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.

Lawsuit-Happy Turkish Group (TCA) Loses Appeal on Armenian Genocide

The Turkish Coalition of America (TCA) has been on a rampage in recent years, filing lawsuits against scholars, public officials, and civic groups who support the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

Last week, a federal appeals court put an end to TCA’s legal tirade against the University of Minnesota by unanimously upholding a federal court’s decision dismissing TCA’s baseless allegations.

The Turkish advocacy group had filed a lawsuit against Prof. Bruno Chaouat, Director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at the University of Minnesota, for labeling TCA’s website and others as “unreliable.” The university’s webpage had posted the following stern admonition to students: “We do not recommend these sites. Warnings should be given to students writing papers that they should not use these sites because of denial, support by an unknown organization, or contents that are a strange mix of fact and opinion.”

Initially, TCA had complained that the inclusion of TCA’s website on the university’s list of “Unreliable Websites” violated the Turkish group’s freedom of speech. The university rejected TCA’s allegation, although, the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies revised its website on Nov. 18, 2010, removing the “Unreliable Websites” and recommending new resources for genocide research. The university asserted that the revision was not prompted by TCA’s complaint and denied any wrongdoing. On Nov. 24, 2010, Prof. Chaouat posted a statement on the Center’s website explaining that the list of “Unreliable Websites” was removed because he did not want to “promote, even negatively, sources of illegitimate information.”

TCA then filed a lawsuit against the university, its president, and Prof. Chaouat, claiming that including its website on the same list as websites denying the Jewish Holocaust, stigmatized the Turkish organization. The court dismissed the lawsuit.

A three-judge panel of the 8^th circuit federal appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision on May 3, 2012, ruling that the university did not violate TCA’s First Amendment rights, since it neither blocked nor restricted access to the Turkish website.

The judges also rejected the Turkish group’s second claim that it was defamed when the university stated that TCA’s website is “unreliable,” engages in “denial,” presents “a strange mix of fact and opinion,” and is an “illegitimate source of information.” In a sinister attempt to win the lawsuit, TCA claimed that its website did not deny certain underlying historical facts, affirming that “certainly hundreds of thousands of Armenians died.” However, since the Turkish website had alleged that it is “highly unlikely that a genocide charge could be sustained against the Ottoman government or its successor,” the judges ruled in favor of the university asserting that TCA had in fact engaged in “denial.”

TCA’s malicious lawsuit disturbed many US scholars who were worried that this case would set a dangerous precedent and have a chilling effect on academic freedom. The gravity of these concerns had prompted the Middle East Studies Association to demand TCA to withdraw its lawsuit.

Although TCA failed in its bullying tactics against the University of Minnesota, there is no guarantee that this Turkish group will stop suing other academic or civic organizations for refusing to cave in to Turkey’s denialist campaign. It should be noted that TCA spent $630,000 on legal fees out of its 2010 budget of $3.6 million. Significantly, no mention was made in its annual report of the sources of TCA’s funding, except a passing remark that it is “supported entirely by private donations.” The Boston Business Journal reported that Turkish-American Yalcin Ayasli, founder of Hittite Microwave Corp., contributed $30 million to TCA in 2007.

TCA engaged in the following wide ranging activities and political objectives with its $3.6 million budget in 2010:

— Delivered 75 position papers to members of Congress and US opinion leaders;

— Monitored the American media;

— Took a Native American business delegation to Turkey;

— Lobbied the Congress against the Armenian Genocide resolution;

— Advertised in Roll Call and Washington Quarterly;

— Organized Summer internships in Washington for Turkish students;

— Provided scholarships to African-American, Armenian-American, Hispanic American, Native American, and Turkish-American students to study in Turkish universities;

— Awarded grants for academic conferences;

— Offered research fellowships to professors Michael Gunter, Justin McCarthy, Hakan Yavuz, and others;

— Contributed $100,000 grants to each of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations and Federation of Turkish American Associations, and a smaller amount to the Azerbaijan Society of America;

— Spent $630,000 on lawsuits against various entities that support the Armenian Genocide issue;

— Funded congressional trips to Turkey, and

— Filed a report with the US government accusing the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) of being a “hate group.”

Given TCA’s tax-exempt charitable status, the Internal Revenue Service should investigate the legality of this Turkish group’s involvement in such extensive political and lobbying activities.

May 9, 2012
Armenian-Americans Preparing Special Welcome for Pres. Aliyev in New York

How could the warmongering President of Azerbaijan be permitted to chair the UN Security Council, the august body that is supposed to promote peace and security in the world? Unfortunately, such an outrage is possible simply because it is Azerbaijan’s turn to take over the rotating chairmanship of the Security Council in the month of May.

