Tag: Davutoglu

Turkey threatens ‘serious consequences’
after US vote on Armenian genocide

Strategic partnership at risk despite Barack Obama’s attempts to stop Congress resolution
- Robert Tait in Istanbul and Ewen MacAskill in Washington
- guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 March 2010 21.34 GMT
Foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu says describing the 1915 Armenian killings as genocide is an insult to Turkey’s ‘honour’. Photograph: Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images

Turkey has threatened to downgrade its strategic relationship with the US amid nationalist anger over a vote in the US Congress that defined the mass killings of Armenians during the first world war as genocide.

Barack Obama‘s administration, which regards Turkey as an important ally, was today desperately seeking to defuse the row. It expressed its frustration with the House of Representatives’ foreign affairs committee, which voted 23-22 yesterday in favour of a resolution labelling the 1915 massacre of up to 1.5 million Armenians a “genocide”.

A furious Turkey may now deny the US access to the Incirlik air base, a staging post for Iraq, as it did at the time of the 2003 invasion, or withdraw its sizeable troop contribution to the coalition forces in Afghanistan.

On the diplomatic front, the US needs the support of Turkey, which has a seat on the UN security council, in the push for sanctions against Iran over its nuclear programme. Turkey is also helpful to the US on a host of other diplomatic issues in the Middle East and central Asia.

The White House and state department began work today to try to prevent the controversial issue making its way to the floor of the house for a full vote.

In Turkey, Suat Kiniklioglu, the influential deputy chairman for external affairs in the ruling Justice and Development party (AKP), warned of “major consequences” if the resolution was accepted by the full House of Representatives.

“If they choose to bring this to the floor they will have to face the fact that the consequences would be serious – the relationship would be downgraded at every level,” he said. “Everything from Afghanistan to Pakistan to Iraq to the Middle East process would be affected.

“There would be major disruption to the relationship between Turkey and the US.”

His comments reflected deep-seated anger throughout Turkish society, as well as an official determination to press the Obama administration into making sure the resolution progresses no further.

Turkey withdrew its ambassador to Washington for urgent “consultations” immediately after the vote, which was screened live on nationwide television.

Its foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, appeared to blame the outcome on the White House, and said that describing the 1915 Armenian killings as genocide was an insult to Turkey’s “honour”. France and Canada have both classified the killings as genocide, unlike Britain.

“The picture shows that the US administration did not put enough weight behind the issue,” Davutoglu told a news conference. “We are seriously disturbed by the result.”

The mass killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians has long been a highly sensitive subject in Turkey. While the issue is now more openly debated than in the past, Turkish officials insist that to describe it as genocide equates it with the Nazi Holocaust.

Turkey admits that hundreds of thousands of Armenians died, but disputes suggestions that it was part of a programme to eliminate the population, insisting instead that many died of disease. It has also suggested that the numbers have been inflated, and pointed out that many Turks died at the hands of Armenians.

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, who is on a visit to South America, stressed that both she and Obama opposed the house vote and wanted to see it go no further. She said any action by Congress was not appropriate. “We do not believe that the full Congress will, or should, act upon that resolution, and we have made that clear to all the parties involved.”

Asked how she squared her support for the Armenian campaign on the election campaign trail with her new position, she said circumstances had changed, with the Turkish and Armenian governments engaged in talks on normalisation and a historical commission established to look at past events.

“I do not think it is for any other country to determine how two countries resolve matters between them, to the extent that actions that the United States might take could disrupt this process,” she said.

The chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America, Ken Hachikian, who led the lobbying campaign to get the house committee to back the resolution, today dismissed the Turkish threat of reprisals. “This is part of a Turkish pattern or huffing and puffing. With the other 20 countries that have passed similar resolutions, they made similar threats and then it was business as usual,” he said.

Hachikian, who is based in Washington, said he hoped the vote would go to the full house before 24 April, Armenian genocide commemoration day. He accused Obama and Clinton of hypocrisy in trying to block a vote, saying they had supported the Armenian campaign during the presidential election.

He said the Turkish government had spent $1m during the past few months lobbying members of Congress. His committee had spent only $75,000, which included adverts in media outlets read by members of Congress and their staff.

