Turkish Forum

Category: Eastern Europe

  • EXPLOSIVE GROWTH IN NUMBER OF MOSQUES IN TATARSTAN

    EXPLOSIVE GROWTH IN NUMBER OF MOSQUES IN TATARSTAN

    EXPLOSIVE GROWTH IN NUMBER OF MOSQUES IN TATARSTAN, STILL NONE IN BESLAN. Over the past 10 years, the number of mosques in Tatarstan has nearly doubled from 755 to 1348, more than 500 of which are active and all but about 150 are registered with the state ). But in the North Caucasus, where many people believe that the Islamic expansion is far greater, the number of mosques is increasing much less quickly, thus opening the way for underground radicals to play the dominant role in the life of many Muslims there.

    KAZAN TO ERECT MONUMENT TO TATARS WHO RESISTED MOSCOW IN 1552. The city of Kazan plans to erect a monument to those Tatars who resisted the forces of Ivan the Terrible when he attacked and ultimately conquered that city in 1552. The monument, which officials there say is in “harmony” with the architecture of the city, will be unveiled on the 456th anniversary of Moscow’s victory ).

  • Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland

    Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland

    August 22, 2008

     

    Van Rebellion, took place after the outbreak of World War I. By February of 1915 Muslims in mixed villages were fleeing to be among other Muslims. Armenians did the same. The confrontation was no longer one of Ottoman forces against Russian forces and their Armenian partisans; “[i]t had become a general war between the Muslims and the Armenians.” It raged first outside of the city an then, by late April 1915, in the city itself.

    The Armenians, well armed, though without artillery, determinedly held their ground within the city center throughout the fiercest fighting, earning the upper hand by May 17, at which point they burned the Muslim quarter of the city and massacred those Muslims who had not fled. On May 20, they handed the city over to the Russian Army. The Russians rewarded the rebels by installing the rebel leader, Aram Manukian, as governor of the Russian Province of Van, which was short-lived, as Ottoman forces retook the city ten weeks later, leading to reprisals by Muslims against Armenians, who now were in flight toward the retreating Russian lines. Van was to change hands yet several more times during the ensuing weeks before Russian forces established firm control over the area in late September. This time, however, the Russians remained in charge, appointed a military governor, and disarmed local Armenian “volunteers.” Van’s fate changed yet again when the Russian Army decamped to join in the Russian Revolution. Armenians were left in control of the region and formed a government, which even issued its own currency. Despite an influx of returning Armenian refugees, the military strength of the Armenians had waned and Ottoman forces finally reclaimed the city of Van in April of 1918. When an American survey mission led by Captain Emery Niles toured the area in 1919, they beheld a depopulated, utterly devastated region.
    Mavi Boncuk |

    Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland were Americans ordered by the United States Government (in 1919) to investigate the situation in eastern Anatolia. Their report was to be used as the basis for granting relief aid to the Armenians by the American Committee for Near East Relief. The following is an excerpt from their report:

    “In the entire region from Bitlis through Van to Bayezit we were informed that the damage and destruction had been done by the Armenians, who, after the Russians retired, remained in occupation of the country and who, when the Turkish army advanced, destroyed everything belonging to the Musulmans. Moreover, the Armenians are accused of having committed murder, rape arson and horrible atrocities of every description upon the Musulman population. At first we were most incredulous of these stories, but we finally came to believe them, since the testimony was absolutely unanimous and was corroborated by material evidence. For instance, the only quarters left at all intact in the cities of Bitlis and Van are the Armenian quarters, as was evidenced by churches and inscriptions on the houses, while the Musulman quarters were completely destroyed. Villages said to have been Armenian were still standing whereas Musulman villages were completely destroyed” [U.S. 867.00/1005].

