Category: Authors

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 Elections Give Birth to Oligarchy

Parliamentary elections, which had occupied the daily agenda in Armenia and were expected to lead to new developments, were held last week. According to the final results, five parties are eligible for representation in parliament. Their results in the elections are as follows: the ruling Republican Party (44.05 percent), the Prosperous Armenia Party (30.32 percent), the Armenian National Congress (EUK) (7.07 percent), the Legacy Party (5.76 percent), the Dashnak Party (5.76 percent) and Orinats Yerkir (5.47 percent). Even though the most pressing questions on the election process and the election results refer to transparency issues, the actual issue is the lack of democratization in the former Soviet states. (more…)

May 9, 2012
Turkey Is Drawn into Iraqi Affairs

Turkey Is Drawn into Iraqi Affairs

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 9 Issue: 84

May 3, 2012

By: Saban Kardas

The developments in Iraqi domestic politics, coupled with their regional implications, continue to drag Turkey deeper into Middle Eastern affairs, while its involvement in the Syrian conflict already occupies a large part of Ankara’s foreign policy agenda. The ongoing power struggle between Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his opponents on the one hand, and the complicated relationship between the central government in Baghdad and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Northern Iraq on the other have taken an interesting turn, creating reverberations for Turkey’s regional policies.

In the wake of the withdrawal of US forces, Maliki has moved to consolidate his power, threatening to undermine the delicate balance between various sectarian and ethnic groups. Maliki, who assumed his current post following a 2010 power sharing agreement, has failed to work toward national reconciliation. On the contrary, in this already fractured country, he has even undermined the governing coalition and also put Iraq on a collision course. His campaign against Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, who took refuge in Northern Iraq fearing for his life, crystallized the power struggle. The dispute grew into an impasse, with the increasingly harsher tone of the parties, engulfing Turkey (EDM, January 18). After spending some time in Kurdistan, Hashemi visited Saudi Arabia and Doha and later came to Turkey, effectively beginning his days in “exile.” Calling openly for Ankara’s support, Hashimi also furthered its involvement in his country’s affairs (Anadolu Ajansi, April 10).

A parallel process concerned Iraqi Kurds. The KRG’s relationship to Baghdad is complicated over the status of the disputed city of Kirkuk and the conflict over revenues from the exploration of natural resources in the North. In the ongoing standoff, the leader of KRG, Masoud Barzani, supports Hashimi and has used the leverage he gained to further bolster his position in Iraqi domestic politics. Last month, Barzani suggested he could hold a referendum to redefine ties to Baghdad. In a move that further accentuated this trend, during his trip to the US earlier this month, Barzani urged Washington to reconsider its backing of Maliki. Then, Barzani visited Turkey to meet with Hashimi and Turkish leaders (Anadolu Ajansi, April 20).

Barzani’s visit also underscored the degree to which Turkey has readjusted its regional policies. After years of confrontation with the KRG, Turkey already moved to normalize its relations with the Northern Iraqi Kurdish leadership to solicit their backing for Ankara’s fight against the PKK. In the wake of the latest developments, Ankara has further moved toward Iraqi Kurds to cope with the challenges in Iraqi domestic politics.

In the region, too, Turkey faces a similar fluid environment. With the unfolding of the Syrian uprising, Ankara’s partnerships in the region have gone through a new reshuffling. Faced with Tehran’s support for the Syrian regime and its backing of Iraq’s Maliki, Turkey’s coordination of its policies with the Syrian opposition, Iraqi opposition and the Gulf countries raise interesting questions about the patterns of Ankara’s alignment.

These realignments lead some to suggest that Turkey has been drawn into sectarian groupings but the Turkish government rejects those claims. Ankara justified its support for the Syrian opposition on the principles of human rights and democracy, rather than any sectarian affiliation. In Iraq, Turkey again refrained from framing its support for the Sunni leader Hashimi in sectarian terms and instead underlined the divisive nature of Maliki’s policies.

