Category: Authors

The rise of Azerbaijan

There is one development in the region of the Caucasus, that can not be ignored: the rise of Azerbaijan has changed the interest of the regional superpowers. Where Russia and Turkey were to preoccupied with their western neighbors, they are now turning eastern to the Causasus. The main reason for this is the big economic growth that Azerbaijan has gone threw in the last couple of years.

Ever since the disastrous war against Armenia back in 1992, Azerbaijan has invested largely in their rich oil and gas fields. This has led to the findings of many new oil en gas sources; the excavations and export of these sources has made Azerbaijan without doubt the richest country in the Causasus. Unfortunately for Armenia all the oil and gas pipes are build to go around Armenia (see map 1). So rich that Azerbaijan has found the confidence to tighten the diplomatic relations with other upcoming countries such as Polen , Belarus , Japan , İran , Romania , Russia and their historical and cultural ally Turkey . This is a big difference with Azerbaijan’s biggest rival in the Causasus: Armenia. Ever since Armenia occupied approximately 24% of Azerbaijan’s territory in 1992 (see map 2), it has been regarded as the outlaw of the region. Turkey and Azerbaijan have boycotted Armenia ever since the occupation, an occupation which has led to almost 30.000 dead Azeri civilians and another one million Azeri refugees who were forced to leave the areas occupied by Armenian forces due to Armenia’s policy of ethnic cleansing.

Now Armenia has to spend a big amount of their budget to consolidate the occupation of Azerbaijan, while almost al their neighbors are boycotting Armenian trade. The only lifeline that holds Armenia alive is the Russian-Armenian agreement. But this has started to change, since Russia has realized that Azerbaijan has a lot more to offer them than Armenia. While Armenia is almost bankrupt due to the heavy strain the occupation has provided them, Azerbaijan is among the richest countries in the region. Smart investments has led to a great increase in military technology, which is to be used to recover their lost lands. According to Azerbaijan president İlham Aliyev this can be achieved by diplomatic means or in the worst case by arms. Seeing that they are in a situation without a positive end, Armenia has come to terms with their underdog position. It has recently agreed to re-establish international relations with Turkey and is now talking with Azerbaijan to ensure that it won’t be swept of the map by the upcoming rich state of Azerbaijan. It was Turkish member of parliament Şenol Bal who described the situation accordingly:

“Currently, there is no production in Armenia. People head to other countries to earn money. Nearly 50,000-60,000 Armenian migrants work in Turkey. They support their families with their income back in Armenia. Today Armenia has to make concessions to Turkey, but not Turkey to Armenia. In fact, Armenia should ask us to open borders not to starve to death and abandon its claims.”

According to various diplomats, such as Aladdin Büyükkaya , Armenia has even informally agreed to leave to lands they have occupied for so many years. This has been confirmed by Azerbaijan president Aliyev who stated:

“Armenia has agreed to leave five Azeri regions it has occupied for 15 years. After doing so, we will agree to sign a peace agreement concerning the largest occupied region Karabağ [where fierce fighting between Armenian and Azeri forces continues on and off]. But Karabağ will not be an independent state, like Armenia wishes to realize, nor will their be a corridor between Karabağ and Armenia. It can at most be a autonomous province of Azerbaijan. After redrawing their forces from five Azeri regions, Armenia will have five years to withdraw from the other two regions Kelbeçer and Leçin.”

This would mean that the most disputed province of Karabağ (which is located at the hart of Azerbaijan but has a quite large Armenian minority), would be an autonomous province as a part of Azerbaijan. This would of course be good news for the approximately one million Azeri refugees who can at last return to their homes and not in the least for Armenia which can now start to trade with their neighboring states and in doing so, recover their economy.

There is one development in the region of the Caucasus, that can not be ignored: the rise of Azerbaijan has changed the interest of the regional superpowers. Where Russia and Turkey were to preoccupied with their western neighbors, they are now turning eastern to the Causasus. The main reason for this is the big economic growth that Azerbaijan has gone threw in the last couple of years.

