Turkish Forum

Category: Harut Sassounian

Harut Sassounian is the Publisher of The California Courier, founded in 1958. His weekly editorials, translated into several languages, are reprinted in scores of U.S. and overseas publications and posted on countless websites.<p>

He is the author of “The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2005, Documents and Declarations.”

As President of the Armenia Artsakh Fund, he has administered the procurement and delivery of $970 million of humanitarian assistance to Armenia and Artsakh during the past 34 years. As Senior Vice President of Kirk Kerkorian’s Lincy Foundation, he oversaw $240 million of infrastructure projects in Armenia.

From 1978 to 1982, Mr. Sassounian worked as an international marketing executive for Procter & Gamble in Geneva, Switzerland. He was a human rights delegate at the United Nations for 10 years. He played a leading role in the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.N. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities in 1985.

Mr. Sassounian has a Master’s Degree in International Affairs from Columbia University, and a Master’s in Business Administration from Pepperdine University.

  • Complaint against Azerbaijan in European Court Could Have Grave Consequences

    Complaint against Azerbaijan in European Court Could Have Grave Consequences

    By Harut Sassounian
    Publisher, The California Courier
    sassounian33
    In recent years, Armenian-Americans have filed several lawsuits in U.S. courts against insurance companies, banks, and the Republic of Turkey, seeking compensation for losses stemming from the Genocide of 1915.
    For the first time, on September 15, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) will hold a hearing on a complaint filed by an Armenian family against the Republic of Azerbaijan for damages suffered during the Karabagh (Artsakh) conflict. Remarkably, the ECHR will consider on the same day a similar complaint brought by several Azeris against the Republic of Armenia (Chiragov and others vs. Armenia).
    Minas Sargsyan, a former resident of Gulistan in the Shahumyan region, north of Artsakh, filed a complaint on August 11, 2006, regarding the destruction of his house and eviction from his property. Sargsyan stated in his complaint that someone else, presumably an Azeri, is now living in his house. Although Sargsyan passed away a year ago, his widow and two children are continuing to pursue the case. Due to a backlog, the ECHR normally takes several years before it hears a case. The Sargsyan family is represented before the Court by attorneys Narine Gasparyan and Knarik Ohanyan of Yerevan (members of the Legal Guide NGO), and well known human rights lawyer Prof. Philip Leach representing the European Human Rights Advocacy Center in London.
    The Shahumyan region is situated on the northern border of the former Nagorno-Karabagh Autonomous Oblast, as it was known in Soviet times. More than 80% of Shahumyan was inhabited by Armenians prior to the Artsakh conflict. In June 1992, when the Azerbaijani forces bombed Gulistan, Sargsyans’ two-storey house was destroyed. As a result, the entire population of the village fled fearing for their lives, according to the “Statement of Facts,” summarized by the ECHR.
    Sargsyan’s complaint is based on the following claims:
    1. The destruction of his house and eviction from his property constituted “a violation of his right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.”
    2. Infringement on his right to a private and family life and to his home because of his forced displacement and Azerbaijan’s continuing refusal to allow him access to his home and belongings.
    3. In view of the demolition or vandalism of several Armenian cemeteries in Azerbaijan, Sargsyan stated that he was unaware of the condition of the cemetery of his close relatives and that he was deprived of the possibility of visiting their graves, which he had done regularly in the past. The mere fact of knowing that the graves of his relatives were under the risk of being destroyed caused Sargsyan severe suffering and distress. The inability to visit the cemetery deprived him of spiritual communication with his deceased relatives, as visiting and maintaining his relatives’ graves was a religious duty that he fulfilled before his eviction.
    4. There are no effective remedies available to ethnic Armenians who were forced to leave their homes in Azerbaijan. Armenians who had sought to lodge complaints with relevant Azerbaijani authorities were unable to obtain any redress for the violation of their rights. Due to the unresolved status of the Artsakh conflict, there were practical difficulties and obstacles for gaining direct access to any remedies available in Azerbaijan.
    5. Sargsyan complained that he had been subjected to discrimination in Azerbaijan, based on his ethnic and religious affiliation. He submitted that only ethnic Armenians living in Azerbaijan had been targets of violence, pogroms, and attacks. The Government of Azerbaijan failed to investigate violence against Armenians and to provide redress for the illegal occupation of their properties and the destruction of Armenian cemeteries.
    This is the first Armenian complaint lodged with the ECHR for violations of property rights, among others, by the Republic of Azerbaijan. If successful, it will set an important precedent for claims by hundreds of thousands of Armenians who were forced to abandon their properties in Baku and other parts of Azerbaijan. Similarly, the Chiragov complaint lodged against Armenia could open the door for demands by hundreds of thousands of Azeris who left their homes during the Artsakh conflict. In contrast to the Armenian case, however, most Azeris left at their own free will and sold their properties prior to their departure.
    It cannot be a mere coincidence that the Armenian and Azeri complaints are set to be heard by the Grand Chamber of the ECHR on the same day. If the Court finds a violation of property rights in these two cases, and orders monetary compensation to the applicants, this would likely lead to many similar cases being filed in the future, which could have far-reaching consequences for the economies of Armenia and Azerbaijan, amounting to billions of dollars. Alternatively, the Court could mandate that both countries allow their respective citizens to return to their former homes, which could create new upheavals and security risks in the region. As members of the Council of Europe, Armenia and Azerbaijan are obligated to comply with the decision of the Court.
    Both hearings could be followed live on September 15, on the Court’s website: www.echr.coe.int/echr. The Azeri complaint will be broadcast at 9:15 a.m., while the Armenian one is set for 2:30 p.m. (French time).