However, such statements from Turkish officials have far from convinced the Iraqi leadership. Maliki, already critical of Turkey’s policy on Syria, reacted harshly to recent developments and, in a press release, accused Turkey of interfering in Iraqi internal affairs and acting in a hostile manner (Milliyet, April 21). Reflecting the new regional realignment, Maliki then paid a two-day visit to Tehran on April 22-23, where he met with key Iranian leaders. In his first visit after his reelection, Maliki expressed solidarity with the Iranian leadership and vowed to work in tandem on regional issues (www.presstv.ir, April 23).

Both Prime Minister Recep Tayip Erdogan and Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs gave a very strong reaction to Maliki’s remarks. On his way back from Doha, where he discussed Middle East issues with his regional counterparts, Erdogan called Maliki insincere and maintained that his oppressive policies threatened to divide Iraq. Suggesting that Maliki himself might have a sectarian agenda, Erdogan insisted that Ankara was in communication with all Iraqi groups including Shiite leaders (Sabah, April 22). The MFA’s statement also referred to Maliki’s attempts to monopolize power and exclude others as the basis of the current crisis in Iraq (www.mfa.gov.tr, April 21). Both countries summoned each other’s diplomats posted to the respective capitals over the developments.

To Turkey’s credit, concerns over Maliki’s course are indeed shared by a larger number of Iraqi actors, including Shiite groups. Increasingly, the inability of Maliki to build up coalitions with other groups and the weakening of the ties between Baghdad and the provinces, most notably Northern Iraq, are criticized by major Iraqi actors. Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr also visited Northern Iraq for the first time, in an effort to establish bridges between the parties (Anadolu Ajansi, April 26).

For years, Turkey has worked to ensure a smooth political transition in Iraq. Ankara’s policy was based on the understanding that if national reconciliation cannot be achieved, it could deepen the fragmentation and pave the way for an independent Kurdish state, not to mention other damaging repercussions for regional peace. It was for this reason that Ankara supported the Maliki-led government, although its initial preferences after the Iraqi elections had been different. With the ongoing political crisis and tensions in the region, Turkey has increasingly found itself on the same page as the KRG.

For his part, Barzani apparently hopes to deepen his cooperation with Turkey to further consolidate his position in Iraq. This development inevitably raises speculations as to whether the Iraqi Kurds might press for independence or a greater degree of autonomy from Baghdad, which, ironically, will put Turkey in a difficult position. Given Ankara’s own concerns about an independent Kurdish state and the Kurds’ claims over Kirkuk, Turkey’s support for Barzani will be conditional and it will hardly be the midwife to an independent Kurdistan.

https://jamestown.org/program/turkey-is-drawn-into-iraqi-affairs/

May 4, 2012
It Will not happen to me. Guess What? It Will! Chapter 8

It Will Not Happen to Me! Guess What? It Wll !!!

