Turkish Party Leader Gives Great Christmas Gift to : Armenian Cause

Commentary

Turkish Party Leader Gives Great Christmas Gift to Armenian Cause
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

In a historic decision on December 12, Switzerland's Federal Tribunal
confirmed a lower court's conviction of Turkish Party leader Dogu
Perincek for denying the Armenian Genocide.

The ruling by the Federal Tribunal (Supreme Court) has far-reaching
consequences much beyond the borders of Switzerland. For years,
Turkish officials have claimed that the Armenian mass killings of
1915-23 could not be viewed as a case of genocide since there was no
court verdict to that effect. Turkish denialists persistently ignored
the ample documentation provided by historians, genocide scholars,
resolutions adopted by the European Parliament and legislatures of
more than 20 countries, a UN human rights panel, and verdicts of
Turkish Military Tribunals in 1919.

Two years ago, Perincek, the leader of Turkey's Workers' Party, went
to Switzerland and challenged the Swiss authorities to try him for
violating local laws on denying genocide. He claimed that he could not
have violated the country's laws against genocide denial since there
never was an Armenian genocide. He hoped that by obtaining a not
guilty verdict, he would become a Turkish national hero for having
single-handedly ended Armenian accusations of genocide against Turkey.
Neither Perincek nor the Turkish government that backed his risky
adventure seemed to realize that while winning the court case would
promote their denialist agenda, a guilty verdict would deal a
devastating blow to their continued refusal to acknowledge the
Armenian Genocide.

During his visit to Switzerland in July 2005, Perincek called the
Armenian Genocide an "international lie" and was promptly detained and
interrogated by Swiss Police. He was released, pending a fuller
investigation of his statements. Charges were subsequently filed
against him. For his mandated court appearance, Perincek returned to
Switzerland in March 2007 with a planeload of fanatical supporters who
described themselves as members of the "Talat Pasha Committee," in
honor of the mastermind of the Armenian Genocide. He also brought with
him over 200 pounds of "documents" that supposedly backed his
denialist claims.

Testifying on Perincek's behalf were four notorious Turkophiles:
Prof. Justin McCarthy from the United States; Norman Stone, a British
denialist who teaches in Turkey; Jean-Michel Thibaux, a former
Frenchman who had recently moved to Turkey, acquired Turkish
citizenship and changed his name to "Atakan Turk"; and Prof. Paul
Leidinger from Germany. Testifying against Perincek were genocide
specialists Yves Ternon and Raymond Kevorkian from France and Tessa
Hofmann from Germany.

Despite attempts by the Turkish government to pressure the Swiss
authorities to drop the charges, the Lausanne Court of First Instance
found Perincek guilty and fined $7,350 in lieu of a 90-day suspended
jail term, ordered him to pay a $2,450 fine and $4,750 for court
costs. In addition, the court warned Perincek that should he deny the
Armenian Genocide again within the next 24 months, he could face
imprisonment. Perincek thus became the first person to be convicted
under Switzerland's anti-racism law for denying the Armenian
Genocide. Article 261bis of the Swiss penal code -- which outlaws the
denial, minimization or justification of genocide -- was heretofore
applied only to those who had denied the Jewish Holocaust. Perincek
was also ordered by the court to pay $9,000 for legal expenses and
"moral compensation" to the Switzerland-Armenia Association which had
initiated the lawsuit against Perincek. Since Ankara had sided with
Perincek and provided legal and material support for
his trial, the guilty verdict also implicated the Turkish government
which declared the trial to be "inappropriate, groundless and
controversial in every sense."

Fortunately for Armenians, Perincek stubbornly persisted in his
efforts to challenge the Swiss legal system, thus causing even more
damage to Turkey's denialist campaign. In June 2007, Perincek took his
case to the Swiss Court of Appeal which confirmed his guilty
verdict. Thus, within the short span of three months, Perincek helped
confirm the fact of the Armenian Genocide through the verdicts of two
Swiss courts. Not satisfied, Perincek then appealed his case to the
Swiss Federal Tribunal which confirmed the verdicts of the lower
courts on December 12, 2007.

The Federal Tribunal ruled that there was an overall consensus that
the Armenian Genocide had taken place and that Perincek had not been
able to prove the contrary, thus making light of his 200 pounds of
anti-Armenian "documents" and dismissing the testimonies of the four
so-called scholars who testified on his behalf. The Court also said
that Perincek was "motivated by racism and nationalism," and not a
desire for "historical debate." In countering Perincek's argument that
not all countries have recognized the Armenian Genocide, the Court
stated that even a United Nations resolution condemning the denial of
the Jewish Holocaust received only 103 votes out of the 192 member
states in January 2007. The Court further declared that the refusal of
some countries to acknowledge such genocidal acts for political
reasons does not cast doubt on their validity.

It is noteworthy that the Swiss Federal Tribunal stated in its verdict
that "the denial of the Genocide constitutes a threat to the identity
of the Armenian people." The Court also asserted that
Perincek¢s conviction "contributes to the protection of the
human dignity of the members of the Armenian community who define
themselves by the memory of the Genocide of 1915."
Thanks to Perincek and his shortsighted backers in Ankara, Armenians
have won a very significant victory. This is the first time that the
highest court of any country passes judgment on the Armenian Genocide,
thus serving as a precedent for all future court cases on this issue.
Despite his overzealous efforts to counter the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide, Perincek and Turkish officials who support him have
only managed to undermine Turkey¢s massive denialist
campaign. Perincek announced last week that he will be appealing his
conviction to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Should
he go through with that appeal, he would be making an even more
substantial contribution to the Armenian Cause, by furthering the
legal recognition of the Armenian Genocide through Europe's highest
court of law.

Armenian foreign minister: For historians and experts in

international relations the fact of Armenian Genocide is settled

Turkey does not want to accept Armenia’s position or is trying to misinterpret it, said Armenia’s Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan while speaking at hearings at the Armenian parliament about problems and prospects of the Armenia-Turkey relations, a REGNUM correspondent informs.

According to him, the Turkish approach is to raise all debated issues, to receive an answer that suits Turkey and only after that to restore the diplomatic relations and open the border that was closed by Ankara one-sidedly in early 1990s. “Show to me two neighboring country in Europe that have no debated issues and problems, but none of them resorts to closing borders,” Oskanyan noted.

After listing all pre-conditions for Turkey to establish the relations with Armenia, the foreign minister noted that up to 1998, when the position of the authorities was relatively mild, Turkey was focusing upon one of the pre-conditions – settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. After leadership changed in Armenia, the situation became more complicated and Turkey started insisting upon all the three point equally.

The minister stressed that from the point of view of the international law, the Turkish pre-conditions stand no criticism. The question of NKR is a problem of Azerbaijan and the Nagorno Karabakh Republic; in this connection, Turkey’s interference and its attempt to make the relations with Armenia upon the Nagorno Karabakh conflict has no grounds. Moreover, there are some contradictions taking into account the Cyprus problem as well as the Treaty of Kars and the Moscow Treaty that are still in force de jure, believes Oskanyan.

The second pre-condition is recognition of Turkey’ border by Armenia, the minister noted, adding that if Turkey really wants to settle the issue, it must establish diplomatic relations that automatically mean mutual recognition of borderlines and non-interference into each other’s domestic affairs and so on. Speaking on Ankara’s claim to forget about a possibility of Turkey recognizing the Armenian Genocide and let historians discuss the issue, Oskanyan noted that for historians of not only Armenian origin and international experts in genocide issues the question has been settled long time ago. Moreover, until Article 301 of the Turkish constitution prohibiting mentioning of the Armenian Genocide exists, discussions and objectivity of Turkish historians still remains an open question. Recently, Oskanyan noted, claims for hampering activity of the Armenian Diaspora in seeking worldwide recognition of the Armenian Genocide and its discussion at parliaments of other nations. However, noted the foreign minister, it is internal affair of each country whether to recognize or not the Armenian Genocide; Armenia does not meddle in the issue.