Ever since the disastrous war against Armenia back in 1992, Azerbaijan has invested largely in their rich oil and gas fields. This has led to the findings of many new oil en gas sources; the excavations and export of these sources has made Azerbaijan without doubt the richest country in the Causasus. Unfortunately for Armenia all the oil and gas pipes are build to go around Armenia (see map 1). So rich that Azerbaijan has found the confidence to tighten the diplomatic relations with other upcoming countries such as Polen, Belarus, Japan, İran, Romania, Russia and their historical and cultural ally Turkey. This is a big difference with Azerbaijan’s biggest rival in the Causasus: Armenia. Ever since Armenia occupied approximately 24% of Azerbaijan’s territory in 1992 (see map 2), it has been regarded as the outlaw of the region. Turkey and Azerbaijan have boycotted Armenia ever since the occupation, an occupation which has led to almost 30.000 dead Azeri civilians and another one million Azeri refugees who were forced to leave the areas occupied by Armenian forces due to Armenia’s policy of ethnic cleansing.

Now Armenia has to spend a big amount of their budget to consolidate the occupation of Azerbaijan, while almost al their neighbors are boycotting Armenian trade. The only lifeline that holds Armenia alive is the Russian-Armenian agreement. But this has started to change, since Russia has realized that Azerbaijan has a lot more to offer them than Armenia. While Armenia is almost bankrupt due to the heavy strain the occupation has provided them, Azerbaijan is among the richest countries in the region. Smart investments has led to a great increase in military technology, which is to be used to recover their lost lands. According to Azerbaijan president İlham Aliyev this can be achieved by diplomatic means or in the worst case by arms. Seeing that they are in a situation without a positive end, Armenia has come to terms with their underdog position. It has recently agreed to re-establish international relations with Turkey and is now talking with Azerbaijan to ensure that it won’t be swept of the map by the upcoming rich state of Azerbaijan. It was Turkish member of parliament Şenol Bal who described the situation accordingly:

“Currently, there is no production in Armenia. People head to other countries to earn money. Nearly 50,000-60,000 Armenian migrants work in Turkey. They support their families with their income back in Armenia. Today Armenia has to make concessions to Turkey, but not Turkey to Armenia. In fact, Armenia should ask us to open borders not to starve to death and abandon its claims.”

According to various diplomats, such as Aladdin Büyükkaya, Armenia has even informally agreed to leave to lands they have occupied for so many years. This has been confirmed by Azerbaijan president Aliyev who stated:

“Armenia has agreed to leave five Azeri regions it has occupied for 15 years. After doing so, we will agree to sign a peace agreement concerning the largest occupied region Karabağ [where fierce fighting between Armenian and Azeri forces continues on and off]. But Karabağ will not be an independent state, like Armenia wishes to realize, nor will their be a corridor between Karabağ and Armenia. It can at most be a autonomous province of Azerbaijan. After redrawing their forces from five Azeri regions, Armenia will have five years to withdraw from the other two regions Kelbeçer and Leçin.”

This would mean that the most disputed province of Karabağ (which is located at the hart of Azerbaijan but has a quite large Armenian minority), would be an autonomous province as a part of Azerbaijan. This would of course be good news for the approximately one million Azeri refugees who can at last return to their homes and not in the least for Armenia which can now start to trade with their neighboring states and in doing so, recover their economy.

Drs. Armand Sag

December 8, 2009
“ARMENIA GETS PREPARED TO USE 1909 ADANA INCIDENTS AGAINST TURKEY”

26 November 2009

Historian Cezmi Yurtsever claimed that Turkish government’s ’Armenia opening’ initiative will be undermined by ’Adana incidents’ file.

Historian Cezmi Yurtsever claimed that Armenians are getting prepared to use ’Adana incidents’ as a political card against Turkish government as a reply to Turkish governments calls for Armenia to return to occupied lands to Azerbaijan.

Yurtsever said, “Armenians initiated preparations in 2009. They held panels and conferences titled „What happened in Adana in 1909“ about the civil war in Adana in 1909. This issue was brought to the agenda in Yerevan, Beirut Cilicia Church and Istanbul Sabanci University by the support of Armenian diaspora. In case Turkey brings the demand of withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied lands of Azerbaijan on the agenda of the negotiations towards normalization of relations, Armenia and Armenian diaspora will bring the issue of Adana incidents on the agenda and they will demand for compensation for the real estates of Armenian people that changed hand during the civil war in Adana in 1909.”

