A typical Turkish breakfast consists of cheese (beyaz peynir, kaşar etc.), butter, olives, eggs, tomatoes, cucumbers, green peppers, reçel (jam/marmalade; a preserve of whole fruits) and honey usually consumed on top of kaymak. Sucuk (spicy Turkish sausage), pastırma, börek, simit, poğaça and even soups can be taken as a morning meal in Turkiye. Perhaps more so than traditional breads such as pide, a crusty white loaf is widely consumed. A common Turkish speciality for breakfast is called menemen, which is prepared with roasted tomatoes, peppers, olive oil and eggs. Invariably, Turkish Tea is served at breakfast. The Turkish word for breakfast, kahvaltı, means “before coffee” (kahve, ‘coffee’; altı, ‘under’).
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!
Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedov’s visit to Turkey on February 28-March 1, highlighted the evolving nature of the two countries’ bilateral relations, built around flourishing economic ties. Berdimuhammedov’s first foreign trip since his reelection on February 12 also provided an opportunity to mark the 20th anniversary of the establishment of Turkish-Turkmen diplomatic ties since Turkmenistan’s gaining independence. With many cabinet members, officials and businessmen in his entourage, the visit also provided an opportunity to deepen the relations.
Ankara’s official relations with Ashgabat have been largely carried out by President Abdullah Gul, who has paid four visits to Turkmenistan so far. His last official trip was in May 2011, during which he discussed ways to improve cooperation in energy, construction, transportation and communication. Berdimuhammedov also expressed his satisfaction with the accelerating pace of the bilateral ties and underscored that his country viewed Turkey as a strategic partner. For his part, Gul has been particularly interested in improving energy cooperation between the two countries (Anadolu Ajansi, May 31, 2011).
During Berdimuhammedov’s visit, Gul showed the highest level of hospitality, underscoring the importance attached to developing bilateral ties. He decorated Berdimuhammedov with a state medal of honor, which crowned many agreements penned to bolster cooperation in trade, tourism, the fight against terrorism, training of diplomats, etc., in addition to various other business deals. Berdimuhammedov again reiterated that Ashgabat views its relationship with Ankara as strategically important, and Turkmenistan would welcome even a larger involvement of Turkish companies as his country works to rebuild its cities through numerous infrastructure investments. The Turkish-Turkmen Business Forum attended, by both leaders in Istanbul, allowed the parties to discuss specific projects (Anadolu Ajansi, February 29, March 1).
Reflecting the high premium placed by Ankara on mutual economic relations, Turkey’s Economy Minister Zafer Caglayan has also frequented Ashgabat lately. Caglayan’s last visit was in January where he also attended the bilateral business forum and was received by Berdimuhammedov. During that visit, a protocol was signed within the context of the Turkish-Turkmen Intergovernmental Economic Committee, and the parties agreed to instruct their Central Banks to make necessary arrangements so that they could use their national currencies in bilateral commercial deals. Caglayan especially expressed his satisfaction with Turkmen officials’ welcoming attitude toward Turkish construction companies, adding that the latter won up to 90 percent of government construction tenders in Turkmenistan (www.haberturk.com, January 30, 2012).
Nonetheless, although Turkey became a major trading partner for Turkmenistan, relations have yet to live up to the ambitious rhetoric. Turkey’s trade with Turkmenistan and Turkish-speaking countries, despite a two-fold increase in the last five years, still makes up only a small fraction of its overall trade. While the trade volume between these countries was $8.6 billion in 2011, it only accounted for three percent of Turkey’s overall trade volume. Turkmenistan ranked third after Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan in Turkey’s overall trade with Turkic-speaking countries. While Turkey’s imports from Turkmenistan were worth $392.7 million, its exports totaled $1.5 billion (Anadolu Ajansi February 6).
Turkey’s main economic activity with Turkmenistan and partly other Turkic-speaking countries has been in construction projects. Many of these countries have been working to rebuild, using the wealth generated by their energy riches. Turkmenistan has stood atop that list in recent years. For instance, in a development that marked the growing importance of Turkmenistan for Turkish contractors’ international operations, in 2010, Turkmenistan ranked number one on the list of tenders assumed by Turkish companies in around 50 countries. Of the total $20.3 billion in projects that Turkish firms undertook globally in 2010, they contracted on tenders worth $4.3 billion in Turkmenistan, followed by Libya, Iraq and Russia. To date, the total volume of projects undertaken by Turkish companies in Turkmenistan exceeded $23 billion, corresponding to about 10 percent of the Turkish firms’ operations worldwide (Anadolu Ajansi, March 19, 2011; July 25, 2011).
With these statistics, Ankara has been Ashgabat’s chief trade partner, while Turkmenistan emerged as the main destination of Turkish investments in Central Asia. Most Turkish economic activity in Turkmenistan is carried out by small or medium scale enterprises. Established there by Turkish investors following Turkmenistan’s independence, some of these companies acted rather in an adventurous manner and took risks. While many of them lost their investments in the 1990s, the first comer’s advantage worked in favor of many others who later became important business actors.
