Category: Europe

Duchess and Daughters: Their Shambolic Secret Mission

FTA UK Press Release
London, 10th November 2008The Federation of Turkish Associations UK would like to voice their extreme frustration and disappointment at the actions and comments of the Duchess of York, presenter Chris Rogers and inferences made by Barrister John Cooper in the broadcasting of the distorted portrayal of Turkey in the programme “Duchess and Daughters: Their Secret Mission” aired by ITV on the 6th October 2008.

The rules and broadcasting codes laid out by Ofcom have been infringed according to section 1: “protecting the under eighteens”, section 2: “harm and offence”, section 3: “crime”, section 5: “due impartiality and due accuracy”, section 7: “fairness” and section 8: “privacy” and we are reporting these infringements to Ofcom and expect a full and detailed explanation of why this programme has been allowed to be aired.

Duchess and Daughters: Their Shambolic Secret Mission

The Federation of Turkish Associations UK would like to voice their extreme frustration and disappointment at the actions and comments of the Duchess of York, presenter Chris Rogers and inferences made by Barrister John Cooper in the broadcasting of the distorted portrayal of Turkey in the programme “Duchess and Daughters: Their Secret Mission” aired by ITV on the 6th October 2008.

As an NGO based in the UK, we have to clarify that our criticism regarding this programme is not because it is highlighting an institution which certainly needs improvement or to defend the methods used to treat mentally or disabled children under state protection in those institutions, but the presentation made and the wording used in the program to accuse and insult the Turkish nation as a whole.

We would of course like to see things improve in the social services in Turkey and as we are informed many improvements have been made over recent years. It is a pity that this programme has been made in such a way as to misguide the British public as to the conditions and attitudes towards disabled children in Turkey and has created negativity in the relations between the two countries and more seriously created grave concerns amongst the Turkish community in this country as to the aims and sincerity of ITV.

It is clear that the programme from the beginning had a separate agenda, perhaps to glorify the work of the Duchess of York or as a locomotive to encourage opposition to Turkey’s aspirations about the EU. It seems that the producers of the programme had in mind more of a two-pronged PR stunt aimed firstly at demonising Turkey and secondly at improving the flailing popularity of the Duchess of York at someone else’s expense. Perhaps in her own mind, she imagines she can fill the void left by Princess Diana who was a true campaigner for humanitarian causes. Unfortunately, our members do not believe that she sincerly cares about the issue and suggest she participate in a programme uncovering some of the child abuse cases that are frequently uncovered in Britain or to visit the war zones in Afganistan and Iraq to see the gross humanitarian crisis, particularly in the lives of innocent children.

Secret cameras used to film as if there were some cloak and dagger activities going on seem to be gimmicks used to imply that the Duchess was in some form of danger in Turkey. Another reference to police stopping the camera crew likened Ankara to some third world war zone, sensationalising the programme. Some of our members have been stopped and searched several times in the centre of London and they don’t need a camera to prove this since ‘stop and search’ is used as a regular practice by Metropolitan Police.

In any case the institutions visited by the Duchess were not orphanages for abandoned children as portrayed, but institutions for the mentally disabled. These institutions so ‘secretly’ filmed by the Duchess are open for inspection on a regular basis to NGO’s from anywhere in the world and not ‘hidden away’ as implied by the documentary. After the filming, no respect was shown to the rights of those filmed to protect their identity and no permission was obtained to show the film from the families of those involved. This is a gross violation of their rights.

Certain actions and generalisations used in the programme have been found very offensive by our members and have led to distress and disillusionment across a wide section of our community. Comments made such as “Many of these children are abandoned by their parents because in Turkey there is a shame associated with having a disabled child” is an unfair and untrue generalisation suggesting that Turkish people do not care about their handicapped.

Turkey has a population estimated at 70 million, of which 3% are registered as either physically or mentally disabled putting the total amount of handicapped people at approximately 2.1 million. The number of mentally disabled children in these 53 homes and institutions total only 3673 given by the State Ministry of Women and Family Affairs. This in itself shows, contrary to the accusations in the programme, that the vast majority of handicapped children are looked after in the home. The new initiatives set up by the government are facilitating even more of those in homes to be looked after back in their family unit. Unlike Britain, in Turkey most of the families look after their handicapped children at home and without any financial assistance from the government. Those children shown in the documentary are there because they come from extremely poverty stricken families or broken homes.

