally known novelist
Orhan Pamuk for `insulting Turkishness.'

`We welcome with enthusiasm and optimism the decision not to pursue
the unwarranted charges against Orhan Pamuk,' Ambassador Julie Finley
told the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
January 26.

`This is a positive development for freedom of expression in Turkey,'
Finley continued, addressing the OSCE Permanent Council in Vienna,
Austria. `We hope and expect that similar cases against a number of
other writers and journalists will be dropped as well. The dropping
of these cases will help to broaden and ensure respect for freedom of
expression throughout Turkey.'

Finley's comments echoed those of State Department spokesman Sean
McCormack, who said January 23 that the United States is `pleased
that the charges against Mr. Orhan Pamuk have been dropped' and
expressed hope that other cases also will be dropped.

Pamuk's alleged offense revolved around comments in a February 5,
2005, interview in the Swiss newspaper Tages Anzeiger on the deaths
of Kurds and Armenians.

Pamuk, the author of Snow and My Name is Red, was facing charges
under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code, which criminalizes the
public denigration of Turkishness, the Turkish state, the Turkish
military or Turkey's Parliament. Article 301 stipulates that the
punishment for denigration of Turkishness shall be increased by one
third when committed by a Turkish citizen in a foreign country, as in
Pamuk's case, according to Amnesty International.

Cases against others charged under Article 301 continue, including
those of Hrant Dink, Sehmus Ulek, Ragip Zarakolu, Fatih Tas, Murat
Pabuc, Birol Duru and Ridvan Kizgin according to a December 1, 2005,
statement by Amnesty International, a nongovernmental human rights
advocacy organization.

In addition, journalists Murat Belge, Ismet Berkan, Hasan Cemal, Erol
Katircioglu and Haluk Sahin were indicted December 12, 2005, under
Article 301 for newspaper articles they wrote criticizing a judicial
decision to ban a conference on the situation of Armenians during the
Ottoman Empire, according to Human Rights Watch, another
nongovernmental human rights advocacy organization.

Other Article 301 cases cited by AI include that of Halil Altindere,
whose photograph exhibition allegedly insulted the army; Abdullah
Yildiz, who published a translation of a book by a Greek author that
allegedly portrays the Turkish people in a bad light; and

professor Ibrahim Kaboglu and professor Baskin Oran, who produced a
report on minority and cultural rights at the request of the Turkish
prime minister.

The State Department's 2004 Human Rights Report on Turkey is
available on the State Department Web site.

The Amnesty International statement is available on the group's Web
site.


(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
http://usinfo.state.gov)

[imported_RUDO]

Washington File, DC
Jan 28 2006

U.S. Welcomes Decision To Drop Case Against Turkish Novelist

Finley at OSCE sees positive development for free expression in Turkey

By Jeffrey Thomas
Washington File Staff Writer



Washington -- An American diplomat has welcomed a Turkish court's
decision to drop the prosecution of internationally known novelist
Orhan Pamuk for `insulting Turkishness.'

`We welcome with enthusiasm and optimism the decision not to pursue
the unwarranted charges against Orhan Pamuk,' Ambassador Julie Finley
told the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
January 26.

`This is a positive development for freedom of expression in Turkey,'
Finley continued, addressing the OSCE Permanent Council in Vienna,
Austria. `We hope and expect that similar cases against a number of
other writers and journalists will be dropped as well. The dropping
of these cases will help to broaden and ensure respect for freedom of
expression throughout Turkey.'

Finley's comments echoed those of State Department spokesman Sean
McCormack, who said January 23 that the United States is `pleased
that the charges against Mr. Orhan Pamuk have been dropped' and
expressed hope that other cases also will be dropped.

Pamuk's alleged offense revolved around comments in a February 5,
2005, interview in the Swiss newspaper Tages Anzeiger on the deaths
of Kurds and Armenians.

Pamuk, the author of Snow and My Name is Red, was facing charges
under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code, which criminalizes the
public denigration of Turkishness, the Turkish state, the Turkish
military or Turkey's Parliament. Article 301 stipulates that the
punishment for denigration of Turkishness shall be increased by one
third when committed by a Turkish citizen in a foreign country, as in
Pamuk's case, according to Amnesty International.

