Category: Main Issues

  • Assyrian Genocide Recognition Creates Political Crisis in Sweden

    Assyrian Genocide Recognition Creates Political Crisis in Sweden

    3-13-2010

    Sweden (AINA) — The historical decision by the Swedish parliament recognizing Seyfo as a de facto genocide on Assyrians, Greeks and Armenians is creating a considerable political crisis in Swedish politics. The issue has dominated the headlines in Swedish media for several days.

    The Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, in a taped interview with Afram Barryakoub for Hujådå, the magazine of the Assyrian federation in Sweden, said he recognized the genocide one week before winning the national elections in Sweden in 2006. This fact is set to create problems between Reinfeldt and his foreign minister, Carl Bildt, one of the most pro-Turkish European foreign ministers.

    Bildt has said he will not consider the decision of the parliament but will do everything he can to avoid it becoming official Swedish foreign policy (AINA 3-13-2010). The response to his remarks have come from Hans Linde, the foreign policy spokesman of the Left Party, who said his party will consider pressing charges against Carl Bildt with the national constitution committee.

    Assyrian International News Agency

  • BEN MEHR, REASSESSING THE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

    BEN MEHR, REASSESSING THE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

    BEN MEHR, REASSESSING THE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION, KAHIRE BASININDA IKTIBASEN YAYINLANDI     Pulat Tacar [[email protected]]

    ———————————————————————————————————————-

    Alon Ben-Meir

    Senior Fellow at NYU’s Center for Global Affairs

    Posted: March 9, 2010 05:09 PM

    Tam boyutlu görseli göster

    Reassessing the Genocide Resolution

    Once again, as has happened every spring for years running, the debate over whether the ethnic clashes against the Armenians in the break up of the Ottoman Empire amounted to genocide has made it into the US political arena for Congress to weigh in. The recent resolution adopted by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs-to officially recognize actions against the Armenians in 1915 as genocide committed by the Ottoman Turks-has less to do with the US government’s pursuit of historical accuracy, than political theater that has come at a strikingly inopportune time.

    Genocide is a serious label, and requires not only moral authority from those who use it but a deep comprehension of the historical context in which these events occurred. Armenians have every right to demand official inquiries about the terms and conditions in which hundreds of thousands of their ancestors were killed, but this is not the task of US Congress, who has neither the moral standing to codify armed clashes of a century ago without proper inquiry nor the right to be selective about human rights offenses for political points. Every effort should be made by President Obama and the remaining House Representatives to prevent the resolution from reaching the House floor.

    Beyond the very serious damage that such a resolution could inflict on US-Turkish relations, should it pass the full House, congressional interference at this juncture could severely erode the very moral argument used justify the resolution. Turkey and Armenia have only recently concluded two protocols calling for closer ties, open borders, and most importantly, the creation of a commission to examine the historical evidence of the tragic events. Not only will this vote undermine the reconciliation process between Turkey and Armenia, but it threatens the US-Turkish relationship at a time when Turkey is playing a critical role aiding the US and the Middle East peace process.

    Sadly, this resolution was politicized at the outset, thereby diminishing much of its moral tenet. Had the purpose been for the US to champion human rights and officially condemn any large scale atrocities in times of war, then why was there no debate about massacres in Sudan, Rwanda, Algeria or the Balkans? The fact that it was supported by a powerful lobby and sponsored by many members of Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Committee Chairman Howard Berman from California, and Donald Payne and Albio Sires from New Jersey, each of whom represent relatively large Armenian constituencies, takes this debate out of the moral realm and into the political one. Beyond this matter, Howard Berman and the Foreign Relations Committee failed to address the pressing issues behind what such a resolution would invite forth, mainly the land disputes between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the issue of reparations for descendants of the victims, none of which can be treated in isolation. However large the political benefit these members of Congress may garner this election year by pushing this resolution, it is not in US interests, as the end result will hurt the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation process and severely undercut Turkish-US cooperation should it come to fruition. Such a serious resolution requires the application of the highest moral review and investigation, not a politically convenient act which is considered an insult to Turkish identity. If genocide was in fact committed, it should be left to an international investigative tribunal, not politicians who need to be reelected every two years.