Again, claims by Barrister John Cooper “any country that treats its children like this is not ready to accede to a family of nations that aspire to dignity and humanity” is an insult to the whole nation and has given our members the feeling that the whole programme has been engineered to smear Turks and Turkey in an attempt to sabotage their accession. We would be very pleased if all EU member countries treat their children as he claims but we all know his statement is far from truth.

Comments like “Europe’s forgotten children”, “no hope for kids”, “born with a life sentence”, “grave concerns on Turkey’s human rights record” and many others are all exaggerated and unfair to the children or staff of the institutions shown in the programme.

Many things were also wrongly implied, for example, the impression was given that Britain is only giving support to Turkey because they need their cooperation in the war on terror. This is an outrageous claim, since Turkey has been on the forefront of fighting terrorism for many years and has suffered attacks at the hands of Al Qaida on several occasions.

It is very regrettable that such a programme has been aired, ignoring the damage it will make to the innocent people who live and work in those institutions. It is essential when doing any programme that a complete and balanced view be provided for the viewer and this is the responsibility not only of those involved in the filming but more so by the producers and broadcasters whom in this instance, have shown a blatant disregard for professional ethics.

We believe the rules and broadcasting codes laid out by Ofcom have been infringed by ITV1 according to section 1: “protecting the under eighteens”, section 2: “harm and offence”, section 3: “crime”, section 5: “due impartiality and due accuracy”, section 7: “fairness” and section 8: “privacy”. Therefore, we are reporting these infringements to Ofcom and expect a full and detailed explanation of why this programme has been allowed to be aired.

We believe that the “Every Child Matters” policy of the Government is vital and should be made universal. Whatever a child’s background or circumstances, they should be given the support they need to stay safe and healthy, enjoy, achieve, make a positive contribution and reach economic wellbeing. Therefore, we all have to work towards making the lives of all children better wherever in the world they may live, certainly not using them as a tool for personal or political aspirations just because they are a member of another nation. The positive approach would be offering sincere help by providing training courses in working with the disabled and psychiatrically disturbed and supporting those NGO’s who are making a difference to their inadequate system of caring for the disabled.

We as viewers have every right to expect fair, impartial, accurate and balanced programs from ITV and are therefore demanding that another program be aired to repair the damage done and help those affected. We also expect an apology from the Duchess of York for not acting responsibly and taking part in a program based on politics to smear Turkey by exploiting mentally disabled Turkish children and her daughters should realise that it is us, the British taxpayer that provides them with their luxurious lifestyles not Turkish or Romanian. If the Duchess and her daughters want to get involved in good causes there are many deserving groups in this country who may welcome their involvement and their financial contribution. Charity begins at home.

Notes to editors

About FTA UK

The Federation of Turkish Associations UK (FTA UK) was formed in 2002 consisting of sixteen independent and diverse Turkish associations to bring together the voice of their members on common issues. The FTA UK represents a large proportion of the Turkish community which is estimated at nearly 500,000 ethnic Turks who live mainly in London and its surrounding areas and includes Turkish Cypriots.

The Federation’s main aims and objectives are; to bring together the Turks living in Britain in solidarity and strengthen their relationship; to help the community to integrate better within the British system whilst maintaining their own culture and identity; to find solutions to their common problems and protect their common interests; to promote and enhance the British – Turkish friendship and to share the Turkish culture and history.

The Federation carries out its duties completely independently without being influenced by any political party, ethnic influence, religion or any form of discrimination and in the interest of the British-Turkish Community. It is a non profit – non governmental organisation and acts as an umbrella organisation and communication vehicle for the whole community.

Contact FTA UK :

E-mail: [email protected]
Post: FTA UK, 41 Camberwell Church Street, London SE5 8TR
Telephone : + 44 (0)77 7000 003

November 15, 2008
Brawling Greek and Armenian monks refuse to turn the other cheek

Christian infighting in Jerusalem

By Michael Hirst
BBC News

The argument over rights within Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre is as complicated and seemingly intractable as the Middle East conflict itself.

But when the dispute descends into violence, battles are pitched with crucifixes and staves rather than missiles, guns and stones.