Reminding that Armenian archpriest of Cilicia Church in Beirut, Aram Sarksyan brought this issue on the agenda, Yurtsever said, “Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan, U. S. Ambassador to Beirut, and leading Christian religious leaders voiced these claims of compensation. But Aram Sarksyan claimed that Turkey should pay compensations for the real estates of 30 thousand Armenians that perished during Adana incidents. On the other hand, Ottoman archives show that the Armenian population in the province was about 18 thousand. This proves that statementsof Armenian religious leader were nothing other than speculation.”

TURKISH HISTORIAN EXHIBITS DOCUMENTS ON ADANA INCIDENTS

Historian Cezmi Yurtsever exhibits historical document that he collected from Ottoman archives and from the archives of other countries about 1909 Adana incidents. Yurtsever said, “I am aiming to bring the attention of Turkish officials to theintention of Armenian officials to demand for compensation on Adana incidents. Exhibitation will be open between November 24 to 28 in front of Adana Metropolitan Municipality Abidin Dino Park.”

November 28, 2009
Adana Massacres Focus of Istanbul Workshop

This is happening in Istanbul, not Armenia. Yuksel Oktay, Sukru Server Aya, Ergun Kirlikovali, Javid Huseynov or many other contra-genocide view holders are not invited, not welcome, and need not apply…. Peace-loving-dove approaches are easy and they bring in peace of mind to individuals promoting them but they may be naive, selfish, even cruel considering current realities… What follows below is hard, cold reality. We have too few people who figght back against nonstop defamation of all things Turkish and even that group is far from being organzied, focused, or even appreciative of the realities… As if Turks are the ones who occupy Karabagh or have driven a million Azeris into exile… Reality check please…

ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI ,

Turkish Forum Advisory Board Member & ATAA president Elect

November 13, 2009

By Roland Mnatsakanyan

From Nov. 6-7, Sabanci University (Istanbul) just hosted an international workshop entitled “Adana: 1909: History, Memory, and Identity from a Hundred Year Perspective.” The workshop included scholars from the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Turkey. The event was sponsored by Gomidas Institute (London), Sabanci University, Istanbul Bilgi University History Department, the International Hrant Dink Foundation, and Bogazici University History Department. A capacity audience filled the lecture theatre and included professors, students, journalists, and members of the public. There was simultaneous translation between English and Turkish. The papers that were presented will be published in English and Turkish editions.

In their opening remarks, Cengiz Aktar and Ara Sarafian welcomed the participants and pointed to new opportunities for holding such meetings in Turkey today. They explained that the Adana 1909 workshop was organized to mark the centennial of the Adana massacres. It began with a call for papers in Turkish, Armenian, and English, and the presentations at the workshop reflected the different interests of the participants.

The first paper was an unusual one, as it was a discussion of Turks who saved Armenians in 1909. The fact that Armenians were massacred was a given, and the speaker presented a sensitive examination of righteous Turkish officials who saved potential victims. The speaker used Ottoman records to show how Ottoman Armenians petitioned the state to recognize one such Turkish official for his role in saving an entire community. This first paper took some of the sting out of the workshop, where the audience could sympathize with the Armenian victims of 1909 without vilifying “Muslims” or “Turks” as single categories. Subsequent papers followed with the same sensitivity.

Each session was chaired by a senior scholar and was followed by a discussion. The workshop thus benefited from the presence of additional senior scholars, such as Selim Deringil, Caglar Keyder, Mete Tucay, and Hulya Adak.

The organizers considered the workshop a success.

The papers that were presented could be summarized as follows (not in the order of presentation at the workshop).

Some new perspectives

Abdulhamit Kirmizi gave a well-nuanced paper discussing the fact that some Muslims saved Armenians during the 1909 massacres. The role played by such Muslims was actually acknowledged by Ottoman Armenians after 1909. The speaker’s focus was Major Hadji Mehmet Effendi and his men who defended Sis, the seat of the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia, from attacks by neighboring tribes and villages. Kirmizi used Ottoman documentation to discuss such Muslims, many of whom were decorated by the Ottoman government. The actions of these officials were the opposite of other officials who encouraged the massacres. Another well-nuanced and probing paper concerned a complex range of different factors related to the Adana massacres. It was stressed that some of these factors could only be probed in a speculative but informed manner at this stage of debates. One such factor was identified as the presence of tens of thousands of impoverished migrant workers who could not find work in Adana in April 1909. Sinan Dincer ( Ruhr University, Bochum ) discussed such migrant workers in Adana province that season, and suggested that they could have been drawn into the fighting for no other reason than to loot and steal Armenian property. The speaker stated that he was not arguing that this was a major factor explaining the massacres, but it might have been a significant contributing factor.

