Category: Authors

  • International Legal Expert Affirms Artsakh’s Right of Self-Deter mination

    International Legal Expert Affirms Artsakh’s Right of Self-Deter mination

    image001 2

    A colloquium was held on February 27, 2018, at the European Parliament in Brussels on the legal right of self-determination for Nagorno-Karabagh (Artsakh). It was hosted by European Parliament deputies Michèle Rivasi (Verts/A LE) and Lars Adaktusson (EPP); and co-organized by the Armenian Legal Center for Justice and Human Rights, Tufenkian Foundation, and the European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy.

    The speakers at the colloquium were: Dr. Alfred de Zayas, a UN Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order; Dr. Paul Williams, Professor of Law, American University Washington College of Law and co-founder of Public International Law & Policy Group; Dr. Sergey Markedonov, Associate Professor at Russian State University; Armine Aleksanyan, Deputy Foreign Minister of Artsakh Republic; and moderator Giro Manoyan, Board Member of the Armenian Legal Center for Justice and Human Rights.

    Prof. Alfred de Zayas started his legal argument by quoting from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which stipulate that “All peoples have the right of self-determination.”

    Furthermore, international legal expert de Zayas emphasized that according to the two UN Covenants, “duty bearers of the right of self-determination are all States parties to the Covenants, who are not merely prohibited from interfering with the exercise of the right, but ‘shall promote’ its realization proactively…. They must not only respect the right, but implement it. Moreover in modern international law, self-determination is an erga omnes [towards everyone] commitment stipulated in numerous articles of the UN Charter and in countless Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. The empowerment of peoples to enjoy human rights without discrimination and to exercise a degree of self-government is crucial for national and international stability. Otherwise, a significant potential for conflict remains.”

    Significantly, Prof. de Zayas stressed: “Even though self-determination has emerged as a jus cogens [compelling law] right, superior to many other international law principles, including territorial integrity, it is not self-executing.” Among “legitimate claimants to the right of self-determination,” Prof. de Zayas included the Kurds, Sahraouis, Palestinians, Kashmiris, Igbos of Biafra, and Tamils of Sri Lanka. He also mentioned as examples “the Russian-Ukrainian entities of Lugansk and Donetsk, the Republic of Pridnestronia (Transnistria-Moldavia), the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno Karabagh), Alkhazia, and Southern Ossetia… among peoples that have achieved self-determination through effective separation from State entities with which they had hitherto been associated, but their international status remains inchoate because of the political bickering among the great powers and consequent lack of international recognition.”

    Prof. de Zayas added that people seeking self-determination “are entitled to the full protection of the International human rights treaty regime. A solution to the impasse can only be through peaceful negotiation, since the use of armed force against self-determination would violate numerous international treaties, including the UN Charter, the human rights Covenants, and the Geneva Red Cross Conventions.”

    “If there is a compelling demand for separation,” de Zayas insisted, “it is most important to avoid the use of force, which would endanger local, regional and international stability and further erode the enjoyment of other human rights.” In addition, “The implementation of self-determination is not exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the State concerned, but is a legitimate concern of the international community.”

    Prof. de Zayas explained that the principal of territorial integrity is only valid in the case of an external attack: “The principle is not intended for internal application, because this would automatically cancel out the jus cogens [compelling law] right of self-determination. Every single exercise of the right of self-determination that results in secession has entailed an adjustment to the territorial integrity of the previous State entity. There are too many precedents to count.”

    There should be no discrimination among people who seek self-determination, according to Prof. de Zayas: “The independence of the former Soviet republics and the secession of the peoples of the former Yugoslavia created important precedents for the implementation of self-determination. These precedents cannot be ignored when modern self-determination disputes arise. It is not possible to say yes to the self-determination of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, but then say no to the self-determination of the people of Abkhazia, Southern Ossetia or Nagorno Karabagh. All these peoples have the same human rights and must not be discriminated against. As in the case of the successful claimants, these peoples also unilaterally declared independence. There is no justification whatever to deny them recognition by applying self-determination selectively and making frivolous distinctions that have no base in law or justice.”

    For those who juxtapose the principle of territorial integrity to self-determination, Prof. de Zayas countered: “The principle of territorial integrity is not sufficient justification to perpetuate situations of internal conflict that may fester and erupt in civil war, thus threatening regional and international peace and security.”

    Finally, Prof. de Zayas suggested that “In order to ensure sustainable internal and external peace in the twenty-first century, the international community must react to early warning signs and establish conflict-prevention mechanisms. Facilitating dialog between peoples and organizing referenda in a timely fashion are tools to ensure the peaceful evolution of national and international relations. Inclusion of all stakeholders must be the rule, not the exception. In conclusion, let us celebrate the implementation of self-determination of peoples as an expression of democracy, as indeed democracy is a form of self-determination.”

  • Terminated Armenia-Turkey Protocols Should be a Lesson for Armenia’s Leaders

    Terminated Armenia-Turkey Protocols Should be a Lesson for Armenia’s Leaders

     image001
     
    Finally, the Armenian President officially declared null and void the infamous Armenia-Turkey Protocols during a meeting of the National Security Council last week. Pres. Sargsyan had made several announcements since 2009, warning that he would remove the Protocols from the Parliament’s agenda unless Turkey ratified them shortly. Pres. Sargsyan’s most recent such warning was made last September during his remarks at the United Nations General Assembly, stating that he would declare the Protocols null and void before the Spring of 2018.
     