Many Christians believe the church in the heart of Jerusalem’s old city marks the place of Jesus Christ’s death, burial and resurrection. As such, it is arguably Christianity’s holiest site.

A church has stood in the area for 1,700 years. Due to the conflicts that Jerusalem has since endured, the building has been partly destroyed, rebuilt and renovated several times.

a diagram of the church

It is now a labyrinthine complex of chapels and living quarters that is visited by hundreds of thousands of pilgrims and tourists every year.

“Caught On Tape:” What began as an annual procession by Christian monksat the Church Of The Holy Sepulchre, ended in a flurry of punches. The church is believed to be the site of Jesus’ crucifixion.

The church is grudgingly shared by six claimant communities – Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox, Egyptian Copt and Ethiopian Orthodox – who have always jealously defended their rights over various parts of the complex.

Rivalry between the groups dates back to the aftermath of the crusades and to the great schism between Eastern and Western Christianity in the 11th Century.

The Status Quo

So intense is the intra-Christian dispute that the six communities cannot agree which of them should have a key to the site’s main door.

Consequently, two Muslim families have been the sole guardians of the 25cm (10 inch) key since they were entrusted with the task by the Muslim ruler Saladin in 1178.

One family is responsible for unlocking the door each morning and locking it each night, while the other is responsible for its safekeeping at all other times.

In order to settle disputes, the Ottoman sultan issued a 1757 edict (now referred to as the Status Quo agreement) which outlined jurisdiction over Jerusalem’s various Christian holy places.

Regarding the Holy Sepulchre, it defined exactly which parts – from chapel, to lamp, to flagstone – of the complex were to be controlled by which denomination.

The ruling forbad any changes in designated religious sites without permission from the ruling government.

It also prohibited any changes whatsoever to designated sacred areas – from building, to structural repairs to cleaning – unless collectively agreed upon by the respective “tenants” from the rival religious communities.

Punishment for a violation of the edict could result in the confiscation of properties overseen by the offending group.

So closely is the ruling followed that it took 17 years of debate before an agreement was reached to paint the church’s main dome in 1995.

Acrimonious processions

Monks and friars have been known to exchange blows over who owns a chapel or whose right it is to clean which step.

Religious ceremonies can appear more like singing contests with communities battling to chant the loudest.

Monks inside the church are fiercely protective about their rights

Access to the tomb of Christ – a pale pink kiosk punctuated with portholes and supported by scaffolding that the writer Robert Byron compared to a steam-engine – is particularly fiercely guarded on such occasions.

Processions on holy days regularly become acrimonious, with jostling crowds exacerbating tensions over territorial disputes that periodically descend into in punch-ups.

The smallest slight can end in violence: In 2004, a door to the Roman Catholic chapel was left open during a Greek Orthodox ceremony.

This was perceived by the Greeks to be a sign of disrespect, and a fight broke out which resulted in several arrests.

The intractable nature of the territorial arguments over the site are epitomised by the short wooden ladder that rests on a ledge above the church’s main entrance.

It has been there since the 19th Century because rival groups cannot agree who has the right to take it down.

Under the Status Quo agreement, rights to the windows reached by the ladder belong to the Armenians, but the ledge below is controlled by the Greeks.

Roof falling in?

Also emblematic of the territorial dispute’s intensity is an ongoing row which, unless resolved, could see the church’s roof collapse.

Ethiopians were banished from the church’s interior by the sultan two centuries years ago because they could not pay the necessary taxes, and have been living in a monastery on the roof ever since.

The huts of Deir al-Sultan are at the heart of an ongoing row

The monastery, Deir al-Sultan, now comprises two chapels, an open courtyard, service and storage rooms and a series of tiny huts inhabited by Ethiopian monks. It is reminiscent of a basic African village.

All agree the monastery is in poor shape, but a recent Israeli report said it had reached an “emergency state”, and was at risk of collapsing through the roof into the church.

Israel has said it will pay for the repairs if the Christians can reach agreement on them, but this seems unlikely, due to a long-running ownership dispute between Ethiopian monks and their Egyptian counterparts.

Over the years, this dispute has been played out on various battlefields, including Israel’s highest courts.

So intense has the argument become that when a monk moved a chair out of the sunshine into a shadier area during a heat-wave six years ago, his action was seen as an attempted land-grab.

A fight broke out that left several monks needing hospital treatment.