  • Why Would Armenians Go to Akhtamar

    Why Would Armenians Go to Akhtamar

    Why Would Armenians Go to Akhtamar, And Become Tools of Turkish Propaganda?

    Ever since the Genocide, after nearly a century of banning Armenian church services, the Turkish government has finally decided to allow a one-time celebration of Mass to be held at the 10th Century Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar Island.

    sassounian32Questions have been raised about the prudence of attending the Sept. 19 church services to which the Turkish government has invited Armenians from around the world, members of the international media and foreign Ambassadors and dignitaries. Those calling for a boycott indicate that the true aim of the Turkish authorities is to score propaganda points with the European Union and the United States, by feigning tolerance towards Christians and other minorities. In reality, successive Turkish governments have carried out a systematic policy of eliminating all visible signs of Armenian presence throughout Western Armenia (Eastern Turkey) for over nine decades, during which more than 2,000 Armenian churches and monasteries have been destroyed or converted into non-religious use. The Holy Cross Church itself was targeted for demolition some years ago, but was saved by the intervention of a local Turkish official.

    Critics of those traveling to Akhtamar also object to the Turkish government’s classification of the historic church as a “museum,” and holding services only once a year. After many requests and complaints, Turkish officials have finally promised to place a cross on the church’s dome.

    There is no reason for Armenians to be grateful to a country that, after confiscating and destroying thousands of churches, is now allowing a religious ceremony in a single church, which it classifies as a museum. This church and thousands of others should belong to the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul, and services should be held as needed, without governmental permission or interference.

    Last week, tempers flared in Armenia when the Holy See of Etchmiadzin announced its intention to send two clergymen to the Sept. 19 ceremonies. His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II usually consults with Armenian officials before taking decisions on matters involving foreign countries. Since he was absent from Armenia while this announcement was made and possibly unaware of the objections raised, His Holiness now has the opportunity to make a final determination regarding the sending of representatives of the Holy See to Akhtamar. As Armenians in Turkey are not permitted to freely express their views, Church officials and lay leaders outside Turkey should take the initiative to condemn the Turkish exploitation of Armenian religious ceremonies.

