Category: USA

Turkey could be America’s most important regional ally, above Iraq, even above Israel, if both sides manage the relationship correctly.

  • MCCAIN ATTACK ON OBAMA GENOCIDE POLICY

    MCCAIN ATTACK ON OBAMA GENOCIDE POLICY

    MCCAIN ATTACK ON OBAMA GENOCIDE POLICY

    armradio.am
    24.07.2008 11:29

    Armenian Americans – a community of one a half million citizens that
    has experienced the horrors of genocide and continues to endure the
    pain of its denial -defended Senator Barack Obama against Senator
    John McCain’s unfounded and starkly hypocritical charges that the
    presumptive Democratic nominee is not serious about preventing future
    genocides.

    Senator McCain’s presidential campaign issued a press statement
    attacking Senator Obama as lacking sincerity in his calls of
    “never again,” even as the Illinois Senator personally traveled
    to Israel’s Yad Vashem memorial to honor the millions slaughtered
    in the Holocaust. Senator Obama has been a consistently strong and
    effective leader on issues of genocide, leading Congressional efforts
    to stop the Genocide in Darfur, and fighting vigorously against the
    Bush Administration’s complicity – enthusiastically backed by John
    McCain – in the Turkish government’s denial of the Armenian Genocide.

    “Armenian Americans, a community with a long and painful experience of
    genocide, know that John McCain lacks the standing to lecture anyone –
    especially a genocide-prevention leader of the stature of Barack Obama
    – regarding America’s compelling national interest and moral obligation
    in opposing all genocides, past or present,” said Armenians for Obama
    Chairman Areen Ibranossian. “Barack Obama has led the fight=2 0against
    the Darfur Genocide, and publicly taken on the Bush White House’s
    obstruction of recognition of the Armenian Genocide, while John McCain
    has done little more than to meekly accept the gag-rule imposed by the
    Turkish government on the discussion of this crime against humanity.”

    “John McCain, who has outsourced U.S. genocide policy to the
    Turkish government, really hit bottom by launching such an obviously
    hypocritical attack against Barack Obama, who is so far out in front of
    him in fighting for real U.S. leadership to end the cycle of genocide,”
    added Ibranossian.

    On January 19th, 2008 Senator Barack Obama issued a forceful and
    passionate statement on the topic of genocide, which reads, in part:
    “Genocide, sadly, persists to this day, and threatens our common
    security and common humanity.

    Tragically, we are witnessing in Sudan many of the same brutal tactics
    – displacement, starvation, and mass slaughter – that were used by
    the Ottoman authorities against defenseless Armenians back in 1915. I
    have visited Darfurian refugee camps, pushed for the deployment of
    a robust multinational force for Darfur, and urged divestment from
    companies doing business in Sudan. America deserves a leader who
    speaks truthfully about the Armenian Genocide and responds forcefully
    to all genocides. I intend to be that President.”

    Armenians for Obama is a nationwide voter registration, education
    and mobilization effort dedicated to electing Ba rack Obama
    President. Based in Los Angeles, and with chapters and affiliates
    in all 50 States, Armenians for Obama will harness the energy and
    enthusiasm for Barack Obama’s candidacy to ensure record high Armenian
    American turnout in critical battleground states

  • The Crisis in Turkey / Buyukelci Mark Parris Ne Diyordu?

    The Crisis in Turkey / Buyukelci Mark Parris Ne Diyordu?

    As the closure case against the ruling Justice and Development Party (JDP) is moving towards a verdict in the Constitutional Court, the Turkish political agenda has become even more complicated with the arrest of a number of prominent individuals allegedly associated with a coup plot against the government. Although the JDP was able to win a decisive victory in the July 2007 elections following a serious dispute over the election of a new president, Turkish society has become even more polarized during the past year and tension is rising in an alarming manner. The gravity and implications of the crisis had been examined by Bulent Aliriza, the Director of the CSIS Turkey Project. Mark Parris, former Ambassador to Turkey in 1997-2000, who is currently a Visiting Fellows at Brookings Institution, then provided a commentary.

    —————————–

    Mark Parris Ne Diyordu?

