Category: Authors

Robert Spano, President of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), visited Turkey last week at the invitation of the Turkish Justice Minister. Spano also met with Pres. Erdogan and give a lecture at the Turkish Justice Academy.

While the President of ECHR has the right to visit any country he wishes, it is highly inappropriate that he accepts an Honorary Doctorate in law from Istanbul University. Several prominent Turkish human rights activists wrote lengthy columns criticizing Spano for his visit and his acceptance of the Honorary Doctorate.

Former Turkish diplomat Aydin Selcen stated that Spano “is not fit to preside [over] the ECHR.” Cenkiz Aktar, a political scientist and academic, called Spano’s visit “scandalous” and urged him to resign. Exiled Turkish journalist Can Dundar wrote that Spano “destroyed the 30-year reputation of the ECHR in three days.” Ahval News quoted several other critical comments from prominent Turks regarding the unfortunate Spano’s visit to Turkey.

Mehmet Altan, one of those critics, is among the 192 professors of Istanbul University who was fired at the instigation of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Altan, jailed for his non-existent membership in the banned Gulen religious group, filed a lawsuit against Istanbul University to reverse his firing. Erdogan also dismissed over 150,000 civil servants from state jobs and investigated close to 600,000 Turkish citizens, arresting 100,000 of them under the false pretext of belonging to the Islamist Gulen movement which was accused of orchestrating the coup attempt against Erdogan in 2016.

The Turkish Ahval News website posted on August 31, 2020, an article titled, “ECHR chief may receive controversial honorary doctorate from Istanbul University.”

Ahval reported that Altan, in an open letter addressed to Spano and published on the website of Turkish journalism platform P24, urged him not to accept the Turkish invitation. “I do not know how much pride there is to be an honorary member of a university that condemns hundreds of lecturers to unemployment and poverty by unjustly expelling them from school,” Altan wrote.

Altan told Spano: “The University from which you will receive a doctorate is included as the ‘defendant institution’ in the lawsuit of academics, like me, who were dismissed by decree…. These cases are still ongoing and it is likely that they will come before the ECHR, which you preside over.”

Altan continued: “On March 2018, the second section of ECHR, presided over by you, set a precedent in universal law and ruled that my right to personal liberty and security and my freedom of expression had been violated. Turkey was convicted…. Ergin Ergul, who was appointed on behalf of Turkey to that case and was the only judge dissenting, put forward such arguments that you wrote ‘a dissenting vote’ against a dissenting vote, for the first time in the history of ECHR, if I am not mistaken. And the other members followed you.”

Ahval reported that there were over 60,000 individual complaints at the ECHR for violations of rights and freedoms in Turkey.

Yavuz Aydin, who was also dismissed from his profession along with 4,500 judges and prosecutors, wrote an article titled, “ECHR president faces a test of honor in Turkey,” which was published in Ahval on Sept. 2, 2020. Aydin wrote: “President Spano is certainly aware of the deterioration of rule of law in Turkey. As a man of honor who has been adjudicating on Turkey-related files at the ECHR for years, the purpose of his visit cannot be thought of as anything other than openly and courageously shouting out facts in the faces of government authorities.”

Aydin continued: “The ECHR president knows very well that the government in Turkey translated to one-man rule by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan since the constitutional amendment of 2017. As openly criticized by the Venice Commission, Spano knows that the separation of powers and judicial independence no longer exist in Turkey. Besides this, he cannot be unaware of Resolution 2156(2017) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which downgraded Turkey to the league of countries under monitoring status for the first time in European history. This decision implies that Turkey no longer meets the famous Copenhagen Criteria, and thus cannot be regarded as eligible for accession negotiations with the EU [European Union].”

Aydin then made a series of suggestions that he hoped Spano would follow during his visit to Turkey:

— Call on Erdogan to return to democracy and restore the rule of law in the country.

