Category: Main Issues

  • WILL THEY BE ALLOWED?

    WILL THEY BE ALLOWED?

    Below, please find a dear colleague letter issued by The Honorable Alcee L. Hastings in the U.S. Congress.

    It is not a secret that there has been a rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia since President Gul visited last September the latter for a soccer match between the respective national teams upon invitation from Armenia’s president.
    This has generated a flurry of activities and joint meetings, giving rise to expectations, perceived or real.
    Though it is known that there can be little advance in this area without resolving the Karabagh issue where Armenia forcibly occupies 20% of Azerbaijan proper along with Karabagh, talks went on.

    Armenia still covets neighbor’s territories in search of a utopia, the creation of greater Armenia: Western regions of Azerbaijan, eastern regions of Turkey, Javath region of Georgia, and others.

    Armenian constitution still refers to eastern Turkey as western Armenia. Armenia also denies the legitimacy of international agreements signed in 1921 between Turkey and Armenia, Turkey and Soviet Union, and others determining the borders between Turkey and Armenia.

    Another contentious issue is the Armenian insistence to characterize the 1915 events a genocide, totally ignoring Armenian propaganda, agitation, raids, terrorism, rebellions, territorial demands and treason, in that order, giving rise to 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turkish, which in turn triggered the TERESET (Temporary Resettlement order of May 27, 1915.)

    In an editorial dated March 10, 2009 in The California Courier, a anti-Turkish, racist Armenian journal, Harut Sassounian wrote the following:

    “… It is hard to believe that the Armenian government would invite the Turkish Foreign Minister to Armenia just one week before April 24. Mr. Babajan, a Genocide denialist and high-ranking official of a hostile country that is blockading Armenia, should never be welcomed in Yerevan, unless he intends to place a wreath at the Armenian Genocide Memorial Monument and offers an apology to the Armenian people!…”

    If such hostile and racist attitudes frequently and openly displayed by Armenian diaspora opinion makers are any yard stick, or if same are allowed to influence the current rapprochement, you can kiss good bye the latter.

    Let’s wait and see.

    ***

    From: The Honorable Alcee L. Hastings
    To: Colleagues
    Re: The Frozen Relations Between Armenia and Turkey are now Showing Some Signs of Melting

    March 9, 2009
    Dear Colleague,

    I am writing to bring to your attention a March 9th commentary in Newsweek, “The frozen relations between Armenia and Turkey are now showing some signs of melting,” by Grenville Byford, a regular contributor to the magazine and an affiliate of the Caspian Studies Program at Harvard University.

    Mr. Byford outlines the way forward to improve Turkish-Armenian relations. Most importantly he recognizes that improved relations between Turkey and Armenia would further U.S. objectives in the Caucasus and enhance regional energy security.

    I urge you to review the article and join with me in demonstrating strong Congressional support for continued Turkish-Armenian rapproachement.

    Sincerely,
    /s/
    Alcee L. Hastings
    Member of Congress
    ***
    THE FROZEN RELATIONS BETWEEN ARMENIA AND TURKEY ARE NOW SHOWING SOME SIGNS OF MELTING

    By Grenville Byford

    NEWSWEEK
    From the magazine issue dated Mar 9, 2009
    https://www.newsweek.com/grenville-byford-turkish-armenian-reconcilation-82299

    It’s almost April, so Washington is gearing up for another performance of the “Armenian Genocide Resolution Spectacular,” a regular event since 1984. Here’s the historical plotline: the Armenian-American lobby gets a few U.S. congressmen to sponsor a resolution recognizing the 1915 massacre of Armenians in what is now Eastern Turkey as a “genocide.” Then other members of the House are induced to support it. (Members of the House may not be history buffs, but they understand the importance of stroking a powerful domestic lobby.) Next, the Turkish government says Turkey is too important to be insulted like this. In response, the American administration, recognizing that Turkey is indeed a critical NATO ally whose Incirlik Air Base is vital to the Iraq mission, starts twisting congressional arms to abandon the resolution. Offstage, the Israeli lobby, generally keen to boost Turkish-Israeli relations (though less so this year), w! orks against the resolution. Finally, the House leadership reluctantly shelves the whole thing and the curtain falls.