Chapter 8

We as concerned citizens must rescue our governments from the privileged few or we will find ourselves as their slaves. Freedom of religion and Bilingualism: Please remember that these chapters are being written because the solutions written in Part One have not been implemented, or worse yet the world economies have collapsed. We are now in the 21st century and moving very fast as far as the standard of living has progressed. The problem is that we citizens must also change to survive. We must welcome change in order to improve on our freedoms. The shock of changing our life styles will be minor versus revisiting the dark ages. Even though those who are able are already dependent upon government assistance and suffer. Rebellion in various ways, individually and as motley groups, should be discouraged. The United States has been a good example of Freedom of Religion until the US Supreme Court banned the use of the word GOD and public prayer in schools. A better example is Turkey after WW II, which had as its First President, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who is now recognized as on the great men of the 20th century. Turkey has always allowed freedom of religion and many historical events and places are there. One of the main reasons Turkey is a noble and superb nation today is because of this man his freedoms. Just compare Turkey with its neighbors to the south. Another one of the major reasons for Turkey’s success as a nation is the separation of church and state. Arrafat’s statement “anyone wearing a fez tomorrow will lose their head.” The very next day one was wearing a fez. Religions that prophesy harmony and love should be respected. Ones that use force should not be. An individual has the right to choose one’s own beliefs. A Persian Rug made in Turkey has an “error” or mistake woven in it. They believe only God is perfect, so they purposely sew an error in it. If you cannot find an error, it probably was not made in Turkey. There is a lesson for the whole world to learn from Turkey. A nation must unite under one banner that allows freedom of expressions and feelings of the individual of his own rights. Bilingualism is another problem. Right now the United States is facing this problem. It had a similar problem with the South after the civil war and right into the 1930’s with the southern accent. Radio and television stopped that game. When a person came on national television and started speaking he became the butt of jokes. No one likes being laughed at and it soon changed to the normal language. A more serious problem is with the Spanish speaking population. Almost everything has become bi lingual. You make a telephone call to a business and the operator tells you to press one for Spanish. This slows a country’s growth down because a certain percentage of the population will refuse to learn the other’s language and barriers are built, both socially and economically. This is a self-defeatist attitude that can cause long-term problems. When I was a kid in the 1940’s and 50’s I had friends that were German, French, Greek, Italian, and Polish. When I was in their homes they would speak in their native tongue, especially when they were scolding my friend. I could tell by the look on his face or the tone of their voice. In public everyone spoke excellent English! A perfect example how bilingualism can slow down a nation is the Province of Quebec in Canada. It is a beautiful province with all kinds of natural resources. The Bank of Montreal was a major bank nationally. The Montreal Stock Exchange was a major exchange for the whole nation. The Quebec Hydro provided cheap power and they had people. In Canada people are important, for the farther north one goes the less people. The United States and Canadian border has to be the friendliest one in the world. Underneath all this prosperity the French citizens were simmering with anger. They felt they were probably being treated as second-class citizens. In some cases this was true because many of the schools were French only. In a major English speaking country this paved a road to poverty. If your education is not in the main stream of the nation that you live in then ones earning power becomes limited. Outside influences tend to be shunned and the power of wage earnings slips by. Exchange of ideas is of the uppermost importance for a thriving community. At first they wanted to secede and become a separate country. To make their point they started bombing mailboxes. The net result of this was that the wealthy middle and upper classes of society moved out of the province. The Bank of Montreal is just a regular bank and the Montreal exchange has been overpowered by the Toronto exchange. Statistically it rated 2nd behind the province of Ontario where the State Capital is located, but other provinces are growing faster. Who would want to locate a business in a province that spoke French when the rest of the nation is English speaking? A sad fact and tale was when Charles De Gaulle was president of France he saw an opportunity to come to Canada and promote France. He came to Montreal to speak and over a million Frenchman came to hear their legendary person. The problem was there was not a Frenchman around that understood a word he was saying. He was speaking proper French while over decades their slang French and become a language of its own. So Turkey is a positive example for nations to follow while Quebec is a sad example. Here is an example when one portion of society closes its cultural barriers to outsiders, or worse yet, refuses to blend in. If 10 percent speaks a foreign language in the nation it resides in, then it misses the opportunities that the 90 percent have or enjoy. Economically it is like swimming upstream just before the waterfall. The survivors that are able to grab a branch of freedom will soon meld into the “common good” of the nation. That majority that succumbs or tries to please the minority will find itself standing on a pile of cow manure. A nation should have a common language. Computers today can translate easily. A segment of a population that demands dual languages is hurting itself by not being able to exchange ideas freely. The free exchange of ideas is very important. While Adolf Hitler held book-burning celebrations in Nazi Germany, he could not kill the ideas gotten from those books. Even today in some parts of the world, the Bible has been memorized whereby services are held for worship. A STRONG NATION WILL LISTEN TO THE MINORITY, AND THE MINORITY WILL APPRECIATE THAT IT WAS HEARD, BUT THE MAJORITY MUST RULE FOR THE COMMON GOOD FOR ALL. This means that as in the case of the United States, it became the melting pot for all citizens to enjoy the fruits of everyone’s labor. This is what Senator Arthur Vandenberg did 1945 for the good of the country and the world. He backed the President of the United States on foreign policy while he was a member of the minority party. William O’Neil, ‘INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY’ Chairman and founder, wrote an article for the Paper on April 25, 2012 on page B5 on ‘How to Find & Own America’s Greatest Opportunities’. He is referring to stock investments, but his opening paragraphs are a superb summary for this chapter. “ We live in the greatest country in the world. How did it evolve? The U.S. system, that is how. It’s your freedom of speech, religion and the press. You are free to own property and keep arms. Every citizen over 18 is free to vote in elections every two and four years, and replace weak or failed leaders. You are free to work, learn, create, innovate and invent because of our way of life. We are a nation of innovators because of these freedoms. Our GDP per person is larger than any other country. That is why millions of people continue to come here to participate in our exceptional freedom and opportunity. Nothing can hold you back except your own attitude or level of determination.” Those three freedoms are most important. Freedom of speech, religion and the press go along way in building a healthy nation.