Such skirmishes may seem nonsensical, but are all too common an occurrence at Christianity’s most revered shrine.

Source: news.bbc.co.uk, 11 November 2008

November 15, 2008
Academics balk at ‘spying’ on students to nail migrant scams

Polly Curtis, education editor

guardian.co.uk, The Guardian, Monday November 10 2008

Universities are being asked to set up surveillance units to monitor the movements of international students in a government-led crackdown on bogus student immigration scams, academics say. New rules to force universities to report overseas students who miss too many lectures to immigration officers will harm the academic-student relationship because lecturers are being asked to act in a “police-like” manner, according to a group of 200 academics and activists opposing the moves.

A letter to the Guardian, organised by Ian Grigg-Spall, academic chair of the National Critical Lawyers Group and signed by leading academic lawyers, the head of the lecturers’ union and Tony Benn, claims that the rules could breach the European convention on human rights, which guarantees the individual’s right to privacy. “This police-like surveillance is not the function of universities and alters the educational relationship between students and their teachers in a very harmful manner,” it says. “University staff are there to help the students develop intellectually and not to be a means of sanctioning these students.”

The rules will require all universities to obtain a licence to admit students from outside the EU. They will then have to sponsor students, who will be required to have their fingerprints taken and be issued with ID cards. Lecturers will have to report any student who misses 10 or more lectures or seminars. Students will also have to prove they have funds to cover fees plus £800 a month for the duration of their courses. Universities have separately raised concerns that the system of registering overseas students, which is planned to take place at six centres around the country, will struggle to cope.

About 350,000 overseas students attend British universities every year. Universities are heavily dependent on the £2.5bn a year they pay in fees.

Almost 300 bogus colleges have been uncovered in the past three years, many involved in immigration scams.

Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, said: “We have grave concerns that new rules on monitoring foreign students have been pulled together without any consultation with the people who would implement them. We do not believe it is appropriate or effective to task colleges and universities with the policing of immigration.”

A Home Office spokesman said: “Those who come to Britain must play by the rules and benefit the country. This new route for students will ensure we know exactly who is coming here to study and stamp out bogus colleges who facilitate the lawbreakers.

“International students contribute £2.5bn to the UK economy in tuition fees alone. The student tier of the points system means Britain can continue to recruit good students from outside Europe.”

Source: www.guardian.co.uk, November 10 2008

November 15, 2008
Moscow’s Moves in Georgia Open Door for Pan-Turkist Projects in North Caucasus