Members of international organizations and Armenian political parties are participating in the hearings. Representatives from Turkey declined to participate in the hearings.

Turkey APrepares to Amend Free Speech Law: Turkish M.F.A. Expresses Discontent over rejection of Perince: Armenia tomorrow's Israel:Lessons of History

Turkey Prepares To Amend Free Speech Law
Reuters

Turkey is preparing to amend a controversial law on freedom of speech
that has been criticized repeatedly by the European Union and could slow
EU accession talks with Brussels.

The justice ministry will hand the draft amendment to article 301 of the
penal code, which makes it an offence to "insult Turkishness", to the
cabinet within 15 days, Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin told reporters
on Tuesday. It was not clear when the cabinet would approve the
amendment.

Article 301 has been used to prosecute Turkish writers and thinkers,
notably for comments on the mass killings of Armenians in 1915 under the
Ottoman Empire. Two years ago the government tried Nobel literature
laureate Orhan Pamuk under article 301 for his remarks on the events of
1915-16, but he was acquitted on a legal technicality.

The European Commission's annual progress report on Turkey, published in
November, called on Ankara to make "significant further efforts" on
freedom of expression and religion, and noted that more people had been
prosecuted under article 301 last year than in 2005. Enlargement
Commissioner Olli Rehn has recommended that the EU not extend accession
talks to the key areas of justice and human rights until the article is
changed.

Critics say Turkey's centre-right government is dragging its feet,
fearing that amending the law could spark a nationalist backlash at a
time when EU membership is becoming less popular among Turks.

EU officials said the law was poisoning Turkey's relations with Armenia
and weighing on the media and non-government organizations in Turkey.

Ankara began EU accession negotiations in 2005 but the EU suspended
talks last December on eight of the 35 chapters or policy areas into
which EU law is divided after Ankara refused to open its ports and
airports to traffic from Cyprus.

Turkish Press
Dec 22 2007
Turkish M.F.A. Expresses Discontent Over Rejection Of Perincek's
Appeal By Swiss F.S.C.
Published: 12/21/2007


ANKARA - Turkish MFA said the rejection of the appeal of Dogu
Perincek, leader of Worker's Party (IP) by The Federal Supreme
Court(FSC)of Switzerland was "a serious violation of freedom of
expression".
FSC of Switzerland had announced its rejection of the appeal of
Perincek, IP leader, against the verdicts of Lausanne Court of First
Instance and Regional Court of Appeal on 19 December 2007.

"We maintain the same views put forward in our press release which
was made following the verdict of Lausanne Court of First Instance.
We consider the verdicts of these courts, above all, as serious
violations of freedom of expression," said a press release issued by
Turkish MFA on Thursday.

Turkish MFA noted that 'an understanding which was predicated on
subjective assessments' prevailed in the said verdicts instead of
universal norms, principles and rules of law.

"In these verdicts, the historical facts have been replaced by the
self-constructed memory of Armenian circles and the erroneous
convictions of some circles concerning the 1915 events," said the
press release.

Turkish MFA recalled the proposal it had made in 2005 to Armenia for
the establishment a joint commission of historians to study the
incidents of 1915 and said, "history should be evaluated and
commented by historians and not by judicial or legislative organs."

On the other hand, Jean-Philippe Jeanneraz, Spokesperson of the Swiss
MFA told A.A that the Swiss Government was of the belief that
formation of a commission of historians would be beneficial for
shedding light to the incidents that had occured in the last period
of the Ottoman Empire, on Thursday.

Turkish MFA welcomed the statement made by the Swiss MFA following
the verdict of FSC.

IP leader Perincek, who had been fined to 9,000 francs for breaching
the disputed Swiss law on "denying" Armenian allegations of genocide
saying "Armenian genocide is an imperialist lie", had filed an appeal
with the FSC in March 2007.

MEMRI, DC
Dec 18 2007
Islamist Columnist: The Jew Is a Curse

Fahri Guven of the antisemitic Islamist Turkish daily Milli Gazete
quoted in his column the following excerpts from a recently published
book by M. Ertugrul Duzdag and Ali Ulvi Kurucu presenting them as
historical truths that every Muslim must take into account:

“The Jew is a curse. If you enter a war against the Jew you end up
fighting powerful nations behind him. If you try to make peace, years
pass with no result. He lies 70 lies. It is not surprising that
America supports Israel. It is because America is a province of
Israel! Last century it was god-damned Britain that was under [Jew’s]
command, this century they made the U.S. their servant…

“Don’t forget the Russian revolution. The only non-Jew was Stalin but
his wife was Jewish. Karl Marks was a Jewish psychopath. Behind the
Free Mason’s that played a role in every revolution is Jewish power
and intelligence. The Jew wants to rule the world, and step by step,
he is advancing towards his goal of destroying faith, respect, love,
honor, family values in the world.

“The Zionist organization, exaggerated what was done to the Jews at
the time of Hitler; created a genocide balloon; blew into it hard
enough so it could fly. He blew it to ten, fifty, hundred times more
than what it really was. Then they [Jews] made this the subject of
thousands of novels, plays and films.

“Who would have believed a hundred years ago? But here it is now; a
Jewish state in the midst of Muslims like an abscess."

"Look at Armenia. This too will become tomorrow’s Israel. It was
built by Christians to severe the ties between Turkey and the Muslim
Turkish world and it will grow. It will be the roadblock between
Turkey and Azarbaycan and the rest of the Turkic world."

Source: Milli Gazete, Turkey, December 15, 2007

Hellenic News of America, PA
Dec 11 2007
Lessons of History: The Question of Armenian Genocide


The Foreign Affairs Congressional Committee voted in the fall for the
recognition of the Armenian massacres perpetrated by the Ottoman
Turks during the First World War, as genocide. The Speaker of the
House, Democrat Nancy Pelosi, has vowed to bring the resolution to
the House floor for a vote before her term in office expires a year
from now.

This development has caused diplomatic tremors in Ankara and
Washington. The two governments are concerned about the political
implications of such a resolution, if it were to pass at this
critical time of uncertainty and turbulence in the Middle East. After
all, the US/Turkish relations have not been in their best state
lately, due primarily to the Turkish refusal to allow the US military
to open a second front of attack in the North, during the invasion of
Iraq in 2003. That refusal, coming unexpectedly from a NATO ally, has
proven rather costly to the US war effort in both dollars and
American lives.

To complicate things further, the Turkish Government has asked and
received authorization from the National Assembly for an invasion and
possible extensive military operations in Northern Iraq ostensibly
against Kurdish “terrorists,” but in reality to get control of some
of the rich oil resources in the area. Such a Turkish move would
certainly make things even more difficult for the US in Iraq, because
it will set in turmoil the only area of Iraq which is relatively
peaceful and prosperous, the Kurdish Iraq in the North.

However, a prosperous and autonomous Kurdistan is exactly what the
Turks fear most, because it will set a “bad example” for the millions
of Kurds in Turkey to imitate. The Turks, therefore, will do whatever
they can to prevent a free Kurdish State from coming into being. They
will not hesitate to use any pretext, even the Armenian genocide
resolution in the US Congress, to move into Northern Iraq and occupy
it militarily, just as they did thirty-three years ago when they
invaded Cyprus and occupied almost half of the island, under the
pretext of protecting the Turkish Cypriots. There are some Turkmen in
Iraq too, who may want to have Turkish “protection” from the
surrounding Kurds.