May 4, 2012
Armenian ‘G’ claims: A matter of balance and due process

Hurriyet Daily News, April 28, 2012

FERRUH DEMİRMEN

We have just passed April 24, when Armenians of various walks of life commemorate the anniversary of the arrest of the Armenian intellectuals in Istanbul 97 years ago, alleged to have been the beginning of “Armenian genocide.” So the pundits chastise, woefully, Turkey for “denying” genocide, and demand that Turkey extend an apology and offer restitution (meaning money and land) to the Armenians.

This is no place to dwell on history to explain why such demands lack rational basis, e.g., if the Ottoman Turks had intent to exterminate the Armenian minority, why they gave Armenian citizens high positions in the government, why they waited for more than 6 centuries – when they were in much better position – to deliberately target Armenians.

Nor is this the proper place to elaborate why some critical pieces of “evidence” e.g., the Andonian files, that the proponents of genocide cite to support their thesis, were forgeries, or that the orders issued by the Ottoman central government to relocate Armenians proscribed that all measures were to be taken to ensure the safety of the deportees and meet their needs during and after relocation.

But there are two aspects the proponents of genocide conveniently ignore, that call for special attention: balance and due process.

Regarding balance, no one denies that Armenians suffered during relocation, and some lost their lives, in a time of war when chaos, lawlessness and depravation prevailed. Surely we must mourn the sufferings and loss of life. But do we ever hear about the sufferings and loss of lives of non-Armenians? During that tragic period more than half a million Muslims – and some Jews – perished at the hands of armed, marauding Armenian gangs that terrorized the countryside and helped invading enemy armies.

Do the lost lives of Muslims not matter?

If we are to recall history, do Armenians carry any sense of guilt and culpability for aiding the enemy and terrorizing the local civil population?

And why do we not hear, one must ask, any remorse on the part of Armenians for the killings by the ASALA organization of more than 40 Turkish diplomats in the 1970’s and ‘80’s?

As for due process, it must be emphasized that “genocide” is a special crime, and the term should not be used lightly. To quote the 1948 UN Resolution on the Prevention of Genocide, determination on genocide can only be made “by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction.” In the case of the alleged Armenian genocide, there has been no such determination. No court verdict; none, period. The U.N. resolution also makes no attribution to “Armenian genocide.”

A parliamentary body, often beholden to special interests, and acting as both the prosecutor and judge, is no substitute for a duly authorized court of law.

So, one must ask, without a court verdict, how can the Turks be accused of the “g” crime? Where is the respect for due process?

