|
Same old Turkish Trick: Make Promises, Get Praised, but Deliver Nothing
Turkish leaders came up with a new ploy last week to impress world public opinion with fake magnanimity toward the country’s long-oppressed minorities.
Prime Minister Erdogan signed a decree last Saturday that supposedly will return hundreds of buildings that belonged to Christian and Jewish community foundations or charitable trusts. There are currently 162 such trusts (vakfs) registered in the Republic of Turkey.
Back in 1936, the Turkish government demanded that all non-Muslim foundations declare their property holdings. In 1974, Turkish courts illegally stripped these foundations from all properties acquired after 1936, and even some that belonged to them before that date. Last week’s decree requested the foundations to submit to the government within the next 12 months the list of properties confiscated from them — now worth billions of dollars — including schools, hospitals, orphanages, and cemeteries. If and when Parliament adopts this decree, the Turkish government is pledging to either return the seized properties or pay compensation for those sold to third parties. It is important to note that this decree does not cover the hundreds of thousands of private properties that were confiscated by the Turkish authorities from Armenians and other minorities during and after World War I.
Before anyone starts thanking the Turkish leadership for its “kindness” or “fair mindedness” toward its non-Muslim citizens, one needs to scrutinize Ankara’s motives and anticipate its possible next steps.
Although Erdogan’s ruling party has more than sufficient votes in Parliament to pass the proposed measure, no one should be surprised if this “generous” offer is considerably watered down in terms of the number and types of properties it covers and their current value, conveniently blaming these restrictions on the opposition parties! Erdogan’s previous promises to return confiscated properties to minority foundations were mired in bureaucratic red tape, causing lengthy delays and failure to honor almost all requests.
Most probably Turkish officials decided to issue this decree after losing several major property claims filed by Armenian and Greek foundations in the European Court of Human Rights. Clearly, Turkey can ill afford to lose hundreds of similar lawsuits. Adnan Ertem, head of Turkey’s administration of charitable trusts, told Sabah newspaper that by dealing internally with non-Muslim foundations, the government would be able to avoid paying much larger sums, including damages and court costs, should it lose the lawsuits filed in the European Court. Ertem claimed that there are 370 confiscated properties that should be returned to minority foundations.
More important than saving money, Turkey would spare itself the embarrassment of losing hundreds of court cases which would tarnish its reputation in the eyes of the world, particularly at a time when it is trying to join the European Union. In addition, Turkey has already scored a major propaganda coup by merely promising to return these properties. The international media has published glowing news reports of this “magnanimous” Turkish gesture, before a single piece of property has been returned to the minorities. No one should be surprised if Turkey uses this new decree as a propaganda tool to counter recent US congressional demands for the return of church properties to their rightful owners.
Likewise, no one should be surprised if Turkish leaders brazenly demand that the Armenian, Greek, and Israeli governments reciprocate with a gesture of their own toward Turkey. Turkish officials should be reminded that by returning the confiscated properties they are not doing a favor to the religious minorities. Such misplaced gratitude would be akin to a robbery victim thanking a thief who for selfish reasons decides to return a small portion of what he has stolen.
Even though the Turkish media has prematurely characterized the Erdogan decree as “historic” and “revolutionary,” in practice, it is less enforceable than the Turkish government’s obligations under the Treaty of Lausanne which provides the country’s Armenian, Greek and Jewish minorities much greater protection under international law. While domestic laws can be amended at any time, Turkey’s international treaty obligations can not be restricted by governmental decree. Fearing for their own safety, none of the non-Muslim communities have dared to file a complaint with the United Nations or international courts, despite the fact that successive Turkish governments have violated the provisions of the Lausanne Treaty since its ratification in 1923.