Although Hachikian claimed to have the votes needed, and 215 members of the 435-member house have publicly backed the resolution, the chances of a full vote are small, given the opposition from the White House and state department.

The vote came as attempts at rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia – which have no diplomatic ties – had already run aground. A protocol signed in Geneva last October promising to restore relations has yet to be ratified by the parliament of either country.

Both Turkish and Armenian analysts voiced fears that the protocols may now be doomed.
March 7, 2010
GRIM HISTORY OF ARMENIANS IN TURKEY THAT LED TO ACCUSATIONS OF GENOCIDE

Mark Tran

guardian.co.uk

Friday 5 March 2010 12.11 GMT

Repression of 2.5 million people in Ottoman empire dates back to
autonomy movement in late 19th century

Ottoman soldiers posing in front of hanged Armenians in 1915. A US
congressional committee yesterday voted to label the Ottoman empire’s
actions as genocide. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

Armenia believes Turkey committed genocide in the deaths of at least
1 million Armenians when they were deported from Turkish Armenia in
1915, and welcomes the non-binding resolution passed by the US house
foreign affairs committee.

Repression of the 2.5 million Armenians in the Ottoman empire dates
back to 1894-96 under Sultan Abdulhamid, when Armenians in the eastern
provinces, encouraged by Russia, began agitating for autonomy.

Abdulhamid cracked down on separatist sentiment by encouraging
nationalistic feelings against Armenians among neighbouring Kurdish
tribesmen.

A combination of Kurdish persecution and a rise in taxes led to an
Armenian uprising that was brutally suppressed by Turkish troops
and Kurdish tribesmen in 1894. Thousands of Armenians were killed
and their villages burned. Two years later, another revolt broke
out when Armenian rebels seized the Ottoman bank in Istanbul. More
than 50,000 Armenians were killed by mobs apparently co-ordinated by
government troops.

Those death tolls were dwarfed by the killings during the first world
war, when Armenians from the Caucasus formed volunteer battalions
to help the Russian army against the Turks. Early in 1915, these
battalions organised the recruiting of Turkish Armenians from behind
Turkish lines.

The Young Turk government reacted by ordering the deportation of the
Armenian population to Syria and Palestine. About 1 million died from
starvation or were killed by Arab or Kurdish tribes along the route.

Many survivors fled to Russian Armenia where, in 1918, an independent
Armenian republic was established. Armenia won independence when the
Soviet Union fractured in 1991.

Turkey accepts that atrocities took place but argues that there was
no systematic attempt to destroy the Christian Armenians. It puts the
number of deaths during 1915 at around 300,000 and says many innocent
Muslim Turks also died in the turmoil of war.

The legal definition of genocide is found in the 1948 UN convention
on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide.

Article two of this convention defines genocide as “any of the
following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part,
a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing
members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members
of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life
calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in
part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
[and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

Henri Barkey, a Turkey scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace in Washington DC, said that “the overwhelming
historical evidence demonstrates that what took place in 1915 was
genocide”. He nevertheless opposes the US ruling as a needless
political manoeuvre.

Argentina, Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, Russia and Uruguay are among
more than 20 countries which have formally recognised genocide against
the Armenians. The European parliament and the UN sub-commission on
prevention of discrimination and protection of minorities have also
done so.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/mar/05/history-armenia-turkey-genocide

__,_._,___

March 7, 2010
Was the 1915 killing of Armenians genocide?

with responce from YUKSEL OKTAY

06 March 2010

The Question Is Debatable, But It’s Not For The Us Congress To Decide

by Stephen Kinzer

Genocide Vote Harms Us-Turkey TiesFor the US house of representatives foreign affairs committee to decide that the killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915 constituted genocide, as it did Thursday by a one-vote margin, would be acceptable and even praiseworthy if it were part of a serious historical effort to review all the great atrocities of modern history. But the singling out of Turks for censure, among all the killers of the 20th century, is something quite different. This vote was a triumph of emotion, a victory for ethnic lobbying, and another example of the age-old American impulse to play moral arbiter for the world.