Given Ilham Aliyev’s persistent anti-Armenian rhetoric, no one should be surprised when he transforms the UN podium into a battlefield. Fortunately, his military has neither the training nor the motivation to use its highly sophisticated weapons, including those purchased recently from Israel for $1.6 billion. Given Azerbaijan’s inability to unleash an actual war against Artsakh (Karabagh), and fearing that such a confrontation may end with the loss of more territory and devastate his country’s petroleum industry and oil pipelines, Aliyev is trying to distract his destitute people’s attention by issuing threats and launching a war of words against Armenians!

The problem is that Azeris at home won’t be the only ones listening to Aliyev’s hostile statements. The countries bordering Azerbaijan — Iran, Turkey and Russia, will be taking special note of his saber-rattling at the UN. These neighboring states are alarmed by Azerbaijan acting as a surrogate for Israel in their backyard. Should Israel attack Iran by using Azerbaijan’s air bases, Iran may retaliate by annexing Azerbaijan, since there are many more Azeris in Northern Iran than in all of Azerbaijan.

Aliyev’s UN diatribe will probably include some of the same hostile words that he has used recently in Baku. He called Armenians “fascists” and described them as Azerbaijan’s chief adversary. He then blamed “the Armenian lobby” for being his “number one enemy.” Using language borrowed from anti-Semites, and substituting “Armenians” for “Jews,” Aliyev made the following racist accusation: “The scope of their influence is quite broad. They [Armenians] are represented in the leading print media outlets of various countries. Sometimes they go under different names and hide their ethnic origin.” Aliyev’s on-going hateful speeches provide the best evidence as to why Artsakh Armenians can never again live under his despotic regime.

The Azeri President also objected to Armenians calling Azerbaijan “backward and undemocratic,” which accurately describe his country’s dismal human rights record. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the European Parliament, the State Department, and the Western media have repeatedly criticized Azerbaijan for violating the rights of countless journalists, bloggers, dissidents, opposition members, and common citizens!

Eduard Sharmazanov, Deputy Speaker of Armenia’s Parliament, gave an fitting response to Aliyev last week, when he bragged that “the day will come when the Azerbaijani flag will fly in Khankendi [Stepanakert] and Shusha [Shushi].” Sharmazanov quipped that the Azeri flag can fly in Azerbaijan’s embassy in Artsakh, only after Baku recognizes the independence of the Republic of Artsakh and establishes diplomatic relations with it.

To counter Aliyev’s war of words, Armenian-Americans, along with human rights activists and Azeri dissidents, will certainly raise their voices in protest in front of the UN headquarters in early May, as Azerbaijan’s President begins spewing his usual anti-Armenian venom.

Unfortunately, Aliyev has no plans to come to the West Coast where the large Armenian community would have surely welcomed him with massive protests against his Armenophobic speeches and activities. However, the California Armenian community could take advantage of Aliyev’s US visit by urging the State legislature to adopt Assembly Concurrent Resolution 96 that commemorates the massacres of Armenians in the Azeri cities of Sumgait, Kirovabad, and Baku.

Violating US laws and established diplomatic protocol, the Consulate General of Azerbaijan in Los Angeles sent a lengthy letter to all members of the California State Assembly urging them not to support this resolution. The letter, signed by Ramil Gurbanov, Acting Consul General of Azerbaijan, is obviously drafted by one of its lobbying firms. This piece of propaganda contains many ridiculous statements, but that is not the concern of the “hired guns,” which will do anything to keep their Azeri paymasters happy, as long as they are compensated handsomely for their dirty work.

West Coast Armenian-Americans should contact their State legislators, in particular, the co-authors of Resolution 96 — Assemblymen Felipe Fuentes, Katcho Achadjian, and Mike Gatto, and urge them to bring this bill to a vote while Pres. Aliyev is still on US soil. Meanwhile, East Coast Armenian-Americans should turn out in large numbers in front of the UN headquarters in early May to protest Pres. Aliyev’s racist remarks as “Chairman” of the UN Security Council!

Furthermore, the Armenian community should complain to Federal and State authorities about the Azerbaijani Consulate’s illegal interference in internal US affairs and demand expulsion of Ramil Gurbanov from the United States as “persona non grata.”

April 29, 2012
FOLLOW FOX TV ON APRIL 24TH – COMMENT ON ARMENIAN ISSUE

Dr. Israel Charny and Harut Sassounian to appear on Fox TV on April 24.