    ABD’ nin Ankara eski Büyükelçisi Mark Parris’ in Türkiye ile ilgili bir değerlendirmesi özet olarak Türk medyasında yer almıştı. Bugün, Cumhuriyet Gazetesinde yayımlanan ve bu konuda daha detaylı bilgi içeren Ergin YIldızoğlu’ nun köşe yazısını aşağıda gönderiyorum. Yabancı dili ingilizce olanlar, arzu ederlerse, aşağıdaki linkten M.Parris’ in konuşmasını kendi sesinden dinleyebilirler. Saygılar,
    Bedii Nezih Oz

    ERGİN YILDIZOĞLU

    Mark Parris Ne Diyordu?

    ABD’nin eski Ankara Büyükelçisi Mark Parris’in, Türkiye’deki siyasi krizle ilgili yorumları geçen hafta medyaya yansıdı. İlgiler daha çok, Parris’in Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin kararına ilişkin adeta bir tarih veren öngörüsü üzerinde odaklandı. Ama Türkiye’den döndükten sonra Stratejik ve Uluslararası Çalışmalar Merkezi’nde (CSIS) yaptığı ilginç konuşmanın içeriği, sanırım, yeterince irdelenmedi. Haberin üzerinden yaklaşık bir hafta geçmiş olmasına karşın konuşmada ilgimi çeken noktaları sizlerle paylaşmak istiyorum.

    Mark Parris Türkiye’ye, bir ABD – AB ortak kuruluşu olan Atlantik Konseyi’nden bir heyetin parçası olarak gelmiş. Türkiye’de olup bitenleri anlamak, büyük olasılıkla etkilemek amacıyla gelen bu heyetin diğer üyeleriyle birlikte Türkiye’de yaygın temaslarda bulunmuş. Parris, dönüşünde CSIS’de yaptığı ve basında aktarılan toplantıdaki (kuruluşun web sitesinden dinlemek olanaklı) yaklaşık 20 dakikalık sunuşunda ve izleyen “Soru-Cevap” bölümünde, özellikle üç noktaya yaptığı vurgunun çok önemli olduğunu düşünüyorum: AKP’ye yönelik eleştiriler, “3. Güç” dediği bir yapılanmaya ilişkin saptamalar, Türkiye’de siyasetin içinde askerin rolünün artacağına ilişkin beklenti.

    AKP başarılı olamadı

    Parris’in AKP’ye, ikinci dönemi bağlamında yönelttiği eleştiriler oldukça kapsamlı. Bunlardan en önemlileri şöyle: AB sürecini canlandıramadı, anayasayı değiştiremedi, varlığından kaygı duyulan İslamcı gündemin/projenin (“agenda” sözcüğünü kullanıyor) keskin yanlarını törpüleyemedi, tüm ülkenin başbakanı olamadı. Nihayet yolsuzluk sorunu AKP grubunu da etkisi altına aldı.

    AB sürecinin aksamasının tek sorumlusunun AKP olmadığını, AB’nin değişen tutumunun süreci fiilen öldürdüğünü göz önüne alırsak, Parris’in, aslında AKP’nin kendisinden istenenleri veremediğinden yakındığını düşünebiliriz. Bence daha önemli eleştiriler AKP’nin toplumda birleştirici olamadığına, dolayısıyla bölücü olduğuna, yolsuzluklara bulaştığına ilişkin saptamalarda yatıyor. Böylece Parris, diplomatik bir dille, AKP’nin meşruiyeti üzerine bir soru işareti koyuyor. Dahası, sermaye sınıfı ve Batı yanlısı liberal seçkinlerle AKP arasındaki ilişkinin bozulmasına yaptığı gönderme, AKP’nin Batı yanlısı tutumunun, liberal demokrat olma iddialarının hakikiliğine ilişkin kaygıların bir yansıması olarak görülebilir. Bu saptamalara karşılık konuşmasında sık sık Tayyip Bey’i övmesini, “Yeri doldurulamaz” demesini “Hatalarından öğrenmiyor” saptamasıyla birlikte okuyunca, aklıma efsanevi Kızılderili Şefi Jeronimo’nun “Beyaz adam çatal dillidir” sözleri geldi, ister istemez.