But this political maneuvering and shrewd calculations of Turkey’s
Islamist Government should not be allowed to derail the legitimate
process of the US Congress to amend a historical error by recognizing
the Armenian genocide with its proper name at last. The Republic of
Turkey does not gain anything of moral value by trying to cover up
the painful and horrible events that accompanied the dissolution of
the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War II, or its own birth in
1923. History has lessons to teach for those who are prudent enough
to learn from it and courageous so as not repeat the same errors.

History teaches us that the dissolution of empires is usually as
messy or violent as a non-amicable divorce. Various ethnic and
religious groups, that had found a modus vivendi under the protective
umbrella of a thriving empire, suddenly come to realization that the
imperial power is falling apart and cannot protect them any more.
Then, each ethnic group goes its own way and tries to become
independent and self-sufficient. Hence the messy process of
separating the common-wealth and getting a fair share arises.

In the case of the Ottoman Turks, their coming into Western Anatolia
and the establishment of an empire there and in Southeastern Europe
was facilitated by the fact that the Christian powers of that time
were divided, while the Byzantine Empire had been broken down into a
number of principalities as a result of the disastrous fourth
Crusade. Thus many Anatolian Christians (Armenians, Syrians, Greeks,
etc.) did not resist but rather helped the Turks build and sustain
for centuries the Ottoman Empire (14th-20th).

For more than a century the Ottoman Empire had become “the old sick
man” of Europe, who would not die, because the Great Powers could not
agree how to burry its corpse and divide the spoils. In the First
World War it appeared that the dismemberment of the Empire would be
accomplished finally. But the rise of Kemalism in Turkey and the
threat of the spread of Communism after its success in Russia (1917),
combined to keep the whole of Anatolia and a corner of Europe in
Turkish hands. Greeks, Armenians, Syrians, and other ethnic
minorities were either slaughtered or forced out from the lands where
they had lived and prospered for millennia.

The Armenians of Anatolia particularly were targeted in such a
systematic way for extermination by massive executions, forced labor
camps, violent transportations, and ethnic cleansing that the term
“genocide” describes fittingly the brutality of that historical
reality. A generation later, Hitler was to use the Armenian genocide
as “a model” for his even more horrific conception of a genocidal
scheme against the Jews in Germany.

No wonder, then, that many of the Jewish and other survivors feel
sympathy for the Armenians and their tragic fate. Many Europeans and
American have felt the same sympathy for a long time. Recently, the
citizens of European States and the United States have found the
courage to apply the necessary pressure on elected officials to act
in the direction of recognition of the Armenian genocide by its
proper name in memory of the millions of its victims. There is hope
that horrors of this magnitude and inhumanity will not be repeated in
the future, if humanity remembers them and names them appropriately.

In this light present day Turkey, which is supposed to be secular and
democratic, should not be offended if other States judge it
politically correct and prudent to recognize the atrocities
perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as genocide.
The Republic of Turkey perhaps should do the same for its own good.
In fact, it would have been better for the image of Turkey and its
aspiration of joining the European Union, if it had done so some time
ago. Instead of this sensible policy, Turkey threatens the United
States with strategic penalties to prevent the resolution on Armenian
genocide from reaching the House of Representatives. This is very
strange behavior of a NATO ally.

Turkish policy makers probably calculate that they can get now the
share of Iraq that they wanted four years ago (2003). At that time
Turkey, under the same Islamist Government of Mr. Erdogan, refused to
help the Americans by allowing them to open a second front in the
North, because the United States did not want it to enter the rich in
oil fields of Northern Iraq. Now they threaten to prevent even
supplies for the SU troops in Iraq to pass through Turkey. They also
threaten to invade Iraq to fight PPK members, using as pretext not
just the killing of ambushed Turkish solders, but also the passing of
the Armenian genocide resolution in the Congressional Committee of
Foreign Affairs.

The Turks may want to repeat the success they had so easily in Cyprus
in 1974, when they invaded the island illegally. By threatening to
occupy the whole of Cyprus, they managed to hold on to more than a
third of it for more than thirty years now. But Iraq is not Cyprus,
Kurds are not Greeks, and the US of post 9/11 is very different from
its previous self. So, if Turkey moves into Northern Iraq against the
expressed will of the US and NATO, if may bite more than it will be
able to chew this time. The good luck cannot be on the Turkish side
for ever. Kurds and poor Armenians deserve a share of it.

Dr. Christos Evangeliou is Professor of philosophy, poet, and author
of several books including the latest, Hellenic Philosophy: Origin
and Character (Ashgate, 2006).

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF ARMENIAN IDENTITY OR WHO IS AN ARMENIAN?

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF ARMENIAN IDENTITY OR WHO IS AN ARMENIAN?

By Armen Ayvazian, Ph.D. in Political Science, Director of the "Ararat" Center for Strategic Research

In the current most complex period of development of Armenia and the Armenians, the problem of the Armenian identity represents not only an academic interest but has a serious practical significance. A strong national identity is a strategic asset in the process of building and strengthening a nation-state, while the dilution of national identity by no means facilitates but, moreover, hinders the consolidation of the individual and society around national goals and objectives.

After all, who can be considered Armenian today? As sensitive as this question is, since it touches the feelings of millions of people (especially our compatriots abroad), answering it is imperative. For an adequate illustration of the topic let us first present the state of affairs which the Armenian nation finds itself in today.

There are some irrefutable realities which we must see and accept exactly as they stand, rather than turn a blind eye to them, as do a significant section of the Armenians, including its "elite".

Thus:

Fact 1: The Armenian ethnicity is under the threat of extinction on the territory of its own homeland – in the Republic of Armenia, Artsakh and Javakhk. This threat springs simultaneously from a number of interrelated sources:

a) the possibility of military aggression by Azerbaijan;

b) a critical demographic crisis (the exhodus of over a million Armenian citizens and the ongoing emigration negatively impact the viability of all spheres of life in the country);

c) the stalling of Armenian nation/state building process as well as the solidification of its political institutions;

d) uncultivated state of Armenia’s National Security doctrine ("The Armenian National Security Strategy" adopted in February 2007 is a declarative document, which, according to official announcements, has been written with the "methodology" and "editorship" of Moscow, Washington and Brussels experts). Consequently, there is a conspicuous absence of a clear Foreign Policy Direction based on national interests.

e) Armenia’s heavy dependence on foreign powers;

f) social tension, including the class and regional aspects (inter alia, the artificially created but effectively maintained dangerous antagonism between "hayastantsi" and "gharabaghtsi", the total mistrust towards politicians and political institutions, the alianation of the people from the decision-making process);

g) the complete absence of any struggle against corruption which pervades all spheres of public life in the republic;

h) the lack of a consistent language policy in Armenia, resulting in a defenseless and vulnerable state of the Armenian language;

i) The Georgian state policy of forcing out Armenians from Javakhk using administrative, economic, cultural, religious, linguistic and demographic pressures, and now even through open show and use of force.

Yet, the foremost threat is characterized by the highly probable Azerbaijani aggression, which is being methodically planned and scrupulously prepared, with Turkey’s direct and indirect participation. If it were to succeed ending in the occupation of Artsakh and the liberated territory around it, the disappearance of the Republic of Armenia from the world map would be inevitable because the next, if not simultaneous, attack will be directed against Syunik – the last dividing bastion between these two Turkic allies. The existence of Syunik, without the shielding "barrier" of Artsakh, would become untenable. The weak communication links with central regions of Armenia, the absence of any defensive depth putting all of Syunik within range of Azerbaijan’s modern artillery systems, as well as the psychological trauma from the fall of Artsakh would reduce the defensibility of this strategically vital region to nearly zero. The resulting encirclement of the remainder of Armenia in a Turkish-Azerbaijani ring, will transform it into a ghetto – a kind of Transcaucasian Swaziland. Subsequently, the obliteration of Armenia by Azerbaijan and Turkey, if not through military action, then through economic, political and psychological pressures, will simply be a matter of time. Thus being deprived of any prospects for sustainable development and losing its role as a potential safe haven for the millions of Armenians scattered throughout the world, the resulting geometrically progressed mass emigration would weaken Armenia to the degree of being divided by and absorbed into Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia. Although the Armenian nation succeeded in eliminating this very scenario in the 1990s, the Turco-Azeri alliance, far from forsaking it, will attempt to implement it if Armenians prove unable to mount an effective resistance.

Fact 2: Armenians can survive only if Armenia survives – as an Armenian state and the Armenian nation living within it.

Fact 3: Without Armenia, the Armenian Spyurk (Diaspora) cannot represent a nation, i.e., a viable entity ensuring national preservation and reproduction of Armenian race (let alone the preservation and development of the Armenian language and culture).

Fact 4: During the last decades the inevitable acculturation and assimilation processes in Spyurk have sharply accelerated to an unprecedented level. In particular, as a result of emigration, every year the ranks of the Armenian communities are thinning out in the Middle East, where until recently the percentage of mixed marriages were extremely low, and the Armenian schools and other community structures functioned effectively. In 20-30 years from now there will remain at best tiny islands of the once flourishing communities of Lebanon, Iran and Syria, similar to what has already happened to the Armenians of Iraq. As for the Armenians living in Russia and the developed West, they are subject to even faster acculturation and assimilation.

Fact 5: There is no Armenian culture without the Armenian language. Along with the statehood and the territory under its control, the language is the foundation and paramount means of preserving the Armenian ethnicity. The fact that many of our compatriots, especially in Spyurk, can feel and consider themselves Armenian without knowing the Armenian language, is possible only thanks to the people of Armenia who still speak, write and create in Armenian. Let us picture a hypothetical situation where Armenians in Armenia have forgotten their mother tongue and communicate with one another, are educated, write and create in a foreign language, no matter which – Russian, English or Chinese. This would signify nothing less than the end of the Armenian civilization, the end of the Armenian culture and the end of the Armenian ethnos!

Yet, today Armenia itself faces the full weight of the challenge of preserving and developing the Armenian language (i.e. culture). As was mentioned eaerlier, this is due to the decrease in the number of users of the Armenian language (including the potential users – children who received and receive non-Armenian educution abroad) attributable to the emigration of our compatriots and the absence of appropriate protection of the Armenian language by the State. After 16 years of independence, it is high time that we duely acknowledge the fundamental role and place that language has in the life of a nation – something that the Armenian political elite and a significant portion of the intelligentsia fail to do. On the contrary, in the language policy, just like in certain other fundamental areas, attempts are still being made to regress the Armenian political thinking.

Conclusions

Conclusion 1: The Armenian nation is in the active phase of the struggle for survival on a fraction of its own homeland, preserved at the cost of unimaginable sacrifices. In other words, the Armenian nation is a struggling organism whose main, vitally important function is the struggle for survival.

Conclusion 2: The frontlines of this struggle for survival stretch out not only along Armenia’s borders with Azerbaijan and Turkey, but evidently also throughout the country itself, embracing the spheres of demography, economy, social life, science and education. Emigration, regardless of its reasons, removes Armenians, partially or fully, from the central battlefield for survival, that is – Armenia. Repatriation, on the other hand, results in the replenishment of a vitally necessary reserve for the country.

Based on the above-mentioned strategic considerations I will attempt to answer the question: "who is an Armenian?" and in what way is s/he differentiated from an Armenian by birth.

One is an Armenian if s/he:

1) considers Armenia his/her only homeland within two dimensions of time and territory – in her historic and present boundaries;

2) has strong psychological attachments to his homeland – its territory, people, language and culture;

3) feels personal responsibility for Armenia’s fate and assumes political obligations towards it;

4) if living abroad, seriously contemplates avenues for his and his family’s repatriation;

5) either is or tries to become the bearer of the Armenian language and culture;

6) strives to maintain his offsprings Armenian, including by means of passing on to them the knowledge of the Armenian language and by bringing them into the realm of the national culture.

Those of our compatriots who consider the country of their birth or citizenship and not Armenia as their homeland, who do not feel psychological attachments and political responsibility towards Armenia, who do not wish to think about living in the Homeland, who do not seek to be the bearers of the Armenian language, who consciously or unconsciously have reconciled with and are not concerned about the inevitable assimilation of their offsprings, can be considered Armenians by origin only, because, in reality, they are already either cosmopolitans or representatives of another nationality. Indeed, it does not matter at all if they shout from the rooftops that they are the most real and authentic Armenians (a genuine self-deception!). The fact is that these individuals, regardless of the reasons, are beyond the nation’s life-process and do not partake in its subsistence even at its most fateful moment.

It should also be emphasized that genetics are of a secondary importance in determining of an Armenian or any other national identity. The real identity of an individual is defined by his personal involvement in and contribution to the life processes of the relevant nation.

Thus, we should differentiate between an Armenian on the one hand, and a person of Armenian origin on the other. This does not mean at all that the former is good and the latter is bad. Simply, the latter no longer can or wants to sacrifice anything for the sake of Armenia and already has a fundamentally different national self-consciousness.

For Armenians by origin it would be useful perhaps to look at themselves honestly and without self-deception and hypocracy: They have actually left the field of the nation’s life activities. Nevertheless, the road is still open for them both ways – total and irreversible assimilation or the return to national roots, the rediscovery of the Armenian language and culture and participation in the nation’s life. In this sense, a large segment of Spyurk are potential Armenians. Unfortunately, such alianated potential Armenians are not rare in Armenia itself, who are fully or partially cut off from the Armenian language, culture and politics and who fail to perceive the common threat of extinction facing all Armenians.

I would like to repeat what I have written about many times before. Preserving Armenianness abroad, "hayapahpanum", cannot be an end in/of itself. The true goal for the preservation of Diasporan Armenians is their reunion with their motherland under the auspieces of an independent state, as of now on the territory under the control of Armenian armed forces. Considering the preservation of Armenianness an end goal (as a considerable part of the Armenians abroad does) severely weakens the most important elements of the same "hayapahpanum."

The struggle for physical survival is unfortunately the core function of life of the Armenian nation. It is this very function that determines and necessitates the fundamental pillar of the Armenian identity – direct and personal engagement in this struggle for the realisation of the national objectives, which presently are:

- the preservation at all cost of that territory, essential for security, on which Armenia (RA and NKR together with the liberated territory around it) has existed for the whole period of its latest independence;

- the increasing of the number of the Armenian population in the Homeland;

- the preservation of the Armenians of Javakhk on their lands;

- the building of a nation-state based on the principles of rule of law, social justice, democracy and protection of national interests and values, including the development of the Armenian language and culture.

There are tremendous practical, ideological and psychological obstacles and ossified stereotypes that must be overcome throughout this struggle. They emanate essentially from non-Armenian sources but are often coming in to the scene through those Armenian political structures which long ago or recently have fallen under the slavish dependence of foreign powers. The engagement in the struggle for the achievement of the above-mentioned objectives will underpin an Armenian’s ethnic resistability with such a breath of emotions, feelings and knolewdge that he/she will indeed have the drive and the need to acquire and become the bearer of the basic elements of the national self-consciousness – the language, culture, customs and traditions.

To sum up, we can conclude that as long as Armenia as a nation and state is drawn into a long-term struggle for survival against powers superior in terms of numbers, resources and territory (Turkey and Azerbaijan), the most natural and functionally strongest ethnically differentiating characteristic feature of an Armenian is the acknowledgment and assumption of personal responsibility – proportionate to his/her strengths and capabilities – for destiny of the homeland.

By Armen Ayvazian, Ph.D. in Political Science, Director of the "Ararat" Center for Strategic Research

P. S. At the end I invite you to read an English translation of an excerpt from a poem by Raphael Patkanyan entitled "The Armenian and Armenianness" written back in 1855, and a quote from Garegin Nzhdeh. Both are most relevant to this discourse.

Who is an Armenian? Is he the one who speaks in Armenian?

Or whose name ends with the suffix yan?

The one who always eats tolma, pilav for lunch

Or proudly always wears Armenian attire and hat?

Who is an Armenian, is he the one who attends an Armenian Church

And goes to confession at least four times a year?

That has never ignored the lent and also fasts during that

And when he yawns he crosses his open mouth?

No, my dear, nationhood is not an external act

Not even your Armenian birth will give you that right...

If you are an Armenian, you must respect the Armenians for sure,

Armenia for you must be the star of hope...

Love your nation not by words but as you love yourself,

For her sake if necessary, sacrifice all your self,

Don’t even save your life, give your blood to her

Not with the hope that your nation instatntly will appreciate you.

(Translated from Armenian by Hratch V. Vartanian, M.D.)

Later, in mid-20th century the same concept is highlighted by Garegin Nzhdeh: "Armenia! He who did not know how to die for you in your hour of need and who will not want to die for you tomorrow – is not your son, is not an Armenian!"

This coincidence could testify only to the following: the struggle for survival of the Armenian nation has now been going on for over one and a half century.

ARMENIA: STATE TIGHTENS MEDIA CONTROLS
Harassment of provincial television station coincides with start of election campaign.
By Ofelia Kocharian and Taguhi Tovmasian in Yerevan

The most popular television station in Armenia's second city, Gyumri, is facing closure as a result of what it says is officially orchestrated pressure, prompted by its favourable coverage of the leading opposition candidate in the presidential election campaign.

The crisis faced by Gala television station comes as the state tightens its overall control of television ahead of the February 19 poll, in which Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian is the officially-favoured candidate.

Gala, a privately-owned channel, has a big audience in Gyumri, which has a population of around 150,000. The station has been accused of tax evasion by the authorities, and its assets and bank accounts have been frozen.

However, the station's owner Vahan Khachatrian, says its problems started after Gala broadcast the speech that former president Levon Ter-Petrosian made in September announcing his return to public politics. Ter-Petrosian has now registered as a candidate for the election.

Khachatrian told IWPR that he did not support any particular party and gave airtime to all politicians.

Because of the company's problems, all 37 of its advertising clients have pulled out. "For over a month, we've had no advertisements," said Khachatrian. "The tax bodies have imposed a fine of 26 million drams [86,000 US dollars] on us, but I am not going to pay it, and we have already lodged a counter-claim in court."

Khachatrian said he had applied repeatedly to Gyumri's municipal authorities to be allowed to buy or lease the television tower his company has been using for its broadcasts, but without success.

However, in November, the 100-metre TV tower, which for the last two decades had no official owner, was suddenly announced to be the property of the city hall.

"I had been told the tower belonged to no one and I could do whatever I pleased with it," he said. "I repaired it, fitted it with equipment and opened the TVcompany - and now the city hall says it needs to privatise it. I declare that I am ready to buy or lease it at any moment."

At a court hearing, Levon Barseghian, chairman of the Asparez journalists' club, which has set up a support committee for the station, proposed that the city authorities cut a three-way deal with Asparez and Gala and allow the tower to be leased at a reasonable rate, to include back-payments for previous use.

The mayor of Gyumri later said a deal could be reached, but on December 18, an offer was made that Barseghian said was exorbitantly expensive. He said Gala was told to pay 200,000 drams for permission to mount antennas on the tower, instead of the 30-40,000 drams that is the going rate, and it was also asked for a back-payment of 5.4 million drams which, at 18,000 dollars, would be enough to build a new television tower.

Gala is a rarity in Armenia, where the electronic media are mostly controlled by government allies and do not step out of line. Around ten television stations generally give the authorities supportive news coverage. Two stations that did provide alternative voices, A1+ and Noyan Tapan, have lost their broadcasting licenses.

Referring to the tax claims made against Gala, Boris Navasardian, chairman of the Yerevan Press Club, said, "Any television company - and especially one based in Yerevan - would find itself in big trouble if it was presented with a document like this concerning its tax payments on advertising income."

Media monitoring carried out in October and November by the Team research centre, with assistance from the Yerevan Press Club, showed that pre-election news coverage on local television was dominated by information about two candidates - Prime Minister Sarkisian and ex-president Ter-Petrosian. While most of the coverage of the former was favourable, that of Ter-Petrosian was very negative.

"If the prime minister was mentioned by all the channels in a positive rather than negative context - 56 positive comments against two negative ones - ), it was the other way around with the first president, six positive comments against 111 negative ones," said Team's interim report on the monitoring exercise.

For example, on the day that Ter-Petrosian held a big rally in central Yerevan in November, the Armenian Channel Two headed its news bulletin with reports about visits made by the prime minister, the arrival of delegations in Armenia and other official news. Then came international news, including a report about a demonstration in Australia involving 200 protestors.

Ter-Petrosian's rally, which attracted many thousands of protestors, was the penultimate news item and was less than one minute long. There were long-range shots of the rally but no recording of what the opposition candidate said. Then came three minutes of vox pops giving only negative views from members of the public, who said they did not like Ter-Petrosian and his 1991-98 presidency brought them nothing but misery.

"The Shant television company and the Armenian Channel Two paid particular attention to one political figure; they both assigned more than a half of their airtime to Serge Sarkisian," said the report.

Both officials and the TV stations concerned deny there is a problem.

Eduard Sharmazanov, press secretary of the ruling Republican Party, said television companies covered whatever they had available, and reporting on the prime minister's activities did not mean they were biased.

The media monitoring suggested that Armenia Television, which belongs to diaspora businessman Jerard Kafesjian, gave the least coverage to opposition candidates. But Gagik Mkrtchian, director of the station's news programmes, assured IWPR that they were providing airtime to all candidates and were under no "pressure from above".

Aleksan Harutyunian, chairman of the board of the Public Television and Radio Company - Armenia's main television station - rejected accusations that the electronic media are merely obeying orders handed down from the presidential administration.

"I don't think that any link in the chain, including the presidential administration, applies any pressure or issues orders," he told IWPR.

"I give everyone airtime equally."

Critics say Harutyunian himself is too close to government because he used to be head of President Robert Kocharian's administration and secretary of the Security Council.

Opposition politicians say they are frustrated by their inability to get their message across. According to former foreign minister Alexander Arzumanian, "No serious opposition figure can express his views through these outlets. Our media serve a totalitarian, tyrannical regime."

The monitoring revealed that there was only one TV station that provides relatively independent news coverage - Yerkir Media, which broadcasts mostly in the capital and belongs to the nationalist Dashnaktsutiun party, a member of the ruling coalition.

Ter-Petrosian - who banned the Dashnaktsutiun party when he was in office - has nevertheless received extensive coverage from the channel, whose director Gegham Manukian says "pressure is put only on those who want it".

"During all this time, our company has not received a single hint, threat or recommendation as to what we should air and what we shouldn't," Manukian told IWPR.

Taguhi Tovmasian is a correspondent for the Chorrord Iskhanutyun newspaper and Ofelia Kocharian is a correspondent for the Iskakan Iravunq newspaper in Yerevan.

Attached, please find the weekly report on The Armenia Fund Rural Development Program activities for December 21, 2007.

The emphasis of this week’s report is on the village school furniture project to be implemented in collaboration with the Armenian School Fund, the development of the IT sector in the border villages, as well as preparation of the vocational training DVD on improving dairy production in the border farming households.

Get involved!: Find out how you can have your input in developing the border villages by adopting a small project or giving as little as 0.01 cents (yes, one cent!). You can find out more at http://www.himnadram.org/eng/?go=donate. Also, share with us your views on Telethon 2007 by taking the survey at www.himnadram.org.

Support! If you know anyone who would be interested in receiving these reports please send us their contact information.

You can also find the reports on our activities at http://www.himnadram.org/villages.

Rural Development Program Staff
The Armenia Fund
Tel: +37410 521505 ext. 107
E-mail: rdp@himnadram.org

----
The Armenia Fund is a non-profit organization established in 1992 with the aim of facilitating humanitarian assistance and infrastructure development in Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. The Fund has 19 affiliates worldwide.

Turkey and its Christians: Discussion of Armenia: Turkey inches toward EU

TURKEY AND ITS CHRISTIANS: THE CROSS AND THE CRESCENT
Economist, UK
Dec 19 2007

Why Christians feel under threat in today's Turkey

AFPTHIS has been a bad year for Orhan Ant. As a Protestant missionary
in Samsun, on the Black Sea, he has had death threats and his church
has been repeatedly stoned. Local newspapers called him a foreign
agent. A group of youths tried to kidnap him as he was driving home.

His pleas for police protection have gone unheeded.

Mr Ant is not alone. All over Turkey, Christians are under attack. In
January Hrant Dink, an ethnic Armenian newspaper editor, was shot dead
in Istanbul by a teenager who said he had "insulted Turkishness". In
April two Turks and a German, all evangelists, were murdered in
Malatya. Their killers bound and tortured them before slitting their
throats. In December an Italian Catholic priest was knifed by a
teenager in Izmir. Another Italian priest was shot dead in Trabzon
in 2006.

Many blame the attacks on a new ultra-nationalism, tinged with Islamic
militancy, that has swept across Turkey. Unemployed teenagers in the
Black Sea region seem especially prone to it. "The plight of Christians
is critical," says Husnu Ondul, president of the Ankara-based Turkish
Human Rights Association. Like many others, he believes that the "deep
state", comprising a few judges, army officers and security officials
who need enemies to justify their grip on power, is behind the attacks.

That may seem far-fetched. Yet evidence leaked to the media in the
Dink and Malatya cases points to collusion between the perpetrators
and rogue elements in the police and the army. It also suggests that
the Istanbul police were tipped off about Mr Dink's murder a year
before it was carried out. "So why did the Istanbul police do nothing
to prevent it?" wonders Ergin Cinmen, a lawyer for the Dink family.

Respecting the religious freedom of non-Muslims is essential to
Turkey's hopes of joining the European Union. Laws against Christians
repairing their churches have been relaxed. Overriding objections
from pious constituents, the ruling Justice and Development (AK)
party has just restored an ancient Armenian church in eastern Turkey. {!!}

School textbooks are being purged of an anti-Western bias.

Yet many Christian grievances remain. The prime minister, Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, resists calls to reopen the Greek Orthodox Halki
seminary on Heybeli island off Istanbul, shut down in 1971. Turkey
refuses to recognise the ecumenical title of the Greek Orthodox
patriarch, Bartholomew I, the spiritual leader of over 200m Orthodox
Christians. The patriarch, a loyal Turkish citizen, has lobbied hard
for Turkey's EU membership. But this has only reinforced suspicions
among ultra-nationalist detractors, who accuse him of trying to
"Christianise" Turkey and wanting a Vatican-style state in the heart
of Istanbul.

Never mind that the Greek Orthodox church in Istanbul has dwindled
to 4,000 souls, many of them too old to follow their children abroad.

Nor that the patriarch must under Turkish law be a Turkish citizen, a
rule which is making it difficult to find a successor to Bartholomew
I. "They [ie, the Turks] apparently won't regard the conquest of
Constantinople as complete until the patriarchate ceases to exist and
all Christians have been frightened away," suggests one restorer of
icons in Istanbul.

The government has yet to approve a draft bill to help non-Muslims
recover thousands of properties that have been confiscated by the state
and either sold or left to decay. The Aya Yorgi church in Istanbul's
Edirnekapi district, which was badly damaged in an earthquake, is one
sad example. Its walls are cracked, its roof is leaking; a marble angel
lies in pieces on the floor. "All we ask is to be permitted to rescue
our church, but we cannot hammer a single nail," complains Bishop
Dionysios, a Greek Orthodox prelate who still conducts services there.

Many Christians concede that AK has treated them better than its
secular predecessors did. They blame the deep state for their recent
troubles. But the excuse of the deep state's power is wearing thin
after AK's big victory in July's general election. "With such a strong
mandate, the government's failure to meet our demands can only mean
one thing, that the deep state is still in charge," says a Christian
priest. Or perhaps that AK believes in religious freedom for Muslims,
but not Christians.

DISCUSSION OF ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS BY EUROPEAN

STRUCTURES IMPORTANT FOR ARMENIA
ARKA News Agency, Armenia
Dec 19 2007

YEREVAN, December 19. /ARKA/. Armenia attaches importance to the
discussion of Armenian-Turkish relations by the European structures,
Speaker of the RA Parliament Tigran Torosyan stated at his meeting
with EU Special Representative in the South Caucasus Peter Semneby,
who is in Yerevan to take part in the parliamentary hearings on
Armenian-Turkish relations.

"Armenia attaches importance to the discussion of the problem at
European structures in the context of European values and European
integration, as, with specific principles being set, neither side can
accuse European structures of being biased," Torosyan said. According
to him, the principles must be clearly set and accepted by the sides
through statements.

Moreover, they must be applied in practice.

"The road travelled by the European Union is evidence that tolerance
and dialogue is the basis for resolving disagreements. Armenia's
position is in harmony with the principles. Armenia is aware of the
problems that have to be put aside for some time and of the necessity
for cooperation in other matters and, through the creation of an
atmosphere of mutual confidence and understanding, contributing to
the resolution of the problems," Torosyan said.

He pointed out that Turkey is setting preconditions, which specifically
concern the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement, recognition of the Armenian
Genocide, Armenian Diaspora thereby considering it possible to
establish cooperation only after the issues have been settled.

"It is natural that the preconditions should be unacceptable for
Armenia, as Turkey is raising issues related to a third state,
Azerbaijan, in the context of Armenian-Turkish relations. Besides,
Ankara is unable to resolve its psychological problems related to the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide and continues Armenia's blockade,"
Torosyan said. He stressed that these steps do not by any means fit
the European system of values.

The RA Parliament has held hearings on problems and prospects of
Armenian-Turkish relations.

The hearings were attended by representatives of a number of Armenian
and international organizations, political parties, as well as by Peter
Semneby. A Turkish representative declined the Armenian Parliament's
invitation.

TURKEY INCHES TOWARD EU, CLOUDED BY FRENCH OBJECTIONS
By James G. Neuger
Bloomberg
Update 2
Dec 19 2007

Dec. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Turkey inched ahead with its bid to enter the
European Union, in talks increasingly clouded by French President
Nicolas Sarkozy's determination to make sure the country never gets in.

Negotiations started today over aligning Turkey's regulations with
the EU in the areas of consumer protection and transport and energy
networks. Turkey has now started talks in six of the bloc's 35 policy
areas and completed one.

Under French pressure, the EU has shifted the negotiations into a
lower gear, a sign of rising opposition in the heart of Europe to
letting in a predominantly Muslim country with a standard of living
less than a third of the EU level.

"Certain member states are trying to erode our political and judicial
position," Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan told a Brussels
press conference. "Such attitudes are not proper and do not reflect
a responsible approach."

Turkey has made scant progress toward joining since embarking on
the EU entry marathon in 2005. The bloc froze negotiations in eight
policy areas last year to punish Turkey for refusing to trade with
the Greek-speaking Republic of Cyprus, part of the EU since 2004.

Negotiations in two or three more areas might get under way in the
first half of next year, EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said.

Alternative Union

Sarkozy, elected in May on a wave of French anti-Turkey sentiment,
says Turkey's place is in an alternative "Mediterranean Union" and has
vetoed talks in policy areas that would lead directly to EU membership.

"Must Europe enlarge indefinitely and, if yes, what will the
consequences be?" Sarkozy said last week after persuading the EU to
set up a blue-ribbon study group that he expects to challenge Turkey's
fitness to join.

Only 21 percent of Europeans want Turkey to become a member, according
to a September poll by the German Marshall Fund. European attitudes
have darkened the anti-EU mood in Turkey, where only 40 percent of
Turks think membership would be a "good thing," down from 54 percent
last year and 73 percent in 2004, the poll found.

Even Turkish schoolchildren are hearing of the broadsides by Sarkozy
and other anti-Turkey politicians in Europe, making it harder for the
government to amass support to modernize the economy along EU lines,
Babacan said.

`Negative Impact'

Such "provocations" stir feelings among Turks "that they are unwanted,
and that in turn has a negative impact on their position toward the
EU," Babacan said.

Babacan, Rehn and Portuguese Foreign Minister Luis Amado, the chairman
of today's meeting, all backed the "accession" process, using the
jargon that France forced the EU to strip from the preparatory
documents.

Diverging public opinion in Turkey and Europe threatens to breed a
"dangerous situation," Amado said.

Rehn, the EU commissioner shepherding the talks, voiced concern
that the "political atmospherics" between Turkey and EU capitals are
damaging the entry process and said the EU needs to be fair to Turkey.

"At the same time, we need to be firm and emphasize conditionality
and that's why we encourage Turkey to relaunch the reform process
in full," Rehn said. As a sign of support for Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan's EU strategy, the European Commission's president,
Jose Barroso, will visit Turkey early next year, he said.

Hammering home a point he often makes in Brussels, Babacan said the
Turkish government's plans to upgrade the economy and enhance civil
rights won't be blown off course by the souring mood.

EU Subsidies

For example, Babacan said, today's start of talks on linking Turkey's
transport and energy networks to the European grid makes Turkey
eligible for EU subsidies to upgrade its infrastructure.

Babacan gave no timetable for meeting the EU's demand that Turkey
rewrite a section of the penal code that has been used to prosecute
authors who challenged the Turkish orthodoxy that that the World
War I massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks was not genocide. One
journalist convicted under the law, Hrant Dink, was later murdered
by a teenage nationalist.

Divided Cyprus

The status of Cyprus also remains an obstacle for Turkey. Turkey's
military has occupied the northern part of the Mediterranean island
since a 1974 invasion in response to a Greek-backed coup.

The dividing line hardened in 2004, when Greek-speaking Cypriots
rejected a unification proposal that had the backing of the Turkish
side. As a result, Cyprus joined the EU without the Turkish-speaking
north of the island, which remains fenced off in the only disputed
border in the EU.

Skirmishes between the Turkish army and Kurdish rebels operating out
of northern Iraq played no role in today's talks. The conflict with
the Kurds didn't come up and Babacan said Turkey isn't relying on
military force alone to pacify the border.

An EU statement yesterday called on the Turkish military to exercise
restraint, while acknowledging Turkey's right to combat terrorists.

No inadequacies in Dink investigation, claim inspectors

Today's Zaman, Turkey
Jan 1 2008
No inadequacies in Dink investigation, claim inspectors

[compare this official report with previous article]

A highly controversial investigation into the murder of Turkish
Armenian journalist Hrant Dink which involved a number of
contradictions has no loopholes, according to the Prime Ministry's
Inspection Council.

Dink was shot dead by an ultra-nationalist teenager outside his
office on Jan. 19. Throughout the investigation, a number of
suspicious points hinting at police involvement have led the Dink
family to conclude that the assassination was being covered up by
either the police or the judiciary -- or maybe both. Rakel Dink, the
slain journalist's wife, had applied to the Prime Ministry's
Inspection Council regarding the suspicions around the investigation.
The Prime Ministry's Office responded positively to the application
and started an inquiry into the investigation process. After working
for eight months on the application, the Prime Ministry office's
inspectors concluded that there were no loopholes in the
investigation.

The inspectors based their finding on intelligence reports, phone
conversation transcripts and official correspondences between the
Police Department of Trabzon and Ýstanbul. Dink's killer was from
Trabzon. Another prime suspect in the operation, who was the one the
assassin said incited him, was a police informant with the Trabzon
police. The investigation had revealed that the Ýstanbul police had
been tipped off about the plans to kill Dink many times.

The inspectors ruled that no document or information on any of the
suspects, including the former police informant, was being hidden.
The Human Rights Committee in Parliament is currently also carrying
out an investigation into the Dink murder.

Fethiye Çetin, a lawyer representing the Dink family said: `There was
no need for this investigation to last eight months. Some documents
are very obvious.' She added that she and the other lawyers hadn't
yet seen the council's report.

The New Anatolian, Turkey
Jan 1 2008
Academician responds to Armenian parliament demands
[showing how antediluvian some so-called academics can be in Turkey]

A Turkish scholar, who is also the chairman of the Association to
Fight Against Baseless Genocide Allegations, said Monday that
Armenian lawmakers were living in a world of dreams, while commenting
on demands of the Armenian parliament.

"Armenian parliament once again stated expressly that they will not
give up emity," said Savas Egilmez, a professor at Ataturk
University, in eastern province of Erzurum.

In a special session on December 19 and 20, Armenian Parliament asked
Turkey to annul article 301th of Turkish Penal Code and re-draw the
border between the two countries according to (the null and void)
Treaty of Sevres, Egilmez recalled.

"They prepared a bill of 14.5 billion USD regarding the incidents of
1915," Egilmez recalled. "They are living in a world of dreams," he
said.

Egilmez said Turkish people expect an apology from Armenia for
massacres committed by Armenian gangs during the WWI.

"In order to establish political and economic relations with this
country, Turkish people expect Armenia to apologize for massacres,
demolish the so-called genocide monument and remove several articles
and allegations (that are against Turkey) from their constitution ,"
he added.

TURKEY AND ITS CHRISTIANS: THE CROSS AND THE CRESCENT

Why Christians feel under threat in today's Turkey

AFPTHIS has been a bad year for Orhan Ant. As a Protestant missionary
in Samsun, on the Black Sea, he has had death threats and his church
has been repeatedly stoned. Local newspapers called him a foreign
agent. A group of youths tried to kidnap him as he was driving home.

His pleas for police protection have gone unheeded.

Mr Ant is not alone. All over Turkey, Christians are under attack. In
January Hrant Dink, an ethnic Armenian newspaper editor, was shot dead
in Istanbul by a teenager who said he had "insulted Turkishness". In
April two Turks and a German, all evangelists, were murdered in
Malatya. Their killers bound and tortured them before slitting their
throats. In December an Italian Catholic priest was knifed by a
teenager in Izmir. Another Italian priest was shot dead in Trabzon
in 2006.

Many blame the attacks on a new ultra-nationalism, tinged with Islamic
militancy, that has swept across Turkey. Unemployed teenagers in the
Black Sea region seem especially prone to it. "The plight of Christians
is critical," says Husnu Ondul, president of the Ankara-based Turkish
Human Rights Association. Like many others, he believes that the "deep
state", comprising a few judges, army officers and security officials
who need enemies to justify their grip on power, is behind the attacks.

That may seem far-fetched. Yet evidence leaked to the media in the
Dink and Malatya cases points to collusion between the perpetrators
and rogue elements in the police and the army. It also suggests that
the Istanbul police were tipped off about Mr Dink's murder a year
before it was carried out. "So why did the Istanbul police do nothing
to prevent it?" wonders Ergin Cinmen, a lawyer for the Dink family.

Respecting the religious freedom of non-Muslims is essential to
Turkey's hopes of joining the European Union. Laws against Christians
repairing their churches have been relaxed. Overriding objections
from pious constituents, the ruling Justice and Development (AK)
party has just restored an ancient Armenian church in eastern Turkey. {!!}

School textbooks are being purged of an anti-Western bias.

Yet many Christian grievances remain. The prime minister, Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, resists calls to reopen the Greek Orthodox Halki
seminary on Heybeli island off Istanbul, shut down in 1971. Turkey
refuses to recognise the ecumenical title of the Greek Orthodox
patriarch, Bartholomew I, the spiritual leader of over 200m Orthodox
Christians. The patriarch, a loyal Turkish citizen, has lobbied hard
for Turkey's EU membership. But this has only reinforced suspicions
among ultra-nationalist detractors, who accuse him of trying to
"Christianise" Turkey and wanting a Vatican-style state in the heart
of Istanbul.

Never mind that the Greek Orthodox church in Istanbul has dwindled
to 4,000 souls, many of them too old to follow their children abroad.

Nor that the patriarch must under Turkish law be a Turkish citizen, a
rule which is making it difficult to find a successor to Bartholomew
I. "They [ie, the Turks] apparently won't regard the conquest of
Constantinople as complete until the patriarchate ceases to exist and
all Christians have been frightened away," suggests one restorer of
icons in Istanbul.

The government has yet to approve a draft bill to help non-Muslims
recover thousands of properties that have been confiscated by the state
and either sold or left to decay. The Aya Yorgi church in Istanbul's
Edirnekapi district, which was badly damaged in an earthquake, is one
sad example. Its walls are cracked, its roof is leaking; a marble angel
lies in pieces on the floor. "All we ask is to be permitted to rescue
our church, but we cannot hammer a single nail," complains Bishop
Dionysios, a Greek Orthodox prelate who still conducts services there.

Many Christians concede that AK has treated them better than its
secular predecessors did. They blame the deep state for their recent
troubles. But the excuse of the deep state's power is wearing thin
after AK's big victory in July's general election. "With such a strong
mandate, the government's failure to meet our demands can only mean
one thing, that the deep state is still in charge," says a Christian
priest. Or perhaps that AK believes in religious freedom for Muslims,
but not Christians.

ARMENIANS DEMAND JUSTICE NOT RECOGNITION

By Harut Sassounian - Publisher, The California Courier

The National Herald, a Greek-American weekly, published a lengthy interview with this writer last week on the issue of genocide recognition. This column was prompted by the ideas expressed in that interview.
The Armenian Cause is not about genocide recognition, but the pursuit of justice which entails that the Armenian victims receive reparations.
Remembering the Genocide is also about keeping the hope and dream alive for succeeding generations of Armenians -- that some day, they will regain their historic lands.

Armenians need to rethink their approach to the pursuit of their cause and present their demands in a more effective manner. The House of Representatives has already adopted an Armenian Genocide resolution twice in 1975 and 1984. Pres. Reagan issued a Presidential Proclamation in 1981 that refers to the Armenian Genocide. More than 20 countries, the European Parliament, a U.N. human rights panel and many genocide and Holocaust scholars have acknowledged the Armenian Genocide. Therefore, continuing attempts to seek genocide recognition from the international community is no longer necessary and distracts from the pursuit of more significant Armenian political objectives.
Armenians have been saying for decades that they have three demands: “Recognition” of the genocide, “Reparations” for losses, and “Return” of their territories -- in that sequence. They have repeated these three R’s so often that even Turkey’s leaders, who closely monitor Armenian statements, have learned them by heart.
Consequently, Armenians and Turks now have the same distorted view of what the Armenian Cause is all about. Both sides mistakenly believe that once the Genocide is recognised by Turks and others, Armenians will proceed to make demands for reparations and lands. This is the main reason why Turks so adamantly refuse to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. They fear that acceptance of the Genocide would obligate them to pay reparations and return the usurped Armenian lands. And knowing well the sequence of the three R’s, Turks cleverly refuse to acknowledge the Genocide -- the first demand -- thus preempting the remaining two Armenian demands.
Armenians should not fall in the Turkish trap of getting stuck on demand number one. Since genocide recognition has already been accomplished, they should immediately proceed to the second and third demands. There is no prerequisite that the Turks -- or the U.S. or anybody else, for that matter -- first acknowledge the Genocide before Armenians can take legal action. Armenians should present their demands to appropriate national and international courts, regardless of whether the Turks recognise the Genocide.
Is justice served when someone murders your family, and the criminal’s descendants who still live on your property simply admit 100 years later that such a crime actually occurred? Would you just thank the murderer’s descendants for acknowledging the crime or would you press to get your family’s stolen property back?
The acknowledgement of the Genocide by Turks or others is not an occasion for Armenians to jump for joy. Genocide is an undeniable fact. Armenians know it happened. The civilised world knows it happened. Many Turks also know it happened. The acknowledgement of a historical fact cannot be viewed as a demand. Justice requires that the criminal be punished, reparations paid, and the ill-gotten fruits gained through genocide returned to their rightful owners.
Obviously, the Turks are not going to voluntarily return the Armenian lands even though Armenians have a just claim to those territories. Nobody gives an inch of land to anyone unless forced to do so. So how does such a claim become reality? It can be done by keeping the hope and dream alive and passing them on to the next generation, the way the Jews did by proclaiming "Next year in Jerusalem" for two thousand years. The just demand for the recovery of their historic lands can disappear once Armenians lose all hope and unilaterally give up their dream.
There is no country in recorded history whose borders have remained unchanged. Mighty empires have come and gone. Likewise, the Republic of Turkey will not have the same borders forever. No one knows what can happen in the next 30 years or 300 years, but if Armenians relinquish their claims now, they would have lost the chance of recovering anything forever. Armenians must continue to remind their offspring for generations to come that those lands which were unjustly stolen from them will eventually return to their rightful owners.
Rather than demanding genocide recognition, Armenians should seek justice