Paul Goble

Tallinn, November 14 – By recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Moscow has opened the door for an expansion of pan-Turkist activity in the North Caucasus, thus falling into a trap set by Western countries when they recognized Kosovo in the former Yugoslavia and setting the stage for a new “parade of sovereignties” in the North Caucasus.
And consequently, however much the Russian moves in Georgia corresponded to Russia’s national interests in the short term, commentator Igor Bokov argues in an essay posted online this week, they could prove fatal to Russian control of the broader region unless Moscow takes preventive measures (www.apn.ru/publications/article20992.htm).
In recent months, many analysts have focused on the growing activism of Circassian groups in the North Caucasus not only because of their support for the independence of Abkhazia and opposition to the Sochi Olympics but also because of the large and influential Circassian diasporas in Turkey and Jordan.
Much less attention has been given to the Turkic language groups in the region, which include the Karachay, Balkars, Nogays and Kumyks, but because of their location near Russia’s southern border and the activities of Turks abroad, they may prove even more important in the political development of the Caucasus in the coming months, the Moscow researcher argues.
Like many Russian analysts, Bokov discusses these trends in terms of what he sees as a broader effort by the West to promote the disintegration of multi-national states like the Russian Federation in order to strengthen the power of capitalist economics by weakening any alternative political arrangements.
But despite that, his article represents an intriguing contribution to the understanding of the Caucasus not only because of what he writes about two major Turkic groups in the North Caucasus but also because of what he says about the “unofficial” efforts by Turkey and other countries to reach out to them.
The Turkic-speaking Balkars, who form 10 percent of the population of Kabardino-Balkaria, have nonetheless formed a Council of Elders of the Balkar People and demanded that the constitution of that republic be amended to give them equal representation in the parliament to the much larger Kabardinian (Circassian) and Russian communities.
If that does not happen by January 31, 2009, this group says, the Council of Elders has declared, then it will proclaim the independence of Balkaria, an action that would undermine not only all the other multi-national republics in the North Caucasus but create a new hotspot for Moscow there.
What makes this movement intriguing, Bokov says, is not just the small size of the Balkar community but the fact that most of the leaders of the Balkar Council of Elders are militia officers who were fired after Arsen Kanokov became president of the republic and who seek to return to power and a new element in their ideology.
For the first time ever, the Balkars are saying “we are not simply a minority, there are 500 million of us” – “the first time in history of Russia or at least post-Soviet Russia,” the Moscow analyst says, when an openly “pan-Turkist” ideological agenda was articulated in the region with such vigor.
The situation in neighboring Karachayevo-Cherkessia represents another Turkic challenge, Bokov suggests. There, “the Turkic ethnos, the Karachay, is the dominant one, and the Cherkess [Circassians] the minority. But again the Turkic group is advancing its interests by ignoring the practice of giving the second most powerful position in the republic to a Cherkess.
Bokov argues that Turkey and other countries interested in weakening Russia. While Ankara carefully avoids public support of such groups lest it offend the Europeans or stimulate its own Kurdish minority, various groups in Turkey are increasingly active because “what is impossible at the official level is completely permissible at others.”
He points to groups like TIKA, the Turkish Agency for Cooperation and Development, Turksoy, an organization involved in cultural ties with Turkic peoples abroad, and Tusam, an information-analytic center supported by the metal workers union, as being especially active in this regard.
But he suggests that pan-Turkist ideas are being pushed not only by Turkey but by various Western countries and by both Georgia and Ukraine, who have an obvious interest in weakening Moscow’s influence and power in the region. And he concludes by arguing that Moscow must be prepared to counter all these groups.

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2008/11/window-on-eurasia-moscows-moves-in.html

November 15, 2008
Germany Meets Turkey Symposium, Berlin, Jan 2009

*** Call for Applications ***

The Germany Meets Turkey Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy Berlin, 26 – 30 January 2008

The Institute for Cultural Diplomacy (ICD) is currently seeking applicants for participation in The Germany Meets Turkey Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy in Berlin between the 26th and 30th of January 2009.

=== About the Symposium ===
The weeklong symposium will offer diverse participants the opportunity to explore and improve diplomacy at the level of social relations between Germany and Turkey. Participants will meet in some of Berlin’s most
prominent sites, where the issues of cultural diplomacy between the two countries are most closely felt: the Bundestag, the Auswärtiges Amt, the Kreuzberg Museum, and Berlin City Hall. Symposium workshops and
discussions with experts will cover not only legal and institutional aspects of the complex relationship between the two societies but will also examine firsthand the daily effect of this relationship as well as mutual cultural contributions.

=== About the Organizers ===
The ICD is an international, not-for-profit, non-governmental organization working to improve intercultural relations by organizing and researching initiatives that facilitate intercultural exchange. Germany Meets
Turkey-A Forum for Young Leaders is an interdisciplinary network which organizes bilateral events such as yearly study tours and whose activities are supported by the Istanbul Policy Center at Sabanci University as well as the Robert Bosch Stiftung in Germany. More detailed information about the ICD can be found at:

www.culturaldiplomacy.org

=== How to Apply ===
The Symposium is designed especially for young academics and advanced university students from both Turkey and Germany. Applicants from other countries with a strong interest and background in Turkish or German studies are also eligible for consideration. An application form, as well as more detailed information about the GMT Symposium can be found at:

If you have any further questions, or require any more information, please do not hesitate to contact me at:

[email protected]

With kind regards,

Alex Balistreri
Program Director – Germany Meets Turkey Symposium

————

*** Aufruf zur Bewerbung ***

The Germany Meets Turkey Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy
Berlin, 26. – 30. Januar 2009

Das Institute for Cultural Diplomacy (ICD) sucht derzeit Bewerber für die Teilnahme am Programm Germany Meets Turkey: Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy in Berlin vom 26. bis 30. Januar 2009.