Views from Europe

Two presentations discussed French and German records related to the Adana massacres. Vincent Duclert (EHESS) contrasted the position of the French government following the Hamidian massacres, the Adana massacres, and the Armenian Genocide. He noted that the French government was reluctant to press the Ottoman authorities after the Adana massacres because many French officials supported the Young Turk government. Instead, French authorities played down the issue in France. Dilek Guven (Sabanci University) discussed German consular records, as well as the records of the Baghdad Railway company. These records attested to the terrible suffering of the Armenians in 1909. She noted that German policy towards Ottoman Turkey was uncertain at that time, especially as the 1909 massacres were reportedly carried out by supporters of Abdul Hamid II, whom the Germans had backed until the 1908 revolution. Benedetta Guerzoni (independent scholar) discussed how imagery of the Adana massacres was constructed in western newspapers, with particular reference to Italy and France.

Some Armenian sources

Ara Sarafian (Gomidas Institute) and Zakarya Mildanoglu (independent researcher) discussed Armenian records related to the events of 1909. Sarafian introduced Hagop Terzian, who published a powerful report in 1912, on the 1909 events. Terzian included his own testimony in Adana city, as well as the testimonies of others in smaller communities. Sarafian argued that Terzian’s text had a certain popular force-of-argument that challenged official accounts that tried to play down the incidents. Sarafian quoted Terzian to stress the devastating role of the newspaper “Itidal” in agitating and fermenting violence against Armenians. Zakarya Mildanoglu presented the Adana massacres through the Armenian periodical press with many illustrations from different journals. His accounts included satire as a powerful tool to convey what had happened to Armenians. (Mildanoglu was also responsible for a separate exhibition of photographs depicting the Adana massacres. These images and texts were displayed at the workshop.)

American witnesses

The role of American missionaries as witnesses was discussed by Lou Ann Matossian (Cafesjian Family Foundation) and Barbara Merguerian (Armenian International Women’s Association), with powerful papers related to events in the cities of Adana and Tarsus. Tarsus was also the focus of Oral Calislar, a well-known Turkish journalist who presented the testimony of Helen Davenport Gibbons in her book Red Rugs of Tarsus. Calislar, who has published the Turkish translation of this work, gave a personal reflection regarding his native Tarsus. (The Gomidas Institute has just published a critical English edition of the Red Rugs of Tarsus.)

Human and material losses

The reality of Armenian losses was stressed by Osman Koker, who gave a fascinating paper on Armenian communities in Adana province, illustrated by photographs and postcards. He included images from Antioch, Alexandretta, Marash, Beylan, Sis, Adana, Tarsus, and Koz Olouk.

Sait Cetinoglu (Belge Uluslararasi Yayincilik) gave a forceful presentation on the organization and plunder of Armenian properties in 1909, while Asli Comu (Cambridge University) gave a solid paper based on land records from the Adana region in the 1920’s. These records gave new insights into how Armenian properties were broken up and par celled out to Muslim refugees. The actual number of Armenian casualties during the massacres was discussed by Fuat Dundar, who raised some questions about the demographics of the Adana massacres based on his work on the massacres of Abdul Hamid II and the Armenian Genocide. The fate of Armenian orphans following the Adana massacres became a major concern for Armenian community leaders. Nazan Maksudyan gave a moving paper on the fate of such orphans, especially in “foreign” orphanages. One key concern was assimilation in government-run orphanages where the language of instruction was Turkish and not Armenian.

Literary responses to the massacres

The legacy of the 1909 massacres could not be explained by simple numbers for casualties or lost properties. Literature was a powerful way to convey a sense of violence, loss, and trauma that accompanied events and lingered on in the lives of survivors. Marc Nichanian (Sabanci University) and Rita Soulahian (McGill Univeristy) discussed the literary response to the Adana massacres, with particular reference to Arshagouhi Teotig, Taniel Varoujan, and Zabel Yessayan. (Unfortunately Nichanian could not be at the workshop and his paper was beautifully presented by Hulya Adak (Sabanci University)).

