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.

  • Why Does Pres. Obama Torture Himself And Armenians Every April 24?

    Why Does Pres. Obama Torture Himself And Armenians Every April 24?

     

     sassounian3
    For some unknown reason, the President of the most powerful nation on earth feels compelled to put himself through a strange and unnecessary ritual every April 24. Weeks in advance of that date, Pres. Barack Obama orders his White House staff to scour the dictionary to come up with series of words other than genocide to describe the Armenian Genocide.
     
    For the fourth year in a row, the President’s resourceful aides have not disappointed him. For this year’s “Armenian Remembrance Day,” they have come up with a dozen words that describe the Armenian Genocide without using that specific term. When they ran out of substitute English words for genocide, the President’s hardworking wordsmiths turned to an Armenian term, “Meds Yeghern,” without providing its English translation (Great Calamity), so no one other than Armenians would understand what Pres. Obama is speaking about!
    Here are some of the words that the President’s men offered this year: ‘Atrocities,’ ‘brutally massacred,’ ‘marched to their deaths,’ ‘unspeakable suffering,’ ‘perished,’ ‘dark chapters of history,’ ‘what occurred in 1915,’ ‘facts of the past,’ ‘lives that were taken,’ ‘senselessly suffered and died,’ and finally, ‘the darkness of the Meds Yeghern.’ Anything but genocide!
    Engaging in verbal gymnastics on genocide is unacceptable and unbecoming of the office of the President of the United States. Could such deplorable efforts be explained as a feeble attempt by Obama to minimize his broken promises? As Presidential candidate, he repeatedly and solemnly pledged that he would recognize the Armenian Genocide. But when he became President, he hid behind insulting statements issued in his name year after year!
     
    In his last four annual statements, Pres. Obama avoided carrying out his campaign promises by claiming: “I have consistently stated my own view of what occurred in 1915. My view of that history has not changed.” But, he never bothered to tell the American public what exactly were his views in the past, what his views are today, and what happened in 1915! He cleverly downplays the significance of the Armenian Genocide by calling it “my own view of what happened in 1915.” Yet, on January 19, 2008, then presidential candidate Obama, seeking the Armenian community’s campaign contributions and votes, had no qualms to call these events by their proper name. Back then, he confidently stated that “the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view,” and promised that “as President,” he would “recognize the Armenian Genocide.”
     
    Sadly, Pres. Obama is not the only member of his administration who has not kept his campaign pledge on this issue. Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, two of the highest officials of the country, had made similar promises to recognize the Armenian Genocide when they were Senators and presidential candidates. While Vice President Biden has remained eerily silent, Mrs. Clinton has gone from being a proponent of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide to its leading opponent. After becoming Secretary of State, she actively lobbied to defeat a proposed congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide!
    After four years of this senseless charade by the White House, the Armenian American community has two good reasons for asking Pres. Obama not to make any more statements on the Armenian Genocide.
     
    First, by breaking his word for four years in a row and playing verbal games with genocide, Obama has lost the moral standing to speak on this highly emotional and painful topic! How can the President of the United States lecture anyone around the world about human rights, democracy, and justice, when he himself has so crudely violated the trust of his own people and lost all credibility? He should stop torturing himself, his staff, and Armenians worldwide by not issuing insulting “Remembrance Day” statements. It makes no sense for Pres. Obama to issue an annual statement that Armenians don’t want, don’t like, and are offended by it!
    Second, another U.S. President, Ronald Reagan, has already acknowledged the Armenian Genocide in a Presidential Proclamation in 1981. The Armenian Genocide was also recognized by the House of Representative in 1975 and 1984, by the Justice Department in an official filing with the World Court in 1951, and by 42 U.S. states. Therefore, the Armenian community has no need to beg Pres. Obama or any other political candidate to recognize that which is already and repeatedly recognized. 
    Genocide is too sacred to be a subject of crass political trading. Those who acknowledge the undeniable fact of the Armenian Genocide do so, not as a favor to the victims, but to restore their own credibility and moral integrity!
  • Clinton Should Resign for Making Offensive Remarks on Armenian Genocide

