Turkish Forum

Author: Aylin D. Miller

  • Israel likely to skip next UN racism conference

    Israel likely to skip next UN racism conference

    By BRADLEY S. KLAPPER

    GENEVA (AP) — Israel will almost surely boycott the next U.N. racism conference in Geneva, its ambassador said Wednesday, warning that the meeting is likely to sink into the same anti-Semitism that prompted the U.S. and Israel to walk out of the last one seven years ago.

    Itzhak Levanon, the Jewish state’s departing U.N. envoy in Geneva, said the event April 20-25 would need to be completely reworked for Israel to participate.

    But with Libya chairing preparations, and Iran and Cuba also involved, Levanon said the Geneva follow-up to the contentious 2001 conference in the South African city of Durban had the making of another international “bashing of Israel.”

    “We want them to discuss human rights, and not only focus on Israel and turning this into an anti-Semitic event,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We will attend the meeting only if there is a radical, substantive change.”

    Canada is the only country that has explicitly said it will not take part in “Durban II,” arguing the meeting will promote racism and not combat it.

    The Bush administration has taken a symbolic position opposing the conference. In December, Washington cast the only “no” vote when the U.N. General Assembly passed a two-year budget because of objections to funding for the conference.

    The State Department has said, however, that a decision whether to attend will be made closer to the time of the conference.

    In 2001, the World Conference Against Racism ended three days before the Sept. 11 attacks, with a declaration and program of action that divided countries even as they agreed to it.

    Dominated by clashes over the Middle East and the legacy of slavery, the U.S. and Israel walked out midway through the eight-day meeting over a draft resolution that singled out Israel for criticism and likened Zionism — the movement to establish and maintain a Jewish state — to racism.

    Those references were removed from the final declaration, though it did cite “the plight of the Palestinians” as an issue.

    A parallel forum of non-governmental organizations, however, branded “Israel as a racist apartheid state” and called for an end to the “ongoing, Israeli systematic perpetration of racist crimes, including war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing.”

    Levanon said the anti-Israel speeches at Durban were a “shame” and that Israel would not have any part in a repetition. But he said the nations that led the attacks on Israel have offered no encouraging signs that the next meeting will be different.

    “Yes, the Europeans say it should not be anti-Semitic and the Israelis are demanding a focus on human rights around the world,” he said. “But what about those that did the bashing? They’ve said nothing.”

    Source: AP, 06 Agust 2008

  • Chinese Islamic group threatens Olympics

    Chinese Islamic group threatens Olympics

    updated 10:10 p.m. EDT, Thu August 7, 2008

    • Story Highlights
    • Reported warning comes days after assailants killed 16 border police in Xinjiang
    • SITE: Group also calls on Muslims to offer support financially, physically, spiritually
    • SITE: Warning implicitly targets those “complicit” with Chinese regime

    BEIJING, China (AP) — A Chinese Islamic faction that has threatened to attack the Olympics released a new video, warning Muslims to stay away from the Beijing Games and avoid buses, trains, planes and buildings used by Chinese, a U.S. group that monitors militant organizations said Thursday.
    A police officer asks girls to move away from the fence outside the National Stadium in Beijing on July 27.

    On the six-minute video issued Wednesday, two days before the opening of the games, a representative of the Turkistan Islamic Party reiterates the group’s threats against the Olympics made in a video last month, according to SITE Intelligence Group. It shows images of the Beijing Olympics logo in flames and an explosion over an Olympics venue.

    “Choose your side,” says the speaker, grasping a rifle and dressed in a black turban and camouflage with his face masked. “Do not stay on the same bus, on the same train, on the same plane, in the same buildings, or any place the Chinese are,” he warns Muslims, according to SITE.

    The video accuses China of using the Olympics to hide its actions from the world.

    The TIP representative spoke the Turkic language of the Uighurs, a largely Muslim minority in China’s restive western Xinjiang territory near the borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Uighurs have a long history of tense relations with the central government.

    The Turkistan Islamic Party is believed to be based across the border in Pakistan, where security experts say it has received training from al Qaeda. Last month, the group issued videotaped threats and claimed responsibility for a series of recent bus bombings in China.

    On Monday, assailants killed 16 border police and wounded 16 others in the Xinjiang city of Kashgar when they rammed a stolen truck into the group before tossing homemade bombs and stabbing them. Chinese authorities called the raid a terrorist attack and said they had arrested two men who are Uighurs. No group has claimed responsibility.

    The latest video claims the communist regime’s alleged mistreatment of Muslims justifies holy war. It accuses China of forcing Muslims into atheism by capturing and killing Islamic teachers and destroying Islamic schools, according to the SITE. It says China’s birth control program has forced abortions on Muslim women.

    “They are implying that anyone who is complicit with the Chinese regime is a legitimate target,” Rita Katz, director of SITE, told The Associated Press.

    “The reason for the increased propaganda from TIP at this time is likely due to the fact that the international media’s attention on the Olympics in China provides the group with the perfect platform to publicize their existence and activities on a global scale,” Katz added.