Turkey recalled its ambassador in Washington immediately after the vote, which was broadcast live on Turkish television. The resolution now goes to the full House of Representatives. Given the pull of moneyed politics, and President Obama’s unwillingness or inability to bring Congress to heel on this issue, as Presidents Bush and Clinton did, it could pass. That would provoke much anger in Turkey, and might weaken the US-Turkish relationship at the precise moment when the US needs to strengthen it.

In the past few years, Turkey has taken on a new and assertive role in the Middle East and beyond. Turkey can go places, talk to factions, and make deals that the US cannot. Yet it remains fundamentally aligned with western values and strategic goals. No other country is better equipped to help the US navigate through the region’s treacherous deserts, steppes and mountains.

Would it be worth risking all of this to make a clear moral statement? Perhaps. What emerged from Washington this week, though, was no cry of righteous indignation. Various considerations, including the electoral power of Armenian-Americans, may have influenced members of Congress. It is safe to surmise, however, that few took time to weigh the historical record soberly and seek to place the Ottoman atrocity in the context of other 20th century massacres.

Two questions face Congress as it considers whether to call the 1915 killings genocide. The first is the simple historical question: was it or wasn’t it? Then, however, comes an equally vexing second question: is it the responsibility of the US Congress to make sensitive judgments about events that unfolded long ago? The first question is debatable, the second is not.

Congress has neither the capacity nor the moral authority to make sweeping historical judgments. It will not have that authority until it sincerely investigates other modern slaughters – what about the one perpetrated by the British in Kenya during the 1950s, documented in a devastating study that won the 2006 Pulitzer prize? – and also confronts aspects of genocide in the history of the United States itself. Doing this would require an enormous amount of largely pointless effort. Congress would be wiser to recognise that it does not exist to penetrate the vicissitudes of history or dictate fatwas to the world.

This vote has already harmed US-Turkish relations because it has angered many Turks. If the resolution proceeds through Congress, it will cause more harm. This is lamentable, because declining US-Turkish relations will be bad for both countries and for the cause of regional stability. Just as bad, the vote threatens to upset the fragile reconciliation that has been underway between Turkey and Armenia in recent months.

In this episode is encapsulated one of the timeless truths of diplomacy. Emotion is the enemy of sound foreign policy; cool consideration of long-term self-interest is always wiser. Congress seems far from realising this. . .

Genocide ruling harms US-Turkey relations | Stephen Kinzer

This article was published on guardian.co.uk at 00.28 GMT on Friday 5 March 2010

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

Open Letter to Stephen Kinzer, long time student of Turkish Affairs and the first New York Times Bureau Chief in Istanbul (1995-2000) and a great guy. Thursday 4 March 2009, Flemington, NJ – Saturday 6 March, Washington, NJ

Your article below was timely and has merits. However, I believe it is time for you to bite the bullet and declare to the world that the events of 1915 can not be labeled as genocide, which I believe you also believe deep in your heart, have but not stated openly in your article. So should Guenther Levy, who wrote an excellent book “Armenian gencide” but rather than stating the positive statement based on all the information presented in his definitive work, he referred to as “Disputed genocide.”. Now, a dozen concerned Turkish-Americans, led by a retired IBM Engineer and flier Sevgin Oktay have published a series of 4 page brochures on the falsifications by a number of Armenian organizations and individuals, which leaves the question to the reader whether it was a genocide or not. I believe it is time for these concerned people and the Turkish-Americans (146,000 according to the new Turkish Ambassador who was recalled to Ankara after the HCFA vote), to stop beating around the bush and face the facts and declare to President Obama, the prime mover of the, that the Armenians fired the first shot, pursued the establishment of a state of their own on lands where they were never the majority through rebellions, took arms against their own government and led uprisings and massacres of Turks, joined the Russian and French Forces even after 1915 when many returned to Turkey from Syria and the USA while hundreds and thousands stayed in the Caucauses, which most Armenians and their blind supporters do not want to talk about.