    Before staging this year’s performance, however, Congress should note that hitherto frozen relations between Armenia and Turkey are now showing signs of melting, and that this may be the first step toward reconciling the Turkish and Armenian peoples. In September, Turkish President Abdullah Gül attended a Turkey-Armenia football match in Yerevan at the invitation of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, who recently met with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Davos. The two foreign ministers, Turkey’s Ali Babacan and Armenia’s Eduard Nalbandian have also been meeting. Both have made optimistic noises.

    Progress has been possible because the Armenians have focused on the concrete issue of opening the Armenian-Turkish border—a vital matter to them since none of their other neighbors (Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran) can offer a viable trade route to the West. Both sides have wisely avoided the genocide dispute, surely recognizing it will have to be dealt with eventually but that developing economic ties will make it easier to do so. Lingering in the background, however, is the Armenian diaspora’s passionate insistence that there was a genocide—and its mirror image in the fury of the Turkish people denying it. Right or wrong is not the point. No Turkish government could contemplate opening the Armenian border with this issue front and center, and Congress should recognize that a genocide resolution would put it there.

    In all probability, Turkey and Armenia can only resolve the genocide dispute if they recognize that “was it a genocide?” may be the ultimate question, but it is not the most important one today. To those aiming for reconciliation, two questions outrank it: what common facts can Turks and Armenians be brought to accept, and is the common ground sufficient for both sides to start binding up the wounds? To this end, Erdogan’s proposal to establish a joint historical commission should be pursued. Though Armenia has rejected the idea so far—largely because it is winning its argument on the world stage—the government has softened its stance recently. If the aim is reconciliation, persuading the Turks to abandon the blanket denial they are taught as schoolchildren is what counts.

    Progress is not as implausible as it sounds. In the early days of the Republic, Kemal Atatürk, who was not personally implicated, described the Armenian massacres as “shameful acts.” No ex-Ottoman officials were investigated, however, as Turkey needed the newly minted heroes of its War of Independence to have no stain on their characters. Today, Erdogan will accept an investigation. In return, Armenia must accept a reciprocal investigation into the Ottoman Armenians, who fought with the sultan’s Russian enemy, and their responsibility for massacres of Turks and Kurds. Weaving together these two violently opposed historical perspectives will take time and patience. As important as the final answer, however, is the development of empathy across the divide.

    Congress can help keep the path to reconciliation open if it is willing to deny the Armenian-American lobby the instant gratification of a genocide resolution. Surely doing so would be far better than repeating the exercises of the last 25 years over and over again until a resolution finally passes and all the House’s leverage over Turkey evaporates, along with most of the good will in the Turkish-American alliance, and maybe even the alliance itself. For its part, the Armenian diaspora might even support reconciliation if only as its second choice.
    Finally, good relations between Turkey and Armenia would further U.S. objectives in the Caucasus. The proposed hydrocarbon corridor through the Caucasus from Central Asia looks much more secure in the context of Turkish-Armenian friendship, and it might give Armenia the confidence to break with the status quo in the longstanding Nagorno-Karabakh dispute with neighboring Azerbaijan. C! ongress and others should recognize that this year holds real promise for the beginning of reconciliation between the Turkish and Armenian peoples. If nothing comes of it, Congress can always return to a resolution.

    Byford writes frequently on Turkish affairs and is a regular contributor to Newsweek.com.

