Gagrule.net

Gagrule.net News, Views, Interviews worldwide

Russian S300 anti-aircraft missiles ‘delivered to Syria’

By

Syria has already received the first shipment of an advanced Russian air defence system, Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad is reported to have said in a Lebanese TV interview.

3-2Russia vowed to go ahead with sending the weapons soon after an EU decision not to renew an arms embargo on Syria, BBC reports.

“Syria has received the first shipment of Russian anti-aircraft S-300 rockets,” Al Manar quoted Mr Assad as saying in an interview due to be broadcast later on Thursday.

“The rest of the shipment will arrive soon.”
The S-300 is a highly capable surface-to-air missile system that, as well as targeting aircraft, also has the capacity to engage ballistic missiles.

The delivery of such missiles raises fears of further tension with Israel as Syria has said it will respond directly if Israel launches any further air attacks on its territory.

Some analysts have characterised the possible use of the missiles as a “game-changer” in the Syrian conflict.
It is also feared that the missiles could endanger efforts to convene a peace conference on Syria in Geneva in June.
Syrian Foreign Minister, Walid Muallem, said on Wednesday that Syria’s armed forces were back on the offensive.
“Our armed forces have regained the momentum,” he told the Lebanese media.

Armenian News – Tert.am

Turkey flies high in world bribery list

By

Turkey ranks among the worst 10 countries in which bribery is commonly used to win contracts, according to an Ernst&Young survey conducted with C-level executives in 36 countries, The Hurriyet Daily News reports.

3-1Some 39 percent of Turkish respondents to the survey think resorting to bribery is necessary to win the tenders in their sector, while 55 percent believe corruption is “widespread” across all businesses.

The gap between the two figures reveals the respondents’ tendency to think bribery is more common in the overall economy than in their own sectors.

“Despite companies knowing the corruption risks in the business world, they don’t acknowledge the risks in their own sectors,” Ernst&Young Turkey Audit Services Department Head Dilek Çilingir Köstem said in a statement. “In order to be able to move against corruption, executives should admit the risks to be able to manage them.”

Concerning “overall” corruption perception, Turkey ranks lower than 11 European countries in the list.

Slovenian bosses have the least faith in the transparency of business in their country, with 96 percent of them telling Ernst&Young surveyors that bribery and corruption commonly took place there.

As usual, northern European countries have the lowest percentages of respondents who think bribery is widespread in their country.

The survey also exposes perceptions over how companies report their true financial performances, by asking: “How often do companies report their financial performance to be better than it is?” The Turkish respondents who said “yes” to the question are reported at 45 percent in the survey results, higher than the 38 percent average.

Armenian News – Tert.am

BBC Reports On Aliyev’s Crackdown of Dissidents

By

BAKU—“I try not to cry so that I can be strong for my son,” mathematics teacher Sakina Gurbanova tells BBC’s Damien McGuinness, struggling to hold back the tears, as she shows me a picture of her son.

A handsome, smiling 27-year-old law graduate, Zaur was pulled off the street by plain-clothed policemen on 1 April. Since then he has been in jail awaiting trial, accused of possessing arms.

But his mother says their home was never searched for weapons and that he is being punished for criticising the government.

According to human rights groups, the charges are trumped up – an authoritarian government’s attempt to stamp out any Arab Spring-style uprising, they say. And now, faced with presidential elections in October, the authorities are accused of clamping down even more heavily.

New regulations mean that participants in anti-government demonstrations in the city centre face heavy fines worth more than the yearly earning of many Azeris. And tough new libel laws are criminalizing criticism online.

Read the entire BBC report by Damien McGuinness.

Law Expert Says Saddam’s Trial Was Illegal

By

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region – The trial of deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein contravened international law because it was carried out under laws put into place by the occupying US forces, according to an expert in international criminal law.
“According to international law the trial was illegal,” said Saeed Pirmurad, explaining that the court was established after the invasion by Paul Bremer, the administrator of the so-called Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA).

Sadam HussinAccording to the Geneva Convention and The Hague agreement, said Pirmurad, an  invader cannot change or draft new laws.
“Article 64 of the Geneva Convention says that the penal laws of the occupied territory shall remain in force,” except if they pose a security threat,” he said.
In 2005, one year before Saddam was convicted and hanged for his crimes, the Iraqi government drafted a new penal system, nullifying a previous version drawn up under American supervision. But the new law was not in force during the trial of Saddam or his top officials, said Pirmurad.
“If the law had nullified all the actions resulting from the law of the coalition forces, then the court would have been legal,” he said. “But the law was never approved by the presidency of Iraq.”