Cases against others charged under Article 301 continue, including
those of Hrant Dink, Sehmus Ulek, Ragip Zarakolu, Fatih Tas, Murat
Pabuc, Birol Duru and Ridvan Kizgin according to a December 1, 2005,
statement by Amnesty International, a nongovernmental human rights
advocacy organization.

In addition, journalists Murat Belge, Ismet Berkan, Hasan Cemal, Erol
Katircioglu and Haluk Sahin were indicted December 12, 2005, under
Article 301 for newspaper articles they wrote criticizing a judicial
decision to ban a conference on the situation of Armenians during the
Ottoman Empire, according to Human Rights Watch, another
nongovernmental human rights advocacy organization.

Other Article 301 cases cited by AI include that of Halil Altindere,
whose photograph exhibition allegedly insulted the army; Abdullah
Yildiz, who published a translation of a book by a Greek author that
allegedly portrays the Turkish people in a bad light; and

professor Ibrahim Kaboglu and professor Baskin Oran, who produced a
report on minority and cultural rights at the request of the Turkish
prime minister.

The State Department's 2004 Human Rights Report on Turkey is
available on the State Department Web site.

The Amnesty International statement is available on the group's Web
site.


(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
http://usinfo.state.gov)

Hovik Have you ever read PAMUK's books?I am starting to read SNOW.I think Armenians should read his books for contributing.

[Gavur]

Chaos at Turkish journalists' trial

Benjamin Harvey in Istanbul and Associated Press
Wednesday February 8, 2006
The Guardian


The trial of five Turkish journalists charged with insulting the country's courts was adjourned yesterday after a tumultuous session in which nationalist lawyers shouted at the judge and tussled with police in the Istanbul courtroom.
The defence had called for the removal of the lawyers, saying they were not officially part of the prosecution but had been acting as disruptive participants in the trial. In turn, the nationalist lawyers challenged the presence of international observers in the court, calling it a foreign invasion. They also accused the judge of being one-sided and asked for his removal.
EU officials have said the case is a test of Turkey's readiness for EU membership.
The journalists were standing trial for criticising a court's decision to shut down a conference about the mass killings of Armenians by Turks during the Ottoman Empire. The prosecutors said they were attempting to influence the outcome of a trial and insulted the court system. The trial was adjourned until April 11.

[Gavur]

Turkish Court Drops Charge in Minorities Case

By Cihan News Agency
Published: Wednesday, February 15, 2006
zaman.com


A Turkish court decided on Wednesday to halt the trial of Professors Ibrahim Kaboglu and Baskin Oran on charges of degrading Turkish identity.

The same court ruled to continue the legal process against the professors on charges of inciting violence.

The first hearing in the trial Kaboglu and Oran took place in Ankara on Wednesday.

Professor Kaboglu is the former chairman of the Prime Ministry Human Rights Advisory Committee. He was responsible for the drawing up of a report on minorities in Turkey while he was chairman.


For further information please visit http://www.cihannews.com

[Gavur]

Journalists Condemn Self-censorship As Hindrance To Free Speech In Turkey

Thomas Grove

TDN
Monday, April 3, 2006

Self-censorship is one of the biggest obstacles to press freedom in
Turkey, said a panel of European and Turkish journalists assembled
in Istanbul yesterday.

"From childhood we are told that we shouldn't wonder why, that we
shouldn't ask about the past," said Å~^irin Payzin of CNN-Turk. "We
have reporters who don't even know how to ask a question," she said.

Eighteen journalists met in Istanbul yesterday for the second day of
this year's EU-Turkey Journalism Conference.

European attention on the Turkish media has been considered an
important step in the country's European Union negotiations process,
especially following a string of high-profile court cases that have
been used by the European community as a benchmark for press freedom
in Turkey.

Late last year Hrant Dink and Orhan Pamuk were tried for "insulting
Turkishness" when they both made separate references to the killings of
Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the beginning of the 20th century. After
the December hearings of the two writers, Camiel Eurlings, the EU
Parliament's rapporteur on Turkey, said the country "risks losing
its standing in Europe."

The Dink and Pamuk cases are classic examples of Article 312 of the
former Turkish Penal Code, which punished those who expressed views
too far astray from the official version of history, said Radikal
Editor in Chief Ismet Berkan, who has also been prosecuted for what
he has published.