  • Peter Gabriel Stresses Importance of Armenian Genocide Recognition

    Peter Gabriel Stresses Importance of Armenian Genocide Recognition

    Peter Gabriel Stresses Importance of Armenian Genocide Recognition

    By KhatchigMouradian • on March 6, 2009 •

    WATERTOWN, Mass. (A.W.)—In an interview that appeared in the March 2009 issue of Conde Nast Traveler, world-renowned musician and songwriter Peter Gabriel talks about the importance of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

    Asked by interviewer Dorintha Elliott about the best places to travel for music, Gabriel said, “I had a house in Senegal and music was a big reason. And when I did music for ‘The Last temptation of Christ,’ I was introduced to one of the most soulful instruments, the Armenian duduk. I went to

    Armenia for the birthday of duduk player Djivan Kasparyan. We visited the Genocide Memorial, which is dedicated to the more than one million Armenians who died in 1915.”

    He added, “The Turks deny the genocide, and Britain and the United States haven’t properly acknowledged it. I hope that happens. As with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, you need to air issues and accept what happened in the past before you are free to move on.”

    Gabriel, 59, has won Grammy Awards in 1989, 1992, 1993, 1995, and 2008 for his work. He received the Nobel Peace Laureates’ Man of Peace Award in 2006 and was named Amnesty International’s Ambassador of Conscience in 2008.

    Also in 2008, Time magazine chose him as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.

  • What Were Armenian Officials Thinking,  If They Were Thinking at all?

    What Were Armenian Officials Thinking, If They Were Thinking at all?

    [email protected]

    Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:25 AM


    Two shocking announcements made by Yerevan officials have deeply troubled Armenians worldwide.

    The first statement was made by Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan in Tsakhkadzor, Armenia on February 21, during an international economic forum — “Outlook for International Economic Cooperation: Problems and Solutions.” The conference was attended by high-ranking officials and businessmen from Russia, Bulgaria, Iran and many other countries.

    In his speech titled, “International Economic Cooperation: New Policy,” the Prime Minister invited the participation of Russia and Turkey in the construction of a new nuclear power plant in Armenia. He said that the multi-billion-dollar project had not only economic but also political significance. The existing power plant, located near Yerevan, was commissioned in 1976. Several international organizations as well as neighboring Turkey have been pressing for the closure of the Medzamor power plant for several years, citing safety concerns. The new power plant is expected to be operational in 2016.

    Turkish leaders have not yet responded to Mr. Sargsyan’s invitation. However, according to Russian sources, Ankara is said to be interested. An unidentified Turkish spokesman was quoted by Nezavisimaya Gazeta as stating: “The government of Turkey is anticipating an official appeal on participation in the atomic power plant from Armenian official circles. Only after that, the Turkish side may consider the prospect of participating in the project and announce its decision. If all the issues involved are complied with, Yerevan’s proposal may be accepted.”

    Several Armenian analysts have raised serious concerns about involving Turkey in such a sensitive project. Some pointed out the risk to Armenia’s national security, given Turkey’s historical enmity. Other commentators brought up the total lack of experience of Turkish companies in constructing nuclear power plants. Ara Nranyan, an Armenian parliament member representing the ARF, a junior member of the governing coalition, stated that his party opposes Turkey’s participation in the new nuclear power plant and views it as “damaging to Armenia’s interests.”

    How can Armenian officials offer a role in constructing a nuclear power plant to a country that denies the Genocide, refuses to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, sets up a blockade to destroy its economy, and provides political and military support to Azerbaijan in the Artsakh (Karabagh) conflict?

    The second disturbing development is an invitation by Armenian officials to Turkey’s Foreign Minister to attend the Black Sea Economic Conference (BSEC) on April 16-17, just days before the 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. Armenia’s six-month rotating chairmanship of BSEC ends on April 30.

    Armenians were further irritated by a report in the Turkish newspaper “Today’s Zaman” that “Armenia has rescheduled a foreign ministerial meeting of Black Sea countries, apparently as a goodwill gesture to ensure Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babajan will be among the participants.” Zaman reported that Armenian authorities had moved the date of the BSEC meeting “from the previously announced April 29 to April 16. The shift is significant because April 29 is only a few days after April 24.”