    Clinton Should Resign for Making Offensive Remarks on Armenian Genocide

     sassounian31
    How many times can Secretary of State Hillary Clinton break her pledge and make insulting remarks on the Armenian Genocide before she is called a liar and forced to resign?
    Armenian-Americans are fed up with Mrs. Clinton and her boss Barack Obama who also has not kept his promises on the Armenian Genocide. And the problem transcends their views on the Armenian Genocide. The Obama Administration has failed the Armenian-American community on many issues, including cutting foreign aid to Armenia, not backing Artsakh’s right to self determination, and pressuring Armenia to sign a treaty with Turkey that runs counter to its national interests.
    In this column, we shall focus on Secretary Clinton, and address our displeasure with Pres. Obama policies later, in the context of the upcoming presidential elections.
    As U.S. Senator, Mrs. Clinton co-sponsored a resolution calling for recognition of the Armenian Genocide. In 2006 and 2008, joining then Sen. Obama, she sent letters to Pres. George W. Bush, describing the Armenian Genocide as a “systematic and deliberate campaign of genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire in 1915…. The victims of the Genocide deserve our remembrance and their rightful place in history.”
    On January 24, 2008, as a Presidential candidate, Mrs. Clinton declared in a written statement that the “horrible events perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against Armenians constituted a clear case of genocide. …Our common morality and our nation’s credibility as a voice for human rights challenge us to ensure that the Armenian Genocide be recognized and remembered by the Congress and the President of the United States.”
    After becoming Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton must have suffered a bout of total amnesia. During a January 26, 2012 Town Hall meeting at the State Department, she reversed her earlier characterization of “clear case of genocide,” to “a matter of historical debate.” While the historical facts of the Armenian Genocide remain unchanged, what must have changed is Secretary Clinton’s moral fortitude to tell the truth!
    Clinton’s distorted moral compass outraged the Armenian-American community. The Armenian Assembly of America sent a letter to Pres. Obama complaining about Mrs. Clinton’s “untenable” statement, and the Armenian National Committee of America asked the Secretary to retract her deeply offensive position, parroting Turkey’s revisionist view of the Armenian Genocide.
    On February 28, over 60 House members from both parties sent a joint letter to Mrs. Clinton, expressing their “deeply held concerns” regarding her January 26 statement “mischaracterizing the Armenian Genocide.” They urged the Secretary to disavow her “ill-considered statement” and reaffirm her previous commitment to recognize the Armenian Genocide.
    On February 29, Cong. Adam Schiff confronted the Secretary of State during her testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee. Recalling her earlier truthful statements on the Armenian Genocide, the Congressman bluntly asked: “Is there any question that you have that the facts of that tragic period between 1915 and 1923 constitute genocide? Do you have any different view on the subject now than you did as a U.S. Senator?” When Secretary Clinton responded with evasive and euphemistic answers, Cong. Schiff chided her: “This is, tragically, very much the line of the Turkish government!”
    In her March 1 response to the letters from the Armenian Assembly and ANCA, the Secretary once again used euphemisms to avoid the term Armenian Genocide, and urged “Armenia and Turkey to work together to address their shared history.” This is as morally repugnant as avoiding the term Holocaust and urging Jews to work out their differences with neo-Nazis!
    Mrs. Clinton’s March 1 letter also describes her 2010 visit to “the memorial at Tsitsernakaberd” in Armenia “as a sign of respect for those who lost their lives during this tragedy.” There are two misrepresentations in this single sentence: she refers to the Genocide as “tragedy,” and avoids calling the “Armenian Genocide Monument” by its proper name. Furthermore, the Secretary did not invite the international media to cover her “low profile” visit to the Armenian Genocide Monument, not to upset the “delicate feelings” of Turkish denialists; and to completely downplay the significance of the visit, the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan issued an imprudent press release, describing her brief stop at the “memorial” as “a private,” not official visit.
    If Secretary Clinton had made similarly offensive comments on the Holocaust, she would have been dismissed from her job on the same day. Armenian-Americans should demand no less. Fortunately, Mrs. Clinton has announced that she will be retiring at the end of this year. We say, goodbye and good riddance!
  • Constitutional Council’s Scandalous Rejection of French Genocide Bill

    Constitutional Council’s Scandalous Rejection of French Genocide Bill

    sassounian3

     

     

     

     

    Armenians in France and throughout the world reacted with utter indignation against the Constitutional Council’s scandalous decision rejecting the Genocide denial bill.

