Turkish Forum

Category: Authors

  • World EXPO 2025: what are the chances of Russia’s Ekaterinburg

    World EXPO 2025: what are the chances of Russia’s Ekaterinburg

    33249437771 d929e87cd5 oWith another milestone of the upcoming FIFA World Cup 2018 yet to be passed, Russia is heading towards the next major international event: EXPO 2025. Ekaterinburg, a Russian city that lies on the East of the Ural mountains is about to compete along with Osaka (Japan) and Baku (Azerbaijan) for hosting the prestigious exhibition. But what can a 2-million city located just on the border of Europe and Asia offer a toffee-nosed tourist?

    Indeed, Ekaterinburg is not a mass tourist destination like, say, Dubai or Bangkok. However, this modern and dynamically growing city still keeps inherent constraints in its development. Its compact structure and accurate infrastructure has made the city a top destination for modern construction and architectural projects.

    The winning of the contest for best architecture and urban planning concept for the EXPO Park in Ekaterinburg by the architectural firm Bechu & Associés known for designing the EXPO parks in Milan and Shanghai is just the perfect proof of that. A permanent host of the annual INNOPROM fair and Russia-China EXPO, Ekaterinburg offers an ultimate balance of culture and modernity, mainly due to the city’s history that goes deep back to the beginning of the 18th century from the time of the first Russian industrialists, the Demidov dynasty, who set up the iron factories and literally determined the fate of the Urals, as being the central core of Russia’s industrial might. Yet, Ekaterinburg is considered a relatively young city. Founded in 1723, it offers a mix of Russian industrial production and hi-technologies, alongside a historical element from Russia’s 18th and 19th centuries.

    neboskreb vysockij

    Perhaps, this unique mix of the past and the future, history and high technologies win over the hearts of city visitors and international guests and residents. U.S. Consul General in Ekaterinburg, Dr. Paul M. Carter said he would be glad to see Ekaterinburg the winner of the EXPO 2025 despite the official disapproval of this idea by the U.S. government. His words were echoed by French Consul General in Ekaterinburg Eric Millet.

    While many in the world consider Dubai, Singapore or even Istanbul models for “out of the box” progress, Ekaterinburg stands as a shining star in the center of the Ural mountains, dividing the continents by its Europe-Asia border. It is here that the crossroads of an ambitious new world is emerging.

  • Turkey is Most Frequent Violator ofEuropean Convention on Human Rights

    Turkey is Most Frequent Violator ofEuropean Convention on Human Rights

    image001

    Veteran Turkish journalist Sedat Ergin wrote in Hurriyet newspaper that “Turkey is the champion of rights violations at the European Court of Human Rights” (ECHR). The European Court rules on cases when signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights violate its provisions.

    Even though Turkey joined the Court in 1986, 27 years after its founding, it had more violations than all other member countries between 1959 and 2016.

    The European Court had a total of 3,270 judgments on Turkey. Only in 73 cases, Turkey was found by the Court not to have made any violations. The remaining cases were settled in other ways. Since more than one article was violated in most cases, Turkey’s violations total 4,514.

    The 2016 Annual Report of the European Court of Human Rights indicated that:

    — The highest number of Turkish violations (832) was in the area of “right to a fair trial.”
    — The 2nd highest category (707 violations) was “the right to freedom and security.” This latter category means that “Turkish citizens are frequently arrested using unlawful methods and that those arrests can easily turn into sentences,” according to Ergin.
    — The 3rd highest category of violations (653) is the “right to property protection,” which means that many Turkish citizens are deprived of ownership of their properties.
    — The 4th highest category (586) is the violation of “length of proceedings.”
    — “Lack of effective investigation” comes in 5th place with 412 violations.
    — “Inhuman or degrading treatment” is in 6th place with 314 violations.
    — In 7th place is the “right to an effective remedy” (268 violations).
    — “Freedom of Expression” comes in 8th place (265 violations).
    — In 9th place are 133 violations of the “right to life — deprivation of life.”
    — In 10th place are 100 violations of the “right to respect private and family life.”
     