    To add insult to injury, Zaman quoted unnamed Turkish officials as stating that Babajan has not confirmed his attendance, and that his participation depended on “Armenia’s commitment to the ongoing rapprochement process and the course of closed-door talks with Armenia.”

    Turkish officials make frequent statements about “rapprochement” with Armenia in order to give the false impression that the two countries are reconciling with each other, thus hoping that the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress would not take any action on the Armenian Genocide.

    While Ankara officials are constantly bombarding Washington with such fake messages, the Armenian side stays astonishingly silent, giving credence to Turkish misrepresentations which are intended to undermine the prospects of any U.S. declaration on the Armenian Genocide.

    In a rare display of responsiveness, Tigran Balayan, the acting spokesman of the Armenian Foreign Ministry, issued a statement denying that the BSEC conference was rescheduled to accommodate Turkish concerns. Mr. Balayan, however, provided no explanation as to why the conference was not held before the month of April.

    It is hard to believe that the Armenian government would invite the Turkish Foreign Minister to Armenia just one week before April 24. Mr. Babajan, a Genocide denialist and high-ranking official of a hostile country that is blockading Armenia, should never be welcomed in Yerevan, unless he intends to place a wreath at the Armenian Genocide Memorial Monument and offers an apology to the Armenian people!

    0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    2009 MEMBERSHIP DUES AND YOUR DONATIONS ARE NEEDED TO CONTINUE OUR POSTED PROGRAMS WITH OUT INTERUPTION

    THE FOLLOWING LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE DUES AND DONATIONS PAGE
    https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/2009/02/14/2009-yili-uye-aidatlari-ve-bagislariniz/
    Turkish ForumBiz Kimiz?Bize UlaşınProjelerimizYardımlarınız

    Hakkımızda (About Us) | Kayıt Ol (Subscribe) | Bize Yazın (Contact Us) | Bağışlarınız (Donations) | Güncelle (Update)

  • Babacan Warns Obama Against Recognizing Genocide

    Babacan Warns Obama Against Recognizing Genocide

    Home / News, Top Story / Babacan Warns Obama Against Recognizing Genocide

    By WeeklyStaff • on March 8, 2009 •

    ANKARA, Turkey (A.W.)-On March 8, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said in an interview to the Haber 7 Turkish television channel NTV that there is a risk President Barack Obama would recognize the Armenian Genocide. He also warned against such a move, noting it would affect the normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia.

    “I still see a risk,” he said. “Mr. Obama made the promise five times in a row.” However, he added, “The new American administration understands Turkey’s sensibilities better today.”

    According to Babacan,”It would not be rational for a third country to take a position on this topic. A bad step by the United States would only worsen the process” of reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey.

    According to the Anatolian News Agency, during a joint news conference after meeting with Paraguay’s Foreign Minister Alejandro Hamed Franco on March 8, Babacan said the genocide issue was on the agenda during U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to Turkey.

    Obama to Visit Turkey in a Month

    On March 7, before meeting with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Clinton announced that Obama would visit Turkey in a month.

    “President Obama will be visiting Turkey within the next month or so. The exact date will be announced shortly,” she said during a joint press conference with Babacan.

    According to Clinton, Obama’s visit will be “a reflection of the value we place on our friendship with Turkey.”

    A senior official from the Obama Administration confirmed recently that Turkey will be the first Muslim country Obama visits since being elected.

    Clinton, who is in Ankara to hold talks with high-ranking Turkish officials, said her trip aims at emphasizing the work the U.S. and Turkey must do “on behalf of peace, prosperity, and progress.” According to the Turkish Hurriyet Daily News, “Diplomatic sources said the efforts to have the U.S. Congress recognize the Armenian claims regarding the 1915 incidents were not discussed in the meeting.”

    Also on March 7, the State Department issued a joint statement signed by Clinton and Babacan reaffirming the importance of U.S.-Turkey ties.