The most sensitive issues in Turkish history include the "Kurdish
problem, the Armenian question, Ataturk, the army and political Islam,"
said Ragip Duran of BiaNET. Over the past 15-20 years, there have been
more than 200 people who have appeared before judges for encroaching
on taboo subjects, said Duran. "And most of them have been convicted,"
he said.

Currently a number of international organizations such as PEN and
various human rights groups have been pressuring the government to
loosen laws restricting what can be printed in the country.

Inherent censorship in the country's judicial system, however, must be
separated from bad journalism, said Metin Munir of Milliyet, accusing
the country's media of superficial treatment of important topics.

"We often confuse bad journalism and self-censorship with a lack of
press freedoms," said Munir. "Professional journalism in Turkey is
in its infancy."

The events surrounding the prosecution of Yuzuncu Yıl University
Rector Yucel AÅ~_kın have not been sufficiently reported in
the Turkish media, allowing many newspapers to rely on inflated
conspiratorial claims.

"The Turkish public doesn't know and will never find out because his
case has been so politicized," said Munir.

Munir also pointed to the Semdinli affair, when a bookstore was bombed
in the predominantly-Kurdish Southeast, as another example where he
said facts have been obscured because of a lack of thorough reporting.

Freedom of speech and the cartoon crisis:

The freedom of the press issue allowed Turkish and European journalists
to discuss the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed,
which led to an outbreak of rioting throughout Europe, the Middle
East and Southeast Asia.

Yavuz Baydar of Sabah newspaper said the publication of the cartoons
showed a lack of responsibility on the part of the press.

With xenophobic rhetoric coming from Denmark before the publication
of the cartoons, German correspondent Gunnar Kohner said the Muslim
minority is already living under the pressure of second-class
citizenship.

"It's like kicking someone when they're already down," said Kohner
concerning the publication of the cartoons.

Although protests took place in Turkey against the cartoons depicting
the Prophet Mohammed with a bomb stuffed in his turban, the images
were not published in Turkey.

"I regret we didn't publish these cartoons so that the Turkish people
would know what the whole fuss was about," said Nilgun Cerrahoglu
of Cumhurriyet.

-----------
Copyright 2006, Turkish Daily News. This article is redistributed with
permission for personal use of Groong readers. No part of this article
may be reproduced, further distributed or archived without the prior
permission of the publisher. Contact Turkish Daily News Online at
http://www.TurkishDailyNews.com for details.

[Gavur]

1915 and Today

Yavuz Baydar

[email protected]20 April 2006


There we are, again. As April 24, day of commemoration of the Armenian Tragedy approaches, nothing new on the Turkish front.

Well, some things are different than, say, 1999.

A couple of days ago, a book printed by Mr Ragıp Zarakolu of Belge Publishers, landed on my desk: the first Turkish translation of “Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story”. A key – and for the official Turkish line, disputable - document for all research around the terrible events in Asia Minor in 1915-16.

Along with “The Blue Book” (Bryce/Toynbee), almost all basic sources of information that defend the “genocide” thesis are now published in Turkey. More is certainly to come.

This is good news, for the sake of more intensive debates and learning.

Turkish opinion, as it widely deserves in a country with a free press and open debate despite some obstacles, is being fed by variety and diversity of opinion on the touchy subject. Interest for finding out “what really took place in those tumultous years” is particularly high amongst the younger segments in society.

Books by Dadrian, Balakian and numerous other Armenian scholars and reasearchers are now freely avaliable in the bookstores of Istanbul, Adana, Edirne, Kayseri etc. People buy and read them.

Despite loud protests in the public sphere, I believe most of the intellectuals are content with the level of debate that is only getting better and better. Different approach from the government, based on respect for free circulation of ideas, is helping a lot. Press is feeling free to give, albeit occasionally, space to “dissent”.

All this is not without headaches, one must add. Mr Zarakolu is facing sentences of 7.5 and 13,5 years for publishing two books: Dora Sakayan's “Memoirs of an Armenian Physician” and George Jerjian's “Truth Shall Set Us Free”. He was in a new court session recently and an “expert report” was demanded for evaluaion of the the Jerjian’s book and the prosesutor's own assessment was deemed sufficient for the other one.

This may sound alarming to some, raising concerns that nothing has changed. It should not. Are we still in an era of deep taboo on the subject? Absolutely not.
It would please some, perhaps, but it is not.