    The group also calls upon Muslims to offer support financially, physically and spiritually, SITE said.

    News of the video came just hours after President Bush landed in Beijing for a three day visit to attend the games opening ceremony and some Olympic events.

    “I think what they’re doing is they’re trying to capitalize on the buildup to the games,” said Ben Venzke of Washington-based IntelCenter, another group that monitors militant groups.

    Terrorism analysts and Chinese authorities have said that with more than 100,000 soldiers and police guarding Beijing and other Olympic co-host cities, terrorists were more likely to attack less-protected areas.  

    Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved

  • U.S. Congressman expels Armenian journalist from the hall for asking about so-called genocide

    U.S. Congressman expels Armenian journalist from the hall for asking about so-called genocide

     
     

    [ 07 Aug 2008 17:03 ]
    Washington–APA. Stephen Cohen, member of U.S. House of Representatives expelled Armenian journalist from the hall for asking about so-called Armenian genocide, APA reports quoting Panarmenian agency.

    Journalist Peter Musurlian functioning in California asked why congressman was against draft bill on so-called Armenian genocide. Cohen getting angry asked him to leave the hall and noted that he would combat draft bill on so-called Armenian genocide.
    Aram Ambarian, Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) assessed the Congressman’s action as hooliganism.
    Draft bill envisaging reorganization of 1915 developments in Ottoman Empire as genocide has been signed by 219 Congressmen.

  • Rwanda points a finger at Paris

    Rwanda points a finger at Paris

    Published: August 6 2008 20:12 | Last updated: August 6 2008 20:12

    Rwanda has produced the most detailed account yet of France’s role during the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The report released in Kigali follows a four year inquiry. It implicates top officials in the French political and military establishment, including François Mitterand, then president, his son, Jean-Christophe, two former prime ministers and a host of military officers.

    Some of the allegations are new. Some have been around for a long time. But the thrust is that Paris gave diplomatic cover and provided military training and arms to Hutu extremists who carried out the slaughter of 1m ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus. There are new details of training that French officers gave to the civil defence units that became the Interahamwe militias responsible for leading the massacres. The report suggests that Paris was providing arms well after the atrocities had begun. It also alleges some French personnel participated directly in war crimes. If there is compelling evidence, they should face justice.

    Washington, London, the UN and others were guilty of standing by as the ugliest chapter in modern African history was scripted. Paris is being accused of much worse: active complicity in the writing of it.

    As could be expected, the French have hit back, describing the allegations as “unacceptable” and questioning the independence of the government appointed committee that carried out the inquiry. There may well be propaganda and exaggeration. The suggestion that French officials knowingly connived in preparations for genocide might not withstand scrutiny.

    But there is substance to Rwanda’s accusation that France allowed the conditions for genocide to develop by supporting a client regime even after it started committing war crimes. Paris has still to acknowledge its errors and issue any form of apology to Rwanda – a source of immense grievance to survivors of the massacres. It also explains why Rwanda has felt it necessary to put on record its version of events.

    This was the nadir of France’s relationship with client states in Francophone Africa. President Nicolas Sarkozy has almost admitted as much, but he needs to do more. Many leading political figures in France have been outspoken in criticizing Turkey for its failure to examine whether the massacre of Armenians during the collapse of the Ottoman empire amounted to genocide. They cite this as a reason Turkey does not belong in the European Union. They need to be honest about their own behaviour in Rwanda.

  • The Israeli-Saudi common interest

    The Israeli-Saudi common interest

    By Moshe Maoz

    The interfaith conference King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia convened in Madrid on July 17 is the first such conference held by this religiously strict kingdom. Jews were among the participants, including a rabbi from Israel. In 2002, when Abdullah was still crown prince, he made a significant move toward Israel that was adopted by the Arab League’s 22 members: recognizing Israel, including diplomatic relations, if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders and a Palestinian state is established with East Jerusalem as its capital.

    Make no mistake, Saudi Arabia, a Wahhabi Islamic kingdom that controls Islam’s holiest places – Mecca and Medina – has not fundamentally changed its ideologically negative attitude toward Jews and the Jewish state. But like other Islamic and Arab regimes, the Saudi regime has changed and improved its attitude out of strategic, political and security considerations and out of a long-term realistic approach.

    Indeed, the Saudis’ realistic attitude toward Israel’s existence is not new. Back in May 1975, King Khaled told The Washington Post that his country was prepared to recognize Israel’s right to exist within the 1967 borders on condition that a Palestinian state was established between Israel and Jordan (Haaretz, May 26, 1975).

    This move was apparently influenced by Israel’s victory in the Yom Kippur War in 1973, after which Egypt and Syria accepted UN Security Council Resolution 338 (which also included Security Council Resolution 242 from November 1967 that was accepted at the time by Egypt and Jordan). Resolution 338 meant indirect recognition of Israel

    In 1981, at the Arab summit that convened in Fez, Morocco, Saudi Prince Fahd (who became king in 1982) proposed recognition of Israel in exchange for a return to the 1967 (1949) lines, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and compensation payments to the Palestinian refugees or repatriating them. The Arab summit rejected the proposal, but accepted it in 1982 after amending it to include the recognition of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s leadership.

    Twenty years later, in 2002, Saudi Arabia once again proposed peace and recognition of Israel in exchange for a return to the 1967 borders and the establishment of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem and an agreed-on solution to the refugee problem (based on UN Resolution 194 from December 1948). This proposal, approved again in 2007 by the Arab League, was apparently influenced by the Saudi need to please the United States after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks, and particularly out of the fear the Saudis and other Sunni Arab countries had of Shi’ite Iran, which threatened them more than Israel did. However, successive Israeli governments rejected or ignored these initiatives. They may have missed chances to advance comprehensive peace with Arab countries.

    Moreover, it may be assumed that the solution to the Palestinian problem and the issue of Jerusalem could have also motivated quite a few Muslim countries to recognize Israel and improve their relationship to Jews. Evidence of such trends has been voiced by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, former Indonesian president Abdurrahman Wahid and other Muslim leaders. The invitation of Jewish delegates to the Madrid interfaith meeting also attests to an important Muslim trend to advance peaceful coexistence and religious dialogue with Judiasm. This trend has also been evident recently in Jordan and Qatar at the government levels, and in the United States and Europe in public and academic bodies.

    It is important to encourage these pragmatic Muslim trends, which represent a centrist stream in Islam. This is a way to combat new extremist Islamic streams represented by the Shi’ite Iranian regime and Hezbollah on the one hand, and Al-Qaida and other radical Sunni groups on the other. These seek to destroy Israel and strike at Jews; in their actions and writings they embody anti-Semitic Muslim tendencies drawn from old Christian anti-Semitism and from tendentious interpretations of the Koran and the Hadith.

    These fanatic Islamic elements endanger not only Israel and Jews, but also pragmatic Arab and Muslim regimes like Saudi Arabia. Accordingly, Israel and Saudi Arabia (and other Arab and Muslim countries) have a common interest in neutralizing and limiting the extremist Islamic influence and its deadly attacks.

    One of the main ways of doing so is Israeli-Saudi cooperation toward a fair and agreed-on solution to the Palestinian problem and the question of Jerusalem.

    The writer is professor emeritus in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

    Source: Haaretz, 03/08/2008

  • Turkish courts show Solomonic wisdom

    Turkish courts show Solomonic wisdom

    The Gazette

    Published: Monday, August 04

    Turkey’s highest court has made a sensible decision in rejecting a suit, brought by the country’s chief prosecutor, to ban the ruling Justice and Development Party. Outlawing the party would have meant banning dozens of politicians including – preposterously – Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul.

    Turkey is a volatile political stew, including a large Muslim majority, a secular constitution, and a secular, intervention-prone military. Sustaining the democratic rule of law in such an environment is a complicated legal and political challenge. This decision, although it came in a narrow split decision of the Constitutional Court, helps.

    Turkey’s 70 million people spoke clearly last year, when the Justice and Development Party, which is frankly a religious Islamic party, won a sweeping parliamentary majority with 47 per cent of the popular vote in multi-party elections. But in Turkey, as elsewhere, ambiguity runs in the arteries of political parties, especially once they take power, and Justice and Development has governed with less religious zeal than its foes had feared.

    That’s good, because the stakes are high in Turkey, which has been called the most important political project in the world today. Bridging as it does east and west, Turkey is a model of a democratic country whose population is majority Muslim and which has achieved real political, social and economic advances.

    Turkey stands as a genuine example to the rest of the world that democracy, far from being Islam’s enemy, can in fact be perfectly compatible with it.

    The legal move against the ruling party was spurred by what we might call secular fundamentalists, who saw danger in a government initiative to allow women to wear headscarves on university campuses. Ever since the days of fiercely secular and still widely beloved reformer Kemal Ataturk, who died in 1938, such symbols of religion have been carefully constrained in Turkey.

    But the courts had already struck down the headscarf law. For the judges to have legitimized the outlawing of a popular – and apparently competent – administration could have plunged the country directly into dangerous political tumult.

    And for what? Erdogan’s party has not undermined the principles of secular democracy in any serious way we can see, and has in fact liberalized a number of economic and social policies. The PM, eager to get Turkey into the European Union, has repeatedly disappointed his harder-line religious followers.

    At least some of the existing tension between the secular and the religious in Turkey comes, we think, from misplaced fears. Many experts say the shift into positions of power of more observant Turks from Anatolia is plausibly more the result of a social and economic movement than a religious impulse. But the country’s entrenched elite – in the military and the secular ruling class – is unhappy with the political success of the new, more religious middle class. The old establishment remains convinced that Erdogan’s party intends to subvert the the secular constitution.

    The military needs to acknowledge that the courts should be the legitimate and primary guardian of the constitution. With this week’s ruling, the courts have strengthened their own position as arbiters of common sense.

    Turkey has faced a constitutional crisis, and survived, intact. This is good news, and not only for the people of Turkey.

    Source: The Gazette (Montreal) August 04, 2008