    According to a BBC correspondent, Turkey will try to ensure Obama does not refer to the mass killing of Armenians in 1915 as “genocide” in his statement on April 24.

    On Jan. 19, in a statement on the importance of relations between the U.S. and Armenia, Obama said, “As a senator, I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution (H.Res.106 and S.Res.106), and as President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide.”

    Although there is a wide consensus among Armenian Genocide and Holocaust scholars that the genocide took place, the Turkish state continues to vehemently deny that a state-sponsored campaign took the lives of approximately 1.5 million Armenians during World War I. The Armenians, the official Turkish argument goes, were the victims of ethnic strife, or war and starvation, just like many Muslims living in the Ottoman Empire. Turkey invests millions of dollars in the United States to lobby against resolutions recognizing the genocide and to produce denialist literature. Moreover, many Turkish intellectual who have spoken against the denial have been charged for “insulting Turkishness” under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code.

    Related Entries

    • Armenians May Benefit from Obama Befriending Turkey
    • Obameter Keeps Track of President’s Campaign Promise on Genocide
    • Using ‘Normalization’ to Fight Genocide Recognition
    • Akcam to Deliver Lecture on Genocide, National Security
    • ANC Alerts Hampshire College to Its Association with Genocide Denier
  • Turkish-American “Strategic Partnership”: On the Way to Rejuvenation?

    Turkish-American “Strategic Partnership”: On the Way to Rejuvenation?

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 45 March 9, 2009 01:42 PM Age: 3 hrs Category: Eurasia Daily Monitor, Foreign Policy, Turkey, Home Page, Featured By: Saban Kardas

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (left) greets Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan (Photo: EPA)

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to Ankara on Saturday, the highest-level direct contact between the administration of President Barack Obama and the Turkish government so far, highlighted the value each side places on sustaining the Turkish-American partnership. In addition to her meetings with President Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Clinton met with Foreign Minister Ali Babacan after which the two held a press briefing and made a joint statement about strengthening the bilateral relationship. Clinton also visited Ataturk’s mausoleum in Ankara and appeared on a popular show on the private NTV channel.

    The joint declaration stated that the parties “reaffirmed the strong bonds of alliance, solidarity, and strategic partnership…as well as the commitment of both countries to the principles of peace, democracy, freedom, and prosperity enshrined in the Shared Vision and Structured Dialogue document agreed to in July 2006” (www.turkey.usembassy.gov, March 7).

    Clinton had a chance to discuss a wide range of issues with Turkish officials including the Middle East peace process, Iraq, Afghanistan, energy security, the global financial crisis, terrorism, developments in the Balkans and the Caucasus, Turkey’s EU membership process, and the Cyprus problem. The continuing discussions on using Turkish territory as a possible route for US troops leaving Iraq reportedly occupied the major part of Clinton’s agenda during her private discussions with Erdogan and other Turkish officials (ANKA, March 8). In response to a question about Turkey’s possible role in the U.S. withdrawal plans, Clinton noted that the process was still in its initial phases and Washington would maintain discussions with Turkey on the subject. Babacan repeated his earlier remarks on the issue, emphasizing that talks at the technical level were already underway and that Turkey had a constructive approach to the subject (Anatolian News Agency, March 7).

    Another major item discussed was Turkey’s contributions to resolving conflicts in the region. Clinton reiterated American appreciation of Turkey’s role with regard to the Palestine issue and the indirect talks between Syria and Israel. Both sides said that they would work together to achieve a comprehensive and sustainable peace in the region. Likewise, Clinton expressed her country’s support for the process of reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia that Ankara initiated. Clinton also noted that Washington found Gul’s visit to Iran this week important (Sabah, March 8). Although some Turkish sources speculated that Gul might have carried messages from Washington to Tehran (Hurriyet, March 9), this has yet to be confirmed officially.