    The Protocols were signed by Armenia’s Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian and Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on October 10, 2009, in Zurich, Switzerland. Also present at the signing ceremony were the Foreign Ministers of Russia, France, Switzerland, U.S. Secretary of State, and high-ranking officials of the European Union.
     
    The lengthy text of the Protocols called for the opening of the borders between Armenia and Turkey, and establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. The Protocols also included many other unrelated matters, such as recognizing the existing Armenian-Turkish border, and the establishment of a historic commission to examine problems between the two countries, meaning the Armenian Genocide.
     
    As a result, there was a worldwide outcry against adoption of the Protocols with protests both in Armenia and many Diasporan communities. Shortly before the signing of the Protocols on October 10, 2009, Pres. Sargsyan embarked on a worldwide tour of major Armenian communities in Paris, New York, Los Angeles,
    Beirut, and Rostov-on-Don (Russia) ostensibly to listen to their concerns regarding the Protocols. However, it was clear from his remarks at these meetings that he had made up his mind to go ahead with the Protocols, and the intent of the tour was to persuade Diaspora Armenians to give up their objections. During his visits overseas, Pres. Sargsyan was greeted with angry protests and confrontations making his propaganda tour a failure.
     
    During Pres. Sargsyan’s stop in Los Angeles on October 4, 2009, he met with leaders of 60 Armenian organizations with the overwhelming majority criticizing the pending Protocols, while thousands of Armenians demonstrated outside the hotel where the meeting was taking place.
     
    In my remarks at that meeting, I cautioned Pres. Sargsyan that Ilham Aliyev, Azerbaijan’s President, by objecting to the Protocols would block their eventual ratification by Turkey. Ironically, such an outcome would mean that Azerbaijan’s President, not Armenian’s President, would be inadvertently defending Armenia’s interests.
     
    It was clear to many Armenians, both inside and outside of Armenia, that Turkey had no intention of opening its mutual border. The Protocols were a Turkish ploy to pressure Armenia to make territorial concessions to Azerbaijan on Karabagh (Artsakh).
     
    In fact, the signing ceremony in 2009 was delayed by several hours when it became known that Turkey’s Foreign Minister, in his remarks, would link the unrelated subject of the Karabagh conflict to the Protocols. Only the last-minute intervention by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton temporarily resolved the dispute and the two sides proceeded to sign the Protocols.
     
    However, in the years following the signing ceremony, the Turkish leaders made repeated statements that they had no intention to ratify the Protocols unless Armenia made concessions on Karabagh. Indeed, Azerbaijan had vigorously protested the signing of the Protocols and warned Turkey not to proceed with ratification. Azerbaijan intended to pressure Armenia to make territorial concessions on Karabagh by keeping Armenia’s borders with Turkey closed.
     
    Armenia’s leaders had allowed major foreign powers to pressure them into making a decision that was contrary to the Armenian people’s interests. As a small state, it is understandable that Armenia could not act like its larger and more powerful Turkish neighbor which repeatedly flaunts the wishes of the international community. Nevertheless, Armenia’s leaders could at least make an effort to keep foreign intervention to a minimum.
     
    Another lesson Armenia’s leaders should learn from the Protocols’ debacle is that before they embark on initiatives that affect Armenian interests worldwide, they should hold serious consultations to make sure that the majority of Armenians in Armenia and the Diaspora are on board with their decisions. Naturally, internal matters affecting those living within Armenia’s borders are their prerogative, however, issues that affect all Armenians, such as the Armenian Genocide, Armenian territorial demands from Turkey, and the final settlement of the Artsakh conflict are major concerns to all Armenians. Long before signing any documents on these subjects, Armenia’s leadership should ensure that most Armenians agree with them. Otherwise, we shall see the repetition of ugly confrontations in Armenia and the Diaspora with Armenian authorities.
     
    I raise these concerns in response to Pres. Sargsyan’s two statements last week:
     
    1)    “When we started the negotiation process, we naturally predicted two outcomes — positive or negative.”
     
    2)    “If we get proposals tomorrow, or the next day, we will be ready to discuss them.”
     
    Pres. Sargsyan’s statements indicate that Armenia’s leaders have not recognized their mistaken approach to Armenian-Turkish issues. It is not true that Armenia did not lose anything. Turkey manipulated the Protocols to ensure that no foreign country meddled in the Armenian Genocide issue. In fact, Pres. Obama also exploited the Protocols to refrain from using the term Armenian Genocide in his April 24 statement of 2009 and in the subsequent seven years.
     
    Furthermore, Pres. Sargsyan’s statements indicate that Armenia is apt to make the same mistake again. For years, he had been declaring that Armenia is ready to ratify the Protocols the same day that Turkey ratifies them. Fortunately, Turkey never ratified the Protocols, preventing Armenia from taking an action contrary to its own national interests!
  • Pres. Erdogan, a Menace to the World,Should be Stopped Before it ’s Too Late

    Pres. Erdogan, a Menace to the World,Should be Stopped Before it ’s Too Late

    image001

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has become a major danger to his own nation as well as many others. His actions and statements in recent years should seriously worry his neighbors and the entire world.