     

     

    The National Assembly and Senate recently adopted a bill that would set a penalty of a year in jail and $60,000 fine for anyone denying the genocides recognized by the French government. France officially recognizes the Jewish Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide.

     

     

    Even though the bill did not specifically mention the Armenian Genocide, the Turkish government did everything short of declaring war against France to undermine its adoption, thereby identifying itself as the perpetrator of one of the two genocides. After failing to block the adoption of the bill by the two chambers of the French legislature, Turkey and Azerbaijan, its junior partner in the crime of genocide denial, left no stone unturned to have the law declared unconstitutional.

     

     

    Turkey applied all kinds of pressure on French legislators to collect the necessary 60 or more signatures needed to appeal the adopted bill to the Constitutional Council. Ironically, while the Turkish government was announcing a boycott of French companies, a Turkish group was hiring a high-powered French lobbying firm to assist in the hunt for signatures. Azerbaijan joined in this sinister lobbying effort by inviting six French Senators to Baku to collect their rewards for having signed the appeal! By hook or crook, the Turkish authorities and their French surrogates succeeded in enticing 142 of over 900 members of the French legislature to file an appeal with the Constitutional Council on January 31, 2012.

     

     

    Clearly, this was an unacceptable intrusion into France’s domestic affairs. Rather than allowing the Turkish Ambassador to pressure members of the legislature to sign the appeal to the Constitutional Council, France should have expelled him for violating his diplomatic mandate! Turkey should not be permitted to dictate French laws!

     

     

    The Constitutional Council is a hodge-podge of 11 retired individuals of various backgrounds. It includes two French Presidents, two judges, three legislators, and four government officials. A major controversy erupted when a French newspaper revealed that several members of the Council, including its Chairman, had serious conflict of interest problems in reaching a fair decision. Some had made prejudicial statements on this issue while serving in the legislature, others have business ties with Turkey, and most shockingly, one of them, Hubert Haenel, is a member of the Bosphorus Institute — a French-Turkish “think tank” that lobbied against the genocide denial bill!

     

     

    Under such scandalous conditions, most Council members should have disqualified themselves from sitting in judgement on this issue. After these embarrassing disclosures, two Council members withdrew from deliberating on the genocide bill, and former Pres. Jacques Chirac was reportedly too ill to attend the session.

     

     

    The Constitutional Council’s eight remaining members ruled on February 28, 2012 that the bill penalizing genocide denial approved by the Parliament and Senate was unconstitutional because it violated French laws on freedom of speech!

     

     

    This was a shocking decision for two reasons: 1) Several members of the Constitutional Council violated the law themselves by sitting in judgment on an issue in which they had a clear bias or conflict of interest; and 2) They ruled the genocide denial bill to be unconstitutional supposedly because it restricted free speech, while leaving intact another law that penalized denial of the Holocaust. The Council members failed to explain why penalizing denial of the Armenian Genocide was a restriction on freedom of expression while penalizing denial of the Jewish Holocaust was not! All genocide victims merit equal protection under the law. There should be no double standards!

     

     

    Unlike the United States, France has several laws that restrict freedom of expression. Why is that when it comes to punishing deniers of the Armenian Genocide, the Council members all of a sudden become staunch defenders of free speech?

     

     

    French Armenians should take up all legal and political measures to reverse the Council’s unfair and illegal decision. They could file a lawsuit with the European Court of Human Rights against the Constitutional Council as well as introduce a new bill in the French legislature.

     

     

    Since the two leading French Presidential candidates have pledged to bring up this bill again after the upcoming elections, this issue will not go away until a law is adopted penalizing Armenian Genocide denial. Turkey must not be allowed to export its denialist policies to European shores!
  • How to Counter Appeals Court’s Ruling Against Insurance Claims

    How to Counter Appeals Court’s Ruling Against Insurance Claims

    sassounian35

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The federal Court of Appeals issued a shocking decision last week. In a unanimous ruling, it struck down a California law that had allowed heirs of Armenian Genocide victims to sue life insurance companies for unpaid claims.