    Overall, statements from both sides stress that the two parties had useful discussions and found mutual ground on issues of common concern, which might herald a new era in Turkish-American relations. Achieving consensus on strategic matters aside, a major roadblock in Turkish-American relations has been the public animosity toward the United States and how to reverse the anti-Americanism that became strongly engrained in the Turkish body politic during the Bush years. Cognizant of these challenges, the American side did its best to appeal to the Turkish people, as reflected in Clinton’s appearance on a TV show targeting female viewers (EDM, March; www.ntvmsnbc.com, March 7).

    Likewise, Clinton capitalized on Obama’s vision of change to emphasize that Turkish-American relations were entering a new phase. She announced that Obama would visit Turkey in a month. A White House official said that Obama’s trip “will be an important opportunity to visit a NATO ally and discuss shared challenges,” adding, “It will also provide an opportunity to continue the president’s dialogue with the Muslim world” (www.cnn.com, March 7). It is not yet known, however, whether the speech Obama had promised to deliver in a Muslim capital during his first 100 days in office will be given in Ankara or in the capital of another Muslim country. Given the positive feelings of the Turkish people toward Obama’s election as president (EDM, November 7), the visit might indeed help improve the deteriorating American image in Turkey.

    A similar move in public diplomacy concerns attempts to diversify bilateral relations on the societal level. The joint statement announced that a new program called “Young Turkey/Young America: A New Relationship for a New Age” would be launched. It would establish ties between emerging young leaders from both countries “to develop initiatives that will positively impact people’s lives and invest in future ties between the leadership of [the] two countries” (www.turkey.usembassy.gov, March 7).

    The Turkish side was apparently satisfied with the trip. Speaking on the private NTV channel, Babacan said, “Turkish-American relations have entered a new phase … Our foreign policy priorities are completely in line with each other. In the new phase, the focus is on consultation and cooperation.” Underlining Turkey’s willingness to work together with the United States as partners, Babacan added, “Clinton emphasized Turkey as a strategic partner. She accentuated this more powerfully than the previous administration, and the new administration is aware of Turkey’s importance.” Nonetheless, Babacan debunked the overly optimistic expectations that Clinton’s visit indicated that Obama might not use the word “genocide’ in his Armenian Memorial Day address in April, This possibility was not completely off the table, he said (www.ntvmsnbc.com, March 8).

    In the 1990s, under the Bill Clinton presidency, the Turkish-American relationship flourished in many areas and came to be called a strategic partnership. The Iraq War and ensuing developments turned “strategic partnership” into an oxymoron to describe Turkish-American relations. Despite efforts to save the relationship from further deterioration, disagreements between Ankara and Washington were difficult to bridge. The 2006 Shared Vision document, which the Babacan-Clinton joint statement referred to, for example, outlined a framework of close cooperation and structured dialogue to regulate bilateral relations. It was not put into practice, however, and relations hit a low point in 2007, when Washington criticized the Turkish government for its silence on anti-Americanism in the country and Ankara censured Washington’s inactivity toward PKK terrorism. This time, there appears to be a more solid basis for rejuvenating the partnership: strong references to the 2006 document after a long break are coupled with both sides’ carefully worded statements, which take each other’s sensitivities into account, and a determination to address problems through dialogue without playing blame games. With political will on both sides, it is not be wrong to assume that finally they may not only “talk the talk” but also “walk the walk.”

    https://jamestown.org/program/turkish-american-strategic-partnership-on-the-way-to-rejuvenation/

    Sphere: Related Content

    <!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:””; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –> THE FOLLOWING LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE DUES AND DONATIONS PAGE
    https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/2009/02/14/2009-yili-uye-aidatlari-ve-bagislariniz/
    Turkish ForumBiz Kimiz?Bize UlaşınProjelerimizYardımlarınız

    Hakkımızda (About Us) | Kayıt Ol (Subscribe) | Bize Yazın (Contact Us) | Bağışlarınız (Donations) | Güncelle (Update)