Granted, Turkish investors still encounter problems. One particular issue has been the difficulties in receiving payment for the projects they complete in Turkmenistan. In addition to inviting new investments to take advantage of attractive business opportunities in his country, Berdimuhammedov also promised to solve the payment problems. Representatives from some Turkish business associations raised questions about his sincerity, as similar promises in the past have not ended the controversy – current pending payments for completed projects are worth $1.3 billion (Hurriyet Daily News, March 2). However, other Turkish firms doing business in the country had been presenting a different picture about the causes of the dispute. A large group undertaking major infrastructure work to build 180 bridges in the country maintained that those that complete their project on time face no such problems (Cihan, February 14).
Such high level contacts and flourishing economic ties highlighted the seamless political relations between Ankara and Ashgabad. Turkey was the first country to recognize Turkmenistan’s declaration of independence and also supported its decision to pursue neutrality in 1995. Following the euphoria of the early 1990s, the Turkish-Turkmen relationship was severely restricted during the later period of Saparmurat Niyazov’s (Turkmenbashi) reign (1991-2006). While his isolationist policy of neutrality was partly responsible for the deteriorating state of affairs, the negative experiences of some Turkish businessmen who went to the country early on also led to the cooling off of the relationship. With Berdimuhammedov’s policy of opening up, which also corresponded to a proactive foreign policy course pursued by the current Turkish government, there has been a visible increase in bilateral exchanges. With the latest trip, Berdimuhammedov has been to Turkey for a fifth time, and especially in the economic realm the progress has been remarkable. For its part, Turkey has been hoping to bolster ties with this energy-rich country, which provides a major avenue for Turkish business operations abroad, especially while the turmoil in the Middle East raises questions about the prospects of these markets.
“Probes are ‘asymmetric, psychological,’ says ex-army chief” shouted the headline in the Hurriyet Daily News, another media mouthpiece of the Turkish government, this one for consumption by English speakers. It seems that former Chief of General Staff İlker Başbuğ claims his recent jailing was designed to dishonor the Turkish Armed forces. “Freedom is not only about being outside,” said the general, “I feel just as free in here.” Surely Başbuğ is joking. There are hundreds of others in jail on trumped up charges, some for almost five years. And the general feels free? Free from what? Responsibility? You, sir, continue to delude yourself. You and your military predecessors and successors are responsible for the demise of Atatürk’s secular republic. You all comprise a long line of general officers who seem to have forgotten what motivated you to the noble endeavor of defending your secular, democratic country.
Generals like Işık Koşaner, who succeeded Başbuğ, and a year later suddenly resigned along with the leaders of the army, navy and air force with the feeble excuse that they could no longer protect their subordinates. This spineless, unexplained act was the final blow that destroyed the Turkish army, and the hope and security of the Turkish people. It was a self-inflicted wound.
Like Yaşar Büyükanıt who asked for a sign of support from the people. Millions of Turks responded. They filled the streets for a series of wildly enthusiastic demonstrations to preserve the secular republic founded by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Soon thereafter Büyükanıt had a secret meeting with the prime minister. He retired and promptly disappeared. Enter Başbuğ.
Like Hilmi Özkök, Büyükanıt’s predecessor,who spent a good deal of his energy redesigning the buttons on the military uniforms, that is, removing Atatürk’s image. He has since specialized in saying very little of relevance. Consulting his profile in Wikipedia reveals the telling remark that he “opposed his peers’ plans to stage a coup.” So much for his leadership skills. Supposedly he now writes poetry.
Like Kenan Evren, a torturer and executioner, a Turkish Pinochet, he was one of America’s “guys” who “did it” for Jimmy Carter with the 1980 US-backed military coup. A professed believer in the enlightened principles of Atatürk, he and his fascist regime instead destroyed them along with many people. He also took up the ‘leftist arts’ in retirement and became a painter.
The tragic fiasco continues. Forget the AKP. It does as its told and is irrelevant in this situation. Ex-army chief Başbuğ, himself, is ASYMMETRIC. He’s in jail. He and his successor and predecessor generals have betrayed the founding principles of the nation. They have dawdled, temporized, rationalized, and collaborated. When the public begged for details and reliable information, the generals spoke in vague generalities. They have tortured. They have executed. And finally they have collapsed in a shameful surrender. Secular Turkey was founded by the military, freeing the Turkish people from hundreds of years of Ottoman incompetence and ignorance. Haven’t any of these senior officers understood Nutuk? It is they, the generals, who have dishonored the Turkish Army. Not the ruling power and certainly not the government’s tragically laughable Alice-in-Wonderland judicial system.
Now these generals can watch the destruction of the Republic in their retirement villas or from their jail cells. Now General Asymmetrica knows how all the leftists felt that his predecessors jailed during the disgraceful USA-inspired coups. Now General Asymmetrica knows that all the secret collaboration with America has yielded bitter fruit indeed. And that all the recent talk about military coup plots has been simply palaver. The real blow delivered to the Turkish nation was the civilian coup, engineered by America’s new “guys,” the AKP. Through the years, the generals collaborated with everyone except their one true ally…the heirs and children of Atatürk. They thought that the secular state could coexist with religion. They failed to protect their troops and failed to know their enemy, the two cardinal principles for an army at war. And for all this they were destroyed. That’s asymmetry. Think about what Atatürk would have done to them all. They would be begging for the days of their youth. That’s the ultimate asymmetry, and it is terrible.