    Regarding Azerbaijan, from 2002 to 2016, the European Court of Human Rights had 122 judgments, of which 118 were found to be violations of the European Convention on Human Rights, far fewer than Turkey, since Baku joined the ECHR much later, in 2002. The remaining 4 cases were settled in other ways. Since some cases had more than one violation, Azerbaijan had a total of 224 rights violations.
     
    — The highest number of violations (44) was the “right to a fair trial.”
    — The 2nd highest violation (34) was the “right to liberty and security.”
    — The 3rd highest violation (30) was the “protection of property.”
    — The 4th highest violation (21) was the “right to free elections.”
    — “Lack of effective investigation” was the 5th highest violation (17).
     
    Armenia, on the other hand, which joined the European Convention on Human Rights at the same time as Azerbaijan (2002), had fewer violations. There were 75 judgments by the ECHR against Armenia between 2002 and 2016, of which 68 were violations. The remaining 7 cases were settled in other ways. Since some of cases had more than one violation, Armenia had a total of 119 violations.
     
    — The highest number of violations (32) was the “right to a fair trial.”
    — The 2nd highest number of violations (27) was the “right to liberty and security.”
    — The 3rd highest number of violations (16) was the “protection of property.”
     
    Neighboring Georgia had a slightly fewer violations than Armenia. It joined the European Convention on Human Rights in 1999. Between 1999 and 2016 the ECHR had 68 judgments on Georgia, of which 52 were violations. The remaining 16 cases were settled in other ways. Since some of the cases had more than one violation, Georgia had a total of 99 violations.
     
    — The highest number of violations (20) was the “right to liberty and security.”
    — The 2nd highest number of violations (17) was “inhuman or degrading treatment.”
    — There was a tie for the 3rd highest violation (12 each) for “lack of effective investigation” and “right to a fair trial.”
     
    In addition to the above-mentioned violations, Turkey and Azerbaijan have much more serious problems with the ECHR. Turkey decided to suspend the European Convention on Human Rights following the attempted coup of July 2016. However, some parts of the Convention cannot be suspended, such as the right to life, and the ban on torture and the inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment.
     
    Azerbaijan faces another serious problem with the ECHR which had ruled that prominent Azeri opposition politician Ilgar Mammadov should be released from jail. Azerbaijan has refused to comply with ECHR’s decision since 2014. The Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe have adopted several resolutions urging Azerbaijan to release Mammadov. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has initiated an unprecedented judicial review of Azerbaijan’s lack of compliance with the ECHR ruling. Further non-compliance by Azerbaijan could result in its expulsion from the Council of Europe!





  • How Azerbaijan Distorts UN Security Council Resolutions

    How Azerbaijan Distorts UN Security Council Resolutions

    (Part 2)

    Last week, I described Azerbaijan’s distortions of two of the four UN Security Council Resolutions adopted in 1993. I will now present the remaining two Resolutions:

    Excerpts from UN Security Council Resolution 874, adopted October 14, 1993:

    “Calls upon the parties concerned to make effective and permanent the cease-fire established as a result of the direct contacts undertaken with the assistance of the Government of the Russian Federation in support of the CSCE Minsk Group.”

    “Expresses the conviction that all other pending questions arising from the conflict… should be settled expeditiously through peaceful negotiations in the context of the CSCE Minsk process.”

    “Calls for the immediate implementation of the reciprocal and urgent steps provided for in the CSCE Minsk Group’s “Adjusted timetable”, including the withdrawal of forces from recently occupied territories and the removal of all obstacles to communications and transportation.”

    “Calls on all parties to refrain from all violations of international humanitarian law and renews its call in resolutions 822 (1993) and 853 (1993) for unimpeded access for international humanitarian relief efforts in all areas affected by the conflict.”

    “Urges all States in the region to refrain from any hostile acts and from any interference or intervention which would lead to the widening of the conflict and undermine peace and security in the region.”