Actually, such trials, with the pattern almost always pointing out to acquittals, are in quantity getting less and less. As long as the EU process is unharmed, it is fair to look into the future – in terms of free speech – with growing optimism.

What we should be worried about is the current political sphere.

Historic research may be continuing; a new conference on Ottoman Armenians in Kayseri’s Erciyas University between April 20-22 may have shown us that the interest for the subject is on the rise for younger generation of scholars; articles and interviews with experts in Turkish press may even increase in the future, but the apparent immobility of Ankara on how to tackle the international press for, let alone any sort of “recognition”, confrontation with the past is alarming.

Because the clock is ticking and certainly the time appears not to be on “official line’s” side.

I am faced by the insistent question every time I meet foreigners – journalists, NGO folks, diplomats, politicians: “Why is it that” they ask, “the governments continue with the denial?”

For me the response is easy, and I do hope every time I tell my take on it, that it will be easily comprehended (often it is not): Democracies certainly develop with enlarged freedom, pluralism and accumulation of all sorts of information. Only then can the citizen be ready to look at the past without prejudice, cliche, and distortion.

If the majority of the society has been kept away from any sort of past (national) wrongdoings by total cover up or disinformation, confrontations with them can be utterly traumatic.

Therefore, in order to avoid reactions based on emotions rather than reason, it is wise to remain patient. Only more and more information and education can help.

In the current climate, given the level of ignorance and defensiveness, any subject matter of this sort can be turned into a tool for violent ultranationalism and populism, which is naturally a nightmare for a seemingly reformist government.

At this very point, I tend to get the following reaction from our foreign friends: “Well, still, the leadership must act, because time is working against Turkey..”

I tell them, simply, that they are forgetting a fundamental element of democracy:

That a consensus on “acceptance” must form, rise and come from within the conscience of the people, that it must move from the bottom to the decision makers. You can not simply impose something “unknown” without seeking understanding from the citizens, majority of whom are totally ignorant on or indifferent to the matter. Otherwise you risk being compared to a dictator.

So, let the Turkish society define its own pace with reaching the truth and some sort of conclusion by itself. It will and must take time, yes, but still, as long as the pace is forward, in better conditions becoming a democracy, every citizen will have an idea of the real picture of 1915.

No matter what the denialists say or the staunch Armenian diaspora say, we are not finished with the subject: Research is still going on, there are chapters in late Ottoman history that we should analyse and understand, we must continue to demand that all archives (Armenian, Turkish, Russian, German) must be fully and unconditionally be opened, and Turks and Armenians of different professions must seek a wider dialogue with each other.

I have studied the subject and read everything within my reach for the past 25 years and I still feel very agnostic about the definition. And my desire to learn more is certainly stronger than reaching a personally premature verdict.

Definition of 1915 has often damaged any further civilised conversation.

Limiting the discussion to “is this a genocide or not?” phrase will never help; it is a trap, a fruitless path that leads nowhere. Neither are declarations of genocide by parliaments here and there. Have those parliaments been equally courageous to look at their own national crimes of humanity in the past? Most of them did not.

Hence, it paves way for all the further debate on hypocricy. No good either.

Something horrendous happened in 1915. It was a human tragedy of enormous dimensions. We know who the responsible were. They were responsible for dragging the country into the World War, and they were responsible for sending tens of thousands of (mainly Muslim) young men of Anatolia to their death on Sarıkamiş Mountains, as they were responsible of sending Ottoman Armenians to their tragic fate, they were responsible for killing the democracy after 1908 by frightening people to silence, having the voices of dissent killed.

Those responsible had nothing to do with the Turkish Republic that followed the Ottoman Empire. Nor could they find any remorse or shelter from the founders of the republic. The remnants of the worst criminals linked with 1915 in Turkey were eliminated by Ataturk himself.

Yes, Turkey will have to face its past; as much as Germany will have to face its pats genocide of Herero people in Africa early 1900’s (which was, despite other claims, the first genocide of last century), as much as the USA must face its past acts of genocide against the indians; as much as France must face its past crimes of humanity against the Algerian civilians etc etc.

And also, let us not forget that the people of today had nothing to do with those crimes. Reconciliation with the past hast to take special care not to hurt feelings of them. Understanding is a more laborious process than dealing with emotions.