Dr. Israel Charny, invited by the United Armenian Council to speak at this year’s commemoration of the Armenian Genocide in Montebello, and Harut Sassounian, a member of the UAC, will appear for around 5 minutes on Fox TV’s evening news hour on Tuesday, April 24, to speak about the Armenian Genocide.

The interview will be aired as follows (West Coast time):

1) KTTV Channel 11 (10-11 p.m., on April 24). It will be repeated later that night, 1-2 a.m.

2) The interview will be repeated again on Channel 13 (11-11:30 p.m., on April 24).

April 23, 2012
Two Faces of Turkey: Veneer of Gentility Masking Ruthlessness

When Turkey’s Foreign Minister met secretly with a group of Armenians in Washington last month, he wooed them with his sly smile and sugar-coated words. This was the fake facade of traditional Turkish diplomacy.

Last week, Turkey’s UN Ambassador in New York revealed the nasty and aggressive face of his government. Upon learning that a symposium on the Armenian Genocide was going to be held at the UN on April 12, Turkey’s Permanent Representative filed a protest with the Secretary General’s office, trying to disrupt the event.

Organized by the Association for Trauma Outreach & Prevention (ATOP), the event was titled: “Toward Preventing Genocide, Nations Acknowledging their Dark History: Psychosocial, Economic and Cultural Perspectives.” Following screening of Dr. J. Michael Hagopian’s documentary, “The River Ran Red,” the attendees heard addresses from filmmaker Carla Garapedian, Dr. Dennis Papazian, Prof. Ervin Staub, and Garen Nazarian, Armenia’s UN Ambassador.

Encouraged by Turkey’s 2007 success in obstructing a reference to the Armenian Genocide in a UN exhibit on Rwanda, the Turkish Ambassador tried to force the UN to cancel last week’s Armenian Genocide symposium. Fortunately, Armenia’s UN Mission, official sponsor of the event, stood its ground and the symposium took place as planned, albeit with some minor disturbances.

At the start of the event, two Turkish diplomats entered the meeting room without an invitation, and repeatedly attempted to disrupt the proceedings. They kept on shouting, accusing the speakers of defaming Turkey, and refused to comply with the organizer’s request to submit all comments and questions in writing. As the commotion continued, UN security officers were called in, and the two undiplomatic Turkish diplomats left the hall, inanely shouting: “we are the security, we own the security, and we pay for the security!”

In his introductory remarks, Amb. Nazarian observed that “97 years ago, a state-devised plan unleashed a crime whose magnitude and consequences were unparalleled not only in the history of the Armenian nation but also in the history of the world. The plan of extermination of the Armenians was implemented by the Ottoman Empire’s state machine through all its structures and carried out with exact instructions.”

Prof. Papazian’s remarks were titled: “Sovereignty, Nationalism, Racism vs. Humanism and Intellectual Freedom: The Causes and Cures of Genocide.” He expressed his discontent “that the Armenian Genocide is not recognized by the present day Turkish government as a crime committed by its predecessor government under the dictatorship of the Committee for Union and Progress”; “that the people of Turkey are denied free access to accurate sources because of Article 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code which makes it a crime to insult Turkishness”; and “that such [Ottoman] collections as the confiscated properties archives and the military archives are not open to inspection by objective scholars.”

Prof. Staub spoke about “Overcoming Evil: Preventing Genocide and Creating Peaceful Societies.” He stated that “acknowledgement by perpetrators, bystanders, and the world in general of a group’s suffering has great value for both healing and reconciliation.” However, “perpetrators rarely, and only with great difficulty, acknowledge their acts and show regret,” because of “their profound devaluation of the victims, their ideology, and their unacknowledged shame.”

Carla Garapedian explored the “Economic Consequences of Acknowledging the Genocide.” She related that J. Michael Hagopian had recorded the testimonies of genocide survivors so that their voices would be heard someday at an international tribunal deciding what restitution Turkey would have to pay to heirs of the victims.

Not counting the value of the properties, lands and other assets confiscated from Armenian victims of the genocide perpetrated by the Turkish government, Garapedian assessed as $15 billion the restitution value of the 1.5 million Armenians who had perished. Her estimate is based on Germany’s $60 billion restitution payment for the six million Jewish victims of the Holocaust since 1952. Garapedian concluded by suggesting that no state should profit from violating the law and unjustly enrich itself, asserting that a criminal state should not be allowed to keep the fruits of its crime.

This week, Dr. Ani Kalayjian, President of ATOP, sent a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon complaining about the “disruptive, unprofessional, and arrogant behavior” of the two Turkish diplomats. She wondered how the UN could bring peace to the world, when it cannot establish order at an event held at its own headquarters!