    Azerbaijan has violated every one of the above clauses. In addition to the frequent violations of the mandated cease-fire, the Azerbaijani forces attacked Artsakh in April 2016, causing major damage to border towns and killing civilians. By cutting off the ears of elderly Armenian villagers and decapitating several Armenian soldiers, Azerbaijan’s armed forces committed a barbaric act and a war crime!

    Excerpt from UN Security Council Resolution 884, adopted November 12, 1993:

    “Calls upon the Government of Armenia to use its influence to achieve compliance by the Armenians of the Nagorny Karabakh region of the Azerbaijani Republic with Resolutions 822 (1993), 853 (1993) and 874 (1993), and to ensure that the forces involved are not provided with the means to extend their military campaign further.”

    Armenian officials usually neither respond to the Azeri accusations regarding the UN Security Council Resolutions nor try to set the record straight. The only exception was Pres. Serzh Sargsyan’s comprehensive speech at the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 24, 2014.

    Pres. Sargsyan stated: “While discussing the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement I cannot but address the four UN Security Council Resolutions, which were adopted during the war, that every so often are being exploited by the Azerbaijani authorities in order to justify their obstructive policy.”

    “It is about those four Resolutions that demanded unconditionally as a matter of priority cessation of all military hostilities. Azerbaijan failed to comply. Azerbaijan’s own noncompliance with the fundamental demands of these Resolutions made impossible their full implementation. The Resolutions contained calls upon the parties to cease bombardments and air strikes targeting the peaceful civilian population, to refrain from violating the principles of the international humanitarian law but instead Azerbaijan continued its indiscriminate bombardments of the civilian population. Azerbaijan did not spare children, women and old persons thus gravely violating all legal and moral norms of the international humanitarian law.”

    “Now Azerbaijan cynically refers to these Resolutions — refers selectively, pulling them out of context as a prerequisite for the settlement of the problem. The adequate interpretation of the UN Security Council Resolutions is not possible without correct understanding of the hierarchy of the demands set therein.”

    “The Resolutions inter alia request the restoration of economic, transport and energy links in the region (UN SC Resolution 853) and removal of all obstacles to communications and transportation (UN SC Resolution 874). It is no secret that Azerbaijan and Turkey imposed blockade on Nagorno Karabakh and the Republic of Armenia from the outset of the conflict. The Azerbaijani President in his statements even takes pride in this fact promising his own public that direction would remain the priority of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy.”

    “The above mentioned UN Security Council Resolutions called upon Azerbaijan to establish direct contacts with Nagorno Karabakh. Azerbaijan refused to establish any direct contacts with Nagorno Karabakh, which was a legally equal party to the Cease-fire Agreement concluded in 1994 as well as a number of other international Agreements; moreover, Azerbaijan preaches hatred towards people it claims it wants to see as a part of their State.”

    “None of the UN Security Council Resolutions identifies Armenia as a conflicting party. Our country is called upon only ‘to continue to exert its influence’ over the Nagorno Karabakh Armenians (UNSC Resolutions 853, 884) in order to cease the conflict. Armenia has fully complied, and due to its efforts a Cease-fire Agreement was concluded in 1994. All UN Security Council Resolutions recognize Nagorno Karabakh as a party to the conflict.”

    “Azerbaijani authorities have failed to implement the fundamental demands of the Security Council Resolutions, including abiding and sticking by the humanitarian norms.”

    “Incidentally, Azerbaijan has been gravely violating this demand every now and then. Azerbaijan’s cruel and inhumane treatment of the Armenian civilian prisoners of war regularly results in their deaths. Although, I think, one shall not be surprised about it because it is the same State that suppresses and exercises the most inhumane treatment of its own people. A clear proof of it was the decision of the UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to suspend its visit to Azerbaijan due to obstructions it encountered in the conduct of official Baku.”

