The Infidel

The Turkish-Armenian Debate (part 5)

A couple of days ago on Tuesday, I missed a chance to go to a demonstration staged by the Armenian diaspora in front of the Turkish Consulate in NYC. Unfortunately, thinking that it was on Wednesday I went there and, of course, saw no one. But on my way back, I came across a small cardboard banner that read "Hrank Dink: 1,500,001st victim of the Armenian Genocide" and that's when I decided to write this post. The cardboard box was actually quoting Robert Fisk's article in which Fisk states that very line in his first sentence.

Besides the obvious, there is a distasteful stench of capitalizing on Hrant's murder for the "genocide" cause, which I really think needs to be criticized. This demonstration was clearly not designed to be a vigil for Hrant because if it was then why didn't anyone invite any Turkish groups to this event? Would it not have been a better idea to stand in unison and condemn the murder, express sorrow, and show solidarity at a neutral place (like across the street at the UN)? Instead the diaspora chose to direct the approximately 600 demonstrators towards the Turkish Center and the Consulate. I was talking with a police officer who was also there that day and he affirmed that it seemed like most were against the Turks with visible hatred (and no, he was not a Turk himself) as if to blame the very Consulate.... That's an American viewpoint for you which clearly shows the nature of the ignorance all of us are engulfed in.

I find this move very low, but at the same time it doesn't surprise me at all. There seems to be a clear divide between the approach of the Armenian diaspora in the US and the Armenians living in Armenia or Turkey. The latter ones are more open to discussion it appears. Either way, in all of this I cannot allow the diaspora to take advantage of Hrant's murder at the expense of the Turks (including the bloggers) that did express condolences (NY Times) and showed a great deal of heart to stand up (BBC 1 and BBC 2).

Furthermore, it's very easy for anyone standing outside of our conflict to just believe any statement made, and like the police officer, not question anything. So, I decided to post the following series of videos that show the flip side of the coin to the argument. The whole series are part of a documentary you can find on YouTube.com under "Armenian Revolt". Everyone, please take the time to watch it all (about an hour in length in total) to get a good idea of the historical circumstances of the debate. Interestingly enough, it is rather rare to find someone from the Armenian side to talk about everything else that led to their forefathers getting killed or kicked out of the area. If you wonder why, watch the clips and you’ll understand. The sources are listed after the clips.

"Armenian Revolt -- Tragedy in the Middle East" produced and directed by Marty Callaghan.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

Part 6:

What are the sources of this documentary you ask? They are:

-- Turkish National Archives

-- U.S. National Archives

-- Kaleidoscope Archives

-- Russian Federation Archives

-- Ullstein Bild, Berlin

-- Bildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz (BPK), Berlin

-- Bulgarian National Archives

-- Romanian National Archives

Here is a nice source and director info from the business wire:

The documentary is based on two years of research with experts in the United States, Russia, Germany, Romania, England and Bulgaria. Interviews were filmed in the United States and Turkey. Stunning, historical footage from 1913 to 1919 has been found in the national archives of the United States, Romania and Bulgaria as well as in a private archive in Moscow, Russia. Still photographs were sourced in the United States and from a private collection in Berlin, Germany.

Callaghan is a veteran documentary filmmaker, focusing on military history, World War I and the Middle East for much of his career. He earned a B.A. degree in History (Valparaiso University), a M.A. degree in English (New Mexico State University) and a M.A. degree in History (Virginia Polytechnic Institute).

Thank you for watching the documentary.

The Funeral

This was it. The funeral of Hrant Dink, a kind and loving family man who stood taller amongst giants than most others in his profession, was attended by tens of thousands of people. And the Turkish leadership missed a true opportunity to show the world that politics can be put aside. Erdogan did not attend "due to his pre-determined program that included hosting Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi".... That's a bunch of bullshit. How about you take Prodi with you, who I'm sure would not have minded seeing you show your solidarity? Even an appearance of five minutes would have proven this, for God's sake.

Instead, Erdogan chose to court the ultra-nationalistic vote since his presidential bid depends on a continued majority. And that's where politicians, in general, lose. They can't seem to make a conscious selfless human decision anymore.

The religious zealots were also missing; what happened there? Was it during prayer times? In fact, can anyone find any information that anyone from the Turkish political/military/religious class was there? I can't seem to find anything.

Well, Metin from TalkTurkey summed it up very nicely, I think:

The President should have been there. The Prime Minister should have been there. The Religious Attaché famous for his recent photo-op with the Pope, and too quick to comment on a holy man's blunder, should have been there. The Chief of the Turkish General Staff should have been there. The Majority Opposition Leader should have been there. The 'so-called' forces of government and 'deep state' representation should have been there. Too bad they weren't there. But too bad for them 'the people' were there.