    For a complete copy of the report, see: | or click

    Mavi Boncuk

    Cornucopia of Ottomania and Turcomania | Contact:mailmaviboncuk(at)gmail.com

  • NATO sends more ships into Black Sea

    NATO sends more ships into Black Sea

     
    13:38 | 23/ 08/ 2008
     

    (Adds Russia’s General Staff comment in paras 3+4)

    ISTANBUL/MOSCOW, August 23 (RIA Novosti) – NATO has sent a Polish frigate and a U.S. destroyer through the Bosporus to boost its presence in the Black Sea, where it is delivering humanitarian cargoes to Georgia, a source in the Turkish navy said.

    “Two more NATO ships passed through the strait and entered the Black Sea on Friday evening,” the source told RIA Novosti.

    The deputy head of Russia’s General Staff said the Navy was aware that NATO was strengthening its presence in the sea.

    “The situation in the Black Sea is escalating. NATO is continuing to build up its naval presence in the area,” Col. Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn told reporters Saturday.

    A Navy officer said Friday that Russia would continue its operations to ensure the security of shipping to and from Georgia’s separatist republic of Abkhazia.

    “The Black Sea fleet continues to carry out its task of maritime traffic security patrols off the coast of Abkhazia,” Captain Igor Dygalo said.

    The ORP General Pulaski and the USS McFaul joined two ships from Germany and Spain that entered the sea earlier Friday.

    The Turkish navy source expected the NATO presence in the Black Sea to grow to about seven vessels.

    Nogovitsyn on Friday expressed doubts that NATO vessels needed to be in the Black Sea, and he promised that Russia would respond swiftly to any provocations against its Black Sea Fleet.

    Tensions between NATO and Russia are high following the recent conflict over Georgia’s breakaway region of South Ossetia.

  • “Forcing Azerbaijan to peace” by Armenia and Russia

    “Forcing Azerbaijan to peace” by Armenia and Russia

    August of 2008 may enter the history of Azerbaijan as a period of determination of our country’s fate, as there is a real threat to its territorial integrity.

    Armenia, which occupied Azerbaijani lands under Russia’s support, has passed to an active pressure on our country in the negotiation process on the resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno Karabakh.

    This pressure is put again under support of Russia, which, by its occupation of Georgia and open support of separatism, openly demonstrated to Armenians whose side it will take in the Karabakh conflict. In fact, Armenia and Russia are now forcing Azerbaijan to peace, which is profitable for Armenia and Russia, but which is a disgrace for Azerbaijan and dangerous for the further territorial integrity of our country. (more…)

  • RESPONDING TO GEORGIA CRISIS, TURKEY SEEKS NEW CAUCASUS SECURITY INITIATIVE

    RESPONDING TO GEORGIA CRISIS, TURKEY SEEKS NEW CAUCASUS SECURITY INITIATIVE

    By Alman Mir – Ismail

    Friday, August 22, 2008

     

    The Georgian-Russian military conflict has created new security dilemmas in the South Caucasus. Not only has the fragile stability established since the chaos of 1990s been ruined, but the East-West energy and transportation corridor has also been made vulnerable. Turkey, as one of the largest donors of the South Caucasus region and an active player in regional politics, surprisingly stayed out of the conflict, neither defending its regional ally Georgia nor making official statements at the governmental level. For many in the region, this was perceived as a sign of Turkish weakness, lack of interest in the South Caucasus region from the ruling AKP party, and growing dependence on Russia in terms of trade and regional alliance. Others simply called it a “sell-out of Caucasus.” Indeed, Turkey benefits from the regional energy pipelines and such a reaction can only raise surprise among regional countries.

    Partly because of the desire to refute these rumors and partly to achieve Turkey’s long-awaited goals in the Caucasus, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan came up with the “Platform for security and cooperation in the South Caucasus” initiative. The initiative, which Erdogan plans to discuss with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, is intended to create a regional security framework. It intends to accomplish this by encouraging greater integration between Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia and empowering Russia and Turkey to play the leads roles of regional security guarantors. Erdogan’s vision is to solve the frozen conflicts in the region on a sustainable and long-lasting basis and to satisfy the national interests of Russia, which regards the West’s influence in the region as a “zero-sum game.” Under this initiative, NATO would be limited to an outside role in providing security for the region — a clear effort to minimize Russian distrust and anger.