  • AMERICAN ARMENIANS OPENLY ATTACKS TO JEWISH AMERICANS

    AMERICAN ARMENIANS OPENLY ATTACKS TO JEWISH AMERICANS

    ANC Alerts Hampshire College to Its

    Association with (ADL) Genocide Denier

    By Contributor • on March 5, 2009 •

    Decries Anti-Defamation League’s invitation to ensure campus tolerance

    WATERTOWN, Mass.-The Armenian National Committee (ANC) of Massachusetts has alerted Hampshire College president Ralph Hexter that the school’s relationship with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) would associate Hampshire College with genocide denial.

    The invitation to the ADL to visit the campus “to ensure that all students feel welcome and safe” follows reports, disputed by college officials, that Hampshire College had divested in companies that profit from Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

    “The Anti-Defamation League is an organization that actively engages in genocide denial, which is the highest form of hate speech and the final stage of genocide,” wrote the ANC-MA.Hampshire College’s inclusion of the ADL in campus discussions on tolerance is an affront to all those fighting for genocide prevention and human rights.”

    The ANC-MA pointed out that as recently as last month, ADL national director Abraham Foxman told the New York Times that the “ADL will continue to oppose a Congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide because ‘there’s too much at stake in the [Israeli-Turkish] relationship.’”

    “It is highly hypocritical for the ADL to present itself as an organization that secures the rights of all people while it actively perpetrates the worst form of hatred against Armenians,” the ANC-MA declared. “The Anti-Defamation League is most assuredly not the group upon which Hampshire College should call to ensure an atmosphere of respect and safety for all members of its community.”

    “Hampshire College, widely known for its progressive values and mandate, must not sanction the ADL’s unethical actions by allowing it to define the terms of tolerance. By partnering with the ADL, Hampshire College will become indelibly associated with genocide denial,” the letter concluded.

    ***0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    TURKISH FORUM INSERT TO THE MIDDLE OF THE ARTICLE

    THIS IS TO REMIND OUR FRIENDS FROM ISRAEL ABOUT DASHNAK ARMENIANS AND THEIR NAZI BRIGADE DURING SECOND WORLD WAR – AND – THE JEWISH PEOPLE KILLED BY THEM DURING FIRST PART OF 20TH CENTURY IN EASTERN ANADOLIA...

    The article of Derounian about Dashnak-Nazi collaboration:   http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/derounian-dashnak-dominat.htm The photo of the demonstration of young Dashnaks in Erevan, April 23, 2003:

    See also:

    http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/Nazi-Collaboration.htm

    0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    Below is the full text of the March 4 ANC-MA letter to Hampshire College.

    Ralph Hexter, President
    Hampshire College
    893 West Street
    Amherst, MA 01002

    Dear Mr. Hexter,

    We are appalled to note that Hampshire College has invited officials from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) “to visit the campus, in order to work together to ensure that all students feel welcome and safe on campus,” according to the “Statement from Anti-Defamation League” posted on your website.

    The ADL is an organization that actively engages in genocide denial, which is the highest form of hate speech and the final stage of genocide.  Hampshire College’s inclusion of the ADL in campus discussions on tolerance is an affront to all those fighting for genocide prevention and human rights.

    The ADL does not possess the moral authority to lecture anyone on tolerance, having abandoned its mission “to secure justice and fair treatment to all” by lobbying for the Turkish government against recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

    By choosing to prioritize narrow geopolitical interests-Israel’s military/strategic alliance with Turkey-over universal human rights, the ADL simply has no credibility in the area of human and civil rights.

    On Feb. 5, 2009, ADL national director Abraham Foxman told the New York Times that the ADL will continue to oppose a Congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide because “there’s too much at stake in the [Israeli-Turkish] relationship.”