— Remind the Turkish leaders of the decision to remove from the Turkish Council of Judges and Prosecutors their observer status in the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary. He should also remind the candidate judges at the Turkish Judiciary Academy [TJA] why the European Judicial Training Network expelled the TJA from observer membership status in 2016.

— Tell them that the existing judges as well as the 10,000 new judges appointed after the coup attempt are often politically biased in applying the law, and call on them to ignore political pressure from the Palace, Constitutional Court and other high courts.

— Remind them that for the first time in history Turkey was found in breach of Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

— Tell the leaders in Turkey that they should immediately release the hundreds of judges still in solitary confinement and reinstate all 4,000 of their purged colleagues.

Aydin urged Spano “to decline the honorary doctorate even before stepping onto Turkish soil, conveying a very strong message to all parties before meeting with them in person. Otherwise, the good will exerted through Spano’s visit would not only be wasted, but serve as a trump card for the government and Erdogan, who will use the gesture as a sign of appraisal and legitimization of the illegalities taking place in the country under his rule.”

Regrettably, Spano ignored all the good advice provided by Turkish human rights activists and thus undermined his own reputation as well as that of the European Court of Human Rights!

I have written in the past pointing out Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s hypocrisy on proclaiming himself as the ‘defender’ of Palestinians, while maintaining a military, diplomatic and economic alliance with Israel.

Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem who is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute, published a lengthy article on August 25, 2020 on Gatestone Institute’s website, titled: “Arabs and Muslims to Turkey’s Erdogan: ‘Why Don’t You Protest Against Yourself?’”

Erdogan inherited from Ottoman Sultans the skill of walking a diplomatic tightrope. For centuries, the Ottoman Empire perfected the political art of seeming to be on both sides of conflicting powers. The Sultans sided with France and England against Germany and with Germany against France and England. The same policy is being pursued now by Erdogan, appearing to be on the Palestinian side, while maintaining multi-faceted relations with Israel. Similarly, Turkey is a NATO member, while purchasing advanced missiles from Russia which violates NATO policies. Amazingly, Erdogan is simultaneously the good friend of both Trump and Putin!

This contradictory and dishonest Turkish behavior finally was exposed in the Arab and Islamic world on the occasion of Israel and United Arab Emirates (UAE) normalizing their relations. Erdogan threatened UAE on August 14, 2020, to cut off diplomatic relations and recall Turkey’s Ambassador from the UAE, while Turkey itself maintains normal relations with Israel, where it has an Embassy, and Israel has an Embassy in Ankara!

Many Arabs are now reminding Erdogan that “Turkey was the first Muslim-majority country to recognize the State of Israel. They also remind him of his official visit to Israel in 2005 and the decades of military, strategic and diplomatic cooperation between Turkey and Israel,” Abu Toameh wrote.

Here are several statements that Abu Toameh quoted from Arab and Muslim sources exposing Erdogan’s hypocritical position.

Erdogan is “the official sponsor of terrorist groups in the region. He uses these groups to destabilize the Arab countries, including Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Egypt…. It seems that Erdogan is suffering from schizophrenia that surprises and confuses even his supporters,” wrote Egyptian journalist Adel al-Sanhoury, in youm7.com, on August 21, 2020. Jordanian writer Noura al-Moteari asked: “Does Erdogan have a mental illness and a dual personality, or does he know for sure that his followers from the oppressed Turkish people and the Muslim Brotherhood follow him with blind loyalty and do not see beyond the end of their noses? How does Erdogan threaten to withdraw his ambassador from Abu Dhabi because of the historic peace agreement with Israel, while the Israeli embassy in Turkey is active?”
Saudi political activist Monther al-Sheikh Mubarak wrote: “I am sure Erdogan needs a psychiatrist. It has been reported that Turkey will serve Israel by transporting Israelis to the UAE at a time when Erdogan is objecting to normalization [with Israel]. There is no cure for stupidity.”