    The last tyrant ignored by the international community was the genocidal butcher Adolf Hitler who unleashed World War II, invading scores of countries and killing millions of people. Regrettably, Western leaders have tried to appease Erdogan, thereby creating a monster! Strangely, some in the Islamic world treat him with respect, while many Western countries consider Turkey as one of their key allies. To make matters worse, Russia is also trying to win Erdogan over, to distance him from the West and NATO.

    A vivid example of Erdogan’s unfit mental state is his recent bizarre public statement posted on the Turkish President’s website, titled: “Turkey is the Standard-Bearer of the Global Fight for Justice.”

    No one in their right mind would make such a deceptive statement. Turkey is the last country in the world to be described as “the standard bearer of the global fight for justice.” With hundreds of journalists and tens of thousands of professors, lawyers, judges, and public employees in jail, how can Pres. Erdogan make such a false claim? Besides the current injustices perpetrated on the Turkish people, Erdogan also denies massive past injustices such as the genocide against Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians.

    Earlier this month, during a speech at the AK Party’s Eskisehir Provincial Congress, Pres. Erdogan shamelessly announced: “Turkey is also the standard-bearer of the global fight for justice. Turkey is a safe haven for the oppressed and a nightmare for the oppressors.” If Turkey is such a ‘safe haven,’ why so many Turks are trying to escape from the country and seeking asylum in Europe? Why is the Turkish government issuing arrest warrants for the escapees and pressuring European countries to extradite Turkish journalists, intellectuals and human rights activists?

    Appointing himself as a world leader, Erdogan has cast a wide net, meddling in the internal affairs of many countries, near and far: “Turkey is the hope for our Crimean brothers and sisters, the oppressed of Turkestan [Turkic people in Central Asia] and our friends from Caucasia, Sarajevo and Africa.” Erdogan goes on to affirm: “If we stumble, Al-Quds [Jerusalem] will fall, Palestine, Rakhine [region in Myanmar] and Somalia will fall.”

    Several days after Erdogan’s pompous speech, Turkish opposition journalist Uzay Bulut wrote a critical commentary in The Washington Times, titled: “Turkey’s violence-tinged foreign policy.”

    Uzay reminded readers that “the Ottoman Empire’s occupation of vast lands and Islam’s flag of conquest still influence Turkey’s foreign policy, including its invasions and ethnic cleansings.”

    The prominent Turkish commentator specifically cited Erdogan’s interventionist policies in Northern Syria (Afrin) and Cyprus. Uzay mentioned that Turkey, having illegally occupied Northern Cyprus since 1974, now threatens what remains of the Republic of Cyprus. Erdogan declared: “Cyprus’ courage will only last ‘until they see our army, our ships and our planes.’” Turkey has ignored dozens of UN Security Council resolutions asking for the withdrawal of its troops from Northern Cyprus.

    Erdogan also warned the European companies that are exploring gas fields in Eastern Mediterranean, in the territorial waters of the Republic of Cyprus. Uzay wrote that earlier this month “Turkish warships blocked a rig belonging to the Italian energy firm ENI from reaching Cypriot waters to start exploring for gas.”

    Erdogan admitted his expansionist policies drawing parallels between Afrin, Cyprus and the Greek islands of the Aegean which are frequent targets of Turkish threats and demands. Erdogan brazenly declared: “Whatever Afrin is to us, our rights in the Aegean and Cyprus are the same. Do not ever think that the natural gas exploration in the waters of Cyprus and the opportunistic attempts in the Aegean Sea drop off from our radar.”

    Going to more extremes, Yigit Bulut, one of Erdogan’s principal advisers, boastfully threatened Greece over the islet of Imia, which Turks call ‘Kardak.’ He warned: “Athens will face the wrath of Turkey worse than that in Afrin. We will break the arms and legs of officials of the [Greek] Prime Minister and any minister who dares to step on the Kardak islet in the Aegean. There is not an armed force in this region that could contend against the Turkish armed forces. So, everyone will know their place. All imperialists will accept that the people in this land are Turks and the nation in this land is Islamic ummah [nation] and they will kiss the hand that they cannot bend.”

    Commentator Uzay reported that Erdogan himself threatened Cyprus with yet another military invasion: “Just as we disrupt the plots [in Syria] through Operation Euphrates Shield and Operation Olive Branch, and soon in Manbij and other regions, we can and we will disrupt the plots of those who engage in miscalculations on our southern border. Our warships and air force are keeping an eye on the area in order to intervene in any way whenever required.”

    Turkey’s neighbors should be aware that Erdogan is intending to recover the Ottoman territories. He openly threatened: “Those who think that we’ve erased from our hearts the lands from which we withdrew in tears a hundred years ago are wrong.”

    At the end of his article, Uzay rightly pointed out that the Western countries are mostly responsible for Erdogan’s out of control behavior: “The global inaction in response to Turkish aggression encourages Mr. Erdogan, the president of a so-called “ally” of the West, to threaten Cyprus with yet another military assault…. What enables him to get away with his intimidating rhetoric and ongoing hostility is the apparent weakness and confusion of the West in the face of violent Turkish supremacism.”