Who ever reads your article and other publications, and ponder on the question, they will probably answer, “Yes, it was a genocide”, just like the 23 members out of 46 led by a fanatic of the House Foreign Relations Committee did on March 4, 2009, a dark page on the US Congress history, probably because all their lives, they have been continuously exposed to the Armenian propaganda, who were elated by the one vote win. I am sure all of them must have visited the US Holocaust Museum in WDC which exhibits the fabricated Hitler statement on “Who remembers the Annihilation of Armenians” (visited by 2.5 million visitors every year,) and now the untruthful “Morgenthau Exhibit” at the Museum of Jewish Heritage in New York”, scheduled to run until the end of 2010, competing with Istanbul as the Cullture Capital of Europe 2010. If they have also read 1915 Ambassador Henry Morgenthau’s “Story Book”, and the Israeli Ambassador to US book on 230 year history of America without mentioning the Turkish contributions, Peter Balakian’s book “The Burning Tigris” and the play, “Beast on the Moon” being stage every year near April 24, how can they not answer “yes” to your question, not knowing the truth.

Probably the best authority in the world on the Armenian issue is Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov, the retired Prof of International Affairs who has written more than 100 books and hundreds of articles about the Armenian issue and has given confrences all over the world, from the US to England to Australia, with genuine documents not faked and fabricated ones being used by most Armenian organizations, the last count according to the late Hrant Dink, over 26,000, some of which will be exposed as another brochure by the. I would humbly recommend that Prof. Ataov should appear on US Media and also, instead of asking a similar question on the Armenian issue, “What happened in 1915”, he too should state the truth about the Srmenian revolts that led to the re-location of Armenians, not deportations, as Turkish Ambassador namik tan erroneously stated in the 10 minute CBS program.

Many individuals and organizations are asking, “What next?” My humble recommendation would be to write to both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi not to bring the Resolution to the floor and to President Obama, to stop his support to the Resolution, and to the American people through lectures at Universities (one place would be the March 13, MIT Conference), appearnecs on TV and articels in the media.

Respectfully,

Yuksel Oktay

Open Letter to the Chairman Howard L. Berman and the 46 Members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on, “Battle over History’’, aired by CBS 60 Minute, Feb. 28, 2010

Part III

February 28, 2010

Open Letter to Andy Rooney, the Commentator on CBS 60 Minute Program, on “Battle over History’’, aired by CBS 60 Minute, today, Sunday at 19:00 PM, Feb. 28, 2010

Andy Rooney,

CBS 60 Minute Commentator

New York, NY

Dear Mr. Rooney,

Your commentary at the end of the 60 Minute program today was excellent, as usual. You were right in questioning the wisdom of including all those questions in the 2010 Census Form. I don’t know if you watched the entire 60 Minute program, especially the segment called “Battle over History”, the 10 minute segment prepared by E. Goushon and Drew Moughathan, which was full of fabricated stories, distorted facts, and not a good one. In fact, it was a disgrace to TV journalism, in which CBS is good at. In fact, probably the best program on TV is the “Sunday Morning” originated by Charles H Kuralt who would neverallow the showing of a one sided story on his program. Just like you questioned the Cencus Form, I would like to question the allegations in the “Battle of History”, if possible, with your help, which was more like “ Battle over History with Fabrications, Forged Documents, and Armenian Distortion of Facts”

For years, 60 Minutes has been presenting excellent segments on many subjects that the public has cherished over and over again. I still remember the segment that was presented some years ago on Ahmet Ertegun, a Turkish-American and a music mogul who made Charles Ray famous along with many African-American musicians over the years. He is now buried in a small grave in Uskudar, Istanbul, but his contributions to the American society will never be forgotten.

The 10 minute segment “Battle of History “, was full of fabrications, forged documents and distorted facts, as a result of which, the truth was lost. In 10 minutes, the entire Turkish nation was convicted of a crime which has never been proven in an International Court. Peter Balakian made a new revelation that 400,000 Armenians died in , which is a fabrication. Many of the re-located Armenians did arrive in and all of them were given homes, land and money. Armenians were given an option to return to Turkey in 1916 and 1917, and many did, in fact some joining the French forces and fighting against the Ottoman Empire. The descendants of the re-located Armenians who chose to live in Syria and Lebanon make up a large portion of the 8 million Diaspora Armenians. These facts were not mentioned in the presentation.