Pirmurad, who has a bachelor’s degree in law from Baghdad University and a degree in international law from Germany, said that neither the first Kurdish judge, Rizgar Amin, nor the subsequent others who took his place, had any knowledge of international criminal law.
“Unfortunately, professors and teachers are not very well familiar with the details of international criminal law in Iraq,” he said, adding that Iraq is not a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC), whose membership is voluntary.
Pirmurad has no doubts that the Iraqi dictator committed crimes against humanity during his 30-year rule, but added that political parties had interfered in the legal system.
“The judges in Saddam’s trial were not professional. I have prepared a study for the European Union evaluating judges’ performance in Iraq and the findings are shocking,” he said.
“If Iraq was a member of the ICC, American military forces as well as Iraqi politicians involved in the sectarian war would have been prosecuted,” according to Pirmurad.
He said that the ICC would have collected more evidence of Saddam’s crimes, and as a result run a fairer and more appropriate trial.

Iraq’s supreme court has recognized crimes against the Kurds by the former Iraqi regime – known as the Anfal Campaign — as genocide.
But in Pirmurad’s opinion it is because of Iraq’s isolation from the international criminal court circle that the world has not yet recognized the crimes – which include the March 1988 killing of 5,000 innocent Kurds in the town of Halabja — as genocide.
Pirmurad said that the Kurds would have benefited more from Saddam’s trial, had international judges been involved in the process.

“Had the decision been made by an international court; the families of the victims of Anfal would have been compensated,” he said.  “But this was not possible as Iraq is not a member of the ICC,” he concluded.

The Turkish “peace process”: suspicious, unspecific, and frail talks and steps 25.5.2013

By

By Shakhawan Shorsh

May 25, 2012

Many countries in the region and around the world welcomed the peace process between the Turkish government and the Kurds, especially after the release of the letter written by Abdulla Ocalan, the jailed Kurdish leader of the Kurdistan Worker Party (PKK).

turkey4697Ocalan’s message is quite broad and lacks a tangible and concrete political proposal. We should not forget that since Ocalan is not a free man, we must read his messages very cautiously. However, the key message of Ocalan’s letter is that the armed conflict can be resolved through dialogue and negotiations between Turks and Kurds. This message can be used for different aims. If Turkey desires a trustworthy solution and accepts the political rights of the Kurds, then this message can result in a reliable solution to the conflict between the Turkish state and the Kurds. In other words, Turkey must understand and accept that there is a huge Kurdish minority within their own territory that has the rights of recognition and self-determination. On the other hand, the message can also be used for a short-term solution to the conflict if the Turkish state continues to ignore the Kurd’s political rights and focuses instead on relatively insignificant individual rights and cultural rights.

If we look at the speeches of the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayip Erdogan, we find that there is not any real admission and recognition of the Kurdish people’s rights. Rather, his speeches focus on the withdrawal of the PKK partisans and the end of the armed conflict; these speeches also focus on half-hearted steps toward ensuring more cultural rights for the Kurds. For instance, according to Erdogan, the only official language of the state is Turkish. Erdogan has said that if someone would like to learn Kurdish,www.ekurd.net they can go to a Kurdish private school and learn Kurdish. According to Erdogan, there is only one nation and one language in Turkey. There is not a Kurdish issue and an oppressed Kurdish minority does not exist in Turkey. Erdogan’s messages can adjust immigrants or small minority ethnic people which number is insignificant. Once we know that the Kurds number 25 million people, Erdogan’s messages seem like little more like a sort of denial and political maneuver to avoid facing the Kurdish problem.


Although Turkish leaders emphasize the importance of the withdrawal of the PKK partisans from Turkey, we cannot see any clear steps toward Turkey officially recognizing Kurdish rights. As PKK members are Kurds that belong to Turkish Kurdistan, the relevant question here is as follows: why should they leave their own homeland? During many negotiations between Iraqi Kurds and the Iraqi Arab regimes in the past 60 years, the withdrawal of Kurdish partisans was never a pre-condition or a demand in the negotiations.

On the other hand, using a jailed leader to lead the secret negotiations raises several questions. Ocalan cannot lead a negotiation in the so-called peace process because he is not a free man. He is no doubt affected by the harsh prison conditions and by the psychological torture and pressure he is experiencing at the hands of Turkish authorities. There is a real risk for Turkey to take advantage of him however it sees fit. Turkey could take real steps toward peace by giving amnesty to all PKK members and engaging the Kurdish leaders (including PKK leaders) in an open process of peace talks. If Turkey has a genuine intention to establish the constitutional recognition and acceptance of Kurdish rights, then it does not need to ask PKK to withdraw or cease the armed struggle. PKK partisans will automatically cease using force when the Kurdish people are free to enjoy their political rights.