  • Sassounian: ‘ANCA & US Armenians Should Sue The Daily Caller and Forbes Magazine

    Sassounian: ‘ANCA & US Armenians Should Sue The Daily Caller and Forbes Magazine

    image001 2

    In recent years, scores of ‘hired pens’ have written derogatory commentaries about Armenia and Armenian-Americans. Many of these anti-Armenians commentators are paid by the governments of Azerbaijan or Turkey.

    It is sad that some countries resort to such cheap tricks to repair their damaged reputation and disparage others. These countries have serious domestic problems widely known throughout the world without anyone getting paid to publicize them. The governments of Azerbaijan and Turkey have paid millions of dollars to public relations and lobbying firms in the United States and Europe trying to whitewash their tarnished images. Political leaders in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin and Moscow are not fooled by these tricks. They know well the extent of miserable conditions and human rights violations in these two Turkic countries.

    Today, I feel obligated to respond to a particularly deceitful article that appeared on Feb. 5, 2018 in the Daily Caller which is “a conservative American news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C. It was founded by political pundit Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney,” according to Wikipedia. Carlson left the website to focus on his Fox News television program “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

    The Daily Caller’s article, written by Raoul Contreras, is titled: “Armenian Influence Presents a Case Study on the Foreign Agents Registration Act.” The writer quotes from earlier article published by Forbes Magazine on Nov. 27, 2017 which falsely claims that “the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) is purported to be a ‘non government organization’, but is widely believed to have deep ties to Russian influence. The Committee betrays Armenia’s post-Soviet nation’s longstanding tradition as a proxy to its former motherland.” This sentence is a complete lie as ANCA does not represent the policies of Russia or any other country. It solely represents the views of a large segment of the Armenian-American community. The writer of the Forbes article is Mfonobong Nsehe, an Africa specialist, who knows very little about Armenia or ANCA.

    Based on the falsehood published by Forbes, The Daily Caller claims that “ANCA represents views of the government of Armenia and, by proxy, the Russian government. Without registration, that may violate FARA [Foreign Agents Registration Act] and lobbying laws.”

    Contreras highlights the fact that Armenia has signed a military treaty with Russia, but, fails to understand that Armenia has no choice but to enter into such a defensive pact. Should Armenia recklessly risk its existence when someday Azerbaijan and Turkey put into practice their hostile and threatening warnings? Contreras ignores the fact that Armenia also enjoys close economic, political and military relations with Western Europe and the United States.

    The Daily Caller’s Contreras concocts another lie in referring to contributions made by Armenian-Americans to U.S. political candidates. He falsely calls them “questionable campaign contributions.” A small amount of political donations are given by ANC PAC (Political Action Committee) which is a separate entity from ANCA and perfectly legal. Furthermore, Contreras does not seem to know that ANCA is a 501(c)(4) IRS (Internal Revenue Service) entity that has the right to make political endorsements. Contreras wrongly calls the ANCA’s endorsements “potentially illegal.” They are not illegal under American law!

    Contreras then brings up a long-settled issue — the 2009 complaint by CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics) in Washington with the Justice Department, the IRS and the Congress, alleging that ANCA violated FARA by not registering as a “foreign agent.” This complaint was thoroughly reviewed and dismissed nine years ago! Contreras does not have the honesty to report that CREW’s complaint had been dismissed by the IRS!

    Contreras goes on to recount ANCA’s success in blocking the Senate confirmation of Matthew Bryza as Ambassador to Azerbaijan. This is a great accomplishment and ANCA is rightly proud of it.

    Finally, Contreras quotes from a Washington Post editorial of 2010 which claims that ANCA’s “lobbying has made reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey, and between Armenia and Azerbaijan, more difficult — thus helping perpetuate Armenia’s impoverishment and overdependence on Russia.” It is laughable when non-Armenians like Contreras, U.S. publications, and hostile nations like Azerbaijan and Turkey, tell Armenians what is in their best interest. Armenians know much better than anyone else what is in their interest. They don’t need a lecture from anyone!

    Rather than suggesting that ANCA should register as a foreign agent, Contreras himself should do so for propagating the interests of Azerbaijan and Turkey in the United States!

    ANCA and Armenian-Americans should consider suing Contreras, The Daily Caller and Forbes for anti-Armenian defamation. The Daily Caller noted at the end of its article that “the views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.” Forbes published a similar note at the end of its article. Publishing lies is defamatory and nothing to do with the writer’s opinion. These two publications must be held responsible for disseminating falsehoods.

  • Mikoyan’s Surprising Comments to Nixon In 1959 About Armenian Rights in Turkey

    Mikoyan’s Surprising Comments to Nixon In 1959 About Armenian Rights in Turkey

    th
     
     
    Recently I came across a document from the U.S. archives that describes the fascinating conversation between Anastas Mikoyan, First Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union, and Vice President Richard Nixon on July 25, 1959 during the latter’s visit to Moscow. The two had met earlier during Mikoyan’s historic visit to the United States.
     