My advice to Turkey’s minorities would be not to withdraw their lawsuits from the European Court of Human Rights until they recover their confiscated properties or receive appropriate financial restitution. |
Category: Authors
-
Sassounian’s column of Sept. 1, 2011
-
Senators Should Reject Pres. Obama’s Appointee as Ambassador to Turkey
Pres. Obama has an endless number of problems these days. Late last year, when Senators blocked several of his ambassadorial nominees, including the one to Turkey, the President resorted to the rarely used tactic of appointing Ambassadors without Senate approval, while Congress is in recess.Unfortunately for Pres. Obama, his unconventional fix could be short-lived. If by the year’s end the Senate does not confirm his “recess appointments,” these Ambassadors must abandon their posts and return home in ignominy.Pres. Obama’s nominee to Turkey, Amb. Francis Ricciardone, was in Washington on August 2, to see if the Senate Foreign Relations Committee would confirm his appointment. During his appearance before the Committee, he antagonized several Senators by making statements that were replete with Turkish propaganda. When confronted with Turkey’s deplorable policies on human rights, its occupation of Cyprus, and denial of the Armenian Genocide, the Ambassador gave a series of evasive and dubious answers.In response to a question from Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) as to whether the United States had ever denied the Armenian Genocide, Amb. Ricciardone regurgitated his poorly memorized talking point: “I stand behind Pres. Obama’s characterization of the ‘Yedz Meghern’ [sic], as the Armenians themselves call it….” Unfortunately, he mispronounced “Medz Yeghern” by reversing the first letters of the two words, making it clear that he had no idea what he was talking about. If he really wanted to use an Armenian word, he could have simply said “tseghasbanoutyoun,” which means genocide!The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will reconvene in September to consider Amb. Ricciardone’s nomination after reviewing his written responses to questions submitted by the Senators following the August 2 hearing. We have obtained copies of the six responses Amb. Ricciardone sent to Sen. Menendez last week. The questions covered such issues as Prime Minister Erdogan’s “authoritarian tendencies,” the return of Christian churches to their rightful owners, Turkey’s refusal to remove its troops from Cyprus, Turkish banks circumventing U.S. sanctions on Iran, Turkey’s blockade of Armenia, and U.S. policy on the Armenian Genocide.Amb. Ricciardone avoided responding to just about every question he was asked. The one time that he did give an answer, he got himself in big trouble by making the following patently false statement:Sen. Menendez: “To the best of your knowledge, approximately how many of the more than 2,000 Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 on the territory of present-day Turkey are still operating today as churches?”Amb. Ricciardone: “Most of the Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 are still operating as churches. Some churches of significance operate as museums. The remaining have fallen into disrepair or were converted to mosques for lack of use.”This is simply an incredible answer from a seasoned Ambassador who is supposed to be extremely knowledgeable about Turkey, since he has had several postings in that country and speaks fluent Turkish. Ricciardone’s problem is that he identifies himself too closely with Turkey. A year ago, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) placed a “hold” on Amb. Ricciardone’s nomination, accusing him of “quickly adopting the positions and arguments of his Egyptian diplomatic counterparts,” during his posting in Cairo. “Given these questions, I am not convinced Amb. Ricciardone is the right Ambassador for Turkey at this time,” Sen. Brownback advised Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in his August 16, 2010 letter.Amb. Ricciardone is now making the same mistake in his new posting in Turkey. He has actually become the mouthpiece of the Turkish government rather than the official representative of the United States in Ankara! Unfortunately, Sen. Brownback is no longer in the Senate to place a new “hold” on Amb. Ricciardone, but there must be other Senators who will do so, to make sure that an American Ambassador upholds U.S. interests overseas rather than do the bidding of the host country.How could anyone explain, let alone justify, Amb. Ricciardone’s nonsensical and false assertion that most of the Christian churches in existence prior to 1915 in Turkey are still functioning as churches? In fact, the exact opposite is true! Only a handful of Christian churches are still functioning as churches in Turkey today, not counting the few dozen Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian churches of Istanbul. Amb. Ricciardone’s vulgar attempt to justify the conversion of churches into museums or mosques is a supreme insult to all Christians.Amb. Ricciardone has clearly disqualified himself from serving as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. One or more Senators should place a new “hold” on his nomination to keep him away from doing any more harm to U.S. national interests! -
Amb. Ricciardone Finally Admits Most Churches not Operating in Turkey
Publisher, The California Courier