=== Über das Symposium ===
Das einwöchige Symposium wird unterschiedlichen Teilnehmern die Gelegenheit bieten, Diplomatie auf der Ebene sozialer Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und der Türkei zu erforschen und zu verbessern. Die Teilnehmer werden an einigen der prominentesten Orte in Berlin, an denen die Probleme kultureller
Diplomatie zwischen der Türkei und Deutschland am spürbarsten sind, zusammenkommen: im Bundestag, im Auswärtigen Amt, im Kreuzberg Museum und im Berliner Rathaus. Die Workshops und Diskussionen des Symposiums werden nicht nur rechtliche und institutionelle Aspekte der komplexen Beziehung zwischen
beiden Gesellschaften näher betrachten, sondern auch Gelegenheit bieten, die täglichen Auswirkungen dieser Beziehung und ihre wechselseitigen kulturellen Beiträge persönlich zu untersuchen.

=== Über die Organisatoren ===
Das ICD ist eine internationale, gemeinnützige Nichtregierungsorganisation mit dem Ziel der Verbesserung der interkulturellen Beziehungen durch die Organisation von Veranstaltungen und Förderung von Initiativen mit dem Ziel der Verbesserung des interkulturellen Austauschs. Germany Meets Turkey – A Forum for Young Leaders ist ein interdisziplinäres Netzwerk, das bilaterale Veranstaltungen, wie z. B. jährliche Studienreisen, organisiert und dessen Aktivitäten vom Istanbul Politikzentrum der Sabanci Universität und der Robert Bosch Stiftung in Deutschland unterstützt werden. Weitere Informationen zum ICD können Sie unter folgendem Link finden:

www.culturaldiplomacy.org

=== Bewerbung ===
Das Symposium ist besonders auf junge Akademiker und fortgeschrittene Universitätsstudenten aus der Türkei und Deutschland zugeschnitten. Interessierte Bewerber aus anderen Ländern, die einen Hintergrund in
Türkeistudien oder Germanistik haben, werden ebenfalls berücksichtigt. Bewerbungsunterlagen und weitere ausführliche Informationen über das GMT Symposium finden Sie unter:

Sollten Sie weitere Fragen haben oder zusätzliche Informationen benötigen, kontaktieren Sie uns bitte unter:

[email protected]

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Alex Balistreri
Programm Direktor – Germany Meets Turkey Symposium

November 15, 2008
Mustafa Jemilev Observes His 65th Birthday

The recognized leader of Crimean Tatars, Mustafa Jemilev observed his 65th
birthday yesterday.

Born in Crimea on 13 November 1943, he was only six months old when his
family and the rest of the Crimean Tatar population were deported by Soviet
authorities in May 1944. His family lived in a special settlement camp in
Uzbekistan until 1956, when tight restrictions were relaxed. At the age of
18, he and several of his activist friends established the Union of Young
Crimean Tatars. His first arrest came in 1966, when he was sentenced for
refusing to serve in the Soviet Army.

A well-known Soviet dissident, He spent almost one fourth of his life in
Soviet prisons and labor camps. He is also remembered for staging the
longest hunger strike in the history of human rights movement. The hunger
strike, which lasted for 303 days (but he survived due to forced feeding),
drew world’s attention to the predicament of Crimean Tatars.

In 1986, as Jemilev was completing his sixth prison term in a hard-labor
camp, he was charged and tried for anti-Soviet activities once again. During
the summit held by Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan, however, the
American President asked for the release of five political prisoners as part
of the negotiations. Jemilev was one of those prisoners and he was released
with the condition that he refrain from any political activity.

In May 1989, he was elected to head the Crimean Tatar National Movement.
That year he returned to Crimea with his family, a move that would be
followed by the eventual return of 250,000 Tatars to their homeland. He is
currently serving as a member of the Ukrainian Parliament (Kyiv) and as
Chairman of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis (Simferopol) .

Jemilev received the Nansen Medal, awarded by the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees for his persistent efforts and commitment to
defend the rights of Crimean Tatars to repatriate. The Crimean Tatar
leadership has always sought to solve conflicts by non-violent means. In an
interview Jemilev gave shortly after receiving the Nansen Medal in October
1998, he stated that “when violent means are used innocent people die, and
no just cause can justify the taking of innocent lives.”

We extend our birthday greetings to Mustafa Jemilev and our best wishes for
a long, healthy and successful life.

Inci Bowman, Ph.D.
International Committee for Crimea
Washington, DC

November 15, 2008