    ‘3. Güç’e dikkat

    Bence, konuşmada çok az yer verilmekle birlikte, Parris’in karşı karşıya olan güçleri sıralarken bir “3. Güç”ten söz etmesi çok önemli. Parris, bugünkü kriz içinde, Tayyip Bey’den yana tutum alan bu “3. Güç”ün sivil güvenlik güçleri, istihbarat örgütleri içinde çok etkin olduğunu ve kendi savcılarına sahip olduğunu söylüyor. Diğer bir deyişle Parris, devlet içinde, şiddet organlarında ve yasama içinde, kaynağı belirsiz (“biz bile bilmiyoruz” demeye getiriyor) karanlık bir güç var diyor. Bu gücün “cemaat” olduğu artık herkesin malumudur. Öyleyse Parris, bu güce işaret ederken “cemaat”in etkisiyle, devletin elindeki şiddet tekelinin parçalanmaya başladığını da söylemiş oluyor. Böylece, Parris, devlet içinde bir “tırmanan darbe” (devleti ele geçirme) olgusuna dikkat çekmiş olmuyor mu?

    Askerin siyasi rolü artacak

    Bence, Parris’in, askerin siyasi etkisi artacak öngörüsü, AKP’yi destekleyerek akıllarınca “militarizme karşı” mücadele ettiklerini hayal eden şaşkın liberallerin üzerinde şok etkisi yapmalıdır. Tabii duyduklarını anlayacak kadar akılları kaldıysa. Parris son dönemde en “aklıselim” yorumların ordu üst kademesinden geldiğine inanıyor. Parris’e göre, önümüzdeki dönemde, “asker-siyasetçi” olarak nitelediği bir kategorinin sivil siyaset içindeki rolü özellikle, Özkök gibi emekli komutanların aracılığıyla artacak. Yine Parris’e göre ordu üst kademesinin, asker siyasetçilerin, sivil siyaset içindeki etkisinin artmasıysa, AKP’yi geriletmeye çalışanlara karşı mücadele eden güçleri daha da güçlendirecek, onlar için bir nevi koruyucu etken olacak. Bu da “başkalarını” düş kırıklığına uğratacak gibi görünüyor.

    Tam bu noktada Parris’in; “Taraflar bir çıkış yolu bulamazlarsa uçuruma birlikte yuvarlanacaklar”, “Ancak görünürde bir taviz verme ya da anlaşma eğilimi yok”. “Birileri bu sorunu çözmeli” yorumu üzerinde düşünmeye başlayabiliriz. Düşünürken benim aklıma, İngiltere dış politikasının önemli düşünce kuruluşu Chatam House’dan Fadi Hakura’nın, bir saptaması geldi “Erdoğan ve AKP’ye ne olursa olsun, Türkiye, ideologların geçmiş dönemdeki kavgalarının biriken küllerinden doğacak yeni bir tarz siyasetin eşiğinde” (17/07/08). Hımm.

    erginy@tr.net

  • U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION TO HOLD HEARING ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN AZERBAIJAN

    U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION TO HOLD HEARING ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIZATION IN AZERBAIJAN

    234 Ford House Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20515-6460
    Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman
    Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin, Co-Chairman
    For Immediate Release
    www.csce.gov
    Media Contact: Lale Mamaux
    202.225.1901
    July 24, 2008

    (Washington, D.C.) Congressman Alcee L. Hastings (D-FL), Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (U.S. Helsinki Commission) and Co-Chairman Senator Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD), will hold a hearing entitled, “Human Rights and Democratization in Azerbaijan.” The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 29 at 3:00 p.m. in room B-318 of the Rayburn House Office Building.

    Azerbaijan has one of the fastest growing economies in the world and plays a pivotal role in diversifying sources of energy. A moderate Muslim country, Azerbaijan enjoys good relations with the United States. On human rights, however, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe have numerous concerns, including freedom of the media, political prisoners and the conduct of elections.

    With an upcoming presidential contest in October, Azerbaijan has an opportunity to hold an election that meets OSCE commitments, as well as implement other reforms. The hearing will examine the state of human rights and democratization in Azerbaijan and discuss how U.S. – Azerbaijan cooperation could help promote advances.

    WITNESSES

    The Honorable David Kramer, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor

    His Excellency Yashar Aliyev, Ambassador, Republic of Azerbaijan

    Mr. Chris Walker, Director of Studies, Freedom House

    **Additional witnesses may be added

    The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, is a U.S. Government agency that monitors progress in the implementation of the provisions of the 1975 Helsinki Accords. The Commission consists of nine members from the United States Senate, nine from the House of Representatives, and one member each from the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce.