Saudi political activist Abdullah al-Bander said in a video he posted on social media that Erdogan is known for his words more than his actions. “What’s funny is that Erdogan was also the first Muslim leader to visit the grave of [Zionism founder Theodor] Herzl in Israel and meet with [then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon. Erdogan is trading in the Palestinian cause. Turkey has had relations with Israel for more than 70 years, but it has done nothing good for the Palestinians all these years.”

Saudi writer Rawaf al-Soain also posted a video on social media platforms in which he asked: “Why don’t you [Erdogan] withdraw your ambassador from Tel Aviv and expel the Israeli ambassador in Turkey so that we can call you a hero and supporter of the Palestinian cause? By accusing the United Arab Emirates, Erdogan is being silly and despicable.”

The Saudi newspaper Okaz wrote in an editorial: “Erdogan’s regime does not miss an opportunity to trade in the Palestinian issue and deceive everyone. Despite Erdogan’s hypocrisy, which has become exposed to Arab and Islamic public opinion, his regime continues to play on the feelings of Muslims. The Turkish president appears to be applying double standards by ignoring the presence of his ambassador in Tel Aviv.”

Abu Toameh concluded: “The strong reactions of many Arabs to Erdogan’s threat is a sign that they understand that he is a conniving opportunist playing the Arab and Muslim card in an attempt to revive an Islamic caliphate under his rule. Judging from the broader Arab response to Erdogan’s threat, the Turkish leader, rather than being perceived as any kind of Caliph, is perceived as a demented demagogue and a sponsor of terrorism.”

In addition, Turkish journalist Burak Bekdil provided the historical background of Turkey’s double-faced approach to diplomacy in an article published by the BESA Center on August 27, 2020.

Bekdil wrote: “Turkey remained neutral during the Arab-Israeli war of 1948. At its conclusion, the then young Turkish republic became the first Muslim country to recognize the infant state of Israel on March 28, 1949. In January 1950, Ankara sent a career diplomat, Seyfullah Esin, to Tel Aviv as the first Turkish chargé d’affaires in Israel. In 1951, Turkey joined the Western bloc of countries that protested Cairo’s decision to deny Israeli ships passage through the Suez Canal. The Mossad [Israel’s Intelligence Agency] opened a station on Turkish soil in the early 1950s. In 1954, Turkish PM Adnan Menderes, while on a visit to the US, called on Arab states to recognize Israel.”

Probably worse than Turkish hypocrisy is the gullibility of Western and Arab nations that have been fooled by Turkish deceits to think that Turkey is their friend and ally.

On November 3, 2020, the American public, including Armenian-Americans, will vote for the next President of the United States.

As to whom should we elect on Nov. 3 to be President and Vice President is a highly controversial subject. There are strong and passionate feelings for and against Biden or Trump, often expressed in rude and offensive terms. 

Given Pres. Trump’s pro-Turkishness, non-existent position on Armenian issues, and his erratic behavior, I decided to vote for the Biden/Harris ticket. In doing so, I am motivated not just by the merits of their candidacies, but even more so by the failings of the Trump/Pence duo. Therefore a vote for Biden/Harris is necessarily a vote against Trump/Pence. Four years ago, I did not vote for either Trump or Hillary Clinton, given my total disappointment with both candidates. However, I cannot remain neutral this time around because four more years of Trump would be the death knoll of democracy in the United States and American relations with the world. The United States cannot continue to be held hostage by the minority of radical right-wing U.S. citizens who form Trump’s base. Trump was saved in 2016 by the Electoral College, despite getting three million less votes than Hillary Clinton.

As far as Armenian issues are concerned, given the Armenian community’s disappointment with previous U.S. Presidents’ lavish pre-election promises which they ignored afterwards, I am not optimistic that what Biden/Harris are promising now will be fulfilled, should they be elected. Nevertheless, we have repeatedly witnessed Trump’s love affair with Turkey’s dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan which is not about to end any time soon.

However, Turkish leaders are clever enough to woo Biden/Harris to their side after the election as they have done to Trump and many other previous presidents. This will be a critical battle between Turkish and Armenian lobbyists which regrettably has been won repeatedly by Turkey.

