Israel has moral duty to recognize Armenian genocide

April 30, 2014 By administrator

At the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, the message of condolence issued by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to the Armenian people on April 23, the eve of the 99th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, was closely examined. What will Israel do now? Will it continue to fence-sit on the issue of recognizing the disaster that befell the Armenian people, caught between taking a moral stand and avoiding angering the Turks? If Erdogan can afford to change the Turkish attitude toward this sensitive issue, perhaps it’s time for Israel to adopt a clearer and more decisive stance.

On the other hand, how will it look for the Israeli government to be dragged along in the wake of a Turkish leader who doesn’t miss a chance to lash out at it? How will the Foreign Ministry explain a decision to recognize the Armenian genocide, after arguing for years that one must examine this sensitive issue “through an open debate based on data and facts, and not on political decisions or declarations.” This is what Likud Minister Gilad Erdan said in a 2009 speech delivered at the Knesset, asking in the government’s name to remove from the agenda the issue of recognizing the Armenian genocide.

At that same debate, Erdan said, “Israel asks not to determine conventions as to what occurred, since these are … supporting the political position of one of the sides.” Is the slaughter of the Armenians in fact a political matter? Twenty-two years ago, the deputy foreign minister in the national unity government of the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and President Shimon Peres said, “There are things that go beyond politics, and there are things that go beyond diplomacy. Holocausts of nations are a clear case in point.” These comments were made in response to a question by then-Knesset member Yair Tzaban of the now-defunct Ratz Party. He was seeking the government’s reaction to reports that Israeli officials were cooperating with Jewish-American organizations to derail a congressional initiative to mark the commemoration of the Armenian genocide in the United States. That deputy foreign minister who answered the question on the part of the government was none other than current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Several months later, in April 1990, it turned out that for the Foreign Ministry, the genocide committed against the Armenian people was most certainly a diplomatic issue. Under pressure from the ministry, Israel’s public television station backed out of its plan to air Theodore Bogosian’s documentary “An Armenian Journey.” Following the uproar that ensued, the board of directors of the Israel Broadcasting Authority ordered that the film be screened. Representatives of the establishment appealed the decision and the film was shelved.

Despite pressure from successive Israeli governments, leftist politicians led by Tzaban and former Minister Yossi Sarid and a handful of right-wingers, among them Knesset members Benny Begin and Reuven Rivlin, refused to drop the matter. In 2011, Tzaban, this time as a private citizen, was invited to the Knesset to take part in a debate on the subject of the Armenian genocide, held by the Knesset’s Committee on Education.

“We are fighting with all our strength, justifiably so, against denial of the Holocaust, but we’re not fighting properly and not doing what needs to be done on the issue of denial of the Armenian genocide,” said the man who was formerly the minister of immigration and absorption. “We have interests; we’re not ignoring them, but we cannot do the opposite of what we have demanded that others do in our case.” In the 1940s, when we implored the world for help and didn’t get it, Tzaban said, supposedly good people told us, “You’re right, but we have interests; we have existential interests that prevent us from lending you a helping hand.”

Tzaban quoted the profound lines written in 1945 by poet Natan Alterman, in “Interests”:

“The hands of the ignorant and the wicked nurtured an illusion of an imaginary world, where each people were commanded to protect a group of interests, and to honor them with prayer, drink and food. Buildings and giant altars were erected to those interests (we will visit their ruins). In the 20th century, children were sacrificed for those interests. Empires bowed their heads, and eternal truths, bound in ropes, were sacrificed to those interests.”

The Marmara flotilla affair and the deterioration in Israel’s relations with Turkey since the humiliation of the Turkish ambassador in the office of former Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon changed the interests map: Turkey out, the Armenian genocide in.

In June 2012, Erdan returned to the speaker’s podium with a new position regarding the genocide. No neutrality this time, no fact-checking or other fig leaves for economic and defense-related interests. This time, the minister determined, “There’s a problem with turning the recognition into a political debate, and the issue should be looked at from the point of view of the value of human life.” Not only that, but, “As Jews and Israelis, we should have a special obligation to learn about human tragedies.” That same government representative who had previously asked to remove the subject from the Knesset agenda announced, “It would be fitting for the Knesset to discuss it in depth and if it deems it appropriate, to express recognition of the genocide.”