While there are secret talks in the name of the peace process and the PKK has started to withdraw from Turkish Kurdistan, ordinary Kurds are worried about their political future and the outcome of the secret talks. It is not clear what Turkey’s actual intentions are underlying the so-called peace process. There is no clear roadmap concerning the solution of the Kurdish issue. Neither Ocalan nor the Turkish government has mentioned any of the known options (options that have been used in other countries) concerning state-minority conflicts.

There is a great doubt regarding the existence of a “peace process” that aims to solve the Kurdish-Turkish problem. The Kurdish question cannot be solved merely by Turkey accepting some of the Kurd’s cultural rights or recognizing the Kurdish language. There should be no need to negotiate cultural rights to begin with as Turkey should accept the cultural rights of its minorities without question. Cultural rights are one of the most basic rights in a free democratic country. Does Turkey not claim to be a free democracy?

The Kurdish issue in Turkey requires concrete political options that can lead to Kurdish self-rule in Kurdish territory and active Kurdish participation in the Turkish central government based on the principles of democracy and minority rights. Some manner of self-rule and self-determination with proportional representation and a power-sharing system (or a federal system) with Kurdish veto rights can lead to a long-term solution and stability in the region. Kurds make up a huge minority in Turkey; therefore, a reliable solution must meet the aspirations of the Kurds. In other words, Kurds have the right to self-rule and self-determination. If Turkey wants to experience a long-term peace with the Kurds inside Turkey, the Turkish government must grant full political rights to the Kurds.

Shakhawan Shorash, a freelance writer from Iraqi Kurdistan and regular contributing writer for Ekurd.net, you can visit Shorsh’s website at: www.kadirshorsh.com

The World from Here: Kurds, Jews and a new Mideast

By

By DAN DIKER, HAROLD RHODE
05/28/2013 21:41
Kurdish suffering under Arab, Turkish and Iranian rule infuses them with a natural affinity for Jews and Israel. Syria’s fragmentation along religious and ethnic lines ShowImageexposes the apparent rupture of what has been known as the Arab Muslim Middle East.

Sunni imperial rule – under the guise of what has been known as pan Arabism – may now be broken beyond repair. The Arab “sacred cow” – the so-called “Zionist invasion and occupation of Palestine” – has failed to unify the Arab world and may now have “two hoofs” in the slaughter house.

While regional realignments may result in a Middle East more amenable to Israel, dangers are still proliferating.

Dore Gold’s prescient analysis, “The Demise of the Middle East’s Borders” (Israel Hayom, May 25) illustrates the geographic and cartographic uncertainty toward which the region appears to be heading.

The often violent competition for power and control among Islamic groups in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, among other states, that house Sunnis and Shi’ites, Alawites, Kurds, Druse, Christians and others continue to cut through and across the random boundaries’ that were established by the British and French empires as a result of the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916.

Mashari al-Zaydi, of the London-based Saudi daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat noted in his May 25 column that, “There is great danger in what is happening in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and may soon also happen on Turkey’s southern border….Egypt and North Africa, in a different way – are about to enter a terrifying era of religious terrorism, sectarian war and civil strife that will harm everyone.”

What stands behind most of the violence in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and other areas is Arab Sunni fundamentalism in its various forms – whether Salafi, Wahhabi, or Muslim Brotherhood. All forms of radical Islam threaten the existence of the Alawites, Kurds, Lebanese Shi’ites, Christians, and other members of the non-Sunni ethnic and religious groups, including non-fundamentalist Sunnis.

This Arab Muslim “zero-sum game” culture defines their view of Kurds and other minorities, including Israel. Just as the Arab Sunni Muslims in general relentlessly “hunt” Israel, they would only accept a permanent solution in the Middle East by which they conquer and control the region, and – according to classical Islamic dogma – eventually the entire world.

But tectonic shifts triggered by the Islamic revolutions over the past few years may succeed in liberating the region from Sunni Arab imperialism and create a better future for the region’s minorities. The Kurds, while overwhelmingly Sunni, see the Muslim Brotherhood and the Wahhabis by and large as Arab imperialists trying to force them to abandon their Kurdish identity and become Arabs – probably the reason most Kurds loathe the Muslim Brotherhood.

For the Brotherhood, being Sunni is not enough. In their view, only Arabs can be true Muslims. Non-Arabs must abandon their languages and cultures and adopt an Arab identity – the same attitude which explains how most of the Middle East became Arab and Muslim during the first century of Islam.