Just one site was shown along the Euphrates, claiming that the bones were everywhere, which is questionable after 95 years. Perhaps they were just placed there for the program. The Turkish Ambassador Nabi Sensoy was not given an opportunity to tell the truth, since he appeared for less than a minute, and erroneouslyreferred to the re-settlement as deportations. The Hitler statement that Peter Balakian loves to state at every occasion is a total fabrication which has been proven to be false. The reference to genocide scholars is also distortion of facts since these people are self appointed individuals without any credentials to pass a judgament on what happened 95 years ago. The murder of Hrant Dink was condemned by everyone in Turkey when 100,000 Turks walked behind his coffin, including this writer.

The 10 minute segment was broadcast as a propaganda material to influence the 46 members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee before their vote on the fabricated Armenian genocide resolution on March 4, 2010. I will venture to say that, if they watched this segment, they will not believe all the falsifications and vote “NO” to the Resolution. Below is a letter that I sent to the members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and I hope you too will read it. And I hope you will have a talk with Bob Simon who put this segment on 60 Minutes, tarnishing its reputation. It would be wise if CBS 60 Minute airs “Armenian Revolt”, a documentary made by an American, which tells the truth about the Armenian issue.

Respectfully.

Yuksel Oktay

Concerned American with Turkish Heritage and Past President,

Federation of Turkish-American Associations, NY (1973)

Saturday, 27 February 2010

Washington, NJ

March 6, 2010
Armenia Resolution Won’t Get Full U.S. House Vote, Aide Says

March 06, 2010, 12:01 AM EST

By Peter S. Green and James Rowley

March 6 (Bloomberg) — Democratic lawmakers bowed to concerns expressed by the Obama administration and agreed not to schedule a full House vote on a resolution that labels as genocide the killing of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey, a congressional aide said.

House leaders have no plans at this time for a chamber vote on the measure, which a House committee approved on March 4, the House Democratic leadership aide said yesterday. The aide spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The resolution passed the House Foreign Affairs Committee on a 23-22 vote. Turkey responded by recalling its ambassador in Washington, Namik Tan, for consultations.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had spoken out against a full House vote on March 4 while attending a conference in Costa Rica. She reiterated yesterday that President Barack Obama’s administration “strongly opposes the resolution.”

A full House vote would “impede the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said in Washington yesterday before word surfaced of the leadership’s decision. “The best way for Turkey and Armenia to address their shared past is through ongoing negotiations,” he said.

The measure says the Ottoman Empire, the predecessor of modern-day Turkey, killed 1.5 million ethnic Armenians from 1915 to 1923. It asks the president to ensure that U.S. foreign policy reflects “appropriate understanding” of the atrocity and “the consequences of the failure to realize a just resolution.”

Similar Recall

Turkey, a U.S. ally and NATO member, had recalled its U.S. ambassador for a brief period in protest to a similar resolution passed by a House committee in 2007. That measure never came up for a full House vote.

Turkish President Abdullah Gul said on his Web site that the March 4 committee vote was “one-sided and remote from historical realities,” and would hurt talks with Armenia.

“We’ve worked at every level with the American administration on a variety of issues and we’ve always supported Mr. Obama’s vision of peace,” Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said in Ankara yesterday. “We don’t expect this contribution of ours to be sacrificed to a few local political games.”

The resolution showed a lack of “strategic vision” on the part of U.S. lawmakers who supported it, Davutoglu said.

Iranian Trade

Turkey has been expanding trade with Iran and Obama in December called the country an “important player” in efforts to curb Iran’s nuclear program.

Turkey’s border and its trade relationship with Iran makes Turkish support vital for U.S. efforts to use sanctions to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, said Bulent Aliriza, Director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

While the Armenia-related resolution came from Congress and not the administration, Turkey may not see any difference, further hampering U.S. efforts to impose sanctions on Iran, said Henri Barkey, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

“What is clearly very likely is that on Iran we are going to get less cooperation from them,” Barkey said before the aide disclosed that the resolution won’t get a full House vote.

