Category: Armenian Question

“The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary

Hayk Demoyan: Turkey three times attempted genocidal acts against Karabakh

PanARMENIAN.Net – At least three times in history Turkey has tried to commit genocidal acts while striving to implement the policy of total extermination and deportation of the Armenian population from Karabakh, director of the Armenian Genocide Institute Museum Hayk Demoyan writes in his article titled “Karabakh and Turkey’s genocidal attempts.”

The article posted on the AGMI official website goes on saying:

“From the historical point of view Turkey’s current stance and attempts to put preconditions to Armenia and the policy of pressure with the intent to get necessary concessions from Armenia in the settlement of Karabakh issue seem very actual; moreover, the references to the historical records are important in shedding a light on the origins of the ‘Turkish strategy’ in Karabakh issue,”

The first attempt

The expansion of the borders of the Ottoman Empire in the Caucasus has started from the 16th century. On the way to the Caspian shores the Turkish armies faced with the heavy resistance of the Armenians of Artsakh (Karabakh) and many times have suffered defeats from the organized resistance of the Karabakh Armenians. In 1725 Sultan Ahmet III (1703-1730) issued a special fatwa to exterminate Armenians for their successful resistance against the Ottomans and ordered to kill them all for bringing the Russians into the Caucasus and blocking the access of the Ottomans towards Baku. The confession of a Turkish general Saleh pasha, who was captured by the Armenians in Karabakh, confirmed that Sultan was aimed at total extermination of local Armenians. He said: “Sultan ordered to exterminate Armenians and Persians (Shia’s – H. D.), since the troops of the Russian Tsar had occupied that shore of the (Caspian) see, thus we have to assault on them. We should remove the Armenians, who are like a wedge between us. We should destroy any obstacle existing on our way and open the way. If there were not you (Armenians), we would have already stepped on Derbend and Baku that belong to us from the ancient times.” [1]. In this 18th century document we see the formation of the Turkish approaches towards ‘non-obedient’ Armenians, who as it was stated, were like a wedge between Istanbul and the Turkic East. After suffering thousands soldiers and pashas, Sultan’s and his allies’ attempts to annex Karabakh and to station the Ottoman forces there failed. Thus, the first attempt of the Ottomans to commit genocide against Karabakh Armenians was not successful, but this was just the beginning…

The second attempt

The second attempt to destroy the Armenian population of Karabakh took place after the Ottoman armies invaded the Caucasus during the WWI and created an artificial state baptizing it under the name of ‘Azerbaijan’ – using the name of the North Iranian province with the purpose of annexing the latter to the newly born Azerbaijan Republic. But this was not the only example of the Turkish state-building engineering. The proclamation of ‘Araz republic’ and the ‘South-Eastern Caucasus democratic republic’ followed the creation of Azerbaijan with the intent to ease the Turkish expansionism. (the modern example of such policy is the creation of the Turkish republic of Northern Cyprus after the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974). The Caucasus campaign of the Ottoman army resulted in capturing Baku city and committing horrible massacre of the Armenian population of the city in September 1918. After taking Baku, the Ottoman forces launched a new military campaign this time ‘to tranquil’ Armenian resistance in Karabakh. Ottoman war minister Enver pasha, who was one of the architects of the Armenian Genocide in 1915, ordered his cousin Nuri pasha, the commander of the Turkish forces in Azerbaijan, “to clear Azerbaijan of Russians and Armenians, in order to ensure Turkish-Turkic territorial continuity”(!)[2] A week after this order Turkey admitted its defeat in the WWI. The Ottoman army suffered its last defeat in WWI just in Karabakh when a detachment of the Ottoman army on their way of the punitive expedition towards the Southern villages of Karabakh were ambushed by Armenian villagers who destroyed about 400 Ottoman solders. The end of WWI and the Turkish withdrawal failed the second attempt of genocide. Later, as a result of Bolshevik and Kemalist Entente, Karabakh was annexed to Soviet Azerbaijan in 1921.

The third attempt

We are not going to claim that the third attempt was a direct policy of an extermination of Karabakh Armenians, but Turkey’s strong support to Azerbaijan in the latter’s attempts at deportation and the crimes against humanity enable us to claim that Turkey was directly involved in a new attempt of committing genocide against the Armenians in Karabakh. It is enough to say that hundreds of soldiers and officers of the Turkish regular army, including 10 generals were involved in the military operations performed against the Armenian self-defense forces. And again Turkey was loser in Karabakh, this time together with Azerbaijan and became a passive spectator of the Baku’s humiliated defeats in 1992-1994.