The shifts are important to the Kurdish future. The Kurdish self-governing authority in Northern Iraq, Syria’s unraveling into geographical units comprised of Alawites, Kurds, Arab Sunnis and other ethnic groups, and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s recent outreach to Turkey’s Kurds could result in a more pluralistic governing structure for a new Middle East whose centers of power are more dispersed In this context, the legitimacy and success of the Kurdish national project across the region could blaze a new path for other minorities. It could also help Israel.

For example, Iraqi Kurdistan’s success as an autonomous area or a potentially independent state may influence a process of self-determination for other sects, tribes, ethnic and religious groups.

Shared challenges make Kurds and the Jewish state good potential allies. Like Jews, the Kurdish people have lived under foreign domination for millennia.

Kurdish suffering under Arab, Turkish and Iranian rule infuses them with a natural affinity for Jews and Israel.

There are an estimated 35 to 45 million Kurds in the Middle East, many of whom have been secretly sympathetic to Israel for years and have even been labeled “Zionist agents” in Iraq, Syria and Iran.

The addition of millions of potential Kurdish friends, for micro-sized Israel with a mere eight million inhabitants, could enhance the Jewish state’s security and regional position. While Jews were always considered politically and socially inferior in the Arab Middle East, Kurds generally did not discriminate against Jews, nor have they demonized Israel. In short, geography, history and destiny create natural affinities and interests between Kurds and Israelis.

Strategically, a large Kurdish state or autonomous area combining Northern Iraq and Syria and the millions of Turkish Kurds – who could be attracted to such independence in the heart of the Middle East could serve various important roles for Israel.

Syria’s disintegration, then, may have a silver lining. The northern part of the country could become a Kurdish federal autonomous area – either within a loosely federated national entity or possibly even as an independent Kurdish state, which appears to be the direction for Iraqi Kurdistan.

Iraqi Kurds, who have provided political counsel to their Syrian brethren, could also form an alliance with Syria’s Arabized Kurds and Alawites west of Aleppo, that lies close to the Mediterranean Sea, and is an important strategic asset. Alawites, as fellow non-Sunni Arabs, may well be open to new alliances as well.

These new alliances could be a major step towards the establishment of a physically strong and economically stable Syrian Kurdistan that together with Iraqi Kurdistan could become – at least quietly if not overtly – Israel’s first regional ally since the reestablishment of the Jewish state in 1948.

Dan Diker is a Foreign Policy Fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, an Adjunct Fellow of the Washington DCbased Hudson Institute and served as Secretary General of the World Jewish Congress from 2010 to 2013.

Dr. Harold Rhode is a Middle East specialist who served in the US Department of Defense from 1982 to 2010. He is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute in New York.

Syria’s fighters: An interview with Jabhat al-Nusra

By

We present an interview of a young fighter from Jabhat al-Nusra, an extremist Sunni group in Syria affiliated with al-Qaeda in Iraq, with Economist.com. A former teacher and then tiler, he is dressed in well-ironed black trousers, a white shirt and a black turban. A gun rests on his lap. He is accompanied by an older man, who appears to be g_image-Syriajudging him on his answers. Both are Syrian and ask not to be named because they do not have permission to speak to the press.

– How has Jabhat al-Nusra become so powerful?

– The reason is the weakening of the other groups. Jabhat al-Nusra gets the advantage because of our ideology. We are not just rebels; we are doing something we believe in. We are not just fighting against tyranny; Bashar Assad is only part of our fight. The other groups are only a reaction to the regime, whereas we are fighting for a vision.

– What is that vision?

– We are fighting to apply what Allah said to the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. We are fighting so people don’t look to other people but only to Allah. We don’t believe in complete freedom: it is restricted by Allah’s laws. Allah created us and he knows what is best for us.

– What future do you see for Syria—or do you even see a Syria in the future?

– We want the future that Islam commands. Not a country with borders but an umma [worldwide Islamic community of believers] of all the Muslim people. All Muslims should be united.

– Syria has long been known for its sectarian diversity. How do you view the other sects?

– The other sects are protected by the Islamic state. Muhammad, peace be upon him, had a Jewish neighbour, for example, and he was always good to him. But the power and authority must be with the believers [Sunnis], not the unbelievers.

– What about other Sunnis who are more moderate than you?

– We will apply sharia law to them.

– What about Alawites?

– Allah knows what will happen to them. There is a difference between the basic kuffar [infidels] and those who converted from Islam. If the latter, we must punish them. Alawites are included. Even Sunnis who want democracy are kuffar as are all Shia. It’s not about who is loyal and who isn’t to the regime; it’s about their religion. Sharia says there can be no punishment of the innocent and there must be punishment of the bad; that’s what we follow.