    The discussion between the two rival leaders at the height of the Cold War was polite, but animated. Nixon praised Mikoyan “who had left in the United States many friends who admire him for his stamina and agility in expressing his views.” Nixon also stated that “Mikoyan’s visit to the U.S. had broken the ice not only officially but also privately, regarding the respective points of view of the two countries.” The archival document noted that Mikoyan “returned the Vice President’s compliments in kind and added that the Vice President is a great debater who never leaves anyone in his debt.”
     
    The conversation quickly turned political when Mikoyan complained about the inappropriateness of a recent congressional resolution on captive nations — states subjugated to Communist rule, including Armenia. Mikoyan felt that the resolution was intended to undermine Nixon’s visit to the Soviet Union. Nixon gave the excuse that the U.S. Congress is an independent body and not even the President can control its decisions! Vice President Nixon went on to explain: “there are in our population elements, whether Mr. Mikoyan believes they are wrong or not, who feel that governments in their former homelands should be changed. Our Congress often passes resolutions representing the views of those elements, who include such nationalities as Polish, Hungarian, etc. The resolution, and particularly the proclamation of the President, had made a point that it was only an expression of the opinion of American people and the American Government and that they are not attempting to engage in so-called subversive activities.”
     
    Surprisingly, Mikoyan, one of the highest ranking Soviet officials, then brought up his Armenian heritage by telling Nixon that “he was an Armenian, and that although he is not active in the Government of Armenia proper, he knows some 30 Supreme Soviet Deputies of that Republic and all of them have been wondering who gave the American Government the authority to act in their behalf and why the American Government is not doing something for the liberation of really oppressed peoples, such as the Armenian minority in Turkey.”
     
    Mikoyan’s statement was surprising because he was speaking with Vice President Nixon as a Soviet leader, not as an Armenian. Furthermore, Mikoyan was not known as an Armenian nationalist. In fact, he had been blamed for the deaths of many Armenians during the infamous purges under Communist rule. Mikoyan also had not supported the reunion of Karabagh (Artsakh) with Soviet Armenia. These are some of the reasons Armenians were unhappy with the recent decision of the Yerevan City Council to erect Mikoyan’s monument in Yerevan.
     
    A further indication of Mikoyan’s anti-nationalist views is his statement of December 1919, during the short existence of the first independent Republic of Armenia (1918-1920): “Armenian chauvinists relying on the allies of imperialism push forward a criminal idea — the creation of a ‘Great Armenia’ on the borders of Historic Armenia. The absence of Armenians and the presence of an absolute Muslim population there does not concern them…our [Communist] party cannot support the idea of either a ‘Great’ or ‘Small’ Turkish Armenia.” The reality is that the Soviet Union did not defend the rights of the Armenians in Turkey.
     
    However, Mikoyan rightly pointed out that the United States is against “the liberation of oppressed peoples” when “the peoples in question are oppressed by its friends and allies,” such as Turkey, and many others.
     
    Mikoyan also questioned whether the Soviet leaders should pay attention to the positive gestures of the White House or the more hostile reactions of the State Department. Mikoyan “wondered whether the Soviet Union should believe the pronouncements by the President or the Vice President or whether it should regard this statement by the State Department as a direct expression of American policy.” Mikoyan explained that “the President had instructed the Department of State to work out measures for the development of foreign trade [with the Soviet Union]. In view of the actions taken by the State Department it appears that the President wants one thing and the Department of State another.”
     
    Mikoyan’s meeting concluded on a conciliatory note with Vice President Nixon promising that “upon his return to the United States he would work on the problem of trade, but that one must realize that difficulties cannot be resolved by a stroke of pen.”
     
    The above conversation shows that Mikoyan was in fact as “wily” as described by Western officials. He had survived for several decades at the highest echelons of the Soviet Union, ending up as Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, the nominal Head of State, from 1964 until his forced retirement in 1965.
  • GENOCIDE.COM A PROFITABLE ARMENIAN ENTERPRISE

    GENOCIDE.COM A PROFITABLE ARMENIAN ENTERPRISE

    THIS ARTICLE IS WRITTEN IN RESPONCE TO THE BILL INTRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA

    By an Armenian-American senator, to claim $$$$$ from certain parties for
    the decendents of non existing GEnoside…

    “I REGRET TO INFORM YOUR LORDSHIP THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THEREIN
    WHICH COULD BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS WHO ARE
    PRESENTLY BEING DETAINED IN MALTA… NO CONCRETE FACTS BEING GIVEN
    WHICH COULD CONSTITUTE SATISFACTORY INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE …THE
    REPORTS IN QUESTION DO NOT APPEAR IN ANY CASE, TO CONTAIN EVIDENCE
    AGAINST THE TURKS. R.C.Craigie,of American Archives,Washington,DC to:British Foreign Secretary, Lord George Curzon- 13 July 1922