April 18, 2012
Turkey’s Foreign Minister In Search of ‘Soft’ Armenians
Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkey’s ‘man on the run,’ has added to his extremely busy schedule the new task of travelling around the globe trying to recruit ‘sensible’ Armenians.

Davutoglu has embarked on such a desperate initiative after the failure of all Turkish attempts to divide and conquer the Armenians and weaken their resolve to pursue their just cause. The Turkish Foreign Minister openly acknowledged that his urgent efforts are prompted by the looming 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide that hangs like a Damoclean Sword over his country.

After the collapse of the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) and Turkey’s futile attempts to seek ‘friendly’ Armenians around the world, Ankara gave up on the Diaspora altogether and turned its attention to a ‘softer target’ — the Government of Armenia.

Initially, Turkey registered some success when the Armenia-Turkey Protocols were signed by both countries, under the guise of opening their mutual border. However, this latest attempt to drive a wedge between ‘soft’ Armenian officials and ‘hard-line’ Diasporans also failed, when the much-touted Protocols were not ratified.

Realizing that Turkey had to deal with the Diaspora, not just Armenia to resolve genocide related issues, Davutoglu once again turned his attention to Armenian communities worldwide. During a March 24, 2010 CNN-Turk interview, he announced that Turkish authorities would initiate a dialog with ‘sensible’ Diaspora Armenians.

To pursue this stratagem, in April 2010 Davutoglu met in Washington with Turkey’s ambassadors to the United States and Canada, and Consul Generals in Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, and Toronto. He instructed them to contact Armenians who are open to dialog, and to avoid ‘hard-line groups,’ according to the Turkish ‘Today’s Zaman’ newspaper.

A few weeks later, ‘Hurriyet’ reported that the Foreign Ministry issued a 10-point action plan, instructing Turkish diplomats worldwide to:
1. Invite and involve local Armenians in Turkish events;
2. Participate in Armenian community activities;
3. Contact Armenians who are materially benefiting from making genocide claims as well as recent immigrants from Turkey; and invite to Turkey those who harbor anti-Turkish sentiments;
4. Establish good relations with Armenian diplomats and attend their official events;
5. Accept speaking opportunities at local community and university events to explain Turkey’s position on Armenian genocide claims;
6. Establish contacts with local academics to explain to them Turkey’s position;
7. Develop contacts with diplomats of countries neighboring Turkey and familiarize them with Turkey’s position on Armenian genocide claims;
8. Advocate the creation of ‘a joint commission of historians’;
9. Promote normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations;
10. Emphasize that the peaceful resolution of the Karabagh conflict would benefit Armenian-Turkish relations.
In December 2011, Turkey announced a revised concept of ‘Diaspora’ to include all descendants of ‘Anatolia,’ regardless of their religion or sect. Davutoglu instructed all Turkish diplomats to hold ‘face-to-face’ meetings with such individuals in order to discuss their ‘joint history’ and “the suffering of all Ottoman people during the incidents of the World War I era.”

Dissatisfied with the efforts of his diplomats, Davutoglu decided to take matters into his own hands. Last month, he spent several hours in Washington meeting privately with several Armenians and non-Armenians from the Los Angeles area to discuss ‘Armenian-Turkish reconciliation.’ The Turkish Foreign Minister also invited the attendees to come to Ankara and bring along other ‘prominent’ Armenians. Since then, Davutoglu has held similar meetings elsewhere.

Meanwhile, another Turkish-initiated group on ‘Armenian-Turkish reconciliation’ will be launched on April 12 in Washington. The host group ‘HasNa’ is set to meet at the offices of Arnold & Porter, a lobbying firm hired by the Turkish government. The attendees will include some Armenians and Turks, U.S. government officials, members of the media, non-governmental organizations, academics, and others.

Armenians who choose to get involved in Turkish recruitment schemes could well be seeking fame or fortune, or are well-intentioned, but naive do-gooders. However, regardless of the reasons for their involvement in such questionable practices, they should be mindful of the consequences of their actions:
1. Dialog for the sake of dialog could do more damage than good to the Armenian Cause. The Turkish government would exploit such efforts to create the false impression that Armenians and Turks are in the process of reconciling, thereby derailing the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by other countries.
2. Unless a specific positive outcome is agreed upon in advance, there is a good chance that the Armenian participants would end up holding an empty bag.
3. Only Armenian officials and credible leaders with diplomatic expertise should be negotiating with shrewd and skilled Turkish diplomats. Otherwise, Turkish officials will cleverly cut a deal with those who are bound to be less demanding and more accommodating.
April 10, 2012
Turks and Azeris Alarmed that Tuvalu May Recognize Republic of Artsakh

March 16, 2012 was like any other day at the United Nations, when the representatives of Armenia and Tuvalu signed a joint declaration establishing diplomatic relations. Tuvalu is a tiny state in the South Pacific, much smaller than Manhattan, with a population barely over 10,000! Who would have thought that such a routine announcement would alarm Turkey and Azerbaijan?