– Did you lose or gain fighters following the announcement that you are linked to al-Qaeda in Iraq?

– We’re with anything that represents real Islam, whether al-Qaeda or otherwise. If there is a better group, we’ll go with them instead. The effect of the announcement is that now we know our friends and our enemies. The good people will come to our side and the bad people will leave.

– Many, maybe most, Syrians do not share your views. Do you care?

– It would be great if the Syrians were with us but the kuffar are not important. Abraham and Sarah were facing all the infidels, for example, but they were doing the right thing. The number with us doesn’t matter.

– Which other rebel groups do you see as acceptable? Ahrar al-Sham, another Salafist group, criticised your links to al-Qaeda.

– I think only 5% of the battalions are against the Islamic vision. Ahrar al-Sham are a mixture of Islamists and people who like Allah so we are not sure about their vision. We are very clear as the Prophet, peace be upon him, made it very clear to us. Other groups have good beliefs but we are the only committed ones.

– Will the differences lead to clashes, as have happened in some places? And how would you react if Western powers decide to arm other rebel groups?

– If the arms reach people who will fight Assad and Hizbullah that’s okay. If they use them against us, then that’s a problem. We’ll avoid fighting [other groups] if we can. The West wants to ruin Syria.

– How hard is it to become a member of Jabhat al-Nusra?

– We examine those who want to join. First you must be loyal to the idea of Jabhat al-Nusra. Second, you must get a recommendation [from someone in the organisation]. Third, you go to a camp to be educated and practice, and take the oath of loyalty to the emir [the group’s leader].

– Do you plan to carry out operations against the West in the future?

– There is no permanent friendship and no permanent enemy. We’ll do whatever is in the interest of Muslims. The first duty on us is to fight the kuffar among us here in the occupied Muslim lands. The next duty will be decided later.

– Do you have contact with the Syrian regime?

– If it is in the interest of the Muslims, such as for gas or water, then we have no problem. These matters are in the hands of the emir.

– Your presence helps the regime which has long tried to portray the opposition as extremist. What do you think about that?

– The regime maybe benefits but in the end we’ll show all humans, Syrian and otherwise, the way, and true Islam.

– What are your views of women?

– The woman in Islam has a special role. She is respected as a wife, a sister, a mother, a daughter. She is a jewel we should preserve and look after. In the West they gave women freedom but they use them and don’t respect them. The woman is to use in adverts. We don’t have an issue with the woman working according to her mind and body. But not jobs that humiliate. Jewellery is okay on women, but not on men, and not too much. Make up should be just for your husband. You can wear coloured clothes and show your face. [The older man disagrees, saying women should cover their face and hands.]

– Shouldn’t men also cover up to avoid women looking at other people’s husbands?

– Our women ask the same question. Some men can’t control themselves and the woman is the source. It’s easier to prevent abuse. The men’s role is to go out and work. Man’s brain is bigger than the woman’s—that’s scientifically proven. Men’s brains have different areas for speaking and thinking, but women’s don’t which is why women they say what they think.

– What if your interpretation of the Koran is wrong?

– There are two types of verse. Firstly ones that are stable and unchanging, such as head-covering. Secondly ones on which people can differ, such as the rule demanding ablution after touching a woman. Does that mean touching her skin or intercourse? Opinions can differ.

– Do you consider any Islamists too radical, like the Taliban, for example?

– There are people committed to Islam and then those far from it. No one committed is too radical. We haven’t met anyone from the Taliban but they seem good Muslims because they defended their religion and the occupation, they kicked out the enemy and applied sharia.

– Did you study religion?

– I was poor but I read the Bible, and lots of Jewish and Islamic books. My head and heart told me to accept the Koran and the Sunna [accompanying religious texts]. Islam is different because it has a complete view of life, society, politics, economics—it is a complete system.

– We hear there is a split inside Jabhat al-Nusra about your links to al-Qaeda. Do you disagree about that or other matters?

– There are small differences, but when we give loyalty, we obey.

 

Source: Panorama.am

Plaintiffs file devastating response to US Government’s anti-Armenian brief

By

Lawyers on behalf of Armenian plaintiffs responded last week to the U.S. Government’s brief which had urged the Supreme Court not to review a Federal Appeals Court decision striking down a California law extending the statute of limitations on Armenian Genocide-era insurance claims.

The Solicitor General, on behalf of the U.S. government, had filed a politically-motivated and flawed brief that completely misrepresented the insurance case and raised Harot Sasonianunwarranted questions about the legality of the California law.