The Thrkish interference in Karabakh conflict and the open support to Azerbaijan in the war against Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia made Turkey more a part of the conflict rather than the its settlement. The Turkish involvement in the conflict included the following components: threats of military intervention, pressure by displaying armed forces, imposing transportation and energy blockade of Armenia; providing military support to Azerbaijan; developing initiatives directed to the formation of anti-Armenian coalition and informational isolation of Armenia; lobbying Azerbaijani interests in international organizations [3].

Permanent military menace and attempts at escalation, the blockade of Armenia and the efforts to isolate Armenia from the regional and international politics created a direct threat towards Armenia and Karabakh. Let’s sum up. The first statement based on the above mentioned historical facts is that having the case of the Turkish approaches towards the solution of Karabakh issue in the historical and modern dimensions in some way turned Karabakh into a polygon for approbation and implementation of genocidal policies by Sultans, Young Turks and Kemalists/Republicans. Moreover, Azerbaijani state created by the Ottoman Turkey has adopted the very Turkish code of demographic engineering, i.e. to solve the entire national or minority issues by imposing forced deportations or commiting mass killings and, in this way pave a way to the “safer and more secure” nation state. Nation states of Turkey and Azerbaijan were formed as a result of the extermination of other nations; thus, this fact represents one of the main threats for the future of both states.

Based on the above mentioned facts and records we can claim that 1. Turkey stands at the origins of the creation of Karabakh issue by the establishment of Azerbaijani state and has attempted to attach Armenian-populated region to it 2. Turkey is one of the sides in Karabakh conflict with an open support to Azerbaijan.

Triple genocidal attempts and defeats of Turkey in Karabakh from the local Armenians must have a clear message to Ankara: Turkey must recognize the Genocide committed against Armenians and many other nations in the ‘Pax Ottomanica’ since, the rewriting of the history is necessary to make ‘zero problem’ with its own history and memory since Realpolitik is not a solution for the country’s current national identity crisis.

For Turkey there are not other alternatives.”

March 11, 2011
Khojali Genocide

The story of Asli Mammadova – the only survivor of Mammadova family in Khojali genocide committed by Armenian and Russian armed forces on 25–26 February 1992 during the Nagorno-Karabakh War.

February 27, 2011
Ruthless Armenian Power gang hit by 74 arrests in huge crackdown on organised crime

Seventy four reputed members of an international gang called Armenian Power were arrested in a huge crackdown on organised crime on Wednesday.

Authorities said the group allegedly netted $20million through kidnapping, extortion, bank fraud and narcotics trafficking and that another 25 members are currently being hunted.

Among the accusations are that Armenian Power members, who are said to have ties with high-level crime figures in eastern Europe, put skimming devices at the cash registers in the discount 99 Cents Only stores and stole customers’ information to create fake credit card accounts.

Find him: FBI special agent John V. Gillies, holds up a photo of fugitive Armen Mkhitaryan, aka Ashot, during a news conference to announce the arrests of more than 70 members of the gang Armenian Power

Managers at stores alerted authorities when they learned of the scheme, which allegedly netted $2 million for the gang.

U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr said: ‘The indictments targeting Armenian Power provide a window into a group that appears willing to do anything to generate a profit.’

Glendale is the centre of the Armenian community in the U.S. but authorities also charged more than a dozen individuals from other states.

Facing charges: Mugshots released by the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force of some of the fugitives allegedly belonging to the largely Californian-based Armenian Power gang

Mr Birotte said some members of the gang are accused of bribing bank employees in Orange County to gather information that allowed them to take over accounts and steal at least $10 million. The group’s criminal enterprises in Los Angeles County netted another $10 million.

He added that the gang uses senior associates nicknamed ‘thieves in-law’ who help coordinate Armenian Power’s activities in America with actions by criminal groups in Russia, Georgia and Armenia.

Armenian Power is also broken down into cells with their own leaders, Mr Birotte said. Members have nicknames like ‘Capone,’ ‘Stomper,’ ‘Casper’ and ‘Thick Neck.’

In all, the crime group is believed to have more than 200 members.

Wanted: Alleged gang members Azizaga Salimov (left) and Armen Mkhitaryan

The group start as a street gang in East Hollywood, California, in the 1980s, identifying themselves with tattoos, graffiti and gang clothing, but the organization quickly became more concerned with racketeering than controlling ‘turf.’