    With this idea, Erdogan visited Baku on August 21 to talk with President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and unveil this plan. Azerbaijani public and politicians generally have greeted this proposal with a great degree of skepticism. Political analyst Rasim Musabeyov was quoted by ANS TV on August 21 saying, “Turkey wants to push Azerbaijan towards compromise and also make sure Armenia plays more pragmatic role. This is the vision behind the Caucasus Platform idea of Erdogan.”

    Opposition newspaper Yeni Musavat believes that under the pretext of the Common Caucasus Platform, Erdogan wants to open borders with Armenia. Indeed, since its arrival in power in 2002, the AKP party has been favoring the idea of restoring economic and trade ties with Yerevan in order to improve the economic situation in Turkey’s Eastern regions, such as Kars and Erzurum, which suffer greatly from the closed borders with Armenia. Azerbaijani officials have protested against these ideas, saying that opening borders prior to Armenia’s liberation of the occupied Azerbaijani territories would not only damage Turkish-Azerbaijani solidarity and alliance in the region, but also symbolically forgive the ethnic cleansing by Armenia. Previous Turkish governments have preconditioned the opening of the borders with Armenia to the end of the Karabakh conflict. For Azerbaijan, closed borders between Turkey and Armenia are another tool of pressure on the officials in Yerevan.

    Nevertheless, after the presidential elections in Armenia in early 2008, Turkish-Armenian relations seem to be entering a new stage. Newly elected President of Armenia Serj Sarkisian has invited his Turkish counterpart Abdulla Gul to Yerevan to watch a soccer game between the two countries. This sport event began a series of diplomatic events, culminating with the revelation by senior Turkish officials that high ranking diplomats of the two nations are engaged in negotiations in Geneva. And on August 22, Yeni Musavat even reported that Turkey opened flights into Armenia.

    Officials in Baku seem less nervous this time about the possibility of the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations than back in 2003-2004. It appears that even in the circles of the Azerbaijani political leadership, there is an understanding that the economic pressures on Armenia do not work and simply reinforce Armenian dependence on Russia. Perhaps the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations will entice a breakthrough on the negotiation process in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. More trust between these two nations might prompt Armenia to extend certain concessions, should Yerevan feel itself more secure.

    However, some analysts believe that this Erdogan’s initiative is doomed to failure. Nationalism, realpolitik, and irrational behavior still dominate politics in the Caucasus, and it would be unrealistic to expect Armenia to be less nationalistic or Russia to behave more pragmatically. “If the West manages to push Russia out of Caucasus, then the idea of the common Caucasus home might be possible. If Russia stays in the region, then not,” says Ilgar Mammadov, political scientist (ANS TV, August 21). His colleague Zardusht Alizadeh echoes pessimism: “The initiative of Erdigan will be unsuccessful” (Day.az, August 20).

    Similar proposals for the common Caucasus House, like the common EU, were made in the early 1990s but eventually failed due to a lack of desire from the competing powers both inside and outside of the region.

  • Post-Soviet security bloc ends joint drills in Armenia

    Post-Soviet security bloc ends joint drills in Armenia

     
    16:31 | 22/ 08/ 2008
     

    YEREVAN, July 22 (RIA Novosti) – The joint Rubezh-2008 command-and-staff exercises of the Collective Security Treaty Organization finished Friday in Armenia.

    About 4,000 troops from Armenia, Russia and Tajikistan took part in the four-stage military exercise, which started July 22, on the territory of Armenia and Russia.

    Other CSTO members were represented by military staff from their defense ministries.

    The Collective Security Treaty Organization is a security grouping comprising Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.