My thoughts go out to his family...

SUSPECT CAUGHT!!!

The suspect of Dink's murder, Ogun Samast, was caught en route to his hometown of Trabzon after his own father recognized him on TV and called the police. Wow, this is an amazing development. Besides Ogun, who is only 17 years old by the way, there are six other suspects in custody. I'm guessing that he will admit to the charges and be sentenced rather quickly, but I'm wondering what the details of this trial will be since he would still be a minor officially. I guess we'll find out shortly...
The BBC has more on this -->

Also, please read what Turkish columnists had to say (in English) via Turkish Torque here.

Obituary: Hrant Dink (1954 - 2007)

                      

                                      Hrant Dink

                            (September 15, 1954 - January 19, 2007)

You can find a short CV from Agos Newspaper (scroll down, I corrected some grammar here):

He was born in Malatya on 15.9.1954. At the age of seven, he migrated to İstanbul together with his family. He got his primary and secondary education in Armenian schools. Immediately after lyceum, he got married.

He graduated from Zoology Department of İstanbul University's Science Faculty. Then he continued his education at Philosophy Department of the same university's Literature Faculty for a while.

Since 1996 he worked as the columnist and editor-in chief of AGOS weekly newspaper which can be regarded as the voice of Armenian community.

He tried to make this newspaper a democratic and oppositional voice of Turkey and also tried to share the injustices done to the Armenian community with public opinion.

One of the major aims of the newspaper is to contribute to the dialogue between Turkish and Armenian nations and also between Turkey and Armenia.

He took part in various democratic platforms and civil society organizations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hrant Dink was murdered in a heinous and cowardly way, most likely, by some brainless and lost ultra-nationalist Turkish young man, who I hope will be brought to justice as soon as possible. I am deeply saddened by Hrant's death because I believe that he had good intentions for Turkey and the Turkish people. Although I don't agree with everything he said and wrote, it is clear that he was a peaceful activist voicing his norm-opposing views to raise awareness, which is the bread and butter of any democracy. No human being should be persecuted for his/her opinions in any country, but especially in Turkey.

Now more than ever, Turks need to show solidarity and condemn this attack as an act of senseless violence against one of our own. Hrant was a Turkish citizen, a man who has contributed greatly to Turkish society and furthermore even served proudly in the Turkish Armed Forces when his time came (standing second from right). He did not shy away from criticism or threats and even is said to have refused protection showing fearlessness and dedication to his principles.

Turks cannot and should not under any circumstances ignore Hrant's or any other journalist's assassinations. This is a shameful act in light of our country's image and will only be held against us as a whole if the assailant is not pursued and brought to justice adequately.

If anyone in Istanbul is reading this, I would be eternally grateful if you could light a candle in my name as a vigil to Hrant's memory. My condolences to his family and may he rest in peace.

UPDATE:

Please read the articles in the NY Times and the Turkish Daily News sites.

Wonderful NYC...

Man, what a strange place New York is. Although Istanbul will always be my #1, I can tell that New York City deserves the runner-up spot. There is soooooo much to do in this city, I’m not sure when I will be able to say that I’ve done and seen most of it. In the last two weeks, I’ve been to the American Museum of Natural History, the "Bodies" exhibition, and today I went to the Guggenheim Museum to saturate my cultured self with some long overdue Dali; brilliant in his own realm and one of my favorites. And yesterday, I watched a full half of the Saints-Eagles game on one of the big screens at Times Square with a whole bunch of strangers.

Today, I also went to a Turkish restaurant that actually sucked, which I really didn’t think was possible, but it apparently is. And in between all of these things, I meet all kinds of people from all walks of life. Each one of them has a story to tell of how they came here and why they stayed. Wonderful, really….

When you hear someone say “there’s no place like New York City,” believe them. I’ve been to many cities across the US, Western Europe, as well as the Middle East, and I can honestly say New York is truly unique. I can see why people flock here year after year and will keep doing so for many more. It’s the possibilities that it allows you to dream about and pursue. In no other place have dreams a better chance to take flight than in New York. You want to make it in the movie business? No problem. You can start from the bottom and reach the top. You want to work for a non-profit? At Wall Street? At the UN? Or all three in due time? All of it is possible in New York.

Despite my claustrophobia amongst all the concrete here, I think I can learn to love this city.... Plus, the ladies are freekin' hot and downright irresistible, but that's a story for another time..........

p.s. Make suggestions where I should go next week...