Also known as AP-13, Armenian Power has close ties with the prison gang Mexican Mafia, which controls much of the narcotics distribution in California’s prisons, and has worked with African-American street gangs.

About 800 law enforcement officers were involved in the swoops on Wednesday, code-named ‘Operation Power Outage.’

The charges came after a two-year investigation by Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force.

Mr Birotte said: ‘This is a significant step in disrupting this organization.

‘These types of criminal organizations – through the use of extortions, kidnappings and other violent acts – have demonstrated a willingness to prey upon members of their own community.’

In one alleged kidnapping, several Armenian Power members forced a man to pay ransom by taking him to an auto body shop belonging to a group member and then threatening him with violence.

In an alleged extortion scheme lasting months, the victim and his family were forced to make repeated payments under threats, authorities said.

Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division said: ‘The department has undertaken the largest one-day takedown of La Cosa Nostra; a coordinated national effort against street gangs; and today, taken action against Armenian Power and others with ties to international organized crime.’

On the case: From left, U.S. Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, FBI Assistant Director Steven Martinez and U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte

In an alleged extortion scheme lasting months, the victim and his family were forced to make repeated payments under threats, authorities said.

Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division said: ‘The department has undertaken the largest one-day takedown of La Cosa Nostra; a coordinated national effort against street gangs; and today, taken action against Armenian Power and others with ties to international organized crime.’

John V. Gillies, special agent in charge of the FBI Miami field office, added: ‘This is the largest national take down of Eurasian organized crime.

‘Today’s significance is not just from the sheer number of arrests, but from disrupting their criminal influence in our community.’

Significant steps: Law enforcement officials Lanny Breuer (left) and Andre Birotte discuss Operation Power Outage

The Daily Mail

February 18, 2011
Understanding the importance of a shared history

Christopher Sisserian

The separation of Armenians and Turks in 1915 is a comparatively recent phenomenon. Both communities often choose to ignore their shared history, to the detriment of efforts at reestablishing ties, the most recent of which appear to have failed. Although the issue has received much attention following the assassination of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and the failure of the protocols aimed at normalizing the relations between the two states, it still remains misunderstood. Both outside observers and Armenians and Turks themselves are often unaware of the shared history between the two peoples, whose grievances cannot be understood without a greater knowledge of the past.
On Saturday, 20th of November 2010 the Times featured a DVD and an article on the life and works of the famous Ottoman architect Sinan. Unfortunately there was no mention of Sinan being Armenian, neither on the DVD nor in the accompanying article. In failing to mention this an opportunity was missed. Rather than neglecting or avoiding Sinan’s Armenian heritage, such facts should be emphasized in order to reflect the truly diverse nature of the Ottoman Empire. In this empire of many languages, religions, cultures and ethnicities, Armenians were often referred to as the millet-i sadıka, or the loyal millet, reflecting their loyalty and commitment to the Ottoman state. Armenians participated in all aspects of Ottoman life and as faithful supporters of the state occupied positions across the social spectrum.
Celebrating such interaction and the inseparable history between Armenians and Turks would do great service to the recent attempts of re-establishing relations between the two states through ‘football diplomacy.’ This necessary endeavor faces many obstacles, of which history is not only the most crucial but also the most difficult to overcome. In order for an understanding to be reached between the two nations regarding the genocide of 1915, it is first necessary to re-discover the history of two peoples living side by side harmoniously for hundreds of years. Sinan’s contributions to the empire must be viewed as a part of this shared history.
An understanding of this is the first step in re-humanising the relations between the two nations and promoting reconciliation. Armenians and Turks have dehumanized each other, often understandably, in the process of maintaining their separate cultural identities. Armenians learning about the genocide are led to believe all Turks were (and by extension still are) inherently evil, ignoring the many Turks that endeavored to save Armenian lives. Correspondingly, Turks alive today who bear no responsibility for the events of 1915 are incensed by accusations that they are guilty of a crime not committed by them. This ‘othering’ is a somewhat natural process in the formation of a national identity. However, it is also a major obstacle to progress.
Turkish journalist Ece Temelkuran’s recent work collecting stories about identity, history and memory from various Armenian communities has been a welcome effort in re-humanizing and depoliticizing an issue that is too emotional to be dealt with in purely rational terms within the political arena. Though needless to say it is this political dimension that opened the latest round of attempted reconciliation. For the Republic of Armenia the closed border with Turkey is economically suffocating, for Turkey the “Armenian Issue” poses a threat to one of its greatest foreign policy goals, integration into the European Union.
For both peoples any possible solution must be dignifying and honourable, characteristics of extreme importance to both cultures. In virtually any dealings between Turks and Armenians the issue of the genocide is brought to the fore, as is only natural for an unresolved problem of such gravity. However it is a mistake to allow the shared history to be distorted by this. The double suffering of a genocide followed by denial experienced by the Armenians must be properly acknowledged without Turks living today being blamed for a crime not committed by them. The first step towards reconciliation is to accept and understand how the two peoples lived alongside each other; celebrating the work of common cultural figures such as Sinan is crucial to beginning this process. Only once it has been remembered that Armenians and Turks used to live together in Anatolia peacefully can the next question be asked: why is it that this is no longer the case?
The recent statement by Turkish prime minister Erdogan expressing his desire to demolish a sculpture representing peace between the two peoples is another step back in the process of reestablishing relations. The two parts of the statue represent a single divided body, a fitting visual reference to the painful split between the two peoples. Once completed the statue would depict one of the figures extending its hand to the other, a symbol of reconciliation that transcends borders. The sculpture is located in the Turkish border city of Kars, a suitable location for such a monument. Kars, a former capital of the medieval Armenian kingdom, had a sizeable Armenian community until the genocide in 1915. The internationally acclaimed Turkish author Orhan Pamuk alluded to this in his novel Snow by referring to the now empty Armenian buildings. As in many towns all over Turkey these empty houses stand as a testament to this forgotten and unspoken history and its abrupt end in 1915. As a border town Kars would stand to benefit from the reopening of the border, reversing the decline it has experienced since its closing.
It is a result of this shared history that Armenians and Turks that encounter each other outside of Anatolia are often surprised at the level of understanding they have for each other. A shared Anatolian history, similar foods, words of common origin, shared cultural values and even the small particulars of coffee making unite the two peoples. This phenomenon often surprises young Armenians and Turks who dare to take a step forward. Occurring often on university campuses, it can be a highly rewarding experience for both sides. A common expression heard in Anatolia, in many of its languages, is that you cannot clap with one hand.
The reestablishment of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey leading to the lifting of the Turkish blockade seem to have faltered, with any prospect for renewed momentum unlikely until after the upcoming elections in Turkey. At the same time, renewed attempts will be prone to failure until progress is made from the bottom. Until the grassroots, ordinary Turkish and Armenian people are able to come together and discuss their past and talk about the future, there is little chance for their representatives to make progress.

============================================================

Turkish parties offer deputy nominations to Armenian leaders

Sunday, February 6, 2011

VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU

ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News

With the June general elections approaching, Turkish political parties are offering deputy nominations to leading figures in the Armenian community, which has not been represented in Parliament since the 1960s. ‘[My running] is kind of a challenge. I want people to stick to their promises,’ says Arev Cebeci, a candidate from the main opposition

The Armenian community is generally indifferent to politics due to painful past events, says Arev Cebeci, who has thrown his hat into the ring as a candidate from the main opposition.

Seven members of Istanbul’s Armenian community are seeking parliamentary deputy posts, holding out the promise that the June general elections may see the group represented in Parliament for the first time in five decades.

“I am an Armenian, but I am also a part of the whole. If I join Parliament, of course I will bring my community’s problems to the fore. But I would like to represent the whole [country] as well,” Arev Cebeci, who has thrown his hat into the ring as a candidate from the main opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.

“[My running] is kind of a challenge. I want some people to stick to their promises,” said Cebeci.

A total of seven Armenian figures are currently seeking parliamentary posts; six have been offered nominations by political parties, while one is likely to join the chase as an independent deputy nominee.

According to Cebeci, the Armenian community in Turkey has typically shied away from politics due to painful events in its past. “We have always been scared by our families,” he said. “They did not want us to be at the forefront. We have always led low-profile lives.”

The murder of Armenian-Turkish journalist and daily Agos Editor-in-Chief Hrant Dink in 2007 was a turning point, Cebeci said. “In the aftermath of the killing, a group of Armenians become more silent, believing that if you speak out, you die. Others, in large numbers, have begun to claim their rights.”

The election of Armenian-Turkish figures to Parliament would be a first since the 1960s, according to Ayhan Aktar, a professor at Istanbul Bilgi University who is known for his research on minorities in Turkey. Noting that members of minority groups were not allowed to become civil servants in the Turkish Republic until 1937, Aktar said: “In the Civil Code dated 1926, the most important qualification for a civil servant candidate was to be of Turkish descent. Therefore, with this law, non-Muslims were clearly denied from civil service. The relevant article was amended in 1946 to include all ‘citizens of the Republic of Turkey.’”

With Turkey still pursuing European Union membership, the country’s Armenian community sees an opportunity to voice its concerns and find solutions to them, Cebeci said. “Our community, unfortunately, is not even aware of its rights granted in the Lausanne Treaty,” he said. “They have adopted a stance of ‘let sleeping dogs lie.’ But I think this is very wrong.”

The Lausanne Treaty of 1923 defined three legally established minorities in Turkey: Greeks, Armenians and Jews. This definition was made at the behest of Western powers and obligated the new Turkish Republic to acknowledge the special status of these groups.

Though the CHP is currently courting some Armenian figures in the run-up to the elections, relations between the party and the community have not always been warm. Just prior to the local elections in 2009, CHP deputy Canan Arıtman issued a statement that infuriated both Armenians in Turkey and the broader public. Arıtman claimed that President Abdullah Gül supported an Armenian apology petition campaign and that he is of Armenian descent on his mother’s side. Armenian-Turkish Raffi A. Hermon, now the acting mayor from the CHP of Istanbul’s Princes’ Islands, was also criticized for his involvement with the party following Arıtman’s statement.

Launched in December 2008, the “I apologize” campaign has drawn harsh criticism within Turkey, even as some 30,000 people, including many intellectuals and journalists, have signed the petition, which reads in part: “My conscience does not accept the insensitivity showed and the denial of the Great Catastrophe that the Armenians were subjected to in 1915.” Armenia claims up to 1.5 million Armenians were systematically killed in 1915 under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. Turkey denies this, saying that any deaths were the result of civil strife that erupted when Armenians took up arms for independence in Eastern Anatolia.

Non-Muslims and politics

According to Aktar, Turkey’s minorities have suffered discrimination throughout the history of the Republic. “In 1935, the CHP formed a group called the ‘Independent Group,’ which also included non-Muslims. But they did not have a say on any issue,” he said, adding that the group normally had the task of serving as an opposition during the one-party period at the Parliament.

The professor also said non-Muslims were not represented in Parliament after 1960, though they reappeared in politics in 1999 with the election of Cefi Kamhi, who is of Jewish descent, to Parliament from the True Path Party, or DYP.

CORRECTION: In an earlier version of this story, the Daily News incorrectly spelled Cefi Kamhi’s surname. The error was corrected on Feb. 7, 2011. The Daily News regrets the error.

February 11, 2011
LSE conference speaker Professor J McCarthy attacked by Armenian audience

Betula Nelson
hhtp://ataturksocietyuk.com
10/02/2001
LSE conference speaker Professor J McCarthy attacked by Armenian audience

Organised by the Federation of Turkish Associations UK and entitled ‘Turkish- Armenian Relations’ this conference took place at the London School of Economics on Friday the 4th February 2011. It was attended by approximately 350 people and amongst the guests were Dr Andrew Mango, British Armenian historian Ara Sarafians,Turkish Ambassador, Azerbaijani Ambassador and other embassy officials. This annual conference is held in remembrance of the Turkish diplomats who were the victims of Armenian terrorists in several countries in the past.
The guest speaker Prof. Justin McCarthy specialises in the social and demographic history of the Modern Middle East, particularly Turkey and the Ottoman Empire. He is presently Distinguished Professor of Arts and Sciences and Distinguished University Scholar at the University of Louisville.He spoke on the subject of ‘Prejudice, Deception and the Armenian Question’.
The conference was chaired by Prof. Sevket Pamuk, Turkish Studies Dept. at the LSE.