    Turkey has been a loyal friend of the United States for more than a half century, and continues to support American efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Arab-Israeli peace process. It is a modern secular democracy, and has made great strides in remaining open and progressive. Why then should the United States Congress hold the descendants of the Ottomans responsible for the deeds of their fathers perpetrated a century ago? Since Turkey vehemently rejects the term genocide, what judgment should then be passed, and by whom, that will not tarnish the present generation of Turks? This generation had nothing to do with past events and, in fact, condemns the atrocities committed during that heinous war, regardless of who the perpetrators were. What then gives the United States’ House of Representatives the moral authority to pass judgment, when domestic political interest shamelessly dominates their motives? The argument against the resolution by the full House should be based on moral grounds, and the members must not act as judges and jurors when Turkey and Armenia have agreed to establish their own joint committee to unravel what in fact happened.

    At a time when America still suffers from a lagging global image after years of hawkish foreign policy and two ongoing wars, the United States Congress must support what Turkey and Armenia have agreed to do to resolve their conflict and help facilitate a resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh territorial dispute. Even the Jewish lobby, in the wake of a series of diplomatic rifts between Turkey and Israel, acted quietly in favor of the Turks, resulting in a close margin in the vote. As much as Prime Minister Erdogan’s recent statements have not fared well with the Israeli public, the Israeli diaspora is keen on maintaining the strategic nature of its relationship with Turkey as well as Turkey’s relationship with the West.

    But more importantly, the Turkish government, who acted out fervently against the US government following the resolution, must come to grips with the separation of power in the United States. Both President Obama and Secretary Clinton have come out strongly against the resolution — albeit last minute — yet they cannot control the votes or the agenda of Congress. Under no circumstance should Prime Minister Erdogan cancel his upcoming visit to the US, as he should use this opportunity to present his case and prove that Turkey is capable of handling the disputes with Armenia without US congressional intervention.

    It is by no means certain that this misguided resolution taken by Pelosi and Berman will pass in the full House should it come to a vote. Furthermore, it is unlikely these sponsors will even bring the resolution to the floor unless they are certain it has a substantial chance to pass. This represents a keen opportunity for Democrats and Republicans alike to find a common area of interest and work in unison for the best interests of the US, Turkey, and the future of Turkish-Armenian relations.

  • Sweden, Turkey jointly denounce genocide vote

    Sweden, Turkey jointly denounce genocide vote

    (Reuters) – The foreign ministers of Turkey and Sweden condemned on Saturday a vote in the Swedish parliament that defined the early 20th-century killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as genocide.

    Luke Baker

    SAARISELKA, Finland Sat Mar 13, 2010

    bildt and davutoglu
    Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt (C) and his Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu (R) talk to the media after their meeting in Saariselka Inari, in the Finnish Lapland March 12, 2010. Credit: Reuters/Lehtikuva/Jussi Nukari

    Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, who is holding informal talks with foreign ministers including Turkey’s Ahmet Davutoglu in northern Finland, said he was upset by the vote on Thursday and concerned it could affect Turkish-Armenian reconciliation.

    “It’s regrettable because I think the politicization of history serves no useful purpose,” he told reporters.

    “We are interested in the business of reconciliation, and decisions like that tend to raise tensions rather than lower tensions,” he said.

    Sweden’s parliament, by a vote of 131-130, backed a resolution that branded the killing of up to 1.5 million Christian Armenians by Ottoman Turks as a genocide, a term that Turkey resolutely rejects.

    Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt phoned his Turkish counterpart, Tayyip Erdogan, on Saturday and said he disagreed with the resolution, according to a statement on the Turkish prime minister’s official website.

    The vote followed a decision by a committee of the U.S. House of Representatives the week before approving a nonbinding measure condemning the 1915 killings.

    In both cases Turkey responded angrily, withdrawing its ambassadors to Washington and Stockholm.

    The vote in the Swedish parliament was particularly galling for Turkey as Sweden is one of Ankara’s strongest backers on issues such as Turkey’s desire to join the European Union.

    Reinfeldt told Erdogan Sweden would continue to back Turkey’s EU bid and that the vote was driven by domestic politics and would not affect bilateral relations, the statement said. Erdogan canceled a planned visit to Sweden this month, and the government recalled its ambassador from Stockholm.

    Davutoglu said Turkey would not stand by quietly if other nations took similar steps to describe the 1915 killings as a genocide and said it was pointless for countries to think they could put pressure on Turkey.

    “We will not be silent and we will not just show the usual attitudes. For each case we will have a different (set of) measures,” he said.

    “What is the purpose of this? If the purpose is to make pressure, nobody can make pressure on Turkey. if the purpose is to get local domestic concerns raised, Turkish historical events should not be misused for these narrow issues.”

    Davutoglu, the architect of Turkey’s foreign policy of re-engaging with its neighbors, including Armenia, said it was wrong for parliaments to think they could define history purely via a vote.