    The Foreign Ministry of Armenia announced that it has not received an official invitation from Ankara to send a delegation to the Holy Cross Church. It is hoped that if and when such an invitation is extended, the Armenian government would reject it. Yerevan handed the Turks a propaganda victory last year by signing the Armenia-Turkey Protocols. Participating in the Akhtamar church services would be tantamount to presenting the Turks an undeserved additional reward.

    There are indications, however, that this time around the Armenian government may not be as accommodating. Eduard Sharmazanov, spokesman of Pres. Sargsyan’s ruling Republican Party and Member of Parliament, harshly criticized the planned church services, calling it a “publicity stunt” and a “provocation” to mislead the international community.

    In addition, a subcommittee of the Public Council, an advisory body formed by Pres. Sargsyan, issued a statement, urging Armenians to boycott the Holy Cross church services. It called on all self-respecting Armenians to refrain from participating in “this cheap Turkish show.” Giro Manoyan, spokesman of the opposition Armenian Revolutionary Federation in Yerevan, also advocated boycotting the church services and criticized the Holy See of Etchmiadzin for planning to send two clerics to Akhtamar.

    A clear indication of Turkish disinterest in preserving Armenian churches is the interrogation by the secret police of several thousand families who have offered to host Armenian visitors in nearby city of Van on September 19, due to shortage of hotel rooms. Turkish officials are suspicious that host families may be forcefully Turkified or Kurdified remnants of Armenian Genocide victims. By this appalling action, reminiscent of Nazi Germany’s Gestapo tactics, the Turkish regime is showing its obsession to keep track of its citizens’ ethnic origin. In fact, after this racist investigation, a number of families have been officially banned from hosting Diaspora Armenians in Van.

    Armenians who naively plan to attend religious ceremonies in “a museum” would inadvertently legitimize the confiscation of a historic Armenian Church and promote a political show staged by Turkish authorities.

    It is perfectly understandable that Turkish leaders would want to create a positive image in order to facilitate their country’s entry into the European Union, and counter Armenian efforts for the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. It is far less understandable, however, why Armenians would help advance the Turks’ anti-Armenian objectives.