Prof. McCarthy explained that the 1915-1919 War years have already been widely discussed and written about, therefore he would concentrate on an earlier period around the 1890s and particularly the Sasun events. He demonstrated with maps, photographs and cartoons how it would have been impossible to report the events from Sasun as they had been by British Embassy Consulars and the various American missionaries who never got beyond the cities of Van or Kayseri. Due to the remoteness of the area, all the reports were second hand and Armenian based. The reports of the Association Press, British Daily News and weekly news in USA cannot be accepted as reliable because they were all based on reports by the Anglo-Armenian Association and missionary reports emanating from Boston. Sometimes these reports were made up as the reporters never managed to go to the claimed massacre sites and had nothing to report other than what they had heard.
Professor McCarthy also talked about the Hacin reports and demonstrated with photographs that the stories about Turks burning down a whole town were untrue because the houses were not made of wood and were upright in a photo taken after the reported event. These serious falsehoods were confirmed by the 1st established Commission by the British, French and Russians and this showed that a/those first killed were the Kurds and b/the Armenian dead was not in the thousands – it was 264. The Professor claimed that most of the reports were fabrications because the Ottoman government gave no figures and the reports were filed from Istanbul sometimes by ignorant AP agents who thought that the city of Kayseri was in Syria! Therefore these reports cannot be relied upon.

The significant theme of the conference was the prejudice which seemed to have been behind the deception and the myths that were created about the Ottoman Turks and events relating to Armenians. The ignorance of the Americans and others were clearly demonstrated in the media portrayal of the Ottoman Turks; they were drawn looking like monkeys and a mixture of Africans and Orientals. They were also portrayed as barbarians, rejoicing in the killings of children and babies in some of the cartoons. The Professor argued that the reports sent to US via British sources and based on claims by Armenian separatists organisations were clearly biased and were determined to influence the world view by portraying the Ottoman Turks in the most negative and horrible way possible. Professor McCarthy’s view was that it would be both wrong and foolish to accept the Armenian claims about massacres based on hearsay and made up stories.

Professor McCarthy explained the context of these events and reminded the audience that Ottoman empire was multiculturalistic and that there was a big movement towards ‘nationalism’ at the time. Unlike the Bulgarians and the Greeks, Armenians did not make up the largest populations in the areas they inhabited (around 20%) and therefore they were not entitled to a state of their own. This the Professor argued was behind the falsifications and myths which the Armenian activists created with the help of the British. For them the war was another means to obtaining a national state on the Ottoman lands.

Verbal attacks from Armenian activists

Unfortunately this was very embarrassing and less than civilised as some of the Armenians verbally attacked the speaker and called him names such as ‘the devil’, ‘liar’ and claimed that he had ‘sold out to the Turkish government’ during the question an answer period. It appeared that they were particularly annoyed because he did not talk about the 1915-1919 period, though the reasons for this were explained at the beginning of his speech. Although the chair gave everyone the opportunity to ask questions, some Armenian fanatics abused the rules and instead of asking questions they resorted to insults and ranting. There were a number of good and sensible questions, however the civilised atmosphere of the conference was spoiled by the behaviour of a minority group.

I felt that Professor McCarthy was heroic in the way he withstood the attacks and the insults, and responded with facts which after all what matters most in this debate. His statement – ‘only the ones without a real argument resort to insults’ seemed to sum up the behaviour of the few pretty well.

Betula Nelson
Media Coordinator
The Ataturk Society of the UK

February 10, 2011
Turkish Diplomats Assassinated By ASALA Commemorated In Igdir

Friday, 28 January 2011 18:48

Consul General Mehmet Baydar and Consul Bahadir Demir, the first Turkish diplomats who fell victim to ASALA terror, were commemorated with a ceremony held Thursday in Igdir.

Citizens, representatives of civil organizations and reporters attended the ceremony held at the Genocide Monument and Museum in Igdir.

ASALA (Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia) was an Armenian terrorist organization which staged terrorist attacks on Turkish targets and assassinated Turkish diplomats between 1973 and 1986, aiming to force the Turkish government to acknowledge the so-called Armenian genocide and cede territory for an imaginary Armenia.

ASALA staged 110 terrorist attacks in 21 countries, killing 5 Turkish ambassadors, 34 Turkish diplomats, 4 foreigners and injuring 15 Turkish citizens and 66 foreigners.

Turkish Consul General in Los Angeles Mehmet Baydar and Consul Bahadir Demir were assassinated by a 73-year-old Armenian-American named Gurgen Yanikiyan in 1973.

Yanikiyan who contacted Baydar and Demir said he wanted to give the portrait of Ottoman Sultan Abdulhamid to Turkey as a present. Yanikiyan who met Baydar and Demir at the Baltimore Hotel in Santa Barbara assassinated the Turkish diplomats with a pistol.

URL:

January 29, 2011