    “The Co-Chairmanship of the OSCE Minsk Group is the only specialized structure that has been dealing with the Nagorno Karabakh issue according to the mandate granted by the international community. While Azerbaijan is very well aware that it could not possibly deceive or misinform the Minsk Group, which is very-well immersed in the essence of the problem, it attempts to transpose the conflict settlement to other platforms trying to depict it as a territorial dispute or exploiting the factor of religious solidarity. That is ironic, since Armenia traditionally enjoys very warm relations with the Islamic nations both in the Arabic world or, for instance, with our immediate neighbor Iran.”

    I would like to summarize my key points regarding Azerbaijan’s distortions of the four UN Security Resolutions:

    1)    The UN Security Council Resolutions were adopted in 1993 during the height of the war between Artsakh/Armenia and Azerbaijan. These Resolutions reflect the conditions on the ground at the time. Since then, the situation has dramatically changed.
    2)    Despite the cease-fire that was signed in 1994 between Armenia, Artsakh and Azerbaijan, the latter keeps violating both the ceasefire and the UN Security Council Resolutions by its frequent attacks on both Artsakh and Armenia.
    3)    Azerbaijan opposes Artsakh’s participation in the negotiations, thus violating the UN Security Council Resolutions.
    4)    The Minsk Group co-chairs, composed of the United States, France, and Russia, are the official mediators of the Artsakh conflict, not the UN Security Council and not the UN General Assembly.
    5)    In fact, when Azerbaijan brought the Artsakh issue to the UN General Assembly in 2008, all three Minsk Group co-chairs voted against it. Azerbaijan’s proposal was adopted by a small number of States. The overwhelming majority abstained.
    6)    By blockading Artsakh, Azerbaijan is violating the four UN Security Council Resolutions.
    7)    Importantly, Armenia is mentioned in the UN Security Council Resolutions, not as a party to the conflict, but only as an intermediary to persuade Artsakh Armenians to comply with these Resolutions. Azerbaijan’s President Heydar Aliyev acknowledged this fact during his speech to the Parliament on February 23, 2001: “Four resolutions have been adopted in the United Nations Security Council…. It is written in these four resolutions that the occupational army should leave occupied lands of Azerbaijan. But there is not a word “Armenia”, that is, there are no words “the Armenian armed forces”. But in one of resolutions it is written to demand from Armenia to exert influence on Mountainous Garabagh (Nagorno-Karabakh). In reality, it is an Armenian-Azerbaijan war. In reality, Armenia has made aggression against Azerbaijan. However, nobody recognizes Armenia as an aggressor in a document of any international organization….”

    Azeris who continue to distort the four UN Security Council Resolutions should follow former President Heydar Aliyev’s statement and refrain from accusing Armenia of violating these Resolutions when in fact Azerbaijan is the one not complying with them.

  • Russian elections: why Putin wins

    For many Russian citizens who gave their votes for the future presidential candidates on Sunday as well as for most of international audience the result of the Russian elections has come to no surprise. However, the re-election of Vladimir Putin has risen a lot of controversies in the international media. While some experts believe the elections had been fabricated, independent international observers who were monitoring the elections process say exactly the opposite.

    Among the new members of the international observation delegation were the representatives from Abkhazia. They shared their fresh and unambiguous impression from the election process. According to Astamur Logua, Abkhazia’s Parliamentary Deputy, the entire election process met the international standards and was perfectly organized. He also added that voters who mostly came with their families and children were very cheerful and friendly while the atmosphere at the voting stations was quite festive. The observers from the Italian “North League” party mentioned that all international observers had been provided with all the necessary facilities required to perform their work including the free access to all the voting stations, non-stop support from the organizers etc.

    But what mystifies the international community the most is perhaps the conscious vote for Putin of most of the Russian citizens. Despite the “authoritative” style of the Putin’s policy, as how most of the Western media describe it, many young Russians along with the senior citizens preferred the Putin’s candidacy to a young opposition leader Ksenia Sobchak. Why did it happen? Many Russian people still clearly remember the tough 1990s, when Boris Yeltsin came to the power and proclaimed the change. It was then when many Russian people were left jobless overnight while others got fabulously wealthy. It was also the time when most of financial and trade deals not recorded and the proclaimed legalized government still reminded a sort of anarchy. When Putin came into power things got stabilized. Russian companies and industries started to thrive again while Russian people could afford buying cars, homes and have a better standard of living.