Ottoman Parliament

Anastasia Iliena Moroni (EHESS & Panteion University, Athens ) discussed how the Adana massacres were presented in the Ottoman Parliament.

Adana Massacres Focus of Istanbul Workshop

November 17, 2009
Apigian-Kessel: Armenians and Greeks Band to Support Rep. Gary Peters

By Betty Apigian-Kessel on October 30, 2009

Congressman Gary Peters (D) of Michigan‘s 9th District in the U.S. House of Representatives was the guest of honor at a highly successful fundraiser dinner on Sept. 28 at Ginopolis’s Restaurant in Farmington Hills, Mich. The event was jointly sponsored by the Armenian National Committee (ANC) of Michigan and members of the area’s substantial Greek American community. It was an opportunity to get to know Peters, who will be making another run for Congress next year.

Peters, 50, a life-long Oakland County resident, has accrued an admirable record of accomplishment since earning his B.A. in political science from Michigan’s Alma College (Magna Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa), his MBA from the University of Detroit, and a law degree from Wayne State University.

The married father of three children has been a political science professor and a highly successful financial adviser, has served in the Michigan Senate, appointed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm as Michigan Lottery commissioner, and adding to his illustrious list of accomplishments is the fact that he served in the United States Navy from 1993 to 2000, and 2001-05 as lieutenant commander.

That evening, Peters’ introduction was by his mentor Paul Jingozian, a noted area financial investment adviser, presently serving as branch manager of Morgan Stanley in Birmingham. Jingozian brought the audience up to date on how he first met Peters: “In 1980, I had a mandate to go out and hire the brightest students for Merrill Lynch, and academically Gary was at the top of the list. I hired him immediately. He started out in the Rochester office working from the basement. He was studying law at the same time and beginning to gain an interest in politics. “ According to Jongozian, clients loved the hard working, customer-oriented Peters who had a passion for helping people, and he soon rose to the position of manager.

Jongozian’s mentoring included introducing Peters to the Armenian community by way of the annual golf outing sponsored by the Armenian General Benevolent Union (AGBU).

According to Jingozian, Peters told him, “I’m not about making a lot of money,” and soon parlayed his interest in politics into a successful run for the Michigan Senate and eventually the U.S. Congress.

Peters grabbed the headlines in a hard-fought race in 2008 when he defeated long-time Republican Congressman Joe Knollenberg for the 9th District Congressional seat in wealthy Oakland County northwest of Detroit, which began shifting from a predominately Republican stronghold to a Democratic one.

ANC chairman Ned Apigian also took part in the evening’s introductions by presenting Peters with best-selling author Peter Balakian’s book The Burning Tigris, “making the Armenian case known to the world.”

Apigian was good naturedly chided by Greek community leader and attorney Ted Andris, who rose to add levity to the evening, much to the amusement of the guests, by declaring the strong presence of Greeks as well as Armenians, although they “did not come bearing gifts.”

Author Bob Koolakian also presented Peters with his book, Struggle for Justice.

An item of great importance was the announcement that Peters had joined the Armenian and Greek Caucus. Attorney Basil Simon rose to commend Peters for his support of Greek interests concerning the illegal Turkish occupation of Cyprus. Much work remains in getting the U.S. to acknowledge the grievances of the Greek and Armenian American communities against the present Turkish government.

There is strength in numbers and Assyrians should not be left out of inclusion in these grievances, as they too were part of the genocide committed by the Ottoman Turks.

Peters was introduced to the guests as they arrived and immediately impressed them with his friendliness. Everyone wanted to get to know this new congressman and what his views were on the many pressing problems facing this great land which gave our immigrant generation refuge.

He answered questions intelligently, unfalteringly. He is a convincing speaker. “We have huge challenges ahead of us. Please discuss any issues you want,” he said. “As a member of the Financial Services Committee, we are working on Wall Street regulations. It was unfathomable about what happened in the auto industry, job losses, and our economy in Michigan. We have to get the economy going here.”

Peters is a member of the Science and Technology Committee. “We have incredible engineering brain power here. We have more engineers in southeast Michigan than any other part of the country. I introduced a bill for Advance Vehicle Technology Plan with over 315 votes supporting the bill. We are in a race with the Koreans, Chinese, and Japanese right now,” he said.