     

     

     

    Acknowledging its reliance on the “rarely invoked doctrine” of “field preemption,” the Court judged the state law to be unconstitutional, claiming that it intruded into the federal government’s foreign policy prerogative.

     

     

     

    The Appeals Court thus annulled a law passed by the California legislature in 2000, which had extended first to 2010 and then to 2016, the deadline for Armenian Genocide heirs to sue life insurance companies. On the basis of that law, California attorneys filed lawsuits against the New York Life and French AXA insurance companies. Both lawsuits were settled out of court for a total payment of $37.5 million.

     

     

     

    In 2003, Armenian plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit in U.S. federal court against German life insurance companies. Rather than fulfilling their long overdue contractual obligations, these companies sought the lawsuit’s dismissal, arguing that the reference to the Armenian Genocide in the State law was an encroachment on the federal government’s foreign policy powers. After several appeals, a panel of 11 federal judges dismissed the lawsuit against the German companies on February 23, 2012. This decision, however, does not undo the settlements reached earlier with New York Life and AXA.

     

     

     

    I believe the Appeals Court’s decision is highly flawed for the following reasons:

     

     

     

    1) The Court took the unusual position that the State law constituted an intrusion into the federal government’s foreign policy domain, even in the absence of any conflict between the two. In fact, the State of California and the federal government are in agreement on the genocide issue, since the House of Representatives recognized the Armenian Genocide in 1975 and 1984, Pres. Reagan acknowledged it in a Presidential Proclamation in 1981, and most importantly, the U.S. Justice Department cited the Armenian case as an example of genocide in an official report submitted to the World Court in 1951.

     

     

     

    2) The Appeals Court overstepped its judicial bounds by paying undue attention to Turkish denials, pressures, and blackmail, and charging that the California statute “imposes the politically charged label of ‘genocide’ on the actions of the Ottoman Empire (and, consequently, present-day Turkey) and expresses sympathy for ‘Armenian Genocide victims.’” This assertion is totally untrue, as the California law makes no reference to “present-day Turkey.” Delving further into political arguments rather than sound legal judgments, the Appeals Court quoted from newspaper articles — that were not part of the court record — to illustrate Turkey’s angry reaction to the French bill on penalizing genocide denial and Ankara’s rejection of the genocide label.

     

     

     

    3) The Court could have severed the reference to genocide from the California statute, while keeping valid the legitimate demands of life insurance claimants, since the purpose of the lawsuit was the recovery of insurance benefits, not asserting genocide.

     

     

     

    Armenians should not be discouraged and not give up the struggle for their legitimate rights, despite this temporary legal setback. Here are some possible steps that could be taken to remedy the situation:

     

     

     

    1) File an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, even though the High Court hears only a very small percentage of the cases submitted to it.

     

     

     

    2) Ask the California legislature to pass a new law that would broaden the category of possible claimants, in order to overcome the Appeals Court’s objection that the existing law is “for a narrowly defined class of claims.”

     

     

     

    3) Lobby the U.S. Congress to pass similar legislation allowing lawsuits against delinquent insurance companies.

     

     

     

    4) Launch a new Armenian political initiative at the federal level, seeking the establishment of a “Presidential Advisory Commission on Armenian Genocide Assets,” similar to the existing commission on the Holocaust, which would use U.S. governmental channels rather than the courts to recover genocide-era assets.

     

     

     

    5) Embark on a worldwide campaign to protest and boycott German insurance companies that refuse to live up to their financial and moral obligations. Stage demonstrations in front of German companies’ offices in different countries until they realize that they would lose more business by ignoring the Armenian claims than paying the amounts owed to heirs of life insurance beneficiaries. Furthermore, Armenians must demand that Germany, Turkey’s ally during World War I, passes a law mandating that German companies pay delinquent insurance claims.