Turkey asserts that the resolution hurts Turkish and Armenian efforts to renew diplomatic relations that were broken over Armenia’s military intervention in Azerbaijan’s Nagorno- Karabakh region following the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union.

Clinton’s Intervention

Turkey and Armenia agreed in October to renew relations after Clinton helped the countries overcome a last-minute dispute before a signing ceremony in Zurich. Under the accords, which are waiting to be approved by Turkey’s parliament, a historical commission would investigate the killings.

After the French parliament in 2006 approved legislation making it criminal to deny that a genocide took place, Turkey said France had done “irreparable damage” to relations between the two countries.

The chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America, a lobbying group in Washington, praised the House committee shortly after it passed its genocide resolution. “You cannot have a relationship or a reconciliation based upon lies,” Kenneth Hachikian said in an interview after the vote. “Turkey can’t come to the table and say let’s reconcile but we deny what the rest of the world acknowledges.”

The House resolution noted that England, France and Russia called the killings a crime against humanity at the time, and that Turkey’s own government indicted the leaders of the massacres after World War I.

–With assistance from Hans Nichols in Washington and Steve Bryant in Ankara. Editors: Don Frederick, Mike Millard.

-0- Mar/06/2010 05:00 GMT

To contact the reporters on this story: Peter S. Green in Washington at psgreen@bloomberg.net; James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jim Kirk at jkirk12@bloomberg.net

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

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2010/03/05/past-imperfect-present-tense

The Armenian genocide

Past imperfect, present tense

Mar 5th 2010 | NEW YORK
From Economist.com

Congress reconsiders America’s official position on the Armenian genocide

TWO questions faced an American congressional panel on Thursday March 5th as it considered the mass killings of Armenians during and after the first world war by forces of the Ottoman Empire. First, was it genocide? The historical debate is as hot, and unsettled, as ever. Armenians continue to insist that it was the first genocide of the twentieth century, while Turks call the killings merely part of the chaos of the break-up of empire.

But the second question on the minds of congressmen in the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives was more urgent. What is more important, fidelity to history or concern for the present? The vote took place as warming relations between Turkey and Armenia have cooled again and those between Turkey and America are under increasing strain over Iran, Israel and other affairs in the region. Turkish diplomats and politicians gave warning before the vote that the consequences would be felt across the range of issues of shared concern to the two countries. In the end the panel narrowly decided against pragmatism and chose to set straight the historical records. A resolution recognising the killings as genocide was sent to the House by a vote of 23 to 22.

When the same House committee passed a “genocide” resolution in 2007 the White House urged that the vote be scrapped. But this year, it had come with a twist; Barack Obama had promised during his election campaign to recognise the event as genocide. But before the vote his advisers said that while he acknowledges a genocide personally, he urged unsuccessfully that official interpretation be left to the parties involved. Congress is far more sensitive to lobbying than the president and to small but highly motivated groups of voters. Lobbyists working for both Armenians and Turks had been active before the vote and Armenians are concentrated in several Californian districts.

But no fashioner of foreign policy–among whom the president is by far the most important–can ignore the strategic importance of Turkey. It is a vital American ally and has the second-biggest army in NATO. The country is home to an important American air base and is a crucial supply route for America’s forces in Iraq. Relations were difficult even before the beginning of the war in Iraq in 2003. The mildly Islamist government denied the Americans the ability to open a second front in Iraq through Turkey. Turkey’s relationship with Israel has deteriorated too. Israel’s two recent wars, in Lebanon and Gaza, have outraged Turkish public opinion. Mr Obama’s more even-handed approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict has improved America’s reputation in Turkey, but not by much.

Turkey itself is caught between forces that make the Armenia issue potentially dangerous. The country’s secular, Western-oriented politicians, among others, have been discouraged by the strict terms offered by the European Union for eventual Turkish membership. In part as a result there has been a gradual realignment in Turkish foreign policy towards its more immediate neighbours. Turkey’s government seeks peaceful relations with countries at its borders, which has meant some cosying up to Iran, despite the fact that most of Turkey’s NATO allies are pushing for more sanctions against the Islamic republic over its alleged efforts to obtain nuclear weapons.