Presidential candidate Joe Biden and Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris have clearly expressed their strong support for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

In a letter to the Armenian National Committee of America on Sept. 16, 2019, Presidential candidate Biden stated: “The United States must reaffirm, once and for all, our record on the Armenian Genocide. We must never forget or remain silent about this horrific and systematic campaign of extermination that resulted in the deaths of 1.5 million Armenian men, women, and children and the mass deportation of 2 million Armenians from their homes. If we do not fully acknowledge, commemorate, and teach our children about genocide, the words ‘never again’ lose their meaning. The facts must be as clear and as powerful for future generations as for those whose memories are seared by tragedy. Failing to remember or acknowledge the fact of a genocide only paves the way for future mass atrocities.”

While this is a very supportive statement, Biden has left out from his text the name of the perpetrator of the Armenian Genocide: Ottoman Empire or Turkey.

Biden has a long record of supporting various Armenian genocide resolutions as a U.S. Senator, but when he was Vice President, President Barack Obama thwarted all efforts in Congress to recognize the Armenian Genocide, breaking his multiple campaign promises. Instead, Pres. Obama repeatedly used the term “Meds Yeghern” (Great Crime) to describe the Armenian Genocide, which was copied by Pres. Trump in the past four years. It is ironic that the two Presidents disagree on almost everything, except for their agreement to avoid the term Armenian Genocide.

Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris, as a U.S. Senator, sent a letter to the Armenian Assembly on Sept. 16, 2019, expressing her support for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Harris wrote: “I am proud to be an original cosponsor of Senate Resolution 150, which ensures that American foreign policy appropriately reflects and acknowledges the horrors of the Armenian genocide. When it comes to crimes against humanity, we can never be silent — we must always speak uncomfortable truths about the past, lest we repeat it.”

Given the adoption of Armenian Genocide resolutions by the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate last year, Armenian issues are no longer limited to the reaffirmation of the Armenian Genocide. There are several other important issues such as providing a larger amount of foreign aid to Armenia and Artsakh, improving U.S.-Armenia relations, supporting the independence of the Republic of Artsakh, and pressuring Turkey to remove the blockade of Armenia. These are some of the key issues that Armenian-Americans should demand that Biden/Harris take a strong position on before they are endorsed for President/Vice President.

Ali Chinar, President of Turkish Heritage Organization, wrote in the Turkish newspaper Daily Sabah on August 12, 2020, describing Biden’s negative views about Turkey: “– He is against storing nuclear weapons at the Incirlik Air Base [in Turkey].– He is against Turkey’s military operations in Syria and stated that YPG/PKK was betrayed by the U.S.– He made statements relating to concerns about freedom of the press and human rights in Turkey.– He emphasizes that, in collaboration with its allies in the Eastern Mediterranean, Turkey must be isolated.– He sides with Turkey’s withdrawal of Russian S-400 missiles; otherwise, he demands sanctions.– He has not made any statements about the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ) or the extradition of its members to Turkey, and nothing was done on the issue during his vice presidency.– He criticized the decision to turn Hagia Sophia into a mosque.– He said that he would recognize the so-called Armenian genocide.”

Between now and the Nov. 3, 2020 Presidential election, there is much more to be said in future articles about Biden and Trump and their positions on Armenian and Turkish issues.

On the top of all the other disputes among Armenians, a new controversy was added last week by Zareh Sinanyan, the Armenian Republic’s High Commissioner for Diaspora Affairs.

A few days before Sinanyan’s visit to Lebanon over the weekend, accompanying a plane-load of humanitarian aid from Armenia, he spoke on a teleconference with a group of Armenian officials and others and made some unexpected statements. Here are excerpts from Sinanyan’s statement:

“…We should create such a reality in Armenia that not in the distant future we can think about not only the repatriation of Armenians, but also making Armenia the homeland of, how do I say this, for nationalities like us. I am talking about Christian Arabs, Assyrians, those nationalities that do not represent a national security danger to Armenia and can be easily integrated in Armenia. Because in such an intelligent, thoughtful and civilized manner, we can change the demographic situation in Armenia. We should not be embarrassed by that. That is a correct step. That will be a success. Imagine that we can make Armenia a country that is attractive also to non-Armenians….”