In fact, the only judicial proceeding that comes close to being an international tribunal on the Armenian case is the Malta Tribunal, held by the victorious British after WWI. The proceedings, investigating charges against 144 high-ranking Ottoman officials accused of harming Armenians, failed to bring about a single conviction. Even searching through the U.S. State Department files in Washington D.C. failed to produce any incriminating evidence. Off went the dispatch from the British Embassy to Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon in London: “I regret to inform Your Lordship that there was nothing therein which could be used as evidence against the Turks who are being detained for trial at Malta.” All the detainees were set free and returned to Turkish soil.

Armenian genocide allegations, apart from being legally unsustainable, create discord and animosity in society. Nearly a century has passed, and it is time to move on toward greater inter-communal harmony.

Will the Armenian Diaspora take note?

[email protected]

April 29, 2012
Armenian ‘G’ claims: A matter of balance and due process

Hurriyet Daily News, April 28, 2012

FERRUH DEMİRMEN

We have just passed April 24, when Armenians of various walks of life commemorate the anniversary of the arrest of the Armenian intellectuals in Istanbul 97 years ago, alleged to have been the beginning of “Armenian genocide.” So the pundits chastise, woefully, Turkey for “denying” genocide, and demand that Turkey extend an apology and offer restitution (meaning money and land) to the Armenians.

This is no place to dwell on history to explain why such demands lack rational basis, e.g., if the Ottoman Turks had intent to exterminate the Armenian minority, why they gave Armenian citizens high positions in the government, why they waited for more than 6 centuries – when they were in much better position – to deliberately target Armenians.

Nor is this the proper place to elaborate why some critical pieces of “evidence” e.g., the Andonian files, that the proponents of genocide cite to support their thesis, were forgeries, or that the orders issued by the Ottoman central government to relocate Armenians proscribed that all measures were to be taken to ensure the safety of the deportees and meet their needs during and after relocation.

But there are two aspects the proponents of genocide conveniently ignore, that call for special attention: balance and due process.

Regarding balance, no one denies that Armenians suffered during relocation, and some lost their lives, in a time of war when chaos, lawlessness and depravation prevailed. Surely we must mourn the sufferings and loss of life. But do we ever hear about the sufferings and loss of lives of non-Armenians? During that tragic period more than half a million Muslims – and some Jews – perished at the hands of armed, marauding Armenian gangs that terrorized the countryside and helped invading enemy armies.

Do the lost lives of Muslims not matter?

If we are to recall history, do Armenians carry any sense of guilt and culpability for aiding the enemy and terrorizing the local civil population?

And why do we not hear, one must ask, any remorse on the part of Armenians for the killings by the ASALA organization of more than 40 Turkish diplomats in the 1970’s and ‘80’s?

As for due process, it must be emphasized that “genocide” is a special crime, and the term should not be used lightly. To quote the 1948 UN Resolution on the Prevention of Genocide, determination on genocide can only be made “by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction.” In the case of the alleged Armenian genocide, there has been no such determination. No court verdict; none, period. The U.N. resolution also makes no attribution to “Armenian genocide.”

A parliamentary body, often beholden to special interests, and acting as both the prosecutor and judge, is no substitute for a duly authorized court of law.

So, one must ask, without a court verdict, how can the Turks be accused of the “g” crime? Where is the respect for due process?

In fact, the only judicial proceeding that comes close to being an international tribunal on the Armenian case is the Malta Tribunal, held by the victorious British after WWI. The proceedings, investigating charges against 144 high-ranking Ottoman officials accused of harming Armenians, failed to bring about a single conviction. Even searching through the U.S. State Department files in Washington D.C. failed to produce any incriminating evidence. Off went the dispatch from the British Embassy to Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon in London: “I regret to inform Your Lordship that there was nothing therein which could be used as evidence against the Turks who are being detained for trial at Malta.” All the detainees were set free and returned to Turkish soil.

Armenian genocide allegations, apart from being legally unsustainable, create discord and animosity in society. Nearly a century has passed, and it is time to move on toward greater inter-communal harmony.

Will the Armenian Diaspora take note?

[email protected]

April/28/2012

April 29, 2012