    He also said he was concerned about the impact the vote could have on efforts by Armenia and Turkey to reconcile their history and find a political common ground at a time when they are making progress toward normalizing relations.

    (Editing by Matthew Jones)

  • Sweden’s FM Denounces Parliament Vote on Armenian Genocide

    Sweden’s FM Denounces Parliament Vote on Armenian Genocide

    Carl Bildt tells reporters vote was ‘regrettable’ and ‘serves no useful purpose’

    sweden carl bildt

    Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt (Photo: AP)

    Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt has denounced a parliamentary resolution that recognizes the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as genocide.

    Bildt held talks with his Turkish counterpart late Friday on the sidelines of a meeting of European foreign ministers in Finland.  He told reporters on Saturday that the vote in Sweden’s parliament was “regrettable” and “serves no useful purpose.”

    Swedish lawmakers by a narrow margin Thursday passed the resolution recognizing the “genocide of Armenians.”  Days earlier, there was a similar vote by a U.S. congressional committee.

    Turkey condemned both measures and recalled its ambassadors from the United States and Sweden.

    Armenians say Ottoman Turks slaughtered as many as 1.5 million people from 1915 until 1923.

    Turkey recognizes that Armenians were killed, but says the death toll is greatly exaggerated.  It says the Armenians died in a civil war that accompanied the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

    Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Saturday that parliaments should not try to define history.

    www1.voanews.com, 13 March 2010

  • Armenian Anti-Semitism in the Ottoman Period

    Armenian Anti-Semitism in the Ottoman Period

    By Sedat Laciner

    The Ottoman experience proves that anti-Semitism is an ‘old Armenian habit’. The main reason for anti-semitism among the Ottoman Armenians was mainly religious biases. For the Christian Armenians the Jews were in great sin. It was a common belief among the Armenians that the Jews slaughter young Christian Armenians and use their blood at the Passover feast. In Amasya province for instance local Armenian priests and notables claimed that an Armenian woman had seen Jews slaughter a young Armenian boy and use his blood for religious purposes. Stanford J. Shaw describes the following events:

    “Several days of rioting and pillaging and attacks on Jews followed, with Armenian mobs devastating the Jewish quarter of the city, beating men, women and children alike. The Armenian notables convinced the local Ottoman governor to imprison several Jewish leaders, including Rabbi Yakub Avayu, who was accused of having supervised the blood letting. They were said, after undergoing severe torture, to have confessed to their crimes and were hanged. Later, however, the Armenian boy who supposedly had been murdered was found and a new Ottoman governor punished the accusers, though nothing could be done about the Jews who had suffered in the process.”[3]

    As Abraham Ben-Yakob put it, the Armenian and Greek attacks against the Armenians continued in the following years:

    “There were literally thousands of incidents in subsequent years, invariably resulting from accusations spread among Greeks and Armenians by word mouth, or published in their newspapers, often by Christian financiers and merchants who were anxious to get the Jews out of the way, resulting in isolated and mob attacks on Jews, and burning of their shops and homes.”[4]

    Apart from the religious prejudices, the Jewish community in the Empire dramatically rose in numbers and their influence over the administration and economy increased, and this development made the Christian subjects (Armenians, Greeks etc.) worried. Unfortunately this competition between the Jews and Christians resulted in a long series of attacks against the Jews by the Armenians and Greeks, who simply did not want to lose their influential position in terms of politics and economy. In these assaults many Jews were assassinated. When the Europeans increased their economic and political influence over the Ottoman Empire they publicly supported the Ottoman Christians and the Armenians and Greeks gained a clear privilege in trade, which was unfavourable to the Jews. The local Armenians and Greeks had the American and the European diplomats and businessmen with them, while the Jews had to rely on their own sources and their good relations with the Ottoman bureaucracy. In addition, as the Armenians and Greeks got richer and more influential, harassments and the constant attacks against the Jews increased as witnessed in Izmir during the 19th century. The competition between the Armenians and the Jews was severe in Palace and the financial system in particular. When the Armenian bankers sustained monopoly over the Ottoman financial system they did everything to get the Jews out of the Palace, and even libelled Jews by accusing the Jews of not being loyal to the Sultan. As a result of these slanders, many Jews lost their life.[5]

    Another dramatic development for the Jews was the impact of the European military victories and conquests of Ottoman territories by the European armies, because when the Christian European armies occupied the Ottoman possessions they were supporting their Christian ‘brothers’, Armenians, Greeks and Bulgarians, and punishing the Jews and Muslims alike.[6] Consequently the Jews became the most loyal ones to the government in the 19th century and this also worsened the relations between the nationalist Armenians and the Jews. The radical Armenians perceived the Jews as the agent of the state against their ‘revolutionary’ movement. Even some Armenians would claim that some of the responsible officers for the 1915 events, which the Armenians see these events as ‘genocide’, were Jews, freemasons or supported by the Jews or freemasons. Although this kind of claims cannot be considered as serious or scholarly, they are useful to understand the degree of the Armenian anti-semitism.