  • Kurds ask for US bases to be built near Iran border

    Kurds ask for US bases to be built near Iran border

    As part of a long-term security agreement with Iraq, US forces could be stationed in Kurdistan. [sic.]

    The Iraqi government and the head of northern Iraq’s regional Kurdish administration, Massoud Barzani, have suggested to military officials that US forces be permanently based in Kurdistan. [sic.]

    Mr Barzani has said a permanent US military presence in the Kurdistan region would defend Iraq from internal and external risks.

    On hearing the request, US Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama said it would be appropriate to redeploy US troops there in the future.

    Mr Obama is known to believe troops stationed in the Kurdistan [sic.] area are not in any great danger.

    There are currently no US airbases in Kurdistan, [sic.] although there are two Air Force facilities in neighbouring provinces.

    The US military has denied any intention of building a US air base, but Kurdish sources have said if the US military decides to establish a permanent presence it will be closer to the Iraqi-Iranian border.

    Source: BirminghamStar.com, 22nd July, 2008

  • Armenians for Obama”

    Armenians for Obama”

    Armenians for Obama” isimli kampanya çerçevesinde Colorado, Washington, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Texas, California, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Washington DC ve New York eyaletlerinde düzenlenmesi öngörülen „grassroots” toplantılarına ilişkin olarak 17 Temmuz tarihinde  „Asbarez”de yayımlanan „Armenians For Obama to Host Nationwide Platform Meetings” başlıklı haberin metni :
     
     sgurbuz@aol.com
     
     „LOS ANGELES, CA – Armenians for Obama announced this week that it has organized grassroots platform meetings throughout the country aimed at including domestic and international issues of interest to the Armenian American community within the Democratic Party’s platform to be approved at the Democratic National Convention in August.
     
    The meetings will take place in Lakewood, CO; Seattle, WA; Gallup, NM; Las Vegas, NV; Portland, OR; Houston, TX; Austin, TX; and Glendale, CA in the Western United States, and in Dearborn, MI; Philadelphia, PA; Washington, DC; and New York, NY on the Eastern part of the country. For more information on the platform hearings, Armenians for Obama, or getting involved, please email: info@armeniansforobama.com.
     
    Those attending the platform meetings will discuss the possible inclusion of US recognition for the Armenian Genocide, the right to self-determination of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh and lifting the Turkish blockade of Armenia. Participants will also address the war in Iraq, the troubled U.S. economy, and rising cost of healthcare.
     
    “The Bush Administration has failed the Armenian-American community on a wide range of issues, especially its continued complicity in the denial of the Armenian Genocide, but also its opposition to a broad array of foreign policy and domestic issues of concern to Americans of Armenian heritage,” said Areen Ibranossian, Chairman of Armenians for Obama.
     
    “Including issues of special concern to Armenian Americans in the Democratic Party Platform, such as the need to end the cycle of genocide, will play a vital role in energizing this highly motivated and networked community to tip the scales for Barack Obama this November in battleground states such as Nevada, Virginia, Colorado, and Michigan”, added Ibranossian.
     
    “In the upcoming election, we have an historic opportunity to elect a President who offers a fundamental change from the failed policies of the last seven year,” explained Ibranossian.
     
    In January, Sen. Obama issued a strong statement to the Armenian American community calling for passage of Armenian Genocide legislation and pledging to end U.S. complicity in Turkey’s denial of that crime against humanity.  “The facts are undeniable,” stated Sen. Obama in his January 19 statement. “An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy. 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.”
     
    He has made subsequent statements in support of US recognition of the Armenian Genocide both publicly and privately during meetings with Armenian-American community representatives.
     
    Last month, Obama submitted questions on the Armenian Genocide to Marie Yovanovitch, President Bush’s nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Armenia. The Senator serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which must confirm Yovanovitch before she can assume her post in Yerevan.
     
    While on a fact-finding mission to Azerbaijan, Sen. Obama openly criticized the Turkish and Azeri blockades of Armenia and urged the two nations to open their borders with the land-locked country.
     
    Armenians for Obama is a nationwide voter registration, education, and mobilization effort dedicated to electing Barack Obama President. Based in Los Angeles, and with chapters and affiliates in all 50 States, Armenians for Obama will harness the energy and enthusiasm for Barack Obama’s candidacy to ensure record high Armenian American turnout in critical battleground states. „
  • Turkish déjà vu

    Turkish déjà vu

    Friday, July 18, 2008

    If Washington were to pursue a military solution in its efforts to halt the Iranian nuclear program, Turkey – the only NATO country bordering Iran – must be a part of its planning. Likewise, if the United States and its European allies were to implement tighter economic sanctions against Iran, Ankara would have to play a key role because much of Iran’s trade with Europe goes through Turkey.

    On the surface, Turkey seems to be on board with the West regarding Iran. But the Turkish position on Iran today looks much like the Turkish position regarding the buildup to the Iraq war in 2003. The specific factors that led to Ankara’s decision to oppose the war are re-emerging, building opposition to American plans to deal with Iran’s nuclear program, either through sanctions or military measures.

    In 2003, the Turkish public had little awareness about the approaching Iraq war. At that time, the United States was using Turkey’s Incirlik air base to bomb Saddam Hussein’s air defenses. At the same time, Ankara was paralyzed by its internal struggle to preserve secularism within the government. If you read Turkish papers published back then, you would not guess that the United States was about to occupy one of Turkey’s neighbors and forever change their neighborhood.

    Five years later – déjà vu. Turkey is once again stricken with political paralysis over the battle between secularists and the governing Justice and Development Party, or AKP. As a result, there is almost no coverage in the Turkish media on foreign policy issues, including Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Domestic tensions make it impossible for that issue to penetrate the debate. Perhaps Turks won’t even notice until Iran actually detonates a bomb.

    Another similarity between today and the events of 2003 is that the AKP government is playing both sides to get away with doing nothing. As it negotiated with U.S. diplomats in 2003 about a joint front against Saddam, the AKP voiced antiwar rhetoric at home. Moreover, days before the war began, the AKP’s trade minister went to Baghdad to sign a multibillion-dollar trade deal with Saddam. In the end, the AKP-dominated Turkish Parliament voted to keep Turkey out of the war.

    Now, once again, the AKP is playing both sides to shirk responsibility. While opposing U.S. military action, the party continues to spout its official line: “Turkey wants a nuclear-free Middle East.” Albeit a good start, this policy implies that Israel’s nukes are as much a problem as Iran’s would be – a stance that absolves Ankara from any real political obligations toward Europe and the United States on Iran. Moreover, at a time when the West is imposing sanctions, the AKP has signed a memorandum of understanding to invest $3.5 billion in Iran’s South Pars gas field – a move eerily similar to 2003.

    Another similarity is America’s failure to communicate with the Turks. In 2003, Turkish officials expected, in vain, that Secretary of State Colin Powell would come to Ankara to promise that the war against Saddam would not break up Iraq and create an independent Kurdish state.

    Today, seasoned diplomats in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs cannot tell from one day to the next how America is planning on dealing with Iran. And like in 2003, Ankara is waiting with crossed fingers for a high-level American statesman to explain Washington’s plans.

    There is, however, one difference between 2003 and 2008: the role of the Turkish military. In the run-up to the Iraq war, bickering between the Turkish government and the military complicated matters for the United States. Neither the AKP nor the military wanted to be responsible for making the decision for their country to go to war. This thinking proved to be a fatal mistake for the military, rendering it irrelevant in Washington and powerless in Turkey.

    After dropping out of the foreign policy debate in 2003, the military lost popularity, as was seen in the July, 2007 elections. Today it is in disarray.

    This leaves the AKP in charge of major decisions regarding Iran. The AKP opposes both a military solution to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, as well as non-military measures like strong economic sanctions. As a result of the AKP’s rapprochement with Tehran since 2003, the official line in Ankara is that “Turkey’s economic interests in Iran are too important to sacrifice.”

    The latest American overture to Ankara, supporting Turkish efforts against the Kurdistan Workers Party, has not sufficed to change the government’s attitude. While Washington has allowed Turkey to target PKK terrorist camps in northern Iraq, Tehran, as a favor to Turkey, has upped the ante with Washington by actually bombing such camps.

    If the United States was betting on Turkish cooperation against Iran, it might as well plan to navigate around the looming iceberg. It might already be too little too late for Washington to count on Turkey on Iran.

    Soner Cagaptay, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, is the author of “Islam, Secularism and Nationalism in Modern Turkey: Who is a Turk?”