After facing harsh criticism for covering up Turkey’s desecration and destruction of thousands of Christian churches, Amb. Francis Ricciardone, Pres. Obama’s appointee as Ambassador to Turkey, reversed himself last week, acknowledging that most churches functioning in Turkey prior to 1915 are no longer operating today.Amb. Ricciardone disavowed the Turkish misinformation he had recently spewed, after realizing that his nomination was about to be rejected by Senators for the second time in 12 months.A year ago, when Pres. Obama nominated Ricciardone as Ambassador to Turkey, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) placed a hold on his nomination, accusing him of being too cozy with Pres. Mubarak’s despotic regime during his posting in Egypt. Obama then circumvented the Senate’s confirmation process and appointed him as Ambassador to Turkey, while Congress was in recess. Should the Senate not confirm him by the year’s end, his assignment would be cut short and he would be forced to return to Washington.During his August 2 appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Amb. Ricciardone repeatedly made excuses for the Turkish government’s domestic and foreign policies, acting as the spokesman of yet another autocratic regime.To make matters worse, in response to a written question from Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Amb. Ricciardone falsely claimed that most Christian churches existing in Turkey before 1915 are still functioning today!The Ambassador’s gaffe triggered a massive outcry from the Armenian-American community. Church leaders wrote irate letters to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, sharply criticizing Amb. Ricciardone’s erroneous assertion. The Armenian National Committee of America demanded that he issue a retraction, correction, and apology for his false statement. In my last week’s column, I called on the Senators to reject his nomination.Fearing that his confirmation is in serious jeopardy, Amb. Ricciardone issued a revised statement last week, partially reversing his earlier misrepresentation.Here is the question that Sen. Menendez had asked: “To the best of your knowledge, approximately how many of the more than 2,000 Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 on the territory of present-day Turkey are still operating today as churches?”Amb. Ricciardone’s initial answer: “Most of the Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 are still operating as churches. Some churches of significance operate as museums. The remaining have fallen into disrepair or were converted to mosques for lack of use.”Amb. Ricciardone’s revised answer: “With your permission, I would appreciate the opportunity to clarify the record. The corrected text should read as follows: Most of the Christian churches functioning prior to 1915 are no longer operating as churches. Christian community contacts in Turkey report that a total of 200-250 churches that date to 1915 and before offer Christian worship services at least once a year. Many churches do not offer services every week due to insufficient clergy or local Christian populations. Some churches of significance operate as museums, others have been converted into mosques or put to other uses. Still others have fallen into disrepair or may have been totally destroyed.”
While Amb. Ricciardone’s revised answer is somewhat more accurate, it is still far from representing the full truth. Here is why:— His figure of “200-250 churches” operating today in Turkey is inflated.— His claim that “many churches do not offer services every week due to insufficient clergy or local Christian populations” is misleading. The real reason most churches do not offer services is that they have been converted to mosques, museums, stables or warehouses, if not outright destroyed.Our own research indicates more than 4,000 Christian churches were operating in Turkey prior to 1915:— More than 2,000 Armenian churches of all denominations (around 2,000 Armenian Apostolic churches, 200 Armenian Catholic churches, and 150 Armenian Evangelical churches);— More than 2000 Greek Orthodox churches;— More than 100 Assyrian churches; and— A small number of Bulgarian, Russian, Georgian and Coptic churches.Only 178 of these 4,000 churches (less than 5%) are still operating today in Turkey, mostly located in Istanbul:— 52 Armenian churches: 40 affiliated with the Armenian Patriarchate (34 in Istanbul, 6 in other regions); 2 Armenian Evangelical churches in Istanbul; and 10 Armenian Catholic churches in Istanbul;— 87 Greek Orthodox churches (74 in Istanbul, 13 in other regions);— 20 Roman Catholic churches (12 in Istanbul, 8 in other regions);— 14 Assyrian churches; and— 5 churches affiliated with other denominations.Amb. Ricciardone’s shameful attempt to minimize the destruction of thousands of Christian churches by the Ottoman authorities and Republic of Turkey is reprehensible. Given his false and evasive answers on this and many other issues, he should not be allowed to represent the United States in Turkey. -
Atatürk will remain a towering figure among Turks
Ferruh Demirmen, Ph.D.
Houston, Texas
ferruh@demirmen.comIt has been a fashion in Turkish media in recent years to question and attack the ideology and accomplishments of Kemal Atatürk – a hero figure for the vast majority of Turks. Columnist Mustafa Akyol, who writes in Turkish Daily News, and who for years has been trying to discredit Atatürk, is one such media personalty.