This news item would have been ignored by the world media were it not for the “acute” eyes of Ugur Ergan, the “astute” reporter of the Turkish Hurriyet newspaper. He brought Tuvalu out of its obscurity for a short while, making it the most talked about country in Turkish and Azerbaijani circles. Ergan quoted unnamed Ankara officials as stating that Armenia had established diplomatic relations and offered tons of money to Tuvalu, so that it would be the first country to recognize Artsakh (Nagorno Karabagh) as an independent state!

Ergan further disclosed that Ankara is “disturbed” by Tuvalu’s possible recognition of Artsakh, suspecting that Armenia would do what Turkish officials have done for decades — buying political favors in return for lucrative gifts. They attribute to others what they routinely practice themselves. As the Holy Bible states, they see the splinter in someone else’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in their own eye!

Even more alarmed were Azerbaijan’s officials who assumed that Tuvalu would shortly recognize Artsakh. Aydin Mirzazade, a Parliamentarian from the ruling New Azerbaijan Party, in an interview with reporter I. Isabalayeva, ridiculed Tuvalu’s readiness “to recognize any state, even a non-existent country, for a small amount of money.” Mirzazade understands well the practice of buying favors. It has been widely reported that Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister put his country’s immense petrodollars to “good use” last year by providing generous financial inducements to poor nations in exchange for their votes for a UN Security Council seat.

Azerbaijan was following its elder brother’s, Turkey’s, footsteps at vote buying at the UN. Gareth Jenkins reported in the Eurasian Daily Monitor that the Turkish government had enticed to Istanbul the leaders of Tuvalu, Tonga, Nauru, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands, Cook Islands, Papua New Guinea, Palau, Fiji, Micronesia, and Samoa to secure their votes for Turkey’s membership in the UN Security Council. Those who have never heard of these Pacific islands should not feel embarrassed. Turkey’s former Deputy Prime Minister Abdullatif Shener had the honesty to confess: “I had never heard of the names of some of them before, but they all have a vote at the UN.” Turkey’s scheme succeeded. It gained a seat on the UN Security Council in 2008 by offering tens of millions of dollars to dozens of little-known countries in far-flung corners of the world.

Yilmaz Ozdil, a more forthright commentator for Hurriyet, boldly countered Ergan’s report, confirming that Turkey was the first to offer “bribes” to Tuvalu and many others. Ozdil disclosed that, to obtain a seat on the UN Security Council, Turkey provided as kickbacks:

— medicines to Angola, Ethiopia, Gambia, Sudan, and the Comoros;

— trade center to Zimbabwe;

— stables to Mauritania;

— drinking water network to Niger;

— water wells to Ethiopia;

— school kits to Ghana;

— field hospital to Sudan;

— cattle-breeding technology to Mozambique and Mauritania;

— electric grid to Benin;

— smelting house to Gambia;

— training schools to Eritrea, Togo, Lesotho, and Uganda;

— police training to Guinea;

— vaccines to Mali;

— humanitarian assistance to Tanzania and Chad;

— school to Congo;

— sewer system to Liberia and Sierra Leone;

— VIP minibus to Palau;

— computers to Antigua;

— wined and dined visiting Prime Minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, stuffed his pocket with gifts, and placed a private jet at his disposal to fly to Izmir;

— donated soccer balls and pumps to Tuvalu.

Another Turkish commentator, Deniz Zeyrek, wrote a hilarious column in the newspaper Radikal, headlined: “Tuvalu: give our soccer balls back.” To buy votes at the UN, Zeyrek reported that Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu asked the visiting Tuvalu Prime Minister if his country needed anything. Tuvalu officials made a surprising request — that their children liked to play soccer, but had no balls. Turkey immediately dispatched to Tuvalu hundreds of soccer balls along with pumps. Tuvalu then complied with Turkey’s demand, supporting its bid to join the UN Security Council.

Zeyrek concluded his article with the following sarcastic question: “Will Turkey now ask for its balls back, if Tuvalu recognizes Karabagh’s independence?”

April 3, 2012