    And according to the Feb. 4, 2009 issue of The Forward, “The strong Jewish opposition to Congressional recognition of the Armenian Genocide has been waning, but some Jewish groups, led by the Anti-Defamation League, are actively opposing any move in Congress.  ‘Right now we have no intention of changing our position from last year,’ said Jess Hordes, who heads the ADL’s Washington office.”

    This ADL support for the denialist Turkish government is abhorrent, particularly for an organization that vigorously combats Holocaust denial.  Israel Charny, executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem, explains the destructiveness of genocide denial: “Denials of known events of genocide must be treated as acts of bitter and malevolent psychological aggression, certainly against the victims, but really against all of human society, for such denials literally celebrate genocidal violence and in the process suggestively calls for renewed massacres-of the same people or of others. Such denials also madden, insult and humiliate the survivors, the relatives of the dead, and the entire people of the victims.”

    It is highly hypocritical for the ADL to present itself as an organization that secures the rights of all people while it actively perpetrates the worst form of hatred against Armenians.  The Anti-Defamation League is most assuredly not the group upon which Hampshire College should call to ensure an atmosphere of respect and safety for all members of its community.

    Perhaps you are unaware that the ADL refuses to unequivocally acknowledge as genocide the massacres by the Turkish government of 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and 1923, and that it actively engages in genocide denial by lobbying for Turkey to prevent passage of a United States Congressional resolution affirming the Armenian Genocide.

    Additionally, the ADL has repeatedly endorsed Turkey’s call for an investigation of the genocide, a standard tactic employed by genocide deniers to raise doubts about settled history. The International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) has condemned this proposal by writing that it “would only serve the interests of Turkish genocide deniers…  There is no more ‘other side’ to the truth about the Armenian Genocide than there is about the Holocaust.”
    Due to the ADL’s unethical position on the Armenian Genocide, 13 Massachusetts communities, including Northampton, withdrew from the ADL’s “No Place for Hate” (NPFH) program in 2007 and 2008.

    In its Sept. 28, 2007 letter to Abraham Foxman informing the ADL of its unanimous decision to withdraw from NPFH, the Northampton Human Rights Commission wrote: “We cannot in conscience continue a relationship with an organization that claims to stand for full accountability for genocide, yet stops short of endorsing a Congressional resolution acknowledging the Armenian Genocide.  We cannot endorse selective recognition of hate by an organization that claims leadership in creating a world where there is no place for hate…  Acknowledging the truth about the Armenian Genocide not only has an impact on survivors and their families, it also has an impact on our ability to address other acts of hate.”

    On April 8, 2008, the Massachusetts Municipal Association (MMA) ended its sponsorship of NPFH, declaring: “The Board believes that unequivocal recognition of the Armenian Genocide is both a matter of basic justice to its victims as well as essential to efforts to prevent future genocides…  The inconsistency between the National ADL’s position on the Armenian Genocide and the human rights principles underlying NPFH is a matter of great concern to MMA Board members and the municipalities they represent…it is imperative to speak with absolute clarity on genocide.”

    Human rights advocates, both here and abroad, have condemned the ADL’s position on the Armenian Genocide; the media is replete with articles denouncing its stance.  In January, Eric Alterman wrote in The Nation: “Foxman’s moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide-specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians…  In light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in a similar fashion, Foxman’s position strikes this Jew at least as one too many ironies to be tolerated.”

    Genocide denial is not merely reprehensible, it is dangerous.  According to the IAGS, “The single best predictor of future genocide is denial of a past genocide coupled with impunity for its perpetrators.”

    Over 25 Armenian political, cultural, religious, athletic, youth, media, and social welfare organizations in Massachusetts have united to combat the ADL’s denial of the Armenian Genocide.  For additional information on this movement, please visit noplacefordenial.com.

    Hampshire College, widely known for its progressive values and mandate, must not sanction the ADL’s unethical actions by allowing it to define the terms of tolerance.  By partnering with the ADL, Hampshire College will become indelibly associated with genocide denial.

    Sincerely,
    Sharistan Melkonian
    Chairperson