The congressman answered questions about Social Security, Obama’s healthcare plan with public option, and what is fact, what is reality. He commented that we have under-invested in science and engineering especially with regard to young women, and that was a major concern he wanted to work to reverse.

Twelve thousand dollars was raised to fund Peters’ run for re-election next year, an indication that he has garnered strong support from his constituents. There was an overall feeling that a mutually beneficial working relationship between Peters and the Greek and Armenian communities has been established. We wish him well.

One burning question remains. What if Peters runs for president in the future? He seems to have the qualities we want in a leader. Will he then honor the memory of our Armenian ancestors, who helped make America the great nation it is, by unequivocally stating that a genocide was committed against the Armenian nation? Then he will truly be deserved to be called a man of his word.

November 6, 2009
A. K. P-NESS: The condition of being A.K.P.
For reasons unknown, Istanbul has been dubbed the 2010 European Capital of Culture. And guess who is in charge of the year-long celebration? The AKP-controlled Istanbul 2010 European Capital of Culture Agency, that’s who.
- The AKP, the Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, the Justice and Development Party which brought neither justice nor development—
- The AKP, seven years in office spent worrying about whether a woman should touch a man’s hand, and calling it modernity—
- The AKP, seven years in office, squeezing the heads of women into headscarves, covering their bodies in bedsheets, and calling it freedom—
- The AKP, seven years in office with a prime minister who has grabbed responsibility for both women’s ovaries and men’s testes (and use thererof) by encouraging, at the top of his lungs, the production of at least three children in each family, and calling it democracy—
- The AKP, seven years in office, still banning thousands of websites, in the name of morality—
- The AKP, seven years in office, still spewing nonsense that the reason Turkey was spared epidemics in the 16th century was due to the Islamic religious ablution five times a day—
- The AKP, seven years in office, and its education ministry still distributes maps to students that depict Armenia, Bulgaria and Georgia residing within Turkish borders—
- The AKP, seven years in office, falsely imprisoning doctors, journalists, writers, businessmen, former military officers, and labor union leaders for their dissenting political views and depriving them of the constitutionally guaranteed rights—
- The AKP, seven years in office, and now picking a mindless quarrel with Israel to satisfy its egomaniacal cravings—
- The AKP, seven years in office, conducting stealth foreign policy initiatives under the direction of western puppet masters that lead to alienation, humiliation, and embarrassment for the Turkish people, and the Turkish Army—
- The AKP, seven years in office, resulting in fabulous wealth to party members, their families, and their special friends—
- The AKP, seven years in office looting the nation and trashing its culture, and calling it development—
And now this same AKP, is preparing for the big cultural event of next year by continuing to do what it does best… the P-word…PLUNDER!

Of surprise only to those who have spent the last seven years at the North Pole watching the polar ice cap melt, the Istanbul agency in charge of next year’s culture fest is being charged with corruption. Big money is missing. And, as is usual, no one knows what’s going on. Bear in mind that this money comes from another sweetheart deal, this one a hosing system that the AKP-controlled parliament approved two years ago. And it’s a beauty. Every time a long-suffering Turkish citizen buys gasoline a few kurus are siphoned off to feed the “culture agency.” The opposition party, the normally inert CHP, claims that this could amount to 250 million lira a year, adding that it smells a lot like the Deniz Feneri swindle that reaches, according to German Prosecutors, the highest levels of the Turkish government. But in typical AK-Plunder party style that investigation has been delayed, deferred, and otherwise quashed. But one thing remains absolutely clear; when the public’s money goes missing, the AK Plunder-party is involved. Playing with Erdoğan’s immortal words uttered in Davos: AKP, about plunder, you know stealing very well.

Beyond money, what has also gone missing is brainpower. It seems that the center piece “cultural” project focuses on yet another p-word: the penis. In particular, the penis of Prince Mehmet who had his prepuce removed to great and long acclaim in 1582. The prince’s father was Murad III, whose reign was described in My Name is Red, the book by the relentlessly self-promoting Turkish author, Orhan Pamuk, another P-word. Pamuk also got money from the culture agency—750,000 lira. Pamuk will use the money to open a museum—the Innocence Museum—the name of his latest book. For certain, connected and cooperative Turks, the rich get richer. And Yaşar Kemal, Turkey’s greatest writer gets exactly what?

It seems that back in the good old days of 1582, the celebration for paring the prince’s prepuce lasted a record 52 days (some sources say 55, but who’s counting). By any measure, that’s a long time to celebrate a teeny-tiny piece of skin from a wee pup of a boy. Moreover, it seems a rather weird event to play such a huge role in any representation of Turkish culture, even by rock-bottom AKP standards. But maybe I’m missing something. Of course, there was much pomp associated with the prince’s penis, considering where it came from and who it emulated, that is, the sultan and the sultan’s. (The boy’s mother seems to have played an uncredited role in the original production.) In this case, certainly pomp is important. Just examine politics and politicians for example (two more P-words). Thus one should pay notice to, and take heed of, the various and sundry processions, gift presentations, and celebratory performances that lasted so long. All this will be staged and dramatized, animated and filmed, documented and published. It will be like living in the 16th century, precisely where the AKP is bringing the country. In a somewhat penetrating article, the Turkish Daily News reported that the cultural commission’s project about the princely penis would not last the full 52 days. Instead, it would be a “shortened performance.” Indeed. Whether this wording was meant to be tongue-in-cheek was not immediately apparent. Nevertheless, even the “shortened” re-creation of Mehmet’s circumcision ceremony is estimated to cost Turkish automobile drivers 12 million lira. And that’s a whopper of a resurrection.

All of this sent me scurrying to my archives to find how some costs might be cut. Perhaps the actual cutting scene can be cut? Perhaps a cast member can be cut? Perhaps? Perhaps? I leave the reader to judge. As luck would have it, right next to my Atatürk biography by Andrew Mango, I found my copy of Jarrahiya Ilhaniye a tome about royal surgery by 15th century surgeon Serafeddin Sabuncuoğlu. It deals with everything one would want to know about Ottoman surgical techniques, particularly as applied to circumcision, more sharply applied to Prince Mehmet. I have read the details of the actual procedure. It might be sufficient to just peruse the following and decide for yourselves whether this event is worth all the time and millions.

The author, Dr. Sabuncuoğlu, suggests a scissor with slightly curved blade tips. He also recommends that two ligations be made for health and safety. No argument from me. He advises that “the surgeon cut the perpetual skin between the ligatures so that there will be no flow of blood and the glans won’t be wounded.” Again, this sounded like good advice to me. But then he began to discuss a complication that often occurs. Oh-oh, I hate complications, particularly…well…. Okay, it’s about…never mind, I’ll let the doctor tell the story*…

(Note: The bold-faced comments in brackets are mine and were recorded on a listening device in the prime minister’s office while I was reading Dr. Sabuncuoğlu’s book. I thank the prime ministry for the use of the tape. Such understanding people.)

“If a part or whole layer of the foreskin slips from your hand”[YIKES!], Sabuncuoğlu cautioned, “and is inverted during the operation [INVERTED? HOW…? LET ME OUT OF HERE!] draw it out immediately with a hook or a crochet [A HOOK? OH MAMA! ANNE! İMDAT!] and make your incision before the place swells.” [WHAT INCISION? WHAT PLACE? WHAT SWELLS?]

Sabuncuoğlu seems unusually calm about such things. He adds, “If you fail to do this, let it be.” [LET IT BE? WHAT KIND OF A DOCTOR ARE YOU?].

Not to worry says Sabuncuoğlu. [I’M WORRIED! I’M WORRIED! IT’S MY PENIS FOR ALLAH’S SAKE!] “Allow the swollen part to subside, and then gently peel the skin.” [SUBSIDE? WHAT AM I? A PATLACAN? PATLICAN MIYIM?].

“Be careful not to cut the tip of the penis,” warns the doctor, “but if it is cut there is no harm done.” [EASY FOR HIM TO SAY! ALLAH KAHRETSİN! HE SOUNDS LIKE ERDOĞAN AND HIS TEĞET ECONOMIC POLICY!]

“Dress the wound with flesh-generating powders.” [YOU QUACK! ŞARLATAN HEKİM!]

“Should the foreskin be cut away more than needed and the skin is wrinkled up that will do no great harm either.” [AAAGH!!! LANET OLSUN!!! AHMAK! DANGALAK!!!!]

But perhaps I overreacted.

Nevertheless, this great leap backward by the AKP, typical as it is, should be thwarted on the grounds of defamation of the character of the Turkish people. We live in a dangerous, difficult age. And that’s the point. We are not Ottomans who kept their women enslaved beneath the veil and behind the lattice, and all their people ignorant and illiterate. Our cultural reference is not their dark-mindedness. We, all of us, are modern, vital citizens of Turkey. Our cultural reference point is the Enlightenment not the corruptions of the Ottoman Empire. That’s the message that should be conveyed to Europeans, and indeed, the world. But first we need to convey it to ourselves. It is far, far better thing to light a candle than continue to curse the darkness. And that is the one sure way to dispel the murk of AKP-ness.

Cem Ryan, Ph.D.

İstanbul

* Consult the below address at MuslimHeritage.com for more “ceremonial” details.
October 24, 2009
TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

By NICHOLAS BIRCH, CHARLES LEVINSON and MARC CHAMPION

A war of words ignited by a new Turkish TV series depicting Israeli military atrocities escalated Friday, shaking what is probably Israel’s strongest partnership in the Middle East.

The first episode of the series, “Separation,” aired Wednesday on the public channel TRT, showed what appeared to be an Israeli soldier gunning down an unarmed Palestinian girl in a cul de sac. Shortly afterward, another soldier shoots a newborn baby.

The images sparked outrage in Israel. Labor unions said they would boycott Turkey as a vacation destination, and Israel summoned Turkey’s ambassador Thursday to lodge a protest. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in a statement Thursday the series “would not be appropriate in an enemy country and certainly not in a state which maintains diplomatic relations with Israel.”

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu responded Friday by criticizing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. He said a recent decision to exclude Israel from planned North Atlantic Treaty Organization exercises in central Turkey was made in response to public outrage in Turkey over Israel’s treatment of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip.

“While the tragedy in Gaza continues, nobody should expect us to put on military displays of this sort,” Mr. Davutoglu said.

As for the TV series, Mr. Davutoglu said: “Turkey is not a country based on censorship.”

Officials and analysts in both countries said the split reveals Ankara no longer needs or wants Israel the way it once did.

The two countries have long had strong diplomatic and trade relations, and Turkey has been a substantial buyer of Israeli military hardware. For years, Israeli pilots trained in Turkish airspace. As recently as August, Turkey took part in joint naval exercises with Israel.

But the ties were built in a period when Turkey felt hemmed in on all sides, analysts say. In the 1980s and 1990s, Turkey had poor relations with Iraq and shared with Israel a deep suspicion of Iran. It was also fighting a guerrilla war with Kurdish militants. In 1998, it came close to war with Syria. Turkey was also in conflict with Greece over Cyprus, while then communist Bulgaria and Armenia were historical and Cold War rivals. Ankara needed Israel’s military hardware and intelligence sharing.

“In the 1990s, Turkish foreign policy was guided by security issues, and that pushed Turkey closer to Israel,” says Kadri Gursel, a columnist for the centrist daily Milliyet.

But under Mr. Davutoglu and his boss, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey has worked hard to fix those problems and reintegrate into the region. This month, Turkey signed significant agreements with Armenia, Syria and Iraq.

“There is no need for this [partnership with Israel] anymore,” said Huseyin Bagci, professor of International Relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara.

Mr. Bagci predicts that Turkey increasingly will look to Italy, France and other suppliers to buy arms, rather than Israel.

The breakdown in relations also appears personal. Mr. Erdogan walked off the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January after clashing with President Shimon Peres of Israel over the conflict in Gaza. In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Erdogan was still simmering.

“If you look at Gaza, 1,500 people died, 5,000 people were wounded, infrastructure, the superstructures were all demolished. … What happened afterwards? There was nothing,” said Mr. Erdogan.

Israel and some Turkish analysts see an ideological component to the dispute, noting the Islamist roots of the ruling Justice and Development Party. “We’ve seen Turkey evolve and change since Erdogan’s Islamic party took power,” the senior Israeli official said.

Mr. Erdogan, in the interview, insisted his position wasn’t driven by identification with Muslim Palestinians, but by the need for honesty and fairness.

Turkish officials insist the relationship is far from dead. “Let’s make no mistake. We value a continuation of relations with Israel, but not at any cost,” said ruling-party official Suat Kiniklioglu.

Write to Charles Levinson at [email protected] and Marc Champion at [email protected]

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A9

October 21, 2009