    The fourth negative development for the Ottoman Jews was the nationalist-separatist movements in the Arab territories, the Balkans and in Anatolia. The only protector of the Jews in these regions was the Ottoman state and its governor because the Arabs and the Christians hated the Jews due to the tradition and religion. That is why the Jews became more and more loyal to their state, and this more annoyed the nationalist groups, particularly the Greeks and the Armenians. In many Greek uprisings for instance the Jews supported the Ottoman State against the rioters as witnessed in the Ottoman – Greek War in 1897 for Crete island. The Ottoman security forces had to intervene to protect the Jews from the Armenians, Greeks and the Arabs especially in the 19th century. In Syria in particular the Christian Arabs and Armenians hated the Jews as a result of the religious biases.[7]

    In summary, the Armenians continually attacked the Jews for the religious reasons and for personal and ethnic interests. In the words of Shaw, ‘the attacks were brutal and without mercy. Women, children, and aged Jewish men were frequently attacked, beaten and often killed’.[8] These attacks inevitably caused a severe tension and nourished mutual hate between the Armenians and the Jews. As a result the Jews sometimes co-operated with other ethnic groups against the Armenians as Shaw puts it:

    “Jewish resentment against the continued persecution and ritual murder attacks by Greeks and Armenians led to such hatred that, for example, many Jews actively assisted the attacks of Kurds and Lazzes on the Armenian quarters of Istanbul in 1896 and 1908, showing the Kurds where Armenians lived and where many of them were hiding and joining them in carrying away the booty. The result was even greater Armenian hatred for Jews than had been the case before, leading to further persecution and attacks in subsequent years’”[9]

    In addition to the assaults against the Jewish people the Armenians and Greeks made enormous efforts to keep the Jews out of the Palace and other important official places. Furthermore they tried to prevent constructing new synagogues in Istanbul. Guleryuz’s research on Turkish Jewry’ gives an example:

    “Greeks and Armenians agitated widely to prevent Jews from constructing new synagogues when needed in the Empire. The best example of this came with Greek and Armenian opposition to the construction of a new Jewish synagogue at Haydarpasha in 1899. Sultan Abdul Hamid II allowed the synagogue to be built, and assured its opening despite the protests by sending a contingent of soldiers from the nearby Selimiye barracks, leading the contregation to adopt the name Hemdat Israel synagogue, but also the word Hemdat was close to the name of their benefactor, Sultan Abdul Hamid.”[10]

    In conclusion, anti-Semitism was a strong tradition among the Ottoman Armenians, and as will be seen it would be revived in the modern ages.

  • Canadian MP calls on colleagues to commemorate the victims of Khojaly tragedy in Parliament

    Canadian MP calls on colleagues to commemorate the victims of Khojaly tragedy in Parliament

    40th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION

    Thursday, March 11, 2010

    HedyFry
    Hon. Hedy Fry Member of House of Common Canadian Parliament

    Member of Canadian Parliament Hedy Fry at the meeting of the House of Commons called on colleagues to commemorate the victims of the Khojaly tragedy jointly with members of country’s Azerbaijani community.

    Fry also called to recognize the tragedies that occurred in the life of peoples, which representatives live in Canada.

    (Non-official translation from French to English)

    L’hon. Hedy Fry (Vancouver-Centre, Lib.):

    “Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask this House to join me and the Azeri community in Canada to commemorate the tragedy of Khojaly, which took place 18 years ago, on 25 and 26 February. I know that this date has passed.

    However, I think it is important for Canada, as a global nation, home to people from different countries who came here to find new beginnings, to recognize the tragedies that once marred their lives and mourn with them, however briefly. The tragedy of lost human life is still too common in a world plagued by civil strife. Canada, through democracy and rule of law, has found peaceful resolution to our own civil disagreements. By remembering tragedies such as Khojaly, we can hopefully help our new citizens to remember the past while beginning anew to embrace values of peaceful coexistence here in Canada”.

    Link: