Tag: Davutoglu

  • Gul Named Chatham House Prize Winner Because Of His Leader Qualities, Says Chairman

    Gul Named Chatham House Prize Winner Because Of His Leader Qualities, Says Chairman

    gul ve karisi

    LONDON (A.A) – 19.03.2010 – Turkish President Abdullah Gul has been voted the winner of this year’s Chatham House Prize because of his qualities as a national, regional and international leader, Chairman of Chatham House said on Friday.

    “I warmly congratulate the President on this award which recognizes his accomplishments and acknowledges the growing influence he has achieved for Turkey,” DeAnne Julius said in a statement.

    Gul will be invited to collect the award and a scroll signed by Queen Elizabeth II at a ceremony in London later this year. The other nominees for this year’s prize were French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde and Croatian President Stjepan Mesic.

    Robin Niblett, Director of Chatham House, said “Chatham House members have a deep interest in international affairs and have voted for President Gul to acknowledge his efforts within Turkey as well as on the international stage. Our members represent a cross-section of the most influential globally orientated individuals in business, academia and public life.”

    Suzan Sabancı Dincer, a member of Chatham House Panel of Senior Advisers, and Chairman and Executive Board Member of Akbank, said that she was proud and delighted that President Gul is to receive this prestigious award.

    “His efforts to bring stability and prosperity to Turkey’s region and his encouragement of Turkey’s rapid progress towards reform and full European integration have been acknowledged by Chatham House members,” she said.

    The Chatham House Prize is an annual award presented to the statesperson deemed by members of the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Chatham House to have made the most significant contribution to the improvement of international relations in the previous year. (TÇ-CE)

    =========================================================

    President      Abdullah Gül Voted Winner of the Chatham House Prize 2010

    FOR IMMEDIATE      RELEASE 13.30 HRS FRIDAY 19 MARCH

    Abdullah Gül, President of Turkey, has been voted the winner of
    the Chatham House      Prize 2010. This annual award is presented to
    the statesperson deemed      by members of the Royal Institute of
    International Affairs at Chatham      House to have made the most
    significant contribution to the improvement      of international
    relations in the previous year.

    President Gül is recognized for being a significant figure for
    reconciliation and moderation within Turkey      and internationally,
    and a driving force behind many of the positive      steps that Turkey
    has taken in recent years.

    Mr Gül has worked to deepen Turkey’s      traditional ties with
    the Middle East, mediate between the fractious      groups in Iraq
    and bring together the Afghan and Pakistani leaderships to try to
    resolve      disputes during 2009. He has also made significant efforts
    to reunify the      divided island of Cyprus and has played a leading
    role, along      with his Armenian counterpart, in initiating a process
    of reconciliation      between Turkey and Armenia.

    President Gül is also recognized for being an unwavering
    proponent of      anchoring Turkey      in the European Union. Under
    his leadership, Turkey is consolidating      civilian democratic rule
    and undergoing extensive political and legal      reforms to bring the
    country closer to European standards of democracy      and human rights.

    President Gül will be invited to collect the award and a scroll
    signed by      our Patron, Her Majesty The Queen, at a ceremony in
    London later this year.

    Dr DeAnne      Julius, Chairman of Chatham House, said:
    ‘President Gül has been      voted the winner of this year’s Chatham
    House Prize because of his      qualities as a national, regional and
    international leader. I warmly      congratulate the President on this
    award which recognizes his      accomplishments and acknowledges the
    growing influence he has achieved      for Turkey.’

    Dr Robin      Niblett, Director of Chatham House, said: ‘Chatham
    House members have      a deep interest in international affairs and
    have voted for President Gül      to acknowledge his efforts within
    Turkey as well as on the      international stage. Our members
    represent a cross-section of globally      orientated individuals in
    business, academia and public life.’

    Suzan Sabanci Dinçer, Panel of Senior Advisers, Chatham House,
    and      Chairman and Executive Board Member, Akbank, said: ‘As a
    Chatham House      Senior Adviser and a Turkish citizen I am proud and
    delighted that      President Gül is to receive this prestigious award.
    His efforts to bring      stability and prosperity to Turkey’s region
    and his encouragement of      Turkey’s rapid progress towards reform
    and full European integration have      been acknowledged by Chatham
    House members.’

    About      the Chatham House Prize
    The process to select the nominees of the Prize draws      on the
    recommendations of our research teams and the advice of our three
    Presidents. Chatham House members then vote for the winner in a ballot.
    The winner is presented with a crystal award and a scroll signed
    by our      Patron, Her Majesty The Queen. The other nominees for the
    2010 Prize were      Christine Lagarde, Finance Minister, France and
    Stjepan Mesic, President      of Croatia (2000-10).

    Previous      Winners of the Chatham House Prize
    President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil won the Prize in
    2009;      President John Kufuor of Ghana was the 2008 winner; HH
    Sheikha Mozah,      Chairperson of the Qatar Foundation for Education,
    Science and Community      Development, was the 2007 winner; Joaquim
    Chissano, President of      Mozambique (1986-2005), was the 2006
    winner; and President Victor      Yushchenko of Ukraine was awarded the
    inaugural Prize in 2005.

    About      the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham
    House)
    Chatham House is both the name of the building in London in which
    the institute is based      and the name by which the Royal Institute
    of International Affairs is      widely known. Our mission is to be a
    world-leading source of independent      analysis, informed debate and
    influential ideas on how to build a      prosperous and secure world
    for all.

    Chatham      House Presidents
    Chatham House is politically independent and has Presidents
    and Council Members from each of the three major UK      political
    parties. Our Presidents are: Lord Ashdown,      (High Representative of
    the International Community and EU Special      Representative in
    Bosnia        and Herzegovina between 2002-06); Sir John Major, (UK
    Prime Minister 1990-97); and Lord Robertson (Secretary      General,
    NATO, 1999-2003).

    Contacts

    Dates for the award ceremony will be released in a separate
    press announcement when the details are confirmed. The award ceremony
    will take place in London      and will be open to the media.

    Nicola Norton, Media Relations      Manager
    Direct: +44 (0)20 7957 5739
    Mobile: +44      (0)7917 757 528
    nnorton@chathamhouse.org.uk

    Sara Karnas, Communications Administrator
    Direct: +44 (0)20 7314 2787
    Mobile: +44      (0)7958 669 785
    skarnas@chathamhouse.org.uk

    Keith Burnet, Communications      Director
    Direct: +44 (0)20 7314 2798
    Mobile: +44      (0)7714 200 920
    kburnet@chathamhouse.org.uk

    ENDS

  • Armenian Refugees Movements And Genocide Claims

    Armenian Refugees Movements And Genocide Claims

    Many reputable sources account to 1.5 – 1.6 million of Armenian population within Ottoman Empire before WW1. Only the number provided by the Armenian Istanbul Patriarchate in 1912 is way above these general numbers, being around 2 million. Oddly, Patriarchate’s number is the only one taken into account in Toynbee’s Blue

    Book and in the declaration published by Boghos Nubar and A. Aharonian before Paris Peace Conference.

    Patriarchate’s 2 million figure highly contradicts with the detailed population numbers provided by British H.F.B Lynch and French Vital Cuinet for the periods ending 19th century and beginning 20th century. When we look at the numbers given by Lynch and Cuinet, it’s easy to see that Patriarchate’s number for before WW1 is nearly 100% higher than the British and French sources for the periods ending 19th century and beginning 20th century which is nearly impossible considering populations can not rise by that much for over only 15 to 20 years. Also the number provided by Armenian Patriarchate for Muslim population in Ottoman Empire in 1912 is 20-30% lower than the other reputable sources.

    In addition to sources of Lynch and Cuinet, many other reputable sources show that Armenian population with in Ottoman empire before WW1 was around 1.3-1.6 million.
    Hence in Lozan Peace Conference, 2 million figure introduced by the Armenians had been found quite an exaggeration and 1.6 million figure by David Magie had been taken into account.
    Another disinformation Ottoman Empire had been a victim of during WW1 about Ottoman Armenians is the number of Armenians that had been killed in Anatolia. It’s almost like this number had been introduced to an auction in last 100 years. ( Numbers given by the Red Cross is between 600.000 and 800.000, numbers given by Morgenthau is 1 million and today Armenian Diaspora claims the number to be around 1.5 to 2 million.

    Some historians that support the Armenian Genocide allegations ignore this debate by saying that; ‘Numbers are meaningless, it’s the crime that matters’. There is no legal document that highlights or clarifies how many Armenians had died or had been killed under what conditions during 1915 phenomenon. Today the main allegation is that most Armenians (1.5 million to 2 million) had faced ethnic cleansing in Anatolian camps or North Syrian camps.

    However when we look at legal documents with European or United Nations origins for the period commencing WW1 and ending 1924, we see just the opposite of these allegations. If we take into consideration the documents of Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutiun) as well as Czardom Russia and Bolshevik Russia documents together with the above mentioned documents, we can see the mobility of Armenians together with how they ended up and their fates.

    The most important official document indicating the ‘Armenian Armed Movements’ before WW1 is the 1910 speech given by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation ideologist Mikail Varangian (aka Warangian) in Copenhagen during Second Socialist International.

    The report shows that Dashnaktsutiun had organized and formed armed gangs in almost everywhere in Anatolia by adopting a terrorist movement. The report is in Belvedere archives.

    Two other sources admitting the ‘Armenian Armed Movements’ that were seen long before WW1 are as follows:
    1- Manifesto of First Prime Minister Hovhannes Katzhaznouni of Yerevan Dashnak Goverment published in Bucharest
    2- The article of First USA Ambassador of Armenia Garekin Pastırmacıyan called ‘Why Armenian Should Be Free – Boston 1918′

    The number of Armenians who had joined in these armed forces were around 200.000 as stated by Armenia Delegation Chairman Avetis Aharonian and World Armenians Delegation Chairman Boghos Nubar in Paris Peace Conference in 1919.

    The act of organizing and arming these 200.000 Armenians was naturally not something that Armenians could manage on their own initiatives financially and technically. The Armenian armed gangs were supported directly by Czardom Russia, Britain and France before WW1.

    Two years before WW1 on 26th November, 1912, the confidential report sent by Russian Ambassador Zinovyev in İstanbul to Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia S. D. Sazanov included the following (Russian State Archives, Politics Department, nr 117/293):

    ‘According to the information provided by our Van, Beyazıd, Erzurum, Trabzon Consulates, the Armenians living in these cities are on Russian side and are waiting for our armies’. [RussianStateArchives/political section n.117/293]

    As paralel to what stated above, the riots of Armenian armed gangs resulted in Russians occupying Van at the beginning of WW1.

    Van tradegy was described as follows in the telegraph sent by German Ambassador in İstanbul Hans Von Wangenheim to Ministery of Foreign Affairs of Germany on 10th May, 1915:

    ‘Armenians in the city of Van started rioting and started to attack Muslim villages and the castle. The Turkish headquarters in the castle had lost 300 soldiers and as a result of the street combats for days, the rebels took over the city. Russia occupied the city on 17th May, 1915. Armenians sided with Russia afterwards and started to massacre Muslims. Approximately 80.000 Muslims around Bitlis started to flee. [Wangenheim,Deutschisches und Armenien 1914-1918,Postdam 1919 p.65]

    The massacres of Muslims by Armenians were also documented in Czardom Russia archives. A report sent by Russian Commander Brigadier Bolhovitinov in Caucasus to headquarters on 11th December, 1915 included the following:

    ‘The Armenian Volunteer Legions had killed Muslims brutally with racist motives.’ [Brigadier General Leonid Bolhovitinov’s Report,1915,Russian Military History Archives (RGVIA) fond2100,list1,folder557,p.303-307]

    While these tradegies were taking place in East Anatolia, Russian, British and French were helping Armenians getting armed in East Mediterranean.

    The telegraph dated 5th November, 1914 sent by Francois George Picot and French Middle Ambassador Defrance of Egypt stated:

    ‘Greece accepted to send 15.000 rifles and 2 million bullets to the volunteer legions in Syria and in a possible intervention of France in Syria there are 30.000 – 35.000 volunteers readily avaliable to side with France in the region’. [Guerre Mondiale Turquie Vol.867 XCIII-document 237,Legion d’Orient 1914-1918]

    The report sent by the French Admiral in Syrian shore to the British military headquarters in Egypt indicated that the riot in Cilicia had lasted for over one month as of 28th May, 1915 and a total of 300 Turkish gendarmes had been killed.
    [U.K.Archives W.O. 157/691/8, 28 April 1915,Cairo]

    The memorandum sent by Russian Ambassador to British Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 24th Feb, 1915 expressed that an Armenian from Cilicia had contacted Kont Warentzoff Dachkoff in Caucasus and had indicated that they had gathered a force of 15.000 to raid the transportation lines of the Turkish Army but that they had not had enough arms and arsenal to perform and those could have been provided by British and French over through Alexandretta Harbour. [U.K. Archives F.O. 371/2484 No.22083,15 Feb.1915]

    As can be seen clearly from documents and information like the ones mentioned above, Armenian Dashnak Forces were committing war crimes behind the battles when Ottoman Empire called all men to the army to fight in Çanakkale, Palestine and Caucasus battles. This situation resulted in Ottoman Empire deciding to relocate Armenians in war zones as well as Armenians in Anatolia who were working for Dashnak Party to Syrian region.

    The ones claiming that there is a genocide are accusing Ottoman Empire of ethnically cleansing 1.5 million Armenians in the Empire with the application of this relocation decision dated 24th April, 1915.

    Many official documents were obtained in relation to the fate of Armenians forced to relocate during WW1 and after which were highly contradicting with the idea of a genocide.

    Although Ottoman Empire decided to relocate Armenians in above mentioned locations, Batumi Ambassador of Britain P. Stevens indicated that many Armenians were not even subject to obligatory relocation and were taken away by Russians to Caucasus in the report he sent to London on 25th Feb, 1916. [Halaçoğlu,Ermeniler:Sürgün Ve Göç,p.84-85]

    [Photo: Armenian Refugees From Turkey arrived in Russia,1914– Harold Buxton;Travel & Politics in Armenia,1914]

    This is also confirmed in the report of British Lord Major Found which he wrote about 1915. 250.000 Armenians moved to Caucasus Armenia from Anatolia fighting against illnesses and war conditions.

    250.000 figure was confirmed in the report sent by Armenian National Delegation Chairman Boghos Nubar to Ministry of Foreign Affairs of France in addition to the figure of 40.000 Ottoman Armenians being in Iran.

    When we can reasonably confirm that 250.000 Ottoman Armenians arriving at Caucasus and 40.000 Ottoman Armenians arriving at Iran at the beginning of WW1, we also obtain some other related information from US National Archives: American Counsel J. B. Jackson of Aleppo indicated in the letter he sent to American Ambassador Henry Morgenthau in İstanbul(8February1916) that 486.000 Armenians were located in the camps between Aleppo and Damascus and there were two charities helping the migrants. [U.S. Archives State Department Record Group 59,867.48/271]
    [—The ones claiming that there was a genocide can not answer the question of why Ottoman Goverment allowed American charities or American ambassadors to help the Ottoman Armenian refugees located in camps between Aleppo and Damascus, locations which were under the control of Ottoman Goverment back then.—]

    We can provide more detailed information related to Armenian refugees in Caucasus and Syria from documents obtained after WW1.

    WW1 ended with Mondros Armistice signed on 30th October, 1918 for Ottoman Empire. In 1918 after the war when the Bolshevik Revolution was over, the massacres of Muslim civilians in East and South East Anatolia by Armenian Dashnak Goverment which was continuing to fight, reached the maximum possible. In the same year, Cilicia was

    Occupied by the French (on 24th December, 1918). It is seen that after Cilicia was occupied by the French, some Armenian refugees in Syria were relocated here.
    [Photo:George R. Swain(Adana/Turkey). Francis W. Kelsey and Near East Expedition of 1919-1920]

    However we obtain the exact number of Armenians living under Ottoman Empire after WW1 from the official document presented to the US by İstanbul American High Council. This document is in US National Archives and was confirmed by İstanbul Armenian Patriarchate.

    According to this official document, there were 624.900 Armenians living under Ottoman Empire in 1921. We also know that apparently around 200.000 were located in Cilicia (in Adana, Antep, Maraş etc.) which was under French control.
    [U.S. Archives NARA, T 1192 R2.860J01/395]

    This document shows that there were 624.900 Armenians under Ottoman borders after WW1 until these Armenians were refugees again.

    There is also another visual document related to Armenians obtained for these years. The photo of Armenian refugees living in Novorossisk (Black Sea shore – South Russia) taken by G. P. Lloyd is in Frank Carpenter archives and it was taken in 1920. Unfortunately we can not obtain any information related to the number of Armenian refugees in Novorossik.

    It is discussed in the Near East Relief Report dated 31st December, 1921 that around 500.000 Armenian refugees in Dashnak Goverment in Yerevan (which was in Caucasus) were being provided aid.

    [Report Of The Near East Relief,For The Year Ending 31 December 1921, Washington Government Printing office 1922]

    The exact number of Armenian refugees who went to Armenia during the Turkish – Armenian War which started with WW1 and ended with Gümrü Treaty signed on 3rd December, 1920 and Bolshevik Russians occupying Armenia on 4th December, 1920, was provided by Fridjof Nansen, Refugees High Commissar of League of Nations.

    Fridjof Nansen indicated that 400.000 of the 1 million population of Yerevan Armenian Goverment was comprised of refugees who came during the war as answer to the question of an Indian representative during the 8th meeting of League of Nations held on 19th October, 1928.

    Even if Fridjof Nansen did not give any indications related to the number of Armenians in whole Caucasus or South Russia, he definitely indicated that 400.000 Ottoman Armenians moved to Caucasus Armenia.

    Meanwhile the Ankara Treaty signed between France and Ankara government resulting in France withdrawing from Cilicia also resulted in 200.000 Armenians leaving the region (who were located there before) and migrating to other countries without ever coming back. 500.000 Muslims being massacred by Armenian Armed Forces in Anatolia made it impossible for the Armenians and Turks living together.

    The document about the ‘Armenian Population Around The World’ dated 1922 and included in US National Archives gives information about the Armenian emigration that started with the French withdrawing from Cilicia. We can follow the refugee movements of the 624.900 Armenians in Ottoman Empire beginning 1921 with the help of the activities of League of Nations.
    [U.S. Archives, NARA 867.4016/816.Janunary 10,1923]

    This refugee movement was also indicated in the declaration prepared by Armenian National Delegation for Lausanne Treaty on 2nd February, 1923.

    [League Of Nation,Armenia, Geneva, February 2nd.1923, 0.153. M.56 1923 VII]

    CONCLUSION:

    From the beginning of WW1 to 1921, there were 624.900 Armenians in Ottoman Empire, at least 400.000 in Yerevan Armenia and finally at least 40.000 in Iran. Unfortunately we can not conclude as to how many Ottoman Armenians immigrated to South Russia, Georgia, Egypt, Greece, USA or Europe.

    However the most certain thing we get out of all these documents is that the Armenian population which was around 1.6 million before WW1 was at least around 1.1 million after WW1.

    [The Republic Of Armenia–A Memorandum , On The Recognition Of The Government Of The Republic Of Armenia, Submitted By The Special Mission Of The Republic Of Armenia To The United States– Presented By Mr. Lodge,November 10,1919, Washington,Government Printing Office 1919]

    GÖÇ EDEN OSMANLI ERMENİLERİNİN AKİBETİ VE SOYKIRIM İDDİASI

    Birinci Dünya Savaşı öncesinde Osmanlı İmparatorluğu sınırları içinde yaşayan Ermenilerin sayıları hakkında verilen ciddi rakamların çoğunluğu 1.5-1.6 milyon arasındadır.Sadece İstanbul Ermeni Patrikhanesi’nin 1912 yılında verdiği rakam , bu genel rakamların çok üzerinde, 2 milyon u bulmaktadır.Patrikhane’nin bu değerleri, hem Toynbee’nin Mavi Kitap’ı ve hemde Paris Barış Konferansı öncesi, Boghos Nubar ve A. Aharonian iklisinin yayınladığı bildiride kullanılır.

    Patrikhane’nin bu 2 milyon rakamı , 19. yy sonu-20.yy başı itibariyle İngiliz H.F.B Lynch ve Fransız Vital Cuinet’in verdiği detaylı nüfus değerleri ile oldukça çelişkilidir.Lynch ve Cuinet’in verdiği rakamlara bakıldığında, Patrikhane’nin verdiği nüfus değerlerinin hemen hemen %100 fazla olduğu anlaşılır ve 15-20 yıl içinde hiçbir insan populasyonu doğal yollardan bu kadar artamaz.Ayrıca İstanbul Ermeni Patrikhanesi’nin 1912 yılında, Müslümanlara ait nüfus sayılarında ise %20-30 oranında bir eksilme görülmektedir.

    Lynch ve Cuinet’e ek olarak birçok kaynakta da, Birinci Dünya Savaşı öncesi için Osmanlı sınırlarındaki Ermenilerin sayısı
    1.3-1.6 milyon civarında verilmektedir.

    Keza Lozan Barış Konferansı’nda da , Ermeni Patrikhanesi’nin 2 milyon takamı çok abartılı bulunarak, David Magie tarafından hazırlanan ve Ermenilerin sayısını 1.6 milyon olarak veren nüfus istatistiği kabul edilmiştir.

    Birinci Dünya Savaşı’nda, Osmanlı Ermenileri hakkında bilimsel olmayan bilgi dezenfermasyonunun bolluğu içinde karşımıza çıkan diğer bir konu ise,Birinci Dünya Savaşı boyunca hayatını kaybeden Anadolu Ermenileri’nin sayısıdır.Bu konu geçen 100 yıl içinde sanki açık arttırmaya çıkmış gibidir. (Kızılhaç 600-800 bin rakamı, Morgenthau 1 milyon, bugünün Ermeni Diasporası ise 1.5-2 milyon kayıptan bahseder)

    ”Ermeni Soykırımı” iddiasında bulunan bazı tarihçiler, bu sayılar hakkında ”ne kadar insanın öldüğünün ne önemi var,önemli olan suçun kendisidir” diyerek, konuyu geçiştirmektedirler.1915 fenomeni içinde ne kadar Osmanlı Ermenisi’nin hangi koşullar altında öldüğü ya da öldürüldüğünün hukuki bir belgesi yoktur.Bugün itibariyle genel iddia, 1.5 (ya da 2) milyon Ermeni’nin,
    Anadolu’da veya Kuzey Suriye’deki kamplarda etnik temizliğe tabii tutulduğu üzerinedir.

    Halbuki 1.Dünya Savaşı’ndan 1924 lere kadar olan,Avrupa ve Birleşik Devletler kaynaklı resmi belgeler bize bu iddiaların tam tersi şeyleri söylemektedir.Bu belgelere , Ermeni Devrimci Federasyonu’na (Dashnakzutiun) ait bazı belgeler ile Çarlık Rusyası ve Bolşevik Rusya’ya ait belgeleri de eklediğimizde, Osmanlı Ermenileri’nin hareketliliğini ve akibetlerini genel bir kesinlikle görüyoruz.

    1.Dünya Savaşı öncesi, Ermeni Silahlı hareketlerinin tarih ititbariyle en önemli ve resmi belgesi, Ermeni devrimci Federasyonu’nun (Dasnakzutiun) ideolojisti Mikail Varangian(or Warangian) ın 1910 yılında Kopenhag’taki 2. Sosyalist İnternasyonal’e verdiği rapordur.

    Raporda bizzat, Dashnakzutiun’un Anadolu’nun hemen her yerleşiminde örgütlendikleri ve silahlı çeteler oluşturarak, terörist eylem biçimini benimsedikleri ifade edilmektedir.Bu rapor Belvedere arşivlerindedir.

    1.Dünya savaşı’ndan çok önce başlayan Ermeni Silahlı organizasyonlarını itiraf eden diğer iki kaynak ise, Erivan Taşnak Hükümeti’nin ilk Başbakanı Hovhannes Katzhaznouni’nin Bükreş’te yayınlanan manifestosu ve Ermenistan’ın ilk Abd Büyükelçisi Karekin Pastırmacıyan’ın ”Ermenistan niçin özgür olmalı”(Why Armenia Should Be Free-Boston 1918) yazılarıdır.

    Keza bu silahlı hareketlere katılan Ermenilerin sayısı, hem 1919′da Paris Barış Konferansı’nda Ermenistan Delegasyon Başkanı Avetis Aharonian ve hem de Dünya Ermenileri Delegasyon Başkanı Boghos Nubar’ın söylediği üzere 200.000 civarındadır.

    Doğal Olarak bu 200.000 kişilik silahlı Ermeni Çetelerin silahlandırılması ve yönetilmesi eylemi, Ermenilerin kendi insiyatifleriyle gerçekleştirebilecekleri teknik ve finansal bir eylem değildir.Ermeni silahlı çeteleri 1.Dünya Savaşı öncesinde bizzat Çarlık Rusyası,İngiltere ve Fransa tarafından desteklenmiştir.

    Keza savaştan 2 yıl önce, 26 Kasım 1912 tarihinde, Rusya’nın İstanbul Büyükelçisi Zinovyev’in Rusya Dışişleri Bakanı S.D. Sazanov’a gönderdiği gizli raporda( Rusya Devlet Arşivi,Siyasi Bölüm,nr 117/293);

    ”Van;Beyazıd;Erzurum,Trabzon konsolosluklarımızın bildirdiklerine göre, bu vilayetlerdeki Ermenilerin hepsi Rusya tarafındadırlar ve bizim ordularımızı bekliyorlar” denilmektedir.

    Bunu gelişmeleri takiben 1.Dünya Savaşı’nın başlangıcında, Ermeni silahlı çetelerinin isyan faaliyeti Rusların Van İlini işgal etmesiyle sonuçlanır.

    İstanbul Alman Büyükelçisi Hans von Wangenheim tarafından Alman Dışişleri Bakanlığı’na gönderilen 10 Mayıs 1915 tarihli telgrafta, ”Van Trajedisi” şu şekilde anlatılır:

    ”Van vilayetindeki Ermeniler ayaklanmışlar,müslüman köylere ve kaleye saldırıya geçmişlerdir.Kaledeki Türk garnizonu 300 kayıp vermiş,günlerce devam eden sokak muharebeleri sonunda şehir asilerin eline geçmiştir. 17 Mayıs 1915′te de Van Ruslar tarafından işgal edilmiştir.Ermeniler Rus tarafına geçmiş ve müslümanları katle başlamışlardır.Bitlis istikametinde 80.000 müslüman kaçmaya başlamıştır.”

    Ermeni çetelerinin katliamları Çarlık Rusyası arşivlerinde de belgelenmiştir.Kafkas Cephesinde görevli Rus komutan Tuğgeneral Bolhovitinov, 11 Aralık 1915′te karargaha gönderdiği raporda;

    ”Ermeni Gönüllü Birliklerinin ırkçı duygularla Müslüman Halka karşı vahşi katliamlar yaptı” der.

    Doğu Anadolu’da bu trajedi yaşanırken, Doğu Akdeniz’de Rus-İngiliz ve Fransızlar tarafından bölgedeki Ermeniler silahlandırılmaktadır.

    Francois George Picot ve Fransa Mısır Orta Elçisi Defrance’ın 5 Kasım 1914 tarihini taşıyan telgrafta;

    ”Yunanistan’ın Suriye’deki gönüllü kuvvetlere 15.000 tüfek ve 2 milyon mermi yollamayı kabul ettiği ve Fransa’nın Suriye’ye müdahelesi durumunda, burada 30-35.000 gönüllünün bulunduğu” ifade edilmektedir.

    Mısır’da ki İngiliz askeri karargahına Suriye kıyısındaki Fransız Amiralinden gelen rapor;

    ”28 Nisan 1915 tarihine kadar Zeytun’daki (Cilicia) isyan bir aydır devam etmektedir ve toplam 300 Türk jandarması öldürülmüştür.”

    Rus Büyükelçisi’nin İngiliz Dışişleri Bakanlığı’na yazdığı 24 Şubat 1915 tarihli memorandumda ;

    ”Zeytun’lu bir Ermeni’nin Kafkasya’da Kont Warentzoff_Dachkoff ile temas kurduğu, Türk ordularının ulaşım hatlarına baskın yapmak üzere 15.000 kişilik bir kuvvet topladıkları ancak silah ve cephanelerinin yeterli olmadığı, ingiliz ve Fransızlar tarafından İskenderun Limanı üzerinden bunun yapılabileceği …” anlatılır.
    Buna benzer birçok belge ve yazışmadan da anlaşılacağı gibi, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu WW1 Savaşı başlangıcında Çanakkale, Filistin, ve Kafkasya cephesinde savaşmak üzere ülkedeki erkekleri askere almışken, Ermeni Taşnak birlikleri cephe gerisinde savaş hukukuna aykırı eylem ve katliamlara girişmişlerdir.Bu durum Osmanlı Devleti’nin savaş bölgelerindeki ermeniler ile tüm Anadolu’daki Taşnak Partisi ile bağlantılı Ermenilerin Suriye bölgesine tehciri kararını almasıyla sonuçlanmıştır.

    İşte ‘’soykırım” iddilarını öne sürenler 24 Nisan 1915 tarihli bu tehcir kararı uygulamasıyla 1.5 milyon ermeninin, Osmanlı Devleti tarafından etnik temizliğe tabii tutulduğunu iddia etmektedirler.

    1.Dünya Savaşı esnasında ve sonraki yıllarda tehcire maruz kalan Ermenilerin akibeti ile ilgili olarak, ” soykırım” iddialarının aksine , çok farklı resmi belgeler ortaya çıkmaktadır.

    Ermenilerle ilgili olarak Osmanlı devleti’nin tehcir kararı almasına rağmen, ingiltere’nin Batum Konsolosu P. Stevens’ın Londra’ya gönderdiği 25 Şubat 1916 tarihli raporda; çok sayıda Ermeninin zorunlu göçe tabii tutulmadığı ve Ruslar tarafından Kafkasya’ya götürüldüğü ifade edilmektedir.

    Bu durumu İngiliz Lord Major Found’un 1915 yılına ait raporuda tasdik eder. 250.000 Ermeni bu yıllarda Türkiye’den Kafkasya Ermenistan’ına geçmiş ve savaş koşullarında hastalıklarla mücadele etmektedirler.

    Aynı bilgiyi Ermeni Milli Delegasyon Başkanı Boghos Nubar’ın Fransız Dışişleri Bakanlığı’na gönderdiği yazıda 250.000 rakamı teyit edildiği gibi İran’da da 40.000 Osmanlı Ermenisinin bulunduğu bilgisi verilir.

    1. Dünya Savaşı’nın ilk yıllarında Kafkasya’ya 250.000, İran’a 40.000 Ermeni’nin gittiği bilgisine ulaşırken başka bir bilgi de Amerikan Ulusal Arşivlerinden çıkıyor.
    Amerikan Halep Valisi J.B. jackson’un 8 Şubat 1916′da Amerikanın İstanbul Büyükelçisi Henry Morgenthau’ya gönderdiği raporda, Halep ve Şam arasındaki bölgede Osmanlı’nın tehcir ettiği 486.000 Ermeni göçmenin kamplarda bulunduğu ve iki yardım kuruluşu tarafından bu göçmenlere yardım edildiği bildiriliyor.

    — Bu rapora baktığımızda ‘’soykırım” iddiasını ileri sürenlerin, o yıllarda Osmanlı kontrolündeki Halep ve şam bölgesinde, Ermeni mültecilere yardım için niçin Amerikan Yardım Kuruluşlarına ve Amerikan Elçisine izin verildiği sorusuna cevapları yoktur.—

    Hem Kafkasya ve hemde Suriye’deki Ermeni mülteciler hakkındaki daha detaylı bilgilere savaş sonrasında ortaya çıkan bilgilerden öğreniyoruz.

    Osmanlı İmparatorluğu için 1.Dünya Savaşı 30 Ekim 1918 de imzalanan Mondros Mütarekesi ile sona erer. 1918′de savaş bittiğinde, Bolşevik Devriminden sonra savaşa devam eden Ermeni Taşnak Hükümeti’nin Doğu ve Güneydoğu Anadolu’da sivil halka karşı gerçekleştirdiği katliamlar doruk noktasına çıkar.Aynı yıl içinde Çukurova (cilicia)
    Bölgesi Fransa tarafından işgal edilir.(24Aralık1918).Çukurova’nın (Cilicia) Fransızlar tarafından işgalinden sonra, Suriye’deki Ermeni göçmenlerin bir bölümünün buraya yerleştirildiğini anlıyoruz.

    Ama 1. Dünya Savaşı sonrası Osmanlı İmparatorluğu içindeki Ermenilerin tam sayısını, Amerikan Ulusal Arşivlerinde bulunan; Birleşik Devletlere, İstanbul Amerikan Yüksek Komisyonunca sunulan ve İstanbul Ermeni Patrikhanesi tarafından da onaylanan resmi belgeden anlıyoruz.

    Bu belgeye göre 1921 yılında Osmanlı İmparatorluğu sınırları içinde 624.900 Ermeni yaşamaktadır.Ve görünen o ki, 200.000 kadar Ermeni Fransız kontrolündeki Cilicia (Adana-Antep-Maraş vs) bölgesine yerleştirilmiştir.

    Bu belge ile , 1. Dünya Savaşı sonrası , Osmanlı sınırları içindeki Ermenilerin, tekrar göçmen durumuna düşmesine kadar ki tam sayıları 624.900 dür.

    Bu yıllarda ortaya çıkan diğer bir fotoğrafik belge de 1920 yılına ait Frank carpenter arşivinde bulunan ve G.P. Lloyd tarfından çekilen, Novorossik’teki(Karadeniz Kıyısı-Güney Rusya) Ermeni Mültecilere ait fotoğraflardır.Malesef Novorossik’teki Ermeni Mültecilere ait sayısal bir değere ulaşamıyoruz.

    Kafkasya’da Erivan Taşnak Hükümeti sınırları içindeki mülteci sayısı hakkında ise, 31 Aralık 1921 tarihli Near East Relief raporunda, 500.000 kişiye yardım edildiğinden bahsedilir.

    1.Dünya Savaşı ile başlayıp 3 Aralık 1920 deki Gümrü Antlaşması’ na kadar süren ve ertesi gün, 4 Aralık 1920′de Ermenistan’ın Bolşevikler tarafından işgal edilmesiyle tamamen son bulan Türk-Ermeni Savaşı boyunca, Ermenistan’a giden Ermeni Mültecilerin tam sayısını, Milletler Cemiyeti (League of Nations) Mülteciler Yüksek Komiseri Fridjof Nansen net olarak söylüyor.

    Milletler Cemiyeti’nin 19 Ekim 1928 tarihli sekizinci oturumunda Hindistan temsilcisinin sorusuna verdiği cevapta , ”Erivan Ermeni Hükümeti’nin 1.000.000 luk nüfusunun 400.000 inin savaş boyunca gelen mültecilerden oluştuğunu söylüyor.

    Bu belgeden bütün Kafkasya ve Güney Rusya’daki Ermenilerin sayısını öğrenemesek bile, Ermenistan’a 400.000 Osmanlı Ermenisi’nin geçiş yaptığını öğreniyoruz.

    Diğer taraftan Fransa’nın 20 Ekim 1921 tarihinde Ankara Hükümeti ile yaptığı anlaşma ile , Fransızların Çukurova’dan (Cilicia) çekilmesi, Çukuroava’ya geri dönen 200.000 kadar Ermeni’nin, geri dönmemek üzere başka ülkelere mülteci olarak yerleşmesi sonucunu doğurdu.Anadolu’da Ermeni Silahlı Birlikleri tarafından öldürülen 500.000 den fazla Müslüman olması, artık Ermeniler ile Müslümanların birlikte yaşayamayacağı sonucunu doğuruyordu.

    Fransızların Çukurova’dan çekilmesiyle başlayan Ermeni göçü hakkında, Amerikan Ulusal arşivlerindeki 1922 tarihli , ”Dünya’daki Ermeni Populasyonu’ nu gösteren belge, bize bu konuda bilgi veriyor. 1921 yılı başlarında Osmanlı sınırları içindeki 624.900 Ermeni’nin, Milletler Cemiyeti’ninde faaliyetleriyle ilk mülteci hareketlerini bu şekilde izliyoruz.

    Bu hareketlilik, 2 Şubat 1923 tarihinde, Ermeni Milli Delegasyonu’nun, Lozan Konferansı için hazırladığı bildiride de yine teyit edilir.

    SONUÇ:

    Dünya Savaşının başlangıcından 1921 yılına kadar ;

    Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun sınırları içinde 624.900 , Erivan Ermenistan’ınanda en az 400.000, İran’da en az 40.000 Osmanlı Ermenisi bulunmaktadır.1914 ile 1921 yılları arasında, Güney Rusya,Gürcistan,Mısır,Yunanistan,Abd ve Avrupa’ya ne kadar Osmanlı Ermenisi’nin göç ettiği hakkında net bir rakama ulaşamıyoruz.

    Ama bu belgelerden öğrendiğimiz en kesin şey, savaş öncesinde sayıları 1.6 milyon olan Osmanlı Ermenileri’nin , savaş sonunda en az 1.1 milyonunun hayatta olduğudur.


    05 Mart 2009 Perşembe

    Photo Galerie

    Armenian Genocide Tale
    Photo Galerie 1

    Armenian Genocide Tale
    Photo Galerie 2


    11 Şubat 2009 Çarşamba

    The Report of Emory Niles & Arthur Surherland in U.S. National Archives

    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.
    U.S. National Archives 184.021/175

    Pls,click to image for read!

    Abd Ulusal Arşivleri’ndeki Emory Niles ve Arthur Sutherland Raporu

    Amerikalı Yüzbaşı Emory Niles ve Arthur Sutherland,Amerika Birleşik Devletleri Hükümeti tarafından,Doğu Anadolu’nun durumunu araştırmak üzere görevlendirildi.
    Bu rapor,Amerikan Yakın Doğu Yardım Kuruluşu (Near East Relief) tarafından, Ermenilere yardım aşamasında referans olarak kullanıldı.
    Amerika Ulusal Arşivleri 184.021/175

    IV. Mezalimler

    Bizim araştırma konumuzla direkt ilgili olmamasına rağmen bizde iz bırakan çok çarpıcı bir gerçek var ki o da, Bitlis’ten Trabzon’a kadar geçtiğimiz tüm noktalarda, diğer bölgelerde Türkler tarafından Ermeniler’e karşı işlenen suçlar ve yapılan zulümlerin aynısının bu bölgelerde Ermeniler tarafından Türkler’e yapılmış olmasıdır. İlk başta bize anlatılan hikayelere kuşkulu yaklaşmakla birlikte, görgü tanıklarının ifadelerindeki fikir birliğini, kendilerine yapılan yanlışları gözle görülür bir istekle anlatmalarını, Ermeniler’e karşı duydukları bariz nefreti ve herşeyden daha önemlisi, ortadaki somut kanıtları gördükten sonra şu gerçekler hakkında ikna olduk:

    1- Ermeniler Müslümanlar’a büyük çaplı olarak çeşitli zalimliklerde bulunmuşlardır.
    2- Köylerde ve kasabalarda meydana gelen yıkımlardan büyük oranda Ermeniler sorumludur.

    Ruslar ve Ermeniler ülkeyi 1915 ve 1916 yıllarında hatırı sayılır bir zaman birlikte işgal etmişlerdir ve bu süre içinde çok az düzeyde karışıklık çıkmış olmasına rağmen Ruslar’ın verdiği zararlar şüphesizdir. 1917 yılında Rus ordusu dağılmış ve Ermeniler’i yönetim ve kontrolde kendi başlarına bırakmıştır. Bu dönemde başıbozuk Ermeni askeri çeteleri, ülkeyi amaçsızca dolaşıp köyleri yağmalamışlar ve Müslüman sivil halkı katletmişlerdir. Türk ordusunun Erzincan, Erzurum ve Van’da ilerlemesi üzerine dağılan Ermeni ordusunun düzenli ve düzensiz birliklerini oluşturan tüm askerleri ise bunun arkasından bölgedeki Müslüman halkın mal mülklerine zarar vermişler ve bölge halkına türlü zulümler yapmışlardır. Bunun sonucunda, geriye ülke halkının eski nüfüsunun yaklaşık olarak sadece dörtte biri kalmış ve ülkede bulunan yapıların gene yaklaşık olarak sekizde yedisi talan edilmiştir. Tamamen harabeye dönmüş olan bu ülkedeki en acıklı olay ise Ermeniler’den nefret eden Müslümanlar’ın bu nefretinin, iki ırkın şu gün itibariyle aynı bölgede birlikte yaşama olasılığını tamamen ortadan kaldırmasıdır. Müslümanlar, bir Ermeni Hükümeti’nin boyunduruğu altında yaşamaya zorlanırlarsa savaşacaklarını beyan etmişler ve bize de bu tehditlerini gerçekleştirecek gibi görünmüşlerdir ki bu görüşümüz, karşılaştığımız tüm Türk görevliler, Amerikan görevliler ve İngiliz görevliler tarafından paylaşılmıştır.

    Durumu daha da kötüleştirici diğer bir konu ise sınır ötesindeki gidişattır. Mültecilerin şikayetlerinin ne kadarının ne ölçüde doğru olduğunu bilmemize ya da Müslümanların bu duruma ne ölçüde sebebiyet verdiklerini yani gerçekte Ermeniler’e karşı organize bir direniş göstermeleri yüzünden bu durumdan sorumlu olup olmadıklarını bilmemize imkan yoktur. Her halükarda, hududun Türk tarafında olan yerli halk, sınırın Ermeni tarafında bulunan din kardeşlerinin Ermeniler tarafından katledildiğine ve mümkün olabilecek en büyük zalimliklere maruz kaldığına inanmakta ve bu durum da halkın Ermenilere karşı olan hislerini bir kat daha yoğunlaştırmaktadır. Kafkasya’daki gerçek gidişatı tespit etmeye yönelik bir araştırmanın yapılması şiddetle tavsiye edilmektedir. Bu araştırma sonucunda şayet Müslümanlar’ın ifadelerinin doğru olduğu ortaya çıkar ise halihazırda kalıcı bir uzlaşmayı kaçınılmaz kılan şartlar sözkonusu iken, bu durumu daha da zora koşacak olası karışıklıkların ve isyanların bir an evvel engellenmesi gerekmektedir.

    Mültecilerin ve yerli halkın ekte bulunan mezalimler ile ilgili ifadelerine dikkat etmeniz hususu arz olunur.

    Full Report:

    Others Links:

    https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2005/07/67-captain-emory-niles-and-mr-arthur.html

    http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/niles-sutherland.htm

    http://search.freefind.com/find.html?id=39745808&pageid=r&mode=ALL&n=0&query=emory+niles


    29 Ocak 2009 Perşembe

    800 Thousand Kurds Were Annihilated With The Attacks Of Armenians

    Russian commander: “I consider adding that Armenians are looting Kurdish villages and raping Kurdish women as my duty.” The publication of Armenian nationalists: “The area, where 800 thousands Kurds inhabited were completely emptied.” General Bolhovitinov: “When the hunter battalion came back it encountered with bodies of 20 Muslim children, who were cut into pieces.” Another Russian commander: “Which precautions shall we take against looter Armenian volunteers?”

    20 children who were cut into pieces in Tatvan –>Click for Continue

    Turkish

    Ermeni Saldırılarıyla 800.000 Kürt yok oldu.

    Rus Komutan: ”Ermenilerin Kürt köylerini yağmaladıklarını ve Kürt kadınlarına tecavüz ettiklerini eklemeyi görev sayarım”
    Ermeni milliyetçilerinin yayın organı: ”800 bin Kürt’ün yaşadığı alan tamamen boşaldı.Yüzlerce Kürt köyü boşaldı ve yerle bir oldu”
    General Bolhovitinov: ”Avcı taburu döndüğünde 20 müslüman çocuğu doğranmış halde bulmuş”
    Bir başka Rus komutan: ”Yağmacı Ermeni gönüllülere karşı hangi önlemleri alacağız?”

    Tatvan’da doğranan 20 çocuk –>Yazının tamamını için(pdf file)

    Remember Khojaly

    Armenian Genocide Ballyhoo

    Innocent Angels Of 1915

    • Home
    • e-books
      • Armenians1915 Archive
      • Sub Page #2
      • Sub Page #3
      • Sub Page #4
      • Sub Page #5
    • pictures
    • movies
    • Other Links
      • TallArmenianTale
      • Armenians1915
      • ArmenianIssue
      • ArmenianQuestion2
      • GenocideReality
    • Quotes
    • Karabagh
    • 1915 (1)
    • 1919 (1)
    • 800.000 Kurd (1)
    • antranik (1)
    • armenian 1915 (1)
    • armenian genocide (1)
    • armenian rebellion (1)
    • armenian rebels (1)
    • Armenian Refugees (1)
    • arthur sutherland (1)
    • Black Book (1)
    • Brigadier Bolhovitinov Report (1)
    • Capitol Hill (1)
    • Charish Russian (1)
    • Dashnakzutiun (1)
    • emory niles (1)
    • Fridjof Nansen (1)
    • genocide pictures (1)
    • genocide resolution (1)
    • Great War (1)
    • Hamidian (1)
    • harbord mission (1)
    • League Of Nations (1)
    • Morgenthau (1)
    • near east relief (1)
    • Near Nast Relief (1)
    • Ottoman Empire (1)
    • Paris Peace Conference (1)
    • Talat Paşa Evrak-ı Metrukesi (1)
    • Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն (1)
    • 2785) Media Scanner 22 Mar 2009
    • 2784) Action Alert: Please Congratulate Sen Ferguson of Australian Senate
    • 2783) Love Story: Australian Nurse Rose & Turkish Lieutenant Kemal During Korean War: New Book Release
    • Armenian Refugees Movements And Genocide Claims
    • Kultige Feuerbändiger
    • Armenian Orphans Refugees in Kaiser’s Farm ( ? ) , in Sivas – Turkey

    ——— YURARIKI SAYFALAR VE YORUM SAHIBI ———–

    Şu yazınız için yeni bir yorum yapıldı: #12454 “Talât Paşa’nın Evrak-ı Metrûkesi”
    URL    :
    Yorum:
    !.5 milyon civarındaki Osmanlı Ermenisi’ne ne oldu?  İşte cevabı.

    http:// angelsof1915.blogspot. com

    Armenian Refugees Movements and Genocide Claims

    https://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2009/03/24/armenian-refugees-movements-and-genocide-claims/

  • Contractors Tied to Effort to Track and Kill Militants

    Contractors Tied to Effort to Track and Kill Militants

    15contractors CA1 articleLarge

    From Left: United States Air Force; Robert Young Pelton; Mike Wintroath/Associated Press; Adam Berry/Bloomberg News

    From left: Michael D. Furlong, the official who was said to have hired private contractors to track militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan; Robert Young Pelton, a contractor; Duane Clarridge, a former C.I.A. official; and Eason Jordan, a former television news executive.

    By DEXTER FILKINS and MARK MAZZETTI
    Published: March 14, 2010

    KABUL, Afghanistan — Under the cover of a benign government information-gathering program, a Defense Department official set up a network of private contractors in Afghanistan and Pakistan to help track and kill suspected militants, according to military officials and businessmen in Afghanistan and the United States. The official, Michael D. Furlong, hired contractors from private security companies that employed former C.I.A. and Special Forces operatives. The contractors, in turn, gathered intelligence on the whereabouts of suspected militants and the location of insurgent camps, and the information was then sent to military units and intelligence officials for possible lethal action in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the officials said.

    While it has been widely reported that the C.I.A. and the military are attacking operatives of Al Qaeda and others through unmanned, remote-controlled drone strikes, some American officials say they became troubled that Mr. Furlong seemed to be running an off-the-books spy operation. The officials say they are not sure who condoned and supervised his work.

    It is generally considered illegal for the military to hire contractors to act as covert spies. Officials said Mr. Furlong’s secret network might have been improperly financed by diverting money from a program designed to merely gather information about the region.

    Moreover, in Pakistan, where Qaeda and Taliban leaders are believed to be hiding, the secret use of private contractors may be seen as an attempt to get around the Pakistani government’s prohibition of American military personnel’s operating in the country.

    Officials say Mr. Furlong’s operation seems to have been shut down, and he is now is the subject of a criminal investigation by the Defense Department for a number of possible offenses, including contract fraud.

    Even in a region of the world known for intrigue, Mr. Furlong’s story stands out. At times, his operation featured a mysterious American company run by retired Special Operations officers and an iconic C.I.A. figure who had a role in some of the agency’s most famous episodes, including the Iran-Contra affair.

    The allegations that he ran this network come as the American intelligence community confronts other instances in which private contractors may have been improperly used on delicate and questionable operations, including secret raids in Iraq and an assassinations program that was halted before it got off the ground.

    “While no legitimate intelligence operations got screwed up, it’s generally a bad idea to have freelancers running around a war zone pretending to be James Bond,” one American government official said. But it is still murky whether Mr. Furlong had approval from top commanders or whether he might have been running a rogue operation.

    This account of his activities is based on interviews with American military and intelligence officials and businessmen in the region. They insisted on anonymity in discussing a delicate case that is under investigation.

    Col. Kathleen Cook, a spokeswoman for United States Strategic Command, which oversees Mr. Furlong’s work, declined to make him available for an interview. Military officials said Mr. Furlong, a retired Air Force officer, is now a senior civilian employee in the military, a full-time Defense Department employee based at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio.

    Network of Informants

    Mr. Furlong has extensive experience in “psychological operations” — the military term for the use of information in warfare — and he plied his trade in a number of places, including Iraq and the Balkans. It is unclear exactly when Mr. Furlong’s operations began. But officials said they seemed to accelerate in the summer of 2009, and by the time they ended, he and his colleagues had established a network of informants in Afghanistan and Pakistan whose job it was to help locate people believed to be insurgents.

    Government officials said they believed that Mr. Furlong might have channeled money away from a program intended to provide American commanders with information about Afghanistan’s social and tribal landscape, and toward secret efforts to hunt militants on both sides of the country’s porous border with Pakistan.

    Some officials said it was unclear whether these operations actually resulted in the deaths of militants, though others involved in the operation said that they did.

    Military officials said that Mr. Furlong would often boast about his network of informants in Afghanistan and Pakistan to senior military officers, and in one instance said a group of suspected militants carrying rockets by mule over the border had been singled out and killed as a result of his efforts.

    In addition, at least one government contractor who worked with Mr. Furlong in Afghanistan last year maintains that he saw evidence that the information was used for attacking militants.

    The contractor, Robert Young Pelton, an author who writes extensively about war zones, said that the government hired him to gather information about Afghanistan and that Mr. Furlong improperly used his work. “We were providing information so they could better understand the situation in Afghanistan, and it was being used to kill people,” Mr. Pelton said.

    He said that he and Eason Jordan, a former television news executive, had been hired by the military to run a public Web site to help the government gain a better understanding of a region that bedeviled them. Recently, the top military intelligence official in Afghanistan publicly said that intelligence collection was skewed too heavily toward hunting terrorists, at the expense of gaining a deeper understanding of the country.

    Instead, Mr. Pelton said, millions of dollars that were supposed to go to the Web site were redirected by Mr. Furlong toward intelligence gathering for the purpose of attacking militants.

    In one example, Mr. Pelton said he had been told by Afghan colleagues that video images that he posted on the Web site had been used for an American strike in the South Waziristan region of Pakistan.

    Among the contractors Mr. Furlong appears to have used to conduct intelligence gathering was International Media Ventures, a private “strategic communication” firm run by several former Special Operations officers. Another was American International Security Corporation, a Boston-based company run by Mike Taylor, a former Green Beret. In a phone interview, Mr. Taylor said that at one point he had employed Duane Clarridge, known as Dewey, a former top C.I.A. official who has been linked to a generation of C.I.A. adventures, including the Iran-Contra scandal.

    In an interview, Mr. Clarridge denied that he had worked with Mr. Furlong in any operation in Afghanistan or Pakistan. “I don’t know anything about that,” he said.

    Mr. Taylor, who is chief executive of A.I.S.C., said his company gathered information on both sides of the border to give military officials information about possible threats to American forces. He said his company was not specifically hired to provide information to kill insurgents.

    Some American officials contend that Mr. Furlong’s efforts amounted to little. Nevertheless, they provoked the ire of the C.I.A.

    Last fall, the spy agency’s station chief in Kabul, Afghanistan’s capital, wrote a memorandum to the Defense Department’s top intelligence official detailing what officials said were serious offenses by Mr. Furlong. The officials would not specify the offenses, but the officer’s cable helped set off the Pentagon investigation.

    Afghan Intelligence

    In mid-2008, the military put Mr. Furlong in charge of a program to use private companies to gather information about the political and tribal culture of Afghanistan. Some of the approximately $22 million in government money allotted to this effort went to International Media Ventures, with offices in St. Petersburg, Fla., San Antonio and elsewhere. On its Web site, the company describes itself as a public relations company, “an industry leader in creating potent messaging content and interactive communications.”

    The Web site also shows that several of its senior executives are former members of the military’s Special Operations forces, including former commandos from Delta Force, which has been used extensively since the Sept. 11 attacks to track and kill suspected terrorists.

    Until recently, one of the members of International Media’s board of directors was Gen. Dell L. Dailey, former head of Joint Special Operations Command, which oversees the military’s covert units.

    In an e-mail message, General Dailey said that he had resigned his post on the company’s board, but he did not say when. He did not give details about the company’s work with the American military, and other company executives declined to comment.

    In an interview, Rear Adm. Gregory Smith, the top military spokesman in Afghanistan, said that the United States military was currently employing nine International Media Ventures civilian employees on routine jobs in guard work and information processing and analysis. Whatever else other International Media employees might be doing in Afghanistan, he said, he did not know and had no responsibility for their actions.

    By Mr. Pelton’s account, Mr. Furlong, in conversations with him and his colleagues, referred to his stable of contractors as “my Jason Bournes,” a reference to the fictional American assassin created by the novelist Robert Ludlum and played in movies by Matt Damon.

    Military officials said that Mr. Furlong would occasionally brag to his superiors about having Mr. Clarridge’s services at his disposal. Last summer, Mr. Furlong told colleagues that he was working with Mr. Clarridge to secure the release of Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl, a kidnapped soldier who American officials believe is being held by militants in Pakistan.

    From December 2008 to mid-June 2009, both Mr. Taylor and Mr. Clarridge were hired to assist The New York Times in the case of David Rohde, the Times reporter who was kidnapped by militants in Afghanistan and held for seven months in Pakistan’s tribal areas. The reporter ultimately escaped on his own.

    The idea for the government information program was thought up sometime in 2008 by Mr. Jordan, a former CNN news chief, and his partner Mr. Pelton, whose books include “The World’s Most Dangerous Places” and “Licensed to Kill: Hired Guns in the War on Terror.”

    Top General Approached

    They approached Gen. David D. McKiernan, soon to become the top American commander in Afghanistan. Their proposal was to set up a reporting and research network in Afghanistan and Pakistan for the American military and private clients who were trying to understand a complex region that had become vital to Western interests. They already had a similar operation in Iraq — called “Iraq Slogger,” which employed local Iraqis to report and write news stories for their Web site. Mr. Jordan proposed setting up a similar Web site in Afghanistan and Pakistan — except that the operation would be largely financed by the American military. The name of the Web site was Afpax.

    Mr. Jordan said that he had gone to the United States military because the business in Iraq was not profitable relying solely on private clients. He described his proposal as essentially a news gathering operation, involving only unclassified materials gathered openly by his employees. “It was all open-source,” he said.

    When Mr. Jordan made the pitch to General McKiernan, Mr. Furlong was also present, according to Mr. Jordan. General McKiernan endorsed the proposal, and Mr. Furlong said that he could find financing for Afpax, both Mr. Jordan and Mr. Pelton said. “On that day, they told us to get to work,” Mr. Pelton said.

    But Mr. Jordan said that the help from Mr. Furlong ended up being extremely limited. He said he was paid twice — once to help the company with start-up costs and another time for a report his group had written. Mr. Jordan declined to talk about exact figures, but said the amount of money was a “small fraction” of what he had proposed — and what it took to run his news gathering operation.

    Whenever he asked for financing, Mr. Jordan said, Mr. Furlong told him that the money was being used for other things, and that the appetite for Mr. Jordan’s services was diminishing.

    “He told us that there was less and less money for what we were doing, and less of an appreciation for what we were doing,” he said.

    Admiral Smith, the military’s director for strategic communications in Afghanistan, said that when he arrived in Kabul a year later, in June 2009, he opposed financing Afpax. He said that he did not need what Mr. Pelton and Mr. Jordan were offering and that the service seemed uncomfortably close to crossing into intelligence gathering — which could have meant making targets of individuals.

    “I took the air out of the balloon,” he said.

    Admiral Smith said that the C.I.A. was against the proposal for the same reasons. Mr. Furlong persisted in pushing the project, he said.

    “I finally had to tell him, ‘Read my lips,’ we’re not interested,’ ” Admiral Smith said.

    What happened next is unclear.

    Admiral Smith said that when he turned down the Afpax proposal, Mr. Furlong wanted to spend the leftover money elsewhere. That is when Mr. Furlong agreed to provide some of International Media Ventures’ employees to Admiral Smith’s strategic communications office.

    But that still left roughly $15 million unaccounted for, he said.

    “I have no idea where the rest of the money is going,” Admiral Smith said.

    Dexter Filkins reported from Kabul, and Mark Mazzetti from Washington.

  • BEN MEHR, REASSESSING THE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

    BEN MEHR, REASSESSING THE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

    BEN MEHR, REASSESSING THE GENOCIDE RESOLUTION, KAHIRE BASININDA IKTIBASEN YAYINLANDI     Pulat Tacar [tacarps@gmail.com]

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

    Alon Ben-Meir

    Senior Fellow at NYU’s Center for Global Affairs

    Posted: March 9, 2010 05:09 PM

    Tam boyutlu görseli göster

    Reassessing the Genocide Resolution

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • SPANISH PARLIAMENT TO CONSIDER ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

    SPANISH PARLIAMENT TO CONSIDER ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

    news.am
    March 11 2010
    Armenia

    The motion on Resolution on Armenian Genocide was introduced to
    Spanish Parliament. The sponsors of the document are representatives
    of Republican Left of Catalonia and three MPs of Initiative for
    Catalonia Greens.

    They also proposed to include in the resolution a provision that
    Spanish Government supports Armenia-Turkey normalization process and
    calls EU to back Yerevan-Ankara dialogue.

    February 26, the Catalonian Parliament, unanimously voted for the
    Armenian Genocide approval.

  • A Nation of Conspiracies

    A Nation of Conspiracies

    TURKEY2

    The article which states ” In the first, the AKP is a party of religious deception that seeks to bring all elements of the government under its control. Its hidden goal is the eradication of the secular state, the wrenching of Turkey from the West, and, ultimately, the imposition of Islamic law.”.

    Regards
    AHMET SUEbR  [klmaf@hotmail.com]

    President, TASAA (Turkish Society of Augusta and Aiken):

    • WALL St JOURNAL
    • MARCH 13, 2010

    Coup plots and growing extremism. Why the West can’t ignore Turkey’s paranoia

    • By CLAIRE BERLINSKI

    Last fall, having observed that few women in Istanbul took martial-arts classes, I conceived the idea to work with local instructors on creating a women’s self-defense initiative. My project met with initial enthusiasm, particularly among women concerned with the high rate of domestic violence in Turkey. But other martial arts instructors in the city grew uneasy, sensing a plot to swindle them out of their small pieces of the martial-arts pie. Istanbul quickened with lunatic rumors that the initiative was a conspiracy to disparage the other instructors’ martial prowess and steal their students. Martial-arts cliques consumed themselves with plotting and counter-plotting. Secret tribunals were held, covert alliances formed, poison-pen letters sent, friends betrayed. I gave up in disgust.
    No one familiar with the prominent role of conspiracies and paranoia in Turkish social and political life will be surprised. Last month, more than five dozen military officers were arrested and charged with plotting a coup. The detained stand accused of planning to bomb mosques and down Greek fighter jets as a pretext for toppling the government. Whether it is true, I don’t know. But either way, the country is drowning in persecutory theories.

    Turkey’s strategic and economic significance to the West is massive—and American-Turkish relations took a turn for the worse earlier this month when a U.S. congressional committee recommended the full House of Representatives take up a vote on a resolution condemning the slaughter of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as genocide.
    OB HS982 Bitter D 20100303221515
    Turkey is a rarity in the Middle East, a democracy with a secular constitution. It has the second-largest army in NATO; it provides a crucial energy route to Europe. The Incirlik air base is a crucial staging point for the US military. Turkey has made a sizable contribution to the coalition forces in Afghanistan. It has a seat on the U.N. Security Council, and could be a vital diplomatic partner—or a vexed antagonist—to America throughout the Middle East and Islamic world.

    The West, understandably, is concerned about the trouble in Turkey. Particularly disturbing is the growing anti-Israel animus of Turkey’s foreign policy and its growing intimacy with the most extremist regimes and parties of the Islamic world. Turkey’s trade with Iran is galloping. Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was the first international figure to host Hamas. He has called for the expulsion of Israel from the U.N. while offering diplomatic support for the denial of genocide in Darfur.

    Turkey has seen three military coups in the past half century—by definition, you can’t have a coup without a conspiracy. The military, which conceives itself as the guardian of Turkish democracy and secularism, has intervened, most recently in 1997, to unseat prime ministers who have veered too far off the secular rails.

    The ruling Justice and Development Party, known as the AKP, came to power in 2002. Its senior figures rose from the ranks of virulent—and banned—Islamist parties, but the AKP claims to be moderate.

    Almost everyone in Turkey subscribes to one of two conspiracy narratives about this party or its antagonists. In the first, the AKP is a party of religious deception that seeks to bring all elements of the government under its control. Its hidden goal is the eradication of the secular state, the wrenching of Turkey from the West, and, ultimately, the imposition of Islamic law. In this narrative, the specter of the sect leader Fethullah Gülen, who has undefined ties to the party and has taken exile in Utah, arouses particular dread. His critics fear he is the Turkish Ayatollah Khomenei; they say that his acolytes have seeped into the organs of the Turkish body politic, where they lie poised, like a zombie army, to be awakened by his signal.
    The second version holds that the AKP is exactly what it purports to be: a modern and democratic party with which the West can and should do business. Mr. Gülen’s followers say the real conspirators are instead members of the so-called Deep State—what they call a demented, multitentacled secret alliance of high-level figures in the military, the intelligence services, the judiciary and organized crime.
    TURKEY1
    Neither theory has irrefragable proof behind it. Both are worryingly plausible and supported by some evidence. But most significantly, one or the other story is believed by virtually everyone here. It is the paranoid style of Turkish politics itself that should alarm the West. Turkey’s underlying disease is not so much Islamism or a military gone rogue, but corruption and authoritarianism over which a veneer of voter participation has been painted.

    The system does not look too undemocratic on paper. Turkish political parties are structured, in principle, around district and provincial organizations. There is universal suffrage, but a party must receive 10% of the vote to be represented in Parliament. Party members elect district delegates, district presidents and board members. Yet Turkish prime ministers have near-dictatorial powers over their political parties and are not embarrassed to use them.
    It is the​party members, not voters, who pick the party leader. Members of Parliament enjoy unlimited political immunity, as do the bureaucrats they appoint. The resulting license to steal money and votes is accepted with alacrity and used with impunity. Corruption and influence peddling are the inevitable consequence. Business leaders are afraid to object for fear of being shut out.
    TURKEY3
    Conspiracies flourish when citizens fear punishment for open political expression, when power is seen as illegitimate, and when people have no access to healthy channels of influence. They give rise inevitably to counterconspiracies that fuel the paranoia and enmity, a self-reinforcing cycle. Throughout Turkey is the pervasive feeling that no one beyond family can be trusted.
    The common charge that the AKP is progressively weakening the judiciary and the military is objectively correct, as is the claim that this concentrates an unhealthy amount of power in the hands of the executive branch. Yet the prime minister and his intimates insist that their actions are defensive. “For 40 years, they have kept files on us. Now, it is our turn to keep files on them,” AKP deputy Avni Doğan has said.

    Their enemies voice the same worldview. “When you look at Turkey today, it is as if the country has … fallen under foreign occupation,” the leader of the opposition CHP party Deniz Baykal has said.
    Paranoia is inevitably also grandiose. When the House Committee on Foreign Affairs passed up the recent resolution to describe the massacre of Armenians in the First World War era as a genocide, Suat Kiniklioglu, the spokesman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Turkish Parliament, explained Turkey’s outrage thus: “I think the Americans would feel that same if we were to pass a resolution in our parliament talking about the treatment of [native] Indians in this country.”
    Mr. Kiniklioglu speaks fluent English; he has spent years in the West. Yet he is blind to the most obvious of facts about American culture: No one in America would give a damn.
    Meanwhile, discussion of Turkey’s most serious social and economic problems—corruption, poverty, unemployment, and a legal system held in contempt even by its attorneys—has been eclipsed. Reports of economic miracles under the AKP have, as everyone now understands, been exaggerated by statistical legerdemain. This is all too easy to do, because Turkey has one of the largest underground economies in the world, worth somewhere between one-third and two-thirds of the country’s GDP. Every major economic sector in Turkey is largely off-the-record. No one can say confidently whether these sectors are growing or shrinking, and even officially, Turkey now has the second-highest rate of unemployment in Europe. This is hardly the mark of an expanding middle class.
    Among the most serious of Turkey’s problems, ignored in the constant din of mutual accusations, is the grave seismic risk to Istanbul. The city’s position on a highly active fault line and the prevalence of shoddy construction make it not only possible but probable that it will be the world’s next Port-au-Prince. The death and displacement of half a million Turks in an earthquake would clearly be the end of any hope of stability and peace in this region.
    The failure to prepare for this predictable event is a betrayal of trust, like so many the Turkish people have suffered. Each deepens the paranoia. Each citizen believes that to survive, he must lie and conspire. Everyone assumes everyone else is lying and conspiring against him because he himself is lying and conspiring.
    Turkish Ambassador Namik Tan recently said that the West “must understand that in this region, two plus two doesn’t always equal four. Sometimes it equals six, sometimes 10. You cannot hope to understand this region unless you grasp this.”
    Psychiatrists are typically advised to attempt to form a “working alliance” with the paranoid patient, avoid becoming the object of projection, and provide a model of non-paranoid behavior. This is also sound advice in diplomacy.
    But paranoia is known to be a particularly intractable disorder. Those who experience it do not trust those trying to help them. The West should keep this, too, in mind, for the paranoid spiral here could easily do what spirals are known to do: spin out of control.