    FRUITFUL LIKE A COTTAGE INDUSTRY

    Before we go any further, let us review what the expression ‘cottage
    industry’ means. The newest edition of a well known dictionary calls it
    “activity carried out or job done in workplace or at home.” Nothing could
    fit better than this to describe the labor-intensive work of Armenians in
    Diaspora. These people struggle slavishly, day and night, at home or office
    to achieve their obsessive objective: To ruin the good name of Turkey and
    Turks by every possible means. Some of their self-admitted confessions
    indicate that “they live every minute of every day just to hate Turks.”
    This hatred -charged loyal labor force, religious to the core, is supported
    one hundred per cent by the mother Church. Tens of thousands of its members
    work in a strictly organized fashion, following a unified agenda to create a
    product, which will represent to the world, on their behalf, the sum total of
    all the alleged misery and calumny ever befallen on the Ottoman Armenians in
    a far-away land, almost a century ago. The product they’re busy fashioning
    is an item, vital for their existence, as much as the air they breathe. It
    is extremely in demand, because without its indispensable support their house
    of cards won’t have a chance to stand up .
    The name of this much sought after profitable product is “GENOCIDE,” and the
    enterprise set up to produce it is called “GENOCIDE.COM ”
    (armenians@genocide.com) There is a HUGE amount of hunger generated for this
    item. Every Armenian wants to acquire it in large quantities, to be taken
    out hot from the presses, to be distributed lavishly by Armenians of every
    walk of life, to every corner of the world. The item is used during their
    interminable discourses, especially while the non-Armenians are being wooed
    to join their side. These people could be the members of domestic or
    international Media, representatives of various legislatures. They say that
    this article, “Genocide,” should be abundantly used at the beginning, in the
    middle, or at the end of all statements. This official procedure is to be
    strictly followed during all encounters with academics, city and state
    legislative bodies, or plain members of the local Press. As precious and
    indescribable an item the product may be, it is neither vegetable, nor
    animal, nor mineral. One may, however, call it ‘verbal.’ In normal
    conditions, excluding the ‘Armenian sacred’ month of APRIL, the principal
    place and time for this item to be used is very important. It is crucial
    that the propagation of the made-up scenarios, such as the improvised sob
    stories, the sorrowful narration of human sufferings of all kinds,
    experienced by their ancestors, and the “brutal” treatment they received
    from the rulers of the now defunct, Ottoman Empire are sensitive anecdotal
    materials ,and they have to be made quite believable. Needless to say, a
    majority of Americans do believe them. “Genocide” has been an item whose
    definition these people have been improving over the years, ever since they
    heard it first introduced in a publication by a non-Armenian . Now,
    however, having been appropriated from him, it is being honed and refined to
    an etymological perfection. Then it is sent everywhere to be subliminally
    transmitted into the cranium of every peaceful, and unsuspecting American
    citizen. This has been a proven method in which the targeted person or
    persons are made to learn to acclimatize themselves to the wrongdoings of
    the Turks as perpetrators of the “genocide.” Nothing is ever left to
    chance. All captive audiences are lectured time and again on the subject of
    a variety of cataclysms which allegedly occurred to their poor down-trodden
    Armenian relatives. Never mind the fact that the Armenians were the favorites
    of the Turkish Sultans and the
    One thing is certain though, the dates of these horrible events may
    constantly be changing. They could be referred to, at times, as having
    happened between the years of 1915 and 16, at other times between 1914 and
    1922. The most popular of them lately, has been the one of 1915 to 1923.
    However, this tedious, monotonous and definitely confusing work, is a labor
    of love for these unwavering, obdurate Armenians. Their work is believed to
    be generating from ghetto-like enclaves of Southern California. In ‘Silicon
    Valley’ alone 200,000 of them live, and many of them infiltrate the local
    computer-age cyber companies where they unload their one-sided views on the
    mythology of “genocide”. Unknown to these captive audiences is the fact that
    the “disinformatsia” the Armenians are passing on to their listeners, is
    worse than its original form employed by the Soviet Union’s KGB apparatchiks.
    The product these people are disseminating comes from their “mental
    rumination.” because they feed each other constantly stories of the distant
    past, most of them are, the purposefully-embellished semi-fictional stories
    depicting vague events allegedly taken place in geographically untraceable
    locales, with funny sounding Armenian names having replaced the original
    ethnic Turkish ones. Armenians make out of all this, a lucrative propaganda
    Industry. By collecting, packaging and peddling around these mythical fables
    passed on from generation to generation, rehashed by semi-senile
    grandmothers with their characteristically confused memories, they score
    success after success and thus recruit new turcophobes.
    The well- known French writer, and member of the “Academie Francaise”, Pierre
    Loti, despised the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire when he lived there and
    had dealings with them intimately on a personal basis. He is rumored to have
    said once : ” ..their vociferous blabber is the only claim to fame.”
    Actually, there could be no objection to what they’re saying and writing
    among themselves. But, this is not the case at all. With great deliberation
    and determination they use every cunning methodology and ‘modus operandi’
    to disseminate these venomous views of theirs, and shove them down the
    throats of uninterested American public and Media. This is the saddest part
    of the whole story, because, in most cases the same Media, accepts their
    drivel without further research or verification of authenticity. And the
    newspapers represented by the members of the Press, publish them verbatim,
    swallowing hook, line and sinker, every falsehood provided to them by the
    Armenian organizations. However, there seems to be an awakening observed of
    late. Some of the members of state legislatures are speaking up, saying :
    “resolutions dealing with 85 year old political events which may or may
    have not occurred, at another part of the world should have no relevance to
    the affairs of the state we represent in this country today.”
    Meanwhile, back in the Cottage Industry, oblivious to all this, writers of
    all caliber of talent and background grind out stories by the dozens. Every
    Spring when the month of April approaches a ‘frenzy and delirium’ take over
    these Armenian institutions. Everyone competes with everyone else, to outdo
    each other in sending letters, faxes, and e-mails, even telegrams to any and
    all publications possible. After all, Spring is the season of
    resurrection, and their stale concoctions left over from the previous years
    have to be revived once again and expedited to their new destinations as if
    they were some freshly cultivated crop. So, now is the perfect time to go
    out and plant in various journals and magazines these fictional accounts.
    Get them published in a myriad of bogus articles, then take those printed
    materials to show to the state legislators , to US Congressmen and
    Senators and demand that they pay attention to them and consider them in
    their future proposals, etc… And , low and behold ! their insidious system
    works. The routine goes on, people are fooled, the deception continues with
    no end in sight. The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) is
    happy, and the lackeys of the Armenian constituents, the unabashed
    bootlickers, the Boniors, the Porters, the Gilmans, the Pallones, the
    Radanoviches are the ones who keep on getting elected and sustain the
    “GENOCIDE.COM” operations. Their ultimate goal is to reach and inundate
    and infest the inhabitants of every conceivable location in this universe
    and beyond.
    The “drone-like” members of this cottage industry keep busy reproducing
    the tools needed to use against the Turkish nation and its government to
    force them to admit the “butchery” of millions of ‘innocent’ ancestors of
    theirs, and force the Turks to repent on the altar of history their
    systematic liquidation of the ‘millions’ of the Armenians in Anatolia.
    However, the figures used in this so-called “genocide” is an ever-changing
    thing. Every time they have reference to it the number of the victims
    fluctuates, varying between 300,000 to three million. This discrepancy does
    not bother the Armenians. They are used to this kind of thing. They are
    known to have lied and having deliberately misrepresented figures, and forge
    documents before. Interested parties should refer to the scandalous forged
    documents known as ANDONIAN papers. On various occasions when they organize
    “genocide” shows around the country, usually a disgusting “photograph” is
    exhibited. It shows hundreds of skulls piled up in a most gruesome
    fashion. The caption says: IN MEMORY OF THE 1,500,000 MARTYRED ARMENIANS
    WHO WERE MASSACRED BY THE TURKS IN 1915. The truth about this perfidious
    claim is that it is a lie. The photo is a counterfeit. It is far from being
    a photograph taken in 1915, it is in fact the photocopy of a Russian
    masterpiece painted in oil by Vassili Vereschagin who died in 1905. His
    original painting is still hanging at the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow
    today. The Armenians know this forgery quite well, but continue using it
    throughout the world on pamphlets and postcards. They did this as recently
    as last month in France.
    Soon after the First World War, the high ranking Ottoman officials were
    arrested and imprisoned by a victorious England, on the island of Malta. the
    men who numbered 140 were detained, while an Armenian scholar named HAIG
    KHAZARIAN was appointed by the British to locate evidence of war crimes and
    persecution of Armenians. After researching the archives of a captive
    Ottoman government, the British archives, and finally the U.S. Department
    archives, all the detainees were released after three years . Although
    Britain suffered a great deal of humiliation, at least, they thoroughly
    researched the matter and were decent enough to admit their mistake before
    releasing these unjustly accused people. ( Erol Bulur, Media Watch report,
    Oct.3,1990)
    WHAT ADOLPH HITLER DID NOT SAY!
    The oft referred to infamous “quotation” of Adolph Hitler: “Who still
    speaks today of the extermination of the Armenians” etc… is as phony as a
    three dollar bill. Hitler had never uttered those words. However, he is
    reputed to have used frequently the following quotation , which sounds like
    it was borrowed from his Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels : “The
    more you repeat a lie, the more it becomes the truth. To be able to give a
    more authoritative answer to the above Hitler quotation, let us read a short
    passage from Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov, Chairman, International Relations
    Division, Ankara, Turkey. Professor Ataov categorically refutes the quotation
    and says in part: “As a matter of fact, Hitler had probably made only one
    reference to the Armenians in a talk delivered on December 12, 1942, in which
    he described them as unreliable (unzuverlassig) and dangerous (gefahrlich.).
    Adolph Hitler was not the only one who had negative feelings about the
    Armenians. It was Pierre Loti, the French novelist and world traveler, whose
    name was mentioned above proudly defended the Turkish position, when others
    sided with the Armenians because they were closer to their religious feelings
    and beliefs. Loti knew the Turks intimately for having lived in Turkey and
    written books about his friends, the Turks, about whom he once said the
    following : “Their loyalty… unblemished honesty,…endless
    hospitality…religious tolerance …moral elegance and natural tact, do give
    affectionately deposition for the Turks in front of great Tribunal of
    Humanity. Letters continue to arrive to me everyday, from officers, soldiers,
    even Catholic priests, who were able to know them closely at the Dardanelles
    and who remain amazed to have found the Turks to be as I had described them.
    One of the most touching came from a soldier who had been their prisoner for
    a long time, to express his tender gratification of the Turks who took care
    of him with brotherly love. Thank God, the truth about them is beginning to
    make headway at home.” (France)….He continues, “To speak …about the
    Armenian race is for me more painful than one would believe, because the
    amount of their unfortunate ‘incidents’ rendered me almost scared; also… If
    I were able to claim and support that all the French who have lived in
    Turkey, even our monks and nuns, give the Turks their esteem and their
    affection, on the contrary, I believe that we would find barely one out of a
    hundred of us who has good memories of these ‘unfortunate’ Armenians. All
    who have had any relationship whatsoever with them, mundane or business,–
    business affairs above all, were turned away with antipathy.

    There are other testimonials . The well-known student of Turkish affairs,
    Dr.Stephan Ronart wrote the following in his, “La Turquie d’Aujourd’hui”
    The Turkey of Today, Paris 1937
    “….Three times in the same millennium, Turks have built three
    inter-continental empires- the mightiest that history has ever recorded. This
    expansive spirit has always been the normal pattern in Turkish social life.
    None of these early Turkish empires allowed the slightest religious
    intolerance to take hold among themselves, nor did they advance the
    superiority of one faith or of one sect over another.

    Alphonse de Lamartime,in his 9 volume essay on Turks wrote long before anyone
    else that Turks were generous and sensitive, that their country was that of
    gentle, heroic people. He proclaimed that to be
    the foe of such a people would be like being the foe of humanity. He
    finished his words by saying :
    “God preserve me from such a sin.”
    Having remembered the injustices perpetrated on the Turkish people by the
    Armenians and Greeks in these
    United States, and having just finished reading the above unsolicited
    testimonials, I cannot refrain myself from asking the following question:
    “Could our ancestors ever commit the crimes they are accused of? Were the
    Turks of the old Ottoman Empire capable of harboring within their hearts a
    burning desire compelling them to annihilate a human race, the Ottoman
    Armenians? Invariably the answer comes up a resounding “NO”, no, no, never!

    There are times when I find it impossible to comprehend the enormity of the
    accusation we Turks have been confronted with. To be able to endure for
    a long time, such a horrendous indictment, a “Genocide” we had to be totally
    innocent of the charges and we are. There was no such thing as a “Genocide”
    For those who ask themselves, “If Turks were such a fair, magnanimous, and
    gentle people why then the Armenians in Diaspora accuse them for such a
    horrendous crime of Genocide?” Here’s the answer which they will never
    accept because it runs against their profitable enterprise of GENOCIDE.COM
    . They will always refute the truth. The wholesale Armenian insurgence in
    the Ottoman Empire for a pipe dream called Independence, and the extortion
    of a piece of valuable Turkish real estate did not pan out ever since the
    Armenians have been playing the role of “bad losers” and selling a
    deportation/resettlement issue as
    plain old “Genocide”

    But why take the prejudicial words of a person like me? Why not listen to the
    an American, General James G, Harbord, the head of the U,S. Government’s
    investigative Commission, sent to Anatolia in the Fall of 1919 by none other
    than President Woodrow Wilson? In his report to President Woodrow Wilson,
    and to the U.S Congress,General James G. Harbord said the following: “The
    Turks and the Armenians lived in peace, side by side for centuries ; that
    the Turks suffered as much as the Armenians at the time of the deportations,
    that at the start of World War I and before, Armenians never had anything
    approaching a majority of the population in the territories they called
    “Armenia”; they would not have majority even if all the deported Armenians
    were returned; and the claims that returning Armenians would be in danger
    were not justified.”

    Finally as a definitive answer to the accusations of the profitable Armenian
    Enterprise “GENOCIDE.COM
    and to its tireless contributors, we have here, one more time, for every
    Armenian to see and to learn by heart, the official words used on the
    declaration of the British Government from the island of Malta, where 140
    high ranking Ottoman government officials suspected of having engineered the
    “Genocide” were kept incarcerated, and then let go free at the end of their
    third year of imprisonment in 1921. From 13 July 1922 British Foreign Office
    Archives, 371/6504/8519, Mr. R.C.Craigie of American Archives in Washington
    ,DC written to Lord Curzon, of England saying that :

    “I REGRET TO INFORM YOUR LORDSHIP THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THEREIN WHICH
    COULD BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS WHO ARE PRESENTLY BEING
    DETAINED AT MALTA…NO CONCRETE FACTS BEING GIVEN WHICH COULD CONSTITUTE
    SATISFACTORY INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE…THE REPORTS IN QUESTION DO NOT
    APPEAR, IN ANY CASE, TO CONTAIN EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS.”

    I’d like to bring this essay to a close with the words one more time of the
    great friend of the Turks Pierre Loti who in his book : “Fantome d’Orient”
    1928 wrote: “One should be blind to history not to understand the Turks.
    The dignified silence of the Turks against the mounting unjustified attacks
    and mean slanders can only be explained by their pity for the blind. …How
    beautifully this attitude of theirs answers the undignified calumnies.”

    Mahmut Esat Ozan
    Prof. Emeritus, Dept.
    International Studies
    MDCC, Miami, Fl.