The vote comes at a sensitive time, too, for Turkey’s relations with Armenia. The pair have been at odds since Turkey closed the border in 1993, during Armenia’s war with Turkey’s ethnic cousins in Azerbaijan. Last year, protocols were agreed that foresaw an establishment of diplomatic relations and an opening of the border. But Armenia’s highest court then declared that the protocols were not in line with Armenia’s constitutionally mandated policy that foreign affairs conform to the Armenian view of the genocide. Turkey responded with fury and the protocols were endangered. The American vote will anger Turkey further and perhaps make it even more inclined to turn away from Europe, America and Armenia in favour of its Islamic neighbours.

One hope is that Turkish anger will subside if, as happened in 2007, the House leadership stops the resolution from reaching a full vote. It may do so again. Turkey recalled its ambassador after Thursday’s vote just as in 2007. The Turkish government, in a spat with the country’s nationalist army, may play the foreign-insult card to bolster its domestic strength. But ultimately the Turks are unlikely to weaken their relationship with America lightly.

March 6, 2010

Davutoglu challenges U.S. to answer the question whether it wants peace in the region:

Turkish FM calls on U.S., West to say whether they really want Armenia-Azerbaijan reconciliation- UPDATE

05 March 2010 [16:21] – Today.Az http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttuzoe7x4UI

In his televised speech on March 5, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu urged the United States and West to resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.Stability in the South Caucasus can become real only after Armenia withdraws from Azerbaijan’s occupied lands and Armenia-Turkey and Armenia-Azerbaijan reconciliation are ensured, CNN-Turk quoted Davutoglu as saying.

Unilateral reconciliation is impossible, Davutoglu said.

It is difficult to reach a full peace through reconciliation only between individual countries in the South Caucasus region, the Foreign Minister explained. In his view, a full peace is possible if only all existing conflicts are solved.

Davutoglu stressed that not only the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation, but also the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation must be focus of attention adding that the United States and West are interested only in normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations.

“If we want peace, then why we talk only about the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation? Why do not we put forward the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation? Why can not we believe that this can be realized? Why Turkey is mistaken when it talks about the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation? Our American and Western friends need to think about it.”

“The question is clear and open. And our response is clear and open, too. Does someone want the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation? Yes, Turkey wants. And now we ask the question: “Do you want the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation or not?” Let them come out and say: “We do not want.” And we’ll know about it. But if they want, let them do all that it is required,” the Turkish FM underscored.

Peace depends on a political will. The path is difficult, but this is not an impossible goal, Davutoglu added.

———–
13:15

Turkey calls on Armenia to open all archives and not to exert pressure through the U.S. Congress, and negotiate face to face, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said.

“The adoption of the resolution on” Armenian genocide” is comical, as the difference of one vote seems very strange,” he added.

U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs on Thursday adopted 23 votes to 22 a resolution recognizing the so-called “Armenian genocide”.

Armenia claims that the Ottoman Empire committed genocide against Armenians living in Anatolia in 1915. Making greater efforts to promote the issue internationally, Armenians have achieved its recognition by parliaments of some countries.

Signing the protocols with Armenia, Turkey sought to bequeath to future generations of peace and stability among nations, but the adoption of this resolution by the U.S Congress’s Committee shows that Yerevan does not act openly in this matter, he added.

The minister considers erroneous the view that the adoption of the resolution could put pressure on Ankara to ratify the Armenian-Turkish protocols.

“The fact is that Turkey has taken decision on in this issue for ten days while Armenia has done for four months,” he said.

The intervention of a third party, in this case the U.S., in relations between Armenia and Turkey, complicates the process of reconciliation between the countries, he said.

The adoption of a resolution recognizing the “Armenian genocide” indicates that the U.S Congress is very weak in developing a future political strategy, the Turkish minister said.

March 6, 2010

Crisis in Turkey
by Daniel Pipes
National Review Online
March 2, 2010
https://www.danielpipes.org/8009/crisis-in-turkey
German

Portuguese

Romanian
The arrest and indictment of top military figures in Turkey last week precipitated potentially the most severe crisis since Atatürk founded the republic in 1923. The weeks ahead will probably indicate whether the country continues its slide toward Islamism or reverts to its traditional secularism. The denouement has major implications for Muslims everywhere.