    Moreover, the example of Ukraine Revolution and the Arab Spring has taught the Russians a lesson: when it comes to the West’s interference into a sovereign government system and the West’s support of the opposition the outcome might be very disastrous for a single nation. Considering the multiple attempts of the West to destabilize the Russian legislative system including the latest case of Sergey Skripal’s poisoning the support of the Russian opposition could hardly have been massive for the Russians care about their national values, culture and traditions and remember the lessons the history has taught them.

  • How Azerbaijan Distorts UN Security Council Resolutions

    How Azerbaijan Distorts UN Security Council Resolutions

    image001 7

    The Armenian National Committee of America, San Fernando Valley West chapter, held an all-day conference on March 17 on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Artsakh (Karabagh) liberation struggle. The conference was held at the Ferrahian Armenian High School in Encino, California. The speakers were: historian Garo Moumdjian, Ph.D, California Courier publisher Harut Sassounian, ANCA National Board Member Steven Dadaian, Esq., A.R.F. Western US Central Committee Member Levon Kirakosian, Esq., and A.R.F. Western US Central Committee Member Vache Thomassian, Esq.

    Here are excerpts from Harut Sassounian’s remarks at the conference:

    The United Nations Security Council adopted four Resolutions during the Artsakh (Karabagh) war in 1993 calling for the withdrawal of Armenian forces, cessation of all hostilities and urging a negotiated settlement of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

    These four Resolutions are often cited by the Azerbaijani media which is under the strict control of the government of Azerbaijan. In the past 25 years, the Azeris have repeatedly condemned Armenia for not abiding by these UN Security Council Resolutions, and have made them a part of their continued propaganda war against Armenia.

    However, Azerbaijan has distorted the contents and context of these Resolutions, trying to deceive the international public opinion. Azerbaijan itself has not complied with these Resolutions. When one side (Azerbaijan) violates these Resolutions, it cannot accuse the other side (Armenia) of not complying with them.

    The UN Security Council is composed of 15 States: Five of them are permanent members who have a veto power (United States, Russia, China, Great Britain, and France) and 10 of them are rotating members. The UN Security Council is charged with maintaining peace and security among nations. UN member states are obligated to carry out the decisions of the Security Council.

    It is particularly hypocritical of the Turkish government to blame Armenia for not complying with the four UN Security Council Resolutions, when Turkey itself has violated over 60 UN Security Resolutions adopted since Turkey’s invasion of Northern Cyprus in 1974.

    Let us now review each of the four UN Security Council Resolutions which were adopted unanimously by all 15 member states. I have added my comments in bold letters at the end of some of the clauses of these four Resolutions:

    Excerpts from UN Security Council Resolution 822, adopted April 30, 1993:

    “Demands the immediate cessation of all hostilities and hostile acts with a view to establishing a durable cease-fire, as well as immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces from the Kelbadjar district and other recently occupied areas of Azerbaijan.” Azerbaijan has violated the cease-fire for 25 years on a regular basis by continuously shooting across the borders of Artsakh and Armenia.

    “Urges the parties concerned immediately to resume negotiations for the resolution of the conflict within the framework of the peace process of the Minsk Group of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and refrain from any action that will obstruct a peaceful solution of the problem.” The Minsk Group of CSCE, subsequently renamed OSCE, is composed of three co-chairs: the United States, France and Russia which are the official mediators to help resolve the Artsakh conflict, not the United Nations Security Council!

    “Calls for unimpeded access for international humanitarian relief efforts in the region, in particular in all areas affected by the conflict in order to alleviate the suffering of the civilian population and reaffirms that all parties are bound to comply with the principles and rules of international humanitarian law.” Despite this clause, Azerbaijan has tried to undermine the delivery of international humanitarian aid to the people of Artsakh.