This time, he did not suggest examining the data and the disputed facts, saying, “There’s something of the ridiculous in the debate, because I did not hear any historic arguments on the question of whether the murder occurred. … The government did not deal with this issue, probably out of a desire to prevent it from turning into a political issue, and it’s fitting for the government to officially recognize the holocaust of the Armenian people.”

These lines are being written on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day. As I do every year, tomorrow I will commune with the memory of my uncles and aunts and their sons and daughters who perished in Auschwitz. I recall that there are those in the world who deny that my family members and my people were murdered, and I congratulate those fighting against those contemptible people. True, no event in modern history can compare to the horrors perpetrated by the Nazi regime against the Jewish people, but Adolf Hitler’s deeds do not give us permission to ignore the tragedies of other peoples. We don’t require a seal of approval from a Turkish tyrant to be moral Jews.

Akiva Eldar is a columnist for Al-Monitor’s Israel Pulse. He was formerly a senior columnist and editorial writer for Haaretz and also served as the Hebrew daily’s US bureau chief and diplomatic correspondent. His most recent book (with Idith Zertal), Lords of

Turkish PM says 30,000 of 2,000,000 Armenians living in Turkey proves there was no ‘genocide’

April 29, 2014 By administrator

ISTANBUL

A woman places a lit candle on portraits of Armenian intellectuals who were killed and deported under the Ottoman rule during the World War I, on April 24, during a commemorative march on the Istiklal Avenue in Istanbul. AFP Photo

Only a week after expressing condolences for the 1915 deportation and killings of Armenians, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has said the small Armenian community still living in Turkey was proof that there was no genocide in the past.

Speaking in an interview with Charlie Rose from PBS, Erdoğan said what happened in 1915 could not be described as a “genocide.”

“This is not possible. Because if there were a genocide, [there would not be] Armenians still living in Turkey,” Erdoğan said, reiterating that Ankara was ready to open its historical archives.

“We see genocide as a crime against humanity. We will never shut our eyes to it. We are ready to open our archives. Armenia and other third party countries should do it too,” he said, adding if documents prove it, then Turkey would apologize.

“These events did not happen under the Turkish Republic, but the Ottoman Empire. If the documents show it, then we will not avoid apologizing and accepting the consequences,” he said.

In an unexpected statement issued April 23, Erdoğan had stressed the common pain endured by the two peoples, expressing condolences for the descendants of the mass killings in 1915.

“The incidents of World War I are our shared pain. To evaluate this painful period of history through a perspective of just memory is a humane and scholarly responsibility,” his statement said.

The remarks had a widely positive response, with Washington describing them as “historic” and many commentators noting that they constituted a major step for confronting the past.

EDITORIAL: The Centennial Must Become A National Movement for Justice

April 29, 2014 By administrator

On April 24, 1965, the entire Armenian nation—for the first time our brethren in Soviet Armenia—rose up to demand justice and recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Such national solidarity reinvigorated the Armenian Cause and began a movement that today has resulted in widespread recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

We, as Armenians, still fight the good fight for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide because Turkey has not ceased its denial of the crime, despite numerous calls by world leaders for it to come to terms with its bloody past. Even the absurd statement by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday proves that Turkey is unable to advance beyond the decades-old lie that its leaders have been feeding their own population and the international community.

This, coupled with countries like the United States’ adamant opposition to the truth, still places the issue of the international recognition of the Genocide high on our national agenda as we look toward the 100th anniversary of the Genocide. Justice, however, goes beyond recognition and it includes reparations and restitution for the crime of Genocide.

We often say that taking lessons from history is the best way to progress and tell the world that the recognition of the Genocide as an act of man’s inhumanity to man will curtail such instances of human rights violations in the world.

Perhaps, it is time that we take our own advice and take a lesson from the past.

The impetus for a nation to rise up on the 50th anniversary of the Genocide introduced a landscape that emphasized national unity and gave birth to a movement at the center of which was a national understanding of our national priorities.