This disturbing trend gained acceptance in certain journalistic circles within the past decade, in particular after the AK Party’s second electoral victoy in 2007. The growing influence of the Gülen Movement has given impetus to the Atatürk-bashing trend.
The attack comes mostly from radical conservatives and idealogs – some outright religious bigots -that cannot make peace with Atatürk’s legacy. These critics typically yearn for a “Second Turkish Republic” that have the markings of a bygone Ottoman era. In a conference held 3 months ago at the Kadir Has University in Istanbul, for example, Mr. Akyol reportedly expressed preference for the “democracy” of the Ottoman era!
The putative reason for Atatürk’s failing, according to these circles, is that Atatürk was anti-Islam, depriving Turks of the freedom to practice their faith. There are even some critics who castigate Atatürk for abolishing Caliphate.
It would be unrealistic to expect these critics, being imbued by religious prejudice, to appreciate what Atatürk has accomplished. Many of these critics like Mr. Akyol are apologists if not the products of the Gülen Movement, and they advocate an Islamist Turkey instead of a secular one. Most of them have joined hands with quack Creationists that assault Darwin’s Evolution Theory. All because it doesn’t fit with their religious dogma.
To realize the hollowness of their arguments, and why Atatürk was not anti-Islam, these opponents should read the works of such researchers as Sinan Meydan (e.g., “Cumhuriyet Tarihi Yalanları”) and Professor Ethem Ruhi Fiğlalı (e.g., “Atatürk And The Religion of Islam”). They will learn, for example, that Atatürk tried to free Islam from the shackles of dogma and advanced the notion that religion is a matter between an individual and God. This is also what Islam teaches. Atatürk eschewed “false prophets” that stood between man and God. He held that Islam should be in conformity with reason and logic. He sponsored the construction of mosques in Tokyo and Paris.
These are not the hallmarks of a leader who was anti-religion or anti-Islam.
But Atatürk’s accomplishments go far beyond religion: He freed the Turkish nation from the shackles of imperialism and introduced reforms toward a civil society, science and modernity – from alphabet to secularism to women’s rights. Thanks to his reforms, the decadence and backwardness of the waning years of the Ottoman Empire was left behind.
It was a call for the Turkish nation to catch up with the West in science and modernity. Turks could still practice their religion, but the State did not adopt or sponsor a particular religion.
If the opponents of Atatürk like Mr. Akyol are breathing freedom in Turkey today, they owe it to the leadership of Atatürk.
If Turkey has any realistic hopes to join the EU, it is because a measure of westernization that Atatürk’s reforms have ushered in. (Reversals in recent years notwithstanding ).
The secular establishment Atatürk founded – through the Republic – was requisite for democratization in Turkey.
It was for good reason that Professor Arnold M. Ludwig of Kentucky University, after 18 years of study of the world leaders of the 20th century (“King of the Mountain”), picked Atatürk as the top winner among the contestants. That makes Atatürk a towering figure in world history. Opponents of Atatürk would do well to read that seminal book.
And it is also remarkable that the Greek Premier Eleftherios Venizelos, a former enemy of Turkey, nominated Atatürk for the 1934 Nobel Peace Prize.
The bigotry and ignorance of these opponents – pathetic as they are in their efforts – could be ignored if it were not for the fact that they regularly pontificate in printed and visual media. It is lamentable that these opponents do not show greater respect for the legacy of a visionary figure beloved by the vast majority of Turkish people. In no major newspaper in the U.S., for example, would one find derogatory remarks about George Washington.
Notwithstanding, there is little doubt that Atatürk will remain a towering historical figure among Turks. Reactionary forces that resist change and want to hold on to the past will not hold the Turkish nation hostage to their hatred and bigotry.
The West fought a hard and grueling battle for Enlightenment, and it eventually won. Turkey eventually will also win; for it must. This is what progress is about.