[Gavur]

I think he needs to familirize himself with with the statement

"I as a Turk am not guilty but responsible"

Fatma Muge Gocek

[1.5 million]

The preceeding article is quite interesting. While it contains some good observations and points - it is what is not said that is most telling. His avoidance of the word "genocide" - a word that in unbiased circles is absolutly uncontested in regards to what the Ottoman Turks did to Armenains during this period. This is just a given - as the definition of the word was based primarily on an attempt to develop a word to describe what occured to the Armenians. By not using this word - the writer is showing us that he is in fact a coward. First - if he knows these things as he has stated then he understands how the Armenians were killed. If he is at all as educated and astute as he seems to be then he understands what the word genocide means.Thus their are perhaps two reasons why he is unable or unwilling to use the correct word (and in making such an issue of use of this word instead of commenting on the shamefulness of the Turkish denial of the application of the word and blame. First - perhaps his Turkish nationalism is preventing him - he just can't do it - he is not man enough...or secondly - it is out of fear - fear of prosecution, fear of reprisal from hyper-nationalistic Turks...eith er way he is a coward.

[Bulgarian]

1.5 million I think you must realise that the Turks are crazy. They have some serious issues that tells us about their mentality.

I watched this program about the worst parliaments (in violent terms) and guess which parliament came out at the top? It was the Turkish parliament. A Turkish politician was killed by another Turkish politician - I cant recall that ever happening in any other country in the world. There are also many fist fights in parliament and verbal shouting matches between politicians. In Turkey people and even university students were killed because they held Nationalist beliefs or Communist/Socialist beliefs. It just goes to show you the backward mentallity of the Turk.

[1.5 million]

"Those responsible had nothing to do with the Turkish Republic that followed the Ottoman Empire. Nor could they find any remorse or shelter from the founders of the republic. The remnants of the worst criminals linked with 1915 in Turkey were eliminated by Ataturk himself."

This is also a very telling (deceptive) comment.Those who were responsible for ordering and perhaps plannign the genocide may not have had anything to do with the Armenian genocide (as many had fled and regardless they were direct political competitors to Kemal anyway and he was happy that they were disgraced and had no chance of realistically rivaling him again - however - those (CUP special representatives, members of the Special Organization, Ottoman local and regional officials, thugs, hacks and henchmen) directly responsible for actually carrying out the Armenian Genocide were incredibly in evidence in the founding of the Republic. They were the backbone of the movement for the creation of the Republic - politically and militarily (along with Kurdish chieftans and their forces and other chettes)...without whom there would be no Turkish Republic. Additionally the only real difference between Kemals plan for the Empire/Republic and that of the CUP was that Kemal had abandoned the grandious and unachievable idea of expanding the Empire to include all Turks of the world from the Aegean Sea (or even perhaps the Danube) to the Gobi desert and instead contented himself with the Turkification of Asia Minor (and a failed attempt to do the same to the Caucuses). Kemal and his cronies made sure he finished the job. He understood - just as the CUP before him did - that the Turks could only free themselves of the influence and presence of the Armenians and Greeks by cleansing Anatolia of such completely. Likewise he continued the abjectly racist approach to "Turkify" every remaining Muslim regardless of actual Turkishness. In this way he could use race to rally around (and distance himself from backword Islam...again just as the Young Turks/CUP wished to and attempted to do all along). Kemal and the Republic are direct outgrowths and extensions of the CUP genocidal campaign - including the appropriation of Greek and Armenian wealth creating the foundations for the Republic. And this is why - more then anything else - that Turkey cannot come to grips with admiting Genocide. (the recent Golberg film also failed to adequatly address this issue...do you think Samantha Powers understands these things...not...give me a break). And this claim of Kemal finishing off the remaining CUP thugs and political types - well yeah - in what 1928 (forgot exact year)...and why...because they and others were oposing his attempts at personl dictatorship...they had become a threat...and the need for their thuggery was over - he had control of all branches of government and judicery and military....he had no need for these low bred thugs anymnore - so he invented an assasination plot against him and had the "perpetrators" tried, convicted and killed. Meanwhile he and they had already finished the job - eliminating an additional 400,000 innocent Armenian lives - who had a right to live nad not be "governed" by Turks - Turks who had proven a distinct lack of ability to govern - you don't slaughter your own population - this is not acceptable government. This story needs to be told (I see another movie in the making....)