The Turkish-Armenian Debate (part 4)

Lawyerman,

First, I would like to thank you for showing up at our small but crucial get-together. Secondly, I hope that despite the fact that you’re probably a pretty busy man it would be much appreciated if you could comment as frequently as you can to give us more of your legal insight. And thirdly, I would like to post your comment first for everyone to read and then answer to the individual points.

You said:

“This case involves the extermination of a group of its own citizens by the Ottoman Empire, a state which no longer exists. Of course there was no Armenian state at the time. So it would be difficult to see the ICJ taking the case.

There is also the International Criminal Court (www.icc-cpi.int) which is separate from the ICJ. Unfortunately its jurisdiction only extends to crimes committed after July 1, 2002.

There have been some quasi-legal proceedings surrounding the genocide:

The Permanent People’s Tribunal, at a session in Paris in 1984, decided that there is no doubt regarding the reality of the physical acts constituting the genocide. The facts are clearly proven by the full and unequivocal evidence submitted to the Tribunal that the Young Turk government was guilty of this crime not subject to statutory limitations and that 'The Armenian genocide is also an 'international crime' for which the Turkish state must assume full responsibility, without using the pretext of any discontinuity in the existence of the state to elude that responsibility…”. Turkey refused to participate and of course refused the verdict.

Then in 2002 during the proceedings of the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) at the instigation of one of the Turkish members, former ambassador Gunduz Aktan, an independent legal opinion was sought from the International Center for Transitional Justice seeking an objective and independent legal analysis regarding the applicability of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to the events in question. The ICTL opinion was essentially that the Genocide Convention could not apply retroactively (i.e. to events prior to 1951) but that the events in question would fall within the definition of genocide as: ”.. viewed collectively, can thus be said to include all of the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the Convention, and legal scholars as well as historians, politicians, journalists and other people would be justified in continuing to so describe them”. http://www.genocidewatch.org/TurkeyArmeniaREPORTOFTHETARC.htm

One interesting area to watch is the issue of personal claims involving insurance, property etc. There has already been successful proceedings brought against insurers with respect to life insurance policies purchased by Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. The next step is likely to involve property claims brought by the descendants of those who lost their property at the time and the Ottoman property registers will be fascinating in this regard.”

Now, let’s look at the details. “This case involves the extermination of a group of its own citizens by the Ottoman Empire, a state which no longer exists. Of course there was no Armenian state at the time. So it would be difficult to see the ICJ taking the case” ---- This is correct because this is not the case that the ICJ can consider, like you said, but it's also not the case I would ask to bring in front of this court. Clearly, today there is a country called Turkey and there is a country called Armenia, both of which obviously have a dispute that just needs to be resolved. So, one case that could be brought in front of the Court is whether Turkey has the right to deny the incidents to be referred to as genocide, or whether Armenia has the right to accuse Turkey (including the early leaders of the Republic as well as the transfer of guilt to future generations) of denying a genocide. And that case should be admissible since dispute resolution between two existing countries is the main purpose of the ICJ. For a valid case it is just a matter of formulating the existing dispute between the existing countries. There has to be a way because not accepting this case would not serve the validity of the court one bit. Plus, the court would have nothing to lose if they consider it as an advisory opinion anyways.

Next, “The Permanent People’s Tribunal, at a session in Paris in 1984, decided that there is no doubt regarding the reality of the physical acts constituting the genocide. The facts are clearly proven by the full and unequivocal evidence submitted to the Tribunal that the Young Turk government was guilty of this crime not subject to statutory limitations and that 'The Armenian genocide is also an 'international crime' for which the Turkish state must assume full responsibility, without using the pretext of any discontinuity in the existence of the state to elude that responsibility…'.Turkey refused to participate and of course refused the verdict.”

All right, let’s look at this Permanent People’s Tribunal (PPT). I stumbled upon the Charter of the PPT and here are some very interesting facts about it that are just begging to be scrutinized. It says “In the tradition of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, the PPT is an international public opinion tribunal which identifies and publicises the systematic violation of fundamental rights, particularly in those cases where national and international law fail to protect people's rights.”… A public opinion tribunal? I know you’re asking the same question as I am right now. So what this tribunal does is it looks at what the majority public opinion is and then agrees with it in form of a court judgment. It considers whatever evidence is in public circulation most, the ones from the accuser versus the accused, and then agrees with whichever evidence outweighs the other, very much unlike the Nuremberg Tribunals. This is brilliant. Yep, that definitely sounds like a valid organization to consider our case.