  • Sassounian’s column of July 22, 2010

    Sassounian’s column of July 22, 2010

    Turkey has no Right to Interfere
    In Armenian Patriarch’s Election
    sassounian31
    Although the Treaty of Lausanne is supposed to protect the rights of non-Muslim minorities in Turkey – Armenians, Greeks, and Jews – these rights are routinely violated by the Turkish government.
    Armenians in Turkey, fearing the government’s wrath, rarely dare to object to the repeated violations of their civil rights. Worse still, Istanbul Armenians sometimes invite Turkish officials to intervene in their community’s affairs in order to settle their internal and personal disputes.
    The latest example of such blatant interference was the selection of Archbishop Aram Ateshyan, as Deputy Patriarch, after doctors had diagnosed the current Patriarch of Turkey, Mesrob Mutafian, as suffering from incurable dementia.
    Six months ago, after a two-year delay during which the Patriarchal seat was practically vacant due to Patriarch Mesrob’s incapacity, the Patriarchate’s Religious Council wrote to the Turkish government seeking permission to elect a coadjutor (co-Patriarch). The Council then set up an Election Committee in order to organize such an election once Ankara gave its permission.
    To complicate matters, the Election Committee, exceeding its authority, sent its own letter to Turkish officials, asking for permission to elect a new Patriarch rather than a co-Patriarch.
    Both initiatives made the serious error of inviting the interference of the Turkish government into the Armenian community’s internal religious affairs. Furthermore, both requests contradicted the Patriarchate’s almost 600-year tradition and practice of not having a co-Patriarch, unlike the Holy See of Etchmiadzin, the Catholicosate of Cilicia, and the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem. The request to elect a new Patriarch was also improper, since a new Patriarch can not be elected, while the existing Patriarch is still alive, as Patriarchs are elected for life.
    Taking advantage of the dissension within the Armenian community, the Turkish government finally responded on June 29, allowing the election of a Deputy Patriarch, but not a co-Patriarch or a new Patriarch. By so doing, Turkish officials violated the Armenian community’s religious rights, ironically, at the community’s own request!
    In authorizing a Deputy Patriarch to represent the Patriarchate, the Turkish government has in effect weakened the status of that historic institution. Since Patriarch Mesrob is mentally but not physically incapacitated, he may live for many years, while the Patriarchate is led by a mere Deputy Patriarch. Such an eventuality would serve Turkey’s interests which has always sought to assimilate the Armenians by bureaucratic obstructions, and depriving it of a freely elected and capable religious leader.
    Within 48 hours of the government’s edict, Archbishop Ateshyan, who de facto ran the Patriarchate as Chairman of the 26-member Religious Council, convened a meeting which unanimously elected him Deputy Patriarch. No other clergymen were given a chance to submit their candidacies for that post.
    While Armenians worldwide remained silent, with the exception of Primate of Germany, Archbishop Karekin Bekciyan, a few courageous Armenians in Istanbul dared to raise their voices in protest. The Election Committee, which the Turkish government disbanded, filed a lawsuit against Ankara’s decision, demanding the election of a new Patriarch, not just a Deputy.
    Where do we go from here? Armenian religious and lay leaders outside Turkey should protest the undue interference of the Turkish authorities in the internal affairs of the Armenian Church in violation of the Lausanne Treaty.
    More importantly, Armenians in Turkey should come together and declare that the office of the Deputy Patriarch is a temporary arrangement, not a long-term solution. Without asking for Ankara’s permission, the Armenian community should organize a new election to elect a co-Patriarch, who would then become Patriarch after the demise of the presently incapacitated Patriarch Mutafian.
    Whether the Armenian community decides to elect a new Patriarch or a co-Patriarch is its own business, and not that of Turkish officials. It is important that the Istanbul Armenian community coalesces around a common position and avoids further dissension. If the local Armenian community becomes united and enjoys the backing of Armenians and others around the world, the Turkish government, which prides itself as a secular and democratic regime, would be more reluctant to politically interfere in the Armenian minority’s religious affairs.
  • Sassounian’s column of July 1, 2010

    Sassounian’s column of July 1, 2010

    Turkish Propaganda Campaign, Part II:
    Exploiting Akhtamar Church Once Again
    SASSUN 24