    Excerpts from UN Security Council Resolution 853, adopted July 29, 1993:

    “Expressing once again its grave concern at the displacement of large numbers of civilians in the Azerbaijani Republic and at the serious humanitarian emergency in the region.” The reference to “the serious humanitarian emergency in the region” also applies to Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan.

    “Reaffirming the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Azerbaijani Republic and all other States in the region.” This clause applies to both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

    “Reaffirming also the inviolability of international borders and the inadmissibility of the use of force for the acquisition of territory.” Artsakh Armenians have the right to self-determination under international law and UN Protocols.

    “Reiterates in the context of paragraphs 3 and 4 above its earlier calls for the restoration of economic, transport and energy links in the region.” This clause is violated by Azerbaijan and Turkey by their blockades of Armenia and Artsakh.

    “Urges the parties concerned to refrain from any action that will obstruct a peaceful solution to the conflict, and pursue negotiations within the Minsk Group of the CSCE, as well as through direct contact between them, towards a final settlement.” The reference to “the parties concerned” and “direct contact between them,” implies Artsakh’s inclusion in the negotiations, as was the case earlier. Azerbaijan blocked Artsakh’s participation in the negotiations.

    “Urges the Government of the Republic of Armenia to continue to exert its influence to achieve compliance by the Armenians of the Nagorny Karabakh region of the Azerbaijani Republic with its resolution 822 (1993) and the present resolution, and the acceptance by this party of the proposal of the Minsk Group of the CSCE.” Armenia coordinates its negotiating position with the government of the Republic of Artsakh. However, Artsakh’s exclusion from the negotiations makes the task of coordination more difficult. Furthermore, Artsakh not being a recognized state and not a member of the UN is under no obligation to comply with any of these Resolutions.

    “Urges States to refrain from the supply of any weapons and munitions which might lead to the intensification of the conflict or the continued occupation of territory.” This clause is violated by Turkey, Russia, Israel, the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Pakistan, and several others, which have supplied billions of dollars of weaponry to Azerbaijan.

    (Continued next week)

  • EU’s bitter lessons

    EU’s bitter lessons

    europe crisisThe European Union continues to struggle with its economic and migration crises. The huge debt, obsolete political and economic regulations and inability to manage its migration policy are important alerts for the EU indicating the Brussels’s need to change its compass, says Pino Arlacchi, Member of the European Parliament.

    By pursuing the US political course in the Syria war, the EU did not get any visible profit. Instead, it was left alone to cope with the increasing flows of illegal migrants posing safety threats for the EU citizens.

    Indeed, The Syrian scenario is very much alike to the one in Afghanistan in 1979. When the Soviet army entered in 1979 trying to set up a friendly government in the country and altering the Cold War balances in the region, The United States, Saudi Arabia, and other countries started arming the anticommunist Afghan militia groups. The country was flooded with weapons while most of those weapons were in hands of Taliban. Shortly after that the US became the number one enemy for Afghanistan, says Arlacchi.

    During the Syria war, the US have once again learned the bitter lesson as they did in Afghanistan. However, the Syrian opposition is so diverse and uncontrolled that its arming could have much tragic consequences. This is why the US used Saudi Arabia and Qatar as a sort of a liaison to keep the balance in the region. But we also saw the conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar that split the countries apart. Obviously, the strategic alliance of Iran, Russia and Turkey has played a crucial role in the Syria war. All the countries could be able to gain the trust from both people and decision-making powers in the region. At the same time the US along with the EU received little credibility from the Syrian government.

    Moreover, the EU is swamped with its internal issues that it faces the risk of splitting apart. Ironically it may be, but with integrity being its main value, The European Union is falling apart today. A huge debt of Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Cyprus and other EU’s members and their inability to repay it explains the attempts of those countries to boycott the Brussels’s regulations.

    According to Arlacchi, the world is changing its compass and the EU has to adapt to it. The West is losing its role of the world economic and political dictator due to its huge debt and ineffective policy. Instead, China and Eurasia are on the rise today.