In his brief on the plaintiffs’ behalf, Igor Timofeyev argues that the California statute (Section 354.4) does not violate any established federal policy and should therefore not be preempted. He asserts that California has the right to regulate the obligations of insurance companies, a traditional sphere of state competence and jurisdiction.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer accuses the US government of advancing “an unprecedented theory of federal affairs preemption: All claims arising out of international incidents are committed exclusively to the federal competence, even when these claims involve private actors and private contracts, and the federal government has taken no action to resolve them.”

Timofeyev qualifies the U.S. government’s position as “revolutionary” and “antithetical to the respect due to the states as separate sovereigns.” He then summarizes his counter-arguments in six points:

1) “To justify the Ninth Circuit’s aberrant decision, the Government articulates a foreign affairs field preemption theory of unprecedented breadth.” Timofeyev asserts: “Petitioners’ claims are against a private [German insurance] company, not against a foreign sovereign. Nor are these claims integral to ‘a major foreign policy dispute’ between the U.S. and a foreign nation.” The State of California, being “home to the overwhelming majority of Armenian-Americans,” has “a legitimate interest in securing compensation for its injured residents, irrespective of whether the underlying injury occurred in-state or abroad.”

2) “The court of appeals committed a fundamental error: It adjudged illegitimate a state’s well-established interests in regulating insurance, setting the statute of limitations for state-law claims, and ensuring compensation for its injured residents simply because the events giving rise to these claims occurred overseas. That is not the law.”

3) Countering the Government’s contention that Section 354.4 is based on “a distinct political point of view on a specific matter of foreign policy… one that decries the actions of the Ottoman Empire,” Timofeyev reminds the court that Pres. Obama himself acknowledges that the Ottoman mass murders were “one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century.” Furthermore, the President commended states for commemorating “the massacre [of Armenians] in the final days of the Ottoman Empire.” Timofeyev also asserts that “the President’s repeated praise for states’ commemorative efforts is fundamentally inconsistent with the Government’s claim that the foreign affairs doctrine automatically preempts any state action expressing a ‘point of view’ on this issue.”

4) “The Government tries to bootstrap its preemption argument by invoking the U.S. efforts to negotiate a resolution of World War I era claims…. The Government concedes that Section 354.4 ‘does not conflict’ with any of these diplomatic efforts. Indeed, the Government acknowledges that ‘the United States did not…attempt to negotiate the resolution of claims by Armenians who were injured by the Ottoman Empire during that period.’” In fact, one of the reasons why the US Senate refused to ratify the American Treaty of Lausanne was “the absence of provisions for the Armenian refugees and exiles from the Ottoman Empire.”

5) The Government seems alarmed that Section 354.4 “imposes the politically charged label of ‘genocide’” on Turkey, which “could provoke Turkey’s ire. But fear of ‘upsetting foreign powers…even when the Federal Government desperately wants to avoid upsetting foreign powers’ is not a legitimate reason to preempt traditional state activity…. The Government cannot explain why, if the term ‘Armenian Genocide’ employed by Section 354.4 would have an adverse effect on foreign affairs, the same would not hold equally for laws and resolutions adopted by about forty states that expressly recognize the Armenian Genocide by name. Nor does the Government explain why a statute ‘creating judicially enforceable rights’ is more offensive to Turkey than state laws including the Armenian Genocide as part of mandatory school curricula.”

6) “The Ninth Circuit’s aberrant decision is generating confusion among lower courts.”

Timofeyev rightly concludes his brief by urging the Supreme Court to “review and correct the Ninth Circuit’s decision before it causes greater mischief.”
Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

Turkish government, opposition engage in war of Reyhanlı words

By

The prime minister and the main opposition leader of Turkey have hurled severe charges against each other over their approach and alleged possible role in twin-bomb attacks which have so far killed 52 people, Hurriyet Daily News reported.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan overtly accused the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) of provoking people, while remaining vague about a game 333being played with sectarianism initiated by forces outside Turkey.

CHP leader Kemal Kilichdaroglu harshly criticized the government for the alleged failure to act on time concerning the attacks in Reyhanli, the town on the Syrian border which was hit by two car bombings on May 11. This failure took place despite intelligence, Kilichdaroglu said, quoting the exact date of the intelligence submitted by the National Intelligence Organization (MİT).

Speaking at a parliamentary group meeting of his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), Erdoğan argued that certain forces were attempting to play a dangerous game in Hatay.

“So much so that this game is being planned outside Turkey. With its extensions inside Turkey, it is being attempted by deceiving the citizens of the Republic of Turkey. Here, a political sectarianism is being created. This is a very dangerous game,” Erdoğan said.