     

     

     

    Clearly, the pursuit of Armenian demands is more of a marathon than a sprint! Armenians must persist in their struggle and overcome all obstacles until their long overdue quest for justice is realized.
  • Sassounian’s column of February 23, 2012

    Sassounian’s column of February 23, 2012

    sassounian32
    Egemen Bagish: Turkey’s
    Minister of Genocide Denial
    Even though all Turkish government officials routinely deny the Armenian Genocide, one particular minister has turned denial into a full-time job. Ironically, as Minister for European Union Affairs, Egemen Bagish has harmed Turkey’s prospects for EU membership more than any of its critics!
    Although Bagish has been making zany statements ever since his ministerial appointment two years ago, his recent blunder in Zurich made headlines around the world. The Turkish Minister arrogantly dared Swiss authorities to arrest him after boasting that “the events of 1915 were not genocide!” Switzerland has a law that penalizes genocide denial, similar to the law now pending in France. A Swiss prosecutor is investigating Bagish’s words and his diplomatic status to see if charges could be filed against him for genocide denial.
    Of course, it does not take much courage to hide behind the cover of diplomatic immunity and make Don Quixotic statements, challenging the laws of other countries. If Minister Bagish were truly a macho man, he would waive his immunity, go to Switzerland, and publicly deny the Armenian Genocide. However, it appears that the feisty Minister has chickened out! After boasting that he would gladly return to Switzerland to deny the Armenian Genocide again, he facetiously declared that he would not go to Switzerland, since he has no money in Swiss banks! The real reason for the Minister’s abrupt change of heart is his fear of getting arrested should the Swiss prosecutor rule that his diplomatic immunity does not protect him from the crime of genocide denial.
    How much longer can Prime Minister Erdogan tolerate Mr. Bagish’s clownish antics that make Turkey look like a rogue state in the eyes of the world? Admiring his fluency in English, the Prime Minister had offered this 41-year-old former New York college student a top ministerial post, not realizing what a liability his loose tongue would prove to be!
    Just as Pres. George W. Bush’s nonsensical statements became known as “Bushisms,” the world now has a rich collection of “Bagishisms!” Here is a sampling of his preposterous remarks:
    — “What happened in 1915 can’t be classified as genocide as far as I’m concerned, but I was not around in 1915!”
    — “I’m a politician. My job is to determine the future, not the past!”
    — “In recent years, every one has seen that more Europeans are moving to Turkey than vice versa.”
    — During a recent conference in Qatar, Minister Bagish became the laughing stock of the audience, when he proudly announced that “Europe” is a Turkish word! The Greek Ambassador to Qatar angrily responded: “Europa was one of the lovers of Zeus in Greek mythology, everyone knows that!”
    — Minister Bagish does not seem to realize that he is contradicting himself by asking other countries to open their archives to see if there was an Armenian genocide, while concluding that there was no genocide! The least he could do is have the decency to keep his mouth shut until the Ottoman archives are fully open. Meanwhile, the archives of other countries have been open for decades.
    — Rattling off the witty Americanisms he picked up in the streets of New York, such as “a day late and a dollar short,” Bagish told Euronews: “This is execution without trial. Calling the 1915 events a genocide based solely on information we have right now comes from a lobby that nurtures malicious hatred.”
    — “Germany was a strong ally of the Armenians in 1915, so the Germans should open their archives and give documents to historians for examination,” Bagish told EU Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fule, according to Hurriyet newspaper. Bagis made two factual errors in one sentence: Germany was the ally of the Ottoman Empire, not Armenians; and the German archives have been open for years!
    — “There’s no force that could bring about the arrest of any Turkish Minister,” Bagish bragged to journalists. Why is he then afraid to waive his diplomatic immunity and then deny the Armenian Genocide in Switzerland?
    — Bagish keeps on repeating the falsehood that the Armenian government “did not have the courage to respond to Prime Minister Erdogan’s letter requesting the formation of a commission of historians to study the Armenian Genocide.” In fact, the then Pres. Kocharian did answer, suggesting that all outstanding issues between the two countries be resolved in the larger context of government to government relations. It was the Turkish Prime Minister that did not respond to Armenia’s President.

    While Minister Bagish has diplomatic immunity, the rest of Turkey’s population does not enjoy such a privilege. It may be a good idea to accord immunity to all 72 million Turks in order to shield them from prosecution, when they utter the words “Armenian Genocide” in Turkey!