“Taraf” broke the Balyoz conspiracy theory on Jan. 22, 2010.

Turkey’s military has long been both the state’s most trusted institution and the guarantor of Atatürk’s legacy, especially his laicism. Devotion to the founder is not some dry abstraction but a very real and central part of a Turkish officer’s life; as journalist Mehmet Ali Birand has documented, cadet-officers hardly go an hour without hearing Atatürk’s name invoked. On four occasions between 1960 and 1997, the military intervened to repair a political process gone awry. On the last of these occasions, it forced the Islamist government of Necmettin Erbakan out of power. Chastened by this experience, some of Erbakan’s staff re-organized themselves as the more cautious Justice and Development Party (AKP). In Turkey’s decisive election of 2002, they surged ahead of discredited and fragmented centrist parties with a plurality of 34 percent of the popular vote.
Parliamentary rules then transformed that plurality into a 66 percent supermajority of assembly seats and a rare case of single-party rule. Not only did the AKP skillfully take advantage of its opportunity to lay the foundations of an Islamic order but no other party or leader emerged to challenge it. As a result, the AKP increased its portion of the vote in the 2007 elections to a resounding 47 percent, with control over 62 percent of parliamentary seats.
Repeated AKP electoral successes encouraged it to drop its earlier caution and to hasten moving the country toward its dream of an Islamic Republic of Turkey. The party placed partisans in the presidency and the judiciary while seizing increased control of the educational, business, media, and other leading institutions. It even challenged the secularists’ hold over what Turks call the “deep state” – the non-elected institutions of the intelligence agencies, security services, and the judiciary. Only the military, ultimate arbiter of the country’s direction, remained beyond AKP control.
Several factors then prompted the AKP to confront the military: European Union accession demands for civilian control over the military; a 2008 court case that came close to shutting down the AKP; and the growing assertiveness of its Islamist ally, the Fethullah Gülen Movement. An erosion in AKP popularity (from 47 percent in 2007 to 29 percent now) added a sense of urgency to this confrontation, for it points to the end of one-party AKP rule in the next elections.

Gen. Ibrahim Firtina, a former head of the air force, was questioned in court about a plot to overthrow the government.

The AKP devised an elaborate conspiracy theory in 2007, dubbed Ergenekon, to arrest about two hundred AKP critics, including military officers, under accusation of plotting to overthrow the elected government. The military responded passively, so the AKP raised the stakes on Jan. 22 by concocting a second conspiracy theory, this one termed Balyoz (“Sledgehammer”) and exclusively directed against the military. The military denied any illegal activities and the chief of general staff, Ýlker Baþbuð, warned that “Our patience has a limit.” Nonetheless, the government proceeded, starting on Feb. 22, to arrest 67 active and retired military officers, including former heads of the air force and navy. So far, 35 officers have been indicted.
Thus has the AKP thrown down the gauntlet, leaving the military leadership basically with two unattractive options: (1) continue selectively to acquiesce to the AKP and hope that fair elections by 2011 will terminate and reverse this process; or (2) stage a coup d’état, risking voter backlash and increased Islamist electoral strength.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoðan, President Abdullah Gul and Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Ýlker Baþbuð met on February 25.

At stake is whether the Ergenekon/Balyoz offensives will succeed in transforming the military from an Atatürkist to a Gülenist institution; or whether the AKP’s blatant deceit and over-reaching will spur secularists to find their voice and their confidence. Ultimately the issue concerns whether Shari’a (Islamic law) rules Turkey or the country returns to secularism. Turkey’s Islamic importance suggests that the outcome of this crisis has consequences for Muslims everywhere. AKP domination of the military means Islamists control the umma‘s most powerful secular institution, proving that, for the moment, they are unstoppable. But if the military retains its independence, Atatürk’s vision will remain alive in Turkey and offer Muslims worldwide an alternative to the Islamist juggernaut.

—
March 4, 2010