In recent years, however, the term “national priorities” seems to signify different things to different people or circles. Whether it is due to political expediency or personal interests, this fundamental concept has been defined in various terms. Some argue that the current socio-political plight of Armenia’s citizens is our national agenda, while other contend that the national priority should be the Artsakh question or the situation plaguing our communities in Syria.

While each of those singular issues should become a focal point of every Armenian, they are but links in a larger chain that define our national purpose. After all, the Genocide was an attempt by the Turks to obliterate the entire Armenian Nation. As such, our response to it must be unified and resolute.

As we begin our march toward the centennial, the imperative to act advance as a national movement becomes the critical turning point on whether we will success as a nation to overcome the obstacles and persevere.

Let us rise up, as our nation did 50 years ago, and let of collectively fight for justice for the 1.5 million martyrs as well as for the advancement of our NATION.

Source: Azsparez

Genocide recognition vain without reparation – Armenian historian

April 29, 2014 By administrator

The recognition of the Armenian Genocide will have no value without condemnation and reparation, an Armenian historian has said, commenting on the issue in the light of the Armenia-Turkey reconcilation.

“Today’s Turkish leadership is all the time making attempts to find a roundabout way to mislead [the public] from the main problem which is the reparation. We need a legal way to pursue all the matters as was the case with the Holocaust,” Ashot Melkonyan told a debate organized at the Armenian Center for National and International Studies.

The historian stressed the importance of drastically changing the Armenian tactics on the issue to focus more attention on condemnation and reparation rather than recognition per se.

As for the Armenia-Turkey protocols, Melkonyan said he has fears that a Turkish decision decision to ratify them one day may cause Armenia to follow suit. Meantime he noted that he has observed positive changes in the Armenian authorities’ attitude towards the issue.

“I am not enthusiastic about the Turkish intellectuals’ idea to recognize the Armenia Genocide. They are encouraging, but there are dangerous moments there,” he said, adding that the Turkish denialism which continues to date is a proof that the country remains the Ottoman Empire’s successor.

Analysts Call Turkish PM’s Condolences on Armenia a Political Ploy

April 29, 2014 By administrator

Dorian Jones

April 28, 2014 4:56 PM

ISTANBUL — Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s recent condolences to the relatives of Armenians killed in World War I by Ottoman soldiers has been drawing positive

3BDD01AB-E17D-476B-AC3F-27797E94FB66_w640_r1_s_cx0_cy70_cw0

responses globally.

The message came last Wednesday, one day before Armenians marked the 99th anniversary of the killings in 1915 by Ottoman Turks. Erdogan released the statement in Turkish, Armenian and seven other languages, expressing hope that those killed are in peace and offering Turkey’s condolences to their descendants.

Though the message had an unprecedented conciliatory tone, Sinan Ulgen, a visiting scholar of the Carnegie Institute in Brussels, says Erdogan’s move was part of a wider strategy.

“This has been a plan that was prepared by the foreign ministry. It was not something that was initially set up by the prime minister. It is part of Turkey’s strategy to change the perception of the country on this issue of Armenia, and more steps are due to follow,” said Ulgen.

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan brushed off Ankara’s condolences, accusing Turkey of “utter denial” in failing to recognize the World War I mass killings of Armenians as genocide.

Up to 1.5 million people died in the massacre, and many consider it the first genocide of the 20th century. Armenia wants Turkey to recognize it as genocide, but Ankara has categorically rejected the term, insisting instead that up to 500,000 Armenians died as a result of fighting and starvation during World War I.

The issue remains deeply contentious in Turkey. Many supporters of Turkish nationalism, who make up a large percentage of the prime minister’s grassroots supporters, strongly oppose any efforts to recognize the killings as genocide.

Cengiz Aktar of the Istanbul Policy Center says that with presidential elections looming, there are limits to how far Erdogan can go on the Armenian issue.

“Bearing in mind his designs to become the president and his personal idea about the genocide, that is the utmost limit. He can’t go further than that and it won’t have an effect on relations between Armenia and Turkey,” said Aktar.