    Readers may recall that the Turkish government embarked on a worldwide publicity stunt in 2007 when it renovated and reopened as a museum the Armenian Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar Island in Lake Van.
    At the time, Turkey had gone to great lengths to lure to the opening ceremonies Armenians from around the world. Turkish officials did not conceal that their real purpose was to exploit this event for propaganda purposes. Even before the “Holy Cross Museum” was inaugurated, a Turkish Parliamentary delegation had arrived in Washington with a bulky photo album. Mehmet Dulger, then Chairman of the Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Commission, relayed the following message to Members of the U.S. Congress: “See, the Turks, whom you accuse of genocide, have renovated an Armenian Church with taxes collected from Turks. And those photos are the evidence.” The photo album was distributed worldwide to all organizations advocating “Armenian genocide claims,” according to the Turkish newspaper Zaman. Furthermore, Turkey invited to the opening of the “Holy Cross Museum” the culture ministers of all countries that had adopted or were considering to adopt resolutions recognizing the Armenian Genocide.
    In my column of March 22, 2007, I had asked that the Turkish government designate Holy Cross, not as a museum, but a Church with a cross on its dome, and place it under the jurisdiction of the Armenian Patriarchate in Turkey. If not, I had urged Armenians to boycott the opening ceremonies, in order to avoid being used as tools for Turkey’s campaign of genocide denial. In the end, the Turkish propaganda effort failed, as only a handful of Armenians from overseas traveled to Lake Van to attend the event.
    Now that Turkish officials have grudgingly allowed church services to be performed for one day only — on Sept. 19, 2010 — and a cross to be placed on the dome of this 10th Century Church, they have embarked on Part II of their publicity campaign. All Turkish Embassies and Consulates worldwide have been instructed to invite large numbers of Armenians to this one-time church service in order to accomplish three objectives: 1) Earn millions of dollars in revenue from 5,000 tourists expected on Sept. 19 and another million visitors during the next year; 2) secure concessions from Armenians in return for Ankara’s “magnanimous gesture”; and 3) score propaganda points with Europeans and Americans by presenting the image of a tolerant Turkish society.
    Hakan Tekin, Turkey’s energetic Consul General in Los Angeles, told “Today’s Zaman” that California’s “one million Armenians” are looking forward to take part in the upcoming religious worship. To impress his bosses in Ankara, Tekin proudly announced that the “one-day church service” has caused “a stir” among the Armenian community in Los Angeles — no doubt the result of his hard work! He expressed the wish that Armenia would take “reciprocal steps” in return for Turkey’s “constructive policy.” Tekin also hoped that such a “normalization process” would have a significant impact on Turkey’s relations with the Armenian Diaspora, “especially with Armenians living in California who are hard-liners.”
    In sparing no efforts to publicize the planned “one-day worship,” the Turkish government has undertaken the following preparations:
    — Special solar panels are being installed on Akhtamar Island, so that tourists can visit the Holy Cross Church by day and night.
    — Since hotels are supposedly fully booked, plans are being made to house tourists in school dormitories and private homes in Van.
    — Large video screens are to be placed outside the Church so the thousands of expected visitors can follow the services, as the building can only accommodate 50 worshipers.
    — A 90-page guidebook will be published in the Armenian language.
    — A 10-day Turkish-Armenian Cultural Festival is planned in Van.
    — The border may be opened for a few days, so that tourists can directly travel from Armenia to Van, rather than spending a dozen hours to get there via Georgia, according to the President of Van Chamber of Commerce.
    I urge all Armenians to boycott this new propaganda ploy, unless Turkish officials take the following steps:

    1. Officially designate Holy Cross as a Church, not a museum, opening it for year-round worship services, rather than for one day only.
    2. Place the Church under the jurisdiction of the Armenian Patriarchate of Turkey, not the Ministry of Tourism.
    3. Allow Divine Liturgy to be celebrated regularly, after Holy Cross Church is properly consecrated in accordance with Armenian religious rites.

    Archbishop Aram Ateshian, Locum Tenens of the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul, is the appropriate religious official to present these demands to the Turkish authorities, without whose participation they would be unable to carry out the September 19 church services and propaganda campaign. It is doubtful, however, that such demands would be met by the Turkish government, given its traditional policy of callous disregard for the rights of the Armenian community in Turkey.
  • Sassounian’s column of June 27, 2010

    Sassounian’s column of June 27, 2010

    Armenians Must Take Bold, Pre-emptive

    Measures to Counter all Hostile Acts

    SASSUN 23

    By Harut Sassounian

    Publisher, The California Courier

    Having been victimized by many conquerors throughout history, Armenians have developed a strong instinct for survival. To stay out of trouble, they have learned to be loyal and even subservient to the states that ruled over them.

    While Armenians gained plenty of “moral victories,” their actual battlefield successes have been few and far between. One has to go back to two thousand years to find a rare example of a conquering Armenian ruler, King Tigran the Great (140-55 BC) whose vast empire extended from the Caspian to the Mediterranean Sea. In the modern era, prior to the Armenian Genocide, Armenian Freedom Fighters (Fedayees) fought back against the murderous Turks and Kurdish mercenaries. During the Genocide, the Armenians of Aintab, Hajin, Musa Dagh, Sassoun, Van, and Zeitoun bravely defended themselves, while 1.5 million of their kinsmen were slaughtered like sheep. The heroic Battle of Sardarabad saved the remnants of the Armenian people in Eastern Armenia, culminating in the establishment of the first Armenian Republic in 1918. Finally, beginning in 1988, brave young men and women battled the much larger and better armed forces of Azerbaijan to liberate Artsakh (Karabagh).