-
Obama’s Lack of Credibility Undermines His Initiative on Genocide Prevention
By Harut SassounianPublisher, The California Courier
If Pres. Obama ends up being a one-term President, he has no one to blame but himself. While it is true that he inherited the Bush administration’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a devastated economy, he has not only failed to lead the nation out of its quagmire, but in some respects has made matters even worse.Perhaps Pres. Obama’s biggest failure has been dashing the hopes and expectations of the American public. While most politicians routinely make promises they do not keep, voters trusted this particular President’s assurances that “Yes, We Can” bring about “Change.”Regrettably, within weeks of taking office, Pres. Obama proved that he is just another unprincipled politician by going back on his solemn promise of acknowledging the Armenian Genocide and playing immoral word games for which he had chided his predecessors. Since then, he has not kept his word on hundreds of other issues, thereby undermining his credibility and causing his popularity to plummet like a lead balloon.Having lost trust in Pres. Obama, most Americans no longer takes him seriously even when he attempts to do the right thing. Last week, he issued an important “Presidential Directive” on the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide, mandating the creation of an “Interagency Atrocities Prevention Board” within 120 days. This new Board is to be composed of top U.S. government officials, including the Vice President, the Secretaries of State, Defense, Treasury, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the National Security Advisor, and Directors of the CIA, National Security Agency, and Defense Intelligence Agency, among others.In his Directive, Pres. Obama claimed that “preventing mass atrocities and genocide is a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.” He went on to assert with a straight face that “history has taught us that our pursuit of a world where states do not systematically slaughter civilians will not come to fruition without concerted and coordinated effort.” Pres. Obama should be reminded of the wise words of philosopher George Santayana: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” How could U.S. officials take any credible action to prevent future genocides when they refuse to acknowledge past genocides?For this new super agency on “Mass Atrocities” to have any credibility, Pres. Obama should stop playing political games with genocide, recognize previous “Mass Atrocities” and draw appropriate lessons from them. Otherwise, his new Directive becomes just another clever ploy to boost his poor rating.Actually, Pres. Obama came quite close to saying the right thing in his Directive, as he was citing historical examples of mass atrocities and genocide: “Sixty six years since the Holocaust and 17 years after Rwanda, the United States still lacks a comprehensive policy framework and a corresponding interagency mechanism for preventing and responding to mass atrocities and genocide.” Curiously, Pres. Obama started his historical narrative with the Holocaust and avoided any mention of the Armenian Genocide — the first genocide of the 20th Century! If the United States is serious about fighting mass atrocities and genocide, it should start by refusing to deny and distort historical facts in order to accommodate modern-day political considerations.In his Directive, Pres. Obama suggested that the proposed interagency board consider the recommendations of the Genocide Prevention Task Force, co-chaired by former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen. This is a serious mistake because both of these cabinet members had sent letters to Congress opposing the adoption of a resolution on the Armenian Genocide. How could these genocide denialists serve as appropriate guides to prevent future genocides? These two former officials have lost all moral standing to make any pronouncements on the subject of genocide.Pres. Obama also issued last week a presidential proclamation banning the entry into the United States of individuals who have participated in “widespread or systematic violence” against civilians, and committed “war crimes, crimes against humanity or other serious violations of human rights.”Here are my humble suggestions regarding the two foregoing presidential initiatives:1) Since descendants of genocide victims have a unique sensitivity regarding acts of mass violence, Pres. Obama should appoint one representative of each of those victimized groups to the “Interagency Atrocities Prevention Board,” at least in an advisory capacity; and2) To prevent new genocides, Pres. Obama should ban the entry into the United States of not only those who have participated in gross human rights violations, but also those who are genocide deniers, because denial is the final step of the genocidal process, and a license to commit future genocides. -
Village institutes’ (Köy enstitüleri)
In the 40s, Turkiye experimented with elevating the education level in the countryside. `Village institutes’ (Köy enstitüleri) were founded according to the ideas of philosopher-educator John Dewey, who had visited Turkey in 1924. In his opinion classical education had to be combined with practical abilities and had to be applied to local needs. However, it was the central government which regulated this by law. Mid September lessons started for the pupils of the village institutes. They took theoretical and practical lessons which were supposed to be useful for daily life in the village. There was also resistance against this secular and mixed education. It was feared that it would educate ‘the communists of tomorrow’. In 1953 the village institutes were closed.