He accused the opposition, primarily the CHP, of provoking Hatay and Turkey before anything was clear after the Reyhanlı incident. He noted that they knew that “very severe and very dangerous attempts for provocation” were taking place in the region and that they were closely monitoring it.

“Activities at the level of treason by some dark people in disguise as journalists, traders, and businessman have been detected in Hatay and they are being arrested and submitted to the judiciary. Unfortunately, contacts between these people and some deputies inside the CHP have been confirmed with evidence and documents. For example, the Hatay representative of a newspaper close to the CHP has been arrested with quite obvious evidence of espionage. In rallies, demonstrations in Hatay and its towns, the effects of these structures with roots on the outside [of Turkey] have been detected, especially in attempts of attacks against refugees,” Erdoğan said.

For his part, Kılıçdaroğlu questioned the details about the attack. “When was the last time that MİT warned the officials?” he asked, and continued by saying, “Should I give the date? May 9, 2013. I am saying the date as well. I am asking you questions you cannot overcome. When I tell you ‘You are the murderer of those 52 people’, there are things I know.”

Turkey blamed Syria for the bombings, with the government officials.

“The intelligence organization works to determine the vehicles, it has tracked them since April, it announces it to the concerned authorities; and they [government] are waiting. An explosion happens, 52 people lose their lives. Who is responsible: the CHP,” Kılıçdaroğlu said bitterly.

“MİT is not tied to any ministry. It is directly tied to you. It is giving you information. Now you get up [and say] ‘There is a lack of coordination among intelligence organizations,’” he said, adding that they knew that the intelligence organizations had made the last warning on the phone. Kılıçdaroğlu argued that the intelligence had done its part, yet the government failed to perform its duty.

Kilichdaroglu further accused the government of igniting the conflict in Syria, saying, “They are sending these militants to Syria saying ‘Go kill your brothers.’ They are handing them arms and putting money in their pockets.”

“I wonder, how did those vehicles come to Turkey from Syria?” Kılıçdaroğlu asked, arguing that the Syrian border had been left without surveillance. He further criticized the lack of border control saying “How come there are no security cameras? Because they are training the militants of the terrorist organization.”

He said if there were security cameras, such training would be detected and the removal of cameras was a form of logistic support.

Armenian News – Tert.am

Lessons from the First Republic



By

BY MARIA TITIZIAN

After centuries of being stateless, the First Republic of Armenia, 1918-1920 was founded thanks to the perseverance, valor and heroism of the Armenian people and their leaders. These lands that we are blessed to walk upon are laden with the blood of those martyrs who fought courageous battles at Sardarabad, Bash Aparan and mariatitizian31-300x284Kharakiliseh. With their lives, they ensured the Armenian people their own place in the world.

This year marks the 95th anniversary of that short-lived First Republic but one which became the guarantor of our independence and freedom today.

My intention is not to provide a history lesson; I am nowhere near qualified to embark on such a discourse. What I do want to present here are some passages from Simon Vratsyan’s The Armenian Republic, which I have been reading. What sparked my desire to read it had nothing to do with this landmark anniversary and everything to do with improving my knowledge of our language and history. This endeavor coincided with the relentless verbal diarrhea of our current Minister of Education, Armen Ashotyan about the reasons for the collapse of the First Republic. He could learn some lessons from our history, which he claims to know so much about.

It is no surprise that when certain powers in Armenia want to discredit other political powers, they reference the capitulation of the First Republic of Armenia to the Soviets as an example failure and treason.

Without getting overly political, which I am consciously trying to avoid being these days, certain passages from Vratsyan’s work left an indelible impression and forced me to contemplate where we are today as a state and nation 95 years on.

To put these passages in their proper context, the following must be noted: the First Republic was founded following the Armenian Genocide, toward the end of the First World War as empires were crumbling and alliances were shifting. The Armenian Republic had to contend with a starving refugee population, one which had been violently thrust from its lands in Western Armenia; it had to create non-existent state structures from the ground up; it had to protect its fragile borders against encroaching invasion and provide food and shelter to its desolate citizens. It was also ardently progressive, it established the institutions of democracy, allowed women to vote and be elected to office, and it appointed a woman, Diana Abkar as its ambassador to Japan at a time when women in many Western countries did not have the right to vote.