    In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, many western missionaries, tradesmen, writers and adventurers, often described the Armenians they encountered in the Ottoman Empire as “cringing.” Canadian-Armenian website Keghart.com, in an editorial posted last week, quoted Dr. William Goodell’s depiction of the Armenians of Constantinople in 1871: “Four centuries of torture, of oppression, and of suspense have stamped its impress upon an entire community… constant fear, constant agony, constant humiliation have so crushed out every trace of manhood, that they are still cringing, fawning, an abject race. Several generations of happier descendants can alone efface the mental taints acquired in those long years of vassalage.”

    Regrettably, many Armenians have yet to overcome the “slave mentality” — deeply ingrained in their psyche — inherited from ancestors who lived for centuries under foreign yoke. One comes across countless examples of self-effacing behavior in Armenian communities throughout the Diaspora and in Armenia itself. All too often Armenians meekly accept injustices and insults heaped on them by others.

    It is high time that Armenians throw off their shackles and defend their inalienable rights. They must not remain silent in the face of abuse or physical attack, but respond appropriately without resorting to reckless actions that may endanger their communities or the homeland.

    In the United States, for example, when elected officials, journalists or writers distort the facts of the Armenian Genocide, they must be severely criticized and discredited, so others would be warned to refrain from Genocide denial.

    The most recent example of Armenian inaction is the feeble Armenian response to last week’s night-time attack by Azeri forces on Artsakh, causing the deaths of four Armenian soldiers and the wounding of four others. Beyond expressions of sympathy for the victims and condemning the attack, no concrete action was taken by Armenian officials.

    In the aftermath of this vicious and unprovoked attack, Armenia should have announced the cancellation of the next round of negotiations with Azerbaijan over Artsakh. It is completely unacceptable to conduct peace talks, while Azerbaijan is engaged in warfare. Under these circumstances, Armenians have the right to take all possible actions to defend themselves from future attacks. Rather than merely issuing a condemnation, the Armenian side at a time of its choosing should carry out punishing pre-emptive strikes so that Azeris would think long and hard before mounting another attack. Azerbaijan should clearly understand that any further aggression on their part would:

    1.     Cause the suspension of the peace talks, thus delaying the resolution of the conflict rather than expediting the negotiating process.

    2.     Lead Armenia to eventually abandon all peace talks, since it has little to gain from these negotiations. Azerbaijan is the one that desperately needs to negotiate in order to secure concessions from Armenia.

    3.     Signal to the world that the government of Azerbaijan is not interested in finding a negotiated settlement to the conflict and is responsible for its collapse.

    4.     Discredit the good faith effort of the mediating countries – France, Russia and the United States.

    5.     Force Armenia to initiate military action, causing a disproportionate amount of destruction, even damaging the oil pipelines, in order to discourage Azerbaijan from further attacks.

    Armenians must realize that they no longer live in the Ottoman Empire and are no one’s slave. They should shake off their psychological shackles and take all necessary measures to defend their national interest!

  • Sassounian’s column of June 17, 2010

    Sassounian’s column of June 17, 2010

    Growing Turkish Influence in Middle East
    Leads to Restrictions in Armenian Rights

    SASSUN 22

    Turkey’s growing influence in the Middle East, even before the naval confrontation with Israel over Gaza , had prompted some Arab countries to restrict the political rights of local Armenian communities.

    It is feared that the latest Gaza conflict, which catapulted Prime Minister Erdogan to a heroic stature throughout the Islamic world, would result in further limitations on Armenian activities deemed to be “anti-Turkish.”