Leading members of Armenia’s diaspora have accused Erdogan of being more interested in seeking to derail recognition of the Armenian genocide than wanting cordial relations.

But Ankara denies such charges, pointing to the positive responses to Erdogan’s message, both nationally and internationally, including from some prominent members of Turkey’s small Armenian minority.

Analyst Ulgen says whether or not relations with Armenia move in a positive direction, Erdogan has already scored an important diplomatic success.

“Given the overall quite positive response that this statement has triggered both domestically and internationally, it has helped to improve the image of the government and of the prime minister at a time when there has been many criticisms regarding the behavior of the government,” said Ulgen.

In his comments, Erdogan also repeated an earlier proposal by Turkey for a joint study of the events if 1915, involving academics from both countries. Whether this effort and others will bear fruit remains to be seen.

Source: Voice of America

Rasim Ozan Kutahyali, Erdogan erases Armenian taboo in Turkey

April 28, 2014 By administrator

A day before the annual commemoration of the 1915 Armenian genocide, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan expressed his condolences to the grandchildren of those who lost their lives. As the BBC noted, issued in nine languages, was unprecedented in the history of the Turkish republic. Specifically, he said, “We wish that the Armenians who lost their lives in the context of the early 20th century rest in peace, and we convey our condolences to their grandchildren.” He also stated, “Millions of people of all religions and ethnicities lost their lives in the First World War. Having experienced events which had inhumane consequences — such as relocation, during the First World War — should not prevent Turks and Armenians from establishing compassion and mutually humane attitudes towards one another.”

Devlet Bahceli, chairman of the opposition Nationalist Action Party (MHP), when asked to comment on Erdogan’s statement said, “There is nothing to assess here. It is too much to torment this nation like this.”

Faruk Lologlu, deputy chairman of main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), said the most important aspect of Erdogan’s statement was his use of the word “condolences.” He asserted, “Condolence is a sacred notion, so there is no need to take offense.” Lologlu did, however, question why, after being in power so long, Erdogan had chosen 2014 to make his statement.

Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu added his voice, stating, “History is not black and white. … Everyone needs to show virtue by sharing the pains of the past. I hope the hand we extended will be reciprocated. Turkey does not make such statements under pressure. It is not a declaration made because of timing requirements.”

Armenia and the Armenian diaspora want the deaths of some 1.5 million Armenians forcefully deported during the Ottoman Empire to be recognized as genocide. Some 20 countries, including France, Germany, Russia and Sweden, recognize the 1915 events as such, but the United States, with a large Armenian diaspora, has not yet done so. I am one of those Turks who considers the deaths genocide and have openly said so in the Turkish media and through Al-Monitor. Many people recognize me on the street in Turkey because I am also a TV personality. Some Turks support me for this opinion, but others hate me.

The reality is that in pre-Erdogan Turkey, no one — whether a well-known, popular media figure or someone working in the most marginal media — would have written that the 1915 events were genocide. Doing so would have resulted in immediate imprisonment. In the Erdogan era, speaking about 1915 has gradually come to be accepted. Today in Turkey, the Armenian genocide can be freely discussed. Turkey has made significant progress in respect to freedom of expression on this and the Kurdish issue.

Some writers who personally dislike Erdogan and the Gulenist movement, whose secretive penetration of the state is now known, still insist on presenting an incorrect portrait of Turkey to the world. Sure, some of Erdogan’s policies have been bad — there is much to criticize about his 11-year rule — but as prime minister, he has proven that he is a leader who learns from his mistakes. He has no immovable obsessions and is flexible. His political speeches are provocative, and he stands firm against his rivals, but when it comes to official policies, he can dispense with rigidity and reverse positions.

For example, Erdogan’s analysis of the situation in Syria was faulty, which led to bad policy decisions. With his Syrian policy at an impasse, Erdogan is now likely to take a more realistic position. We should not ignore, as Mustafa Akyol’s analysis for Al-Monitor suggests, that Erdogan will be the most important political figure in Turkey for the next 10 years. The Erdogan phenomenon must therefore be examined impartially, free of personal animosities.