Toward the end of its two year existence, the First Republic of Armenia, against all odds had been registering small successes. Simon Vratsyan who was the last Prime Minister of the First Republic writes:

“The year 1920, for all intents and purposes, began under successful conditions. There reigned a relative peace in domestic life and on the borders. The people in all areas of the country were occupied with productive activities. From top to bottom, from the parliament to the furthest village authority, everyone was absorbed with the awareness of their responsibilities: they were creating a State. And the State, day by day was flourishing and improving. Those who had seen Armenia one year earlier no longer recognized it – everything had changed so much from the train station to the appearance of the streets all the way to the consciousness of society. No longer did anyone doubt the future of Armenia; everyone was working to strengthen their foundation, to accelerate the reconstruction.” (The Armenian Republic)
Vratsyan goes on to explain in detail the process of building state structures and institutions including, the establishment of the first Congress of Armenian Cities, the creation of trade unions but most important of all, the establishment of a university.

On January 4, 1920 during the opening ceremonies of the first Congress of Armenian Cities, which included the cities of Yerevan, Alexandrapol (Gyumri), Kars, Nor Bayazet, Ashtarak, and Ghamarlu, Vratsyan recalls the importance that was accorded to cities in the process nation-building. He writes that A. Abeghayan, a representative of the ARF faction in parliament during the opening ceremonies said: “A people who was sentenced to death one year ago, today has the possibility to organize a congress on local autonomy.” (The Armenian Republic)

On January 26, 1920 the first session of Council of Trade Unions of Armenia was held in Yerevan with the participation of 38 representatives from 13 trade unions including cooperatives, pharmacists, public servants, banks, and workers from leather factories, print houses, bakeries, orphanages and others. A resolution was adopted at that session, which stated: “The first session of the union of all unions welcomes Armenian workers and the victory of their government, which is the first step of the victory for Armenian political rights. The council of the union of unions believes that the Armenian government will not allow the achieved freedom to serve the interests of any imperialistic state and it will navigate the Armenian state’s ship toward the well-being of all workers…” (The Armenian Republic)
On May 16, 1919 the Armenian government passed a decision regarding the creation of a university. This became a reality several months later with the opening of the first branch in Alexandrapol on January 31, 1920. The school had one faculty, History and Linguistics with 262 students and 32 lecturers. Many high ranking guests and foreign dignitaries participated in the opening ceremonies including Speaker of the Parliament Avedis Aharonian, Prime Minister Alexander Khatisian, and Minister of Public Education Nikol Aghbalian who said: “This torch that we are lighting today on the Armenian plateau, will never go out and will illuminate all of Asia.” (The Armenian Republic)

Nikol Aghbalian was the Minister of Public Education from August 1919 to May 1920 and in the fall of 1919, had presented a program of school reconstruction in the country where parochial schools were to be converted to five year compulsory education. According to Aghbalian’s program, about 900 schools were to be constructed but the program was not implemented because most of the school buildings had to be converted into hospitals, orphanages and refugee houses. Despite all the problems 22 schools were opened in Yerevan, Dilijan, Kharakiliseh and Alexandrapol with 5162 students and 283 teachers. In the same time period, 1420 elementary schools were functioning in Armenia with 38,000 students and 1000 teachers, half of which had degrees in education.

Nikol Aghbalian was also instrumental in transporting the library of the Armenian Ethnographic Society from Tbilisi to Yerevan. Under his tenure, a Directorate of Antiquities was formed to preserve architectural heritage. Toros Toramanyan, known for his excavations in Ani was appointed as head of the directorate and as such was able to restart work in Zvartnots.
Aghbalian institutionalized a program that was approved by the government to eradicate illiteracy in adults and opened up a number of People’s Universities in Yerevan, Dilijan, Ijevan, Vanadzor and Gyumri open to any person of any age, race or sex.

At the same time, he sent a message to Armenians in the Diaspora to collect ancient manuscripts and historical items spread around the world. On December 26, 1919 he had declared the Armenian language as the official language of the Republic of Armenia.
Nikol Aghbalian achieved all of this in less than one year as Minister of Public Education during the First Republic under excruciatingly difficult conditions with almost no resources almost a century ago.

The ARF leadership at the time, Aram Manougian, Alexander Khatisian, Avedis Aharonian, Hamo Ohanjanian, Garo Sassouni, Simon Vratsyan and countless others worked, lived and served by example and with a value system which we should all strive for. They were true leaders who understood the value and fragility of statehood.

Hamo Ohanjanian was the third Prime Minister of the First Republic; his son took part and was martyred in the Battle of Kharakiliseh. How many of our current ministers’ sons have served in the Third Armenian Republic’s Armed Forces? When Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the first Prime Minister of the First Republic, was going to travel to the United States to raise funds for the newly established Republic, he had to sell his coat and other personal belongings to secure funds for his passage there. How many of our regime’s leaders are willing to sell any of their belongings for the viability of our country?

Perhaps Mr. Ashotyan has the answers to these and many other questions.