The case brought in front of this “court” had this to say amongst confirming the allegations against Turkey in “The Evidence” section (Article III.): “The Tribunal considers that the facts presented above are established on the basis of substantial and concordant evidence.” Really? Then two sentences later, it starts listing the evidence at hand by starting with the following: “Not counting the Ottoman archives-which are inaccessible-the main documents are as follows…” So, apparently this “court” did not think that to make a judgment in this case it is necessary to consider the main evidence from the actual accused country at all. They went ahead without it. Am I the only one who sees the problem with this judgment here? This judgment is flat-out ridiculous because there is nothing else I can do besides laugh at it. I am willing to bet money that if someone were to take this verdict to an actual court with actual judges whose job it is to protect the law and its principles of due process, this judgment would be thrown out the window faster than you can say “genocide”.

Back to the Charter of the PPT. So, who are these so-called judges sitting on the benches of this court? Well, they apparently “include eminent persons whose reputations must be above reproach in art, culture, science, and politics, including a number of Nobel Prize winners.” Note that these are not actual court judges with a full legal understanding of established laws, they are the people’s judges from amongst the populace, and even Puff Daddy could become a judge on this "court."

Next, it then states “Accused parties are invited to present their case at the hearings, and if they do not attend, the PPT appoints legal counsel to represent their case in a rigorous manner.” Rigorous really? No way. I don’t believe it. After choosing the judges from the population, and not considering the evidence from the accused party, an appointed legal counsel is going to try to defend the accused. Wow, that just brings tears to my eyes. Then on top of it all, this Charter has the audacity to state that “The PPT applies principles of international law…”... Well then there you have it folks. This is all supposed to be international law principles. Beautiful.

Lawyerman: “Turkey refused to participate and of course refused the verdict.” …. Duuuuuuh?!?!?!.... I’m sorry to be so blunt with this, but here is a question I’m really looking forward to hear your answer on. Lawyerman, since your name implies that you are a lawyer, can you say that the principles of law and due process have been completely upheld with this judgment? And if not, does the judgment still stand then?

Next, you mentioned the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC). In my opinion, this is a perfect example why this whole case absolutely needs to go in front of the ICJ as soon as possible. The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) is not a United Nations body, and hence, definitely less in importance to me, and probably others, than the International Court of Justice who is a full-fledged organ. Secondly, although they rightfully recognized that the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is not applicable the ICTJ proclaiming it was genocide before having proven intent in a court of law after looking at official records is just plain stupid. Plus, in 2002 the Turkish archives weren’t even open because Erdogan’s government still was in its infancy with their agenda, so to even try to get an “objective” and accurate conclusion out of anything that’s out there is almost futile.

So, lawyerman (and company), my bottom line on this still stands. Can anyone of you gentlemen defend that international law, due process of the accused, and justice is done without, at least, considering evidence from the accused? That’s the real question in our debate…

I cannot imagine a better way and time to settle this dispute between us once and for all of humanity and future generations. The archives are open and the Turkish government is cooperating more than ever before, so what's keeping this from moving forward?

Go Spitzer!!! Go Spitzer!!!...

Yes, I think Eliot Spitzer is the man. Washington, beware!!! I really hope that Spitzer continues the way he was before he became governor of NY. Fearless, aggressive, and unforgiving....

      

Why is he so good? Here is what he plans on doing as a governor:

--  to overhaul almost every corner of the state’s operations and policies
--  to guarantee health insurance for all children in the state
--  to publicly finance state elections, rein in spending and draft a constitutional amendment to overhaul the state’s courts
--  to broadly overhaul the state’s ethics and lobbying rules (finally!!!!!!)
--  to make pre-kindergarten available to all four-year-olds by the end of his four-year term
--  to overhaul the public authorities that control most of the state’s debt
--  to make New York more palatable to business by changing the state’s approach to policies, like workers’ compensation

Furthermore, the New York Times reports that:

Despite the breadth of his remarks Mr. Spitzer placed special emphasis on political and campaign finance reform, saying it was necessary to regain the confidence of voters.

To achieve this, he proposed “dramatically” lower limits on campaign contributions and an eventual move to full public financing of campaigns. “By cutting off the demand for private money, we will cut off the special-interest influence that comes with it,” he said.

In addition, he said he will propose legislation that establishes “an independent, non-partisan redistricting commission” to draw the boundaries of legislative districts. “Until this happens, I will veto any proposal that reflects partisan gerrymandering,” he said.

Mr. Spitzer said that by the end of the month he will submit a budget that will contain the “first installment” of a three-year, $6 billion property tax cut focused on middle-class homeowners “whose property taxes are rising too fast for their incomes to catch up.”

Now, if this doesn't sound like a champion of the people I don't know who would. There is no doubt in my mind that Eliot Spitzer is the only one capable of real reform. Cross your fingers that other politicians learn something.