  • Bryza Confesses his Love for Turkey, Confirming his anti-Armenian Bias

    Bryza Confesses his Love for Turkey, Confirming his anti-Armenian Bias

     

     sassounian311
     
    It appears that my prediction about Matt Bryza leaving the State Department and working as a lobbyist is coming true. After his brief stint as Ambassador to Azerbaijan came to a premature end, Bryza disclosed to the Turkish Hurriyet newspaper last week that he will be “advising people, government, and private sector on major investment projects.”
     
    It remains to be seen whether Bryza’s planned activities fall within the legal definition of “lobbying” and “advocacy” on behalf of third parties, such as Turkish and Azeri entities, given the restrictions imposed by U.S. law on former government officials. Depending on the specific type of activity, there is either a one or two-year ban. However, in the case of “very senior officials” such as Bryza, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, there is a lifetime ban. He would certainly be prohibited from having contact with former State Department colleagues on behalf of other parties, regarding official matters with which he was involved as a government employee.
     
    In his interview with Hurriyet, Bryza validates in his own words the accusation that he was biased and unprofessional, while acting as the American Co-Chair of OSCE’s Minsk Group of mediators on the Karabagh (Artsakh) conflict. At the time, he was repeatedly criticized for being anti-Armenian, pro-Azerbaijani and pro-Turkish. Senators Barbara Boxer and Robert Menendez, who placed a hold on his nomination as Ambassador to Azerbaijan, and the Armenian National Committee of America, which objected to Pres. Obama’s ill-advised decision to send Bryza to Baku without Senate confirmation, are now fully vindicated.
     
    In the past, Bryza’s apologists used the convenient excuse that as a government official, he had no choice but to support the President’s position on the Armenian Genocide and related issues. Yet, now that he is a free man, why does he continue to parrot those same Turkish-inspired, anti-Armenian slogans? Could it be that Bryza, in and out of government, has been trying to ingratiate himself to his future paymasters? Otherwise, why would he give Hurriyet the standard Turkish line that politicians and parliaments should not get involved in acknowledging the Armenian Genocide? To score points with Turkish and Azeri officials, Bryza angrily lashes out at the ANCA: “The organization that blocked me will keep bringing up this issue forever. But it’s not up to governments but to people to make their own determination on how to characterize it…. Turkey has the ability to influence that debate in a significant way…. The radicals that blocked me hate that. They don’t want to have an open debate; an open dialogue is their enemy.”
     
    While applauding the more open attitude among some Turks toward a discussion of the Armenian Genocide, Bryza finds as “legitimate” the Turkish official view that “this should not be recognized politically as genocide. It’s not the business of any politician in any country to characterize these events as genocide or not as genocide. It has to be up to societies — not to others — to have a decision taken based on a political calendar. To me, that’s dishonest.”
     
    Bryza then takes his pro-Turkish bias a little too far by revealing his denialist views: “Truth is on everyone’s side, especially on Turkey’s side. The debate about this [Armenian Genocide] issue is really one-sided right now. Anybody who voices a different view is attacked as a genocide-denier, which immediately means you are against human rights. If you believe there was a genocide committed, you can equally argue looking from a narrow definition of the word that genocide was committed to many others, against Turks or Muslims in eastern Anatolia. Let’s have a dialogue of the multiple atrocities [against] many groups. Let’s talk about it all. Let’s be fair and not forget the suffering of others.”
     
    Finally, Bryza seems to have fulfilled his life-long dream of living in Istanbul. During his 2005 visit to Ankara, after a U.S. Embassy official introduced him to local journalists as “an old friend of Turkey,” Bryza unabashedly declared: “I am thrilled to be back in Turkey. Turkey in many ways feels for me like a second home…. I can’t spend enough time in your beautiful country. I hope to be back soon and often.” In a column I wrote at the time, I expressed the hope that “Bryza would soon realize his wish and retire in Turkey permanently.” Now, his wish has come true! Hurriyet reported last week that after leaving Baku last month he had settled in Istanbul. “You can’t imagine how happy I am to be in Istanbul…. Look at me, I am married to a Turkish woman,” Bryza exclaimed!