Cem Ryan
Istanbul
12 March 2012
Below is the full text of news article:
Former Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ has described the recent probes that landed him in jail as a “asymmetric, psychological movement to dishonor the Turkish armed forces” in a recent interview. Speaking through his lawyer, the jailed former general told Toygun Atilla of daily Hürriyet that “freedom is not only about being outside.” “I feel just as free in here,” Başbuğ said. “I fought against unjust slander in the public eyes of the Turkish Armed Forces personnel. And yes, I fought with all my strength against any negative impact that the unity and discipline of the Armed Forces may go through. And yes, I told relative authorities about all the problems we faced, and I, from time to time, told the public about my views. This is what I’ve done, and what I’ve tried to do,” he said. “Now I see I was jailed, and retired, simply for talking,” Başbuğ said. “This cannot be seen simply as personal. To call the head of the Turkish Armed Forces a terrorist is a heavy charge against the whole of the Armed Forces.” Başbuğ also said the recent probes were causing the public to have a negative view of the Turkish justice system. It is impossible to avoid seeing that the public conscience is uncomfortable with all this,” he said.
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!
I read the news today, oh boy*. There are thousands of kids, 12-18 years old, in jail in Turkey. They have thrown stones. They have thrown eggs. They have thrown words. They hate their poverty. They despise their incompetent education. They loathe their miserable lives, their oppressive government, their oppressive families, their oppressive youth, themselves. They are terrorists. And they have fully earned their jailing. At all costs, “civilized” society must be protected. Look at it, this civilized society. The way it drives its automobiles. The way its politicians conduct their public discourses. The way fathers and sons murder their daughters and sisters to preserve family honor. The way it visits violence upon its women. Look at it!
In one jail, Pozantı Prison in Adana, two hundred children (or would “little criminals” be more appropriate?) are regularly and systematically rehabilitated through torture and rape. More specifically, the forceful application of their heads against hard substances like elevator doors and walls. They are taught proper hygiene by being stripped naked. The ensuing forceful application of freezing cold water is judged by prison management to be invigoratingly therapeutic. And who could ever question the lusty and manly application of canes against the bare soles of the feet? The bastinado leaves no visible marks, is easy to administer, and is guaranteed to cause exquisite pain with time-proven results. Oh boy.
Something should be done. I mean, while poverty, ignorance, oppression, and the throwing of stones and eggs isn’t nice, it doesn’t deserve being beaten and raped. Or does it? After all this is Turkey.
Actually this is not exactly news. The kids have been writing letters to the authorities for a year. They were complaining about the nature of their rehabilitation therapy, asking to be transferred to a new prison under new management. But obviously the gears of the Minister of Justice, Sadullah Ergin, turn slowly. Poor, busy man, he must deal with such legal tragic-comedies as Ergenekon, Birdcage, Deniz Feneri, and the crafting of a new, more democratic Turkish constitution. So no wonder it took him awhile to promote, reward and transfer the managers of the Pozantı Prison. But now the justice minister knows the real story. And now the justice minister has acted. He will transfer the boys to Sincan Prison at Ankara. No doubt the boys will be going to a far, far, better place. It would be pretty to think so. It would also be pretty stupid to think so.
For the promoted warden of Pozantı Prison is now the warden at Sincan. A perfect choice to fix the system. The perfect felon to remediate and rehabilitate these troubled and destroyed boys. Wouldn’t you agree? Such are the workings of the ruling party in Turkey. Isn’t political Islam wonderful? But the saddest part of this story is that it was a tale told years ago, twenty-nine, to be precise. Stale news, indeed.
I saw a film made twenty-nine years ago, oh boy. By Yilmaz Güney, oh boy. He was supposed to have been a communist, oh boy. Have you seen the film? Lately? Ever? For me, it’s the saddest film. It was the last film Güney made. He shot it in France. The French government cooperated with him. Treacherous France, oh boy. The movie was banned in Turkey, nothing new here. The title of the film is the same as the item that the guards at Pozantı used as therapeutic devices on the heads of the boys—the wall (duvar). DUVAR!
The film DUVAR depicts the brutal aftermath of the 1980 fascist, US-supported military coup in Turkey through the experiences of children in a hell-hole of a prison near Ankara. For these abused kids, trapped in a violent penal system, happiness is being transferred to another prison, a kinder, gentler prison. So go the rumors. The kids plead and plead, write letters, all to no avail. But after experiencing horrendous violence and a fire, they are transferred. And at the new prison, what happens? Their old warden has been reassigned. They are reunited. Sound familiar? Sound far-fetched? See DUVAR and you will see Turkey today. Oh boy. Oh god.
Cem Ryan
Istanbul, 6 March 2012
*”I read the news today oh boy About a lucky man who made the grade”