Sinanyan’s above statement created a major controversy in Armenian circles worldwide. The vast majority of Armenian comments on Facebook pages were highly critical, turning this issue, like many others, into a partisan political dispute.

I also watched another one of Sinanyan’s interviews with the Civilnet website prior to his visit to Lebanon. In that interview, Sinanyan again spoke about Christian Arabs, Assyrians and other nationalities immigrating to Armenia. However, this time, Sinanyan stated that the idea came from Shahan Kandaharian, the edtor of Aztag newspaper in Lebanon, the official organ of the local Armenian Revolutionary Party (ARF). Sinanyan implied that the ARF supported this idea, repeating twice that Kandaharian is an ARF member. In fact, the ARF leaders have publicly announced that they prefer Lebanese Armenians not abandon the well-established community of that country. Naturally, no one can constrain any Lebanese Armenian from immigrating to Armenia, which is much more preferable than immigrating to other foreign lands. Kandaharian’s words were somewhat misconstrued by Sinanyan. In the video, Kandaharian was speaking about the immigration to Armenia of Lebanese who had Armenian roots, not Christian Arabs nor Assyrians. Sinanyan also alleged that those who criticized him on Facebook are ARF members and an “army of fakes.” While there may be a few fakes, but it is clear that the overwhelming majority of the critics are Armenians who do not wish non-Armenians to immigrate to Armenia.

Nevertheless, there are several important issues that need to be raised:

First of all, the immigration of non-Armenians to Armenia is a very sensitive issue for most Armenians with serious national consequences which go far beyond Sinanyan’s authority and responsibilities. The genocide of 1915 which decimated 1.5 million Armenians makes all Armenians extra protective of the remnants of their people and the diminished homeland.

Furthermore, while Sinanyan is responsible for implementing the Armenian government’s policy of repatriating Diaspora Armenians, the immigration of non-Armenians to Armenia has nothing to do with the office of the High Commissioner of Diaspora Affairs.

The immigration of non-Armenians is a matter of governmental policy. Since independence, there has been a small number of non-Armenians who have settled in Armenia as businessmen or family members of Armenian citizens. There have been also some refugees who have asked for asylum in Armenia. Anyway, it is doubtful that a large number of non-Armenians would be interested in moving permanently to Armenia in the near future.

To be clear, we are not talking about the various minority nationalities that live in Armenia, such as Yezidis, Assyrians, Greeks and Russians. These minorities have been residing in Armenia for centuries. There is no question about their continued residence in Armenia.

In terms of changing the demographics of Armenia and increasing its population, the first thing the Armenian government has to do is to establish policies that would discourage the native population of Armenia from leaving the homeland. This would mean creating jobs and providing housing. After that, the Armenian government should try to attract Diaspora Armenians, particularly those in the near abroad, such as the recent emigrants to Russia, to return to Armenia. To do that, Armenia needs to facilitate their move to Armenia by having a simple procedure for their resettlement, and providing them housing and employment. Otherwise, the Russian Armenians either will not return to Armenia or will turn around and go back after a short stay. This is exactly what happened to Syrian-Armenians who moved to Armenia, fleeing from the civil war in Syria. Many of them left for Western Europe, Canada or the United States due to lack of jobs and housing in Armenia.

The priority right now for Sinanyan’s office is to attract Armenians from the Diaspora to move to Armenia. If by a miracle, a large number of Diaspora Armenians resettle in Armenia, only then the Armenian government can raise the issue of allowing a large number of other nationalities to immigrate to Armenia. There needs to be a major national consensus for allowing a large number of non-Armenians moving to Armenia. This is not a one man’s or one group’s decision.