    In recent months, Jordan , Lebanon and Syria have taken specific actions to place some restrictions on the activities of their Armenian citizens either out of concern for a backlash from Turkey or under direct pressure from Turkish authorities.

    A case in point was the Jordanian government’s cancellation of AGBU’s Middle East Young Professionals Forum that was to take place in Amman , June 3-6. Talin Suciyan, reported in The Armenian Weekly that Jordanian authorities had expressed reservations for the gathering of 150 young Armenians from various parts of the world. Suciyan, who was invited to speak on the “Legacy of Hrant Dink” and the Armenian community in Turkey , stated that the organizers were informed the night before that the forum was canceled by orders “from above.” Some observers attributed the cancellation of the AGBU forum to the agreement to set up a Free Trade Zone, which was to be signed between Jordan , Lebanon , Syria , and Turkey , on June 10. A commentator pointed out the irony of Armenian conferences being allowed to take place in Turkey , but not in Jordan !

    Earlier this year, when a Lebanese TV crew was about to enter Syria to record footage on “the Armenian killing fields” in Der Zor, border guards refused to admit them, even though they had secured the necessary filming permits from the Syrian authorities in advance. This incident took place shortly after CBS aired in its “60 Minutes” program a segment on the Armenian Genocide. The program depicted the protruding bones of Armenian Genocide victims from the desert sands of Der Zor. Turkish officials lodged a complaint with the Syrian government for allowing CBS to film an “anti-Turkish” program in their country.

    The third incident, unexpectedly, took place in Lebanon , home to one of the most influential Armenian communities in the Diaspora. In a surprise move, government officials banned the airing of Eileen Khatchadourian’s music video, “Zartir Vortyag,” a genocide era song calling for resistance against oppression. Even though the song makes no reference to Turkey , Lebanese authorities were concerned that it would negatively affect Lebanese-Turkish relations.

    These are troubling examples of blatant interference with Armenian citizens’ right to free expression. In all three countries, Armenians have long enjoyed the most cordial relations with their respective governments and are viewed by them as loyal citizens. Local Armenian community leaders must strongly protest such arbitrary violations of their basic rights as citizens of these countries. They should consider carrying out a campaign to educate their fellow citizens about the extensive damage Turkey has caused to Arab interests for decades, as a close military ally of Israel .

    Armenians should point out that, despite Erdogan’s blistering anti-Israeli rhetoric, he has not canceled any of the 16 agreements with Israel , including the exchange of intelligence, according to Today’s Zaman newspaper. Sedat Laciner, head of Ankara-based International Strategic Research Organization, told Hurriyet that the military leaders of the two countries had also signed several secret agreements. According to the Middle East magazine, the intelligence agencies of Israel and Turkey have cooperated “since the 1950’s in the fight against radical Islamist groups and Iranian clandestine operations in the region.” Furthermore, Turkey was reported to have allowed Israel “to monitor Syrian military maneuvers from Turkish soil.” In addition, Turkey awarded $1.8 billion in military contracts to Israeli companies. The total trade turnover between the two countries reached $2.5 billion in 2009. More than 900 large Israeli corporations have been operating in Turkey and over 1,000 small Israeli exporters have established commercial ties with it.

    Erdogan has cleverly capitalized on the political vacuum created by the inaction of Arab leaders regarding the plight of the Palestinian people, thus raising his own as well as his party’s political rating in advance of the September 12 referendum on constitutional amendments, and next year’s crucial parliamentary elections. It is a pity that Arab leaders have totally abdicated their own responsibility, allowing an outsider to claim the mantle of Arab leadership!

    Prior to Prime Minister Erdogan’s scheduled visit to Lebanon next month, where he might receive an undeserved hero’s welcome by some Lebanese, Armenians must expose his hypocritical show of solidarity with Palestinians, and convince their fellow citizens that he is acting in his own, rather than Lebanon’s, best interest.