A prominent Turkish writer who knew and shared my views about the 1915 Armenian genocide predicted that Erdogan would have me fired from my newspaper. I disagreed, saying that I understood Erdogan’s approach to the Armenian issue, but being a wise politician, he would tackle public perceptions step by step and at the end eliminate the taboo surrounding 1915. I do not feel that anything justifies portraying Erdogan as a reactionary in regard to the Armenian question.

I asked a friend of mine sensitive about the Armenian issue if he would still be unsatisfied if on April 24, 2015, Erdogan traveled to Yerevan as the new president of Turkey, prayed for the genocide’s victims and laid a wreath on their memorial. His response was that Erdogan should not be the president of Turkey, and that we had to be freed of the man. My friend was accepting that anyone other than Erdogan become president, even if he was a fascist who would justify what we did to the Armenians.

Erdogan’s Turkey will from now on confront 1915. Many more steps could follow in 2015. When it comes to facing up to the past, Erdogan is far ahead of his party and cabinet. Davutoglu’s comment on the issue was in a language reminiscent of the Kemalist diplomatic tradition. Turkish diplomacy under Davutolgu must support Erdogan’s courageous move and not create obstructions for Erdogan.

With Erdogan’s statement on 1915, the last taboo of the Turkish republic is gone. True, most people still think as they were conditioned to by Kemalist Turkish nationalists, but Erdogan’s approach will soften this unaccommodating mentality. Erdogan is a leader who can change the minds of people. The Turkish nation must, indeed, convey our condolences to the grandchildren of our Armenian brothers and sisters massacred by the Talat Pasha government in 1915. In this, Erdogan has once again proven to the world that he is not a leader from the usual mold. Those assessing Turkey in Washington must take care to accurately analyze the Erdogan phenomenon.

Rasim Ozan Kutahyali has been a columnist for Sabah since 2011 after writing for Taraf from 2008 to 2011. He is a popular political commentator on various TV programs, having started at CNNTurk and now appearing on Beyaz TV. Kutahyali is known for his anti-militarist and liberal political views. He can be reached at rasim.ozan@hotmail.com

Turkish PM’s Armenian statement unimaginable just 20 years ago

April 28, 2014 By administrator

ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Barçın Yinançbarcin.yinanc@hurriyet.com.tr

The Turkish government’s message of condolence talking about the “shared pain” stemming from the mass killings of Armenians in 1915 is a watershed development that would have been unimaginable in years past, according to former Envoy Ömer Lütem.

“You could not imagine this, let’s say five years ago … 10 years ago, never; 20 years ago, it was unimaginable. There has been a change in the Turkish official position,” he said.

What is your evaluation of the statement?

It is related to the moral side of the Armenian question. First of all, it did not seem to have something related to politics. The moral side or the sentimental side is very important because Armenians really fell some pain. It could look bizarre, because these events happened a century ago, but as they were repeated every day to them, there is the impression as if they happened recently. So the moral side is extremely important when you say we present our condolences; that we are sharing your pain. I think it will have an influence on Armenians, but what will result from the political point, that remains to be seen. The militant ones won’t be influenced. But the silent majority, the majority of the people who are not vocal, but they will be impressed.

Does it mean that it is the first time the Turkish government has shown empathy with the pain you are talking about.

That empathy was expressed with strong words; it was never said like that before. The foreign minister said something similar, but the tone was softer

Is it the first time Turkey recognized April 24th as a remembrance day?

That is correct; before there was an effort not to notice it, but it was there. Yet officially … I don’t know. They did not put emphasis on recognizing April 24 as the Remembrance Day.

But is it an official recognition that something terrible happened in the past?

They did not put it that way. What is not emphasized is not what happened, but the pain that exists; they are not the same thing.

But after all pain is a consequence of an event; so that is not defined then?

That’s right. I think they did not say that something has happened on purpose. They tried to underline the human aspect of what happened.

What is the importance of the statement?

It is a very important turning point. Though it concerns the humanitarian aspect, it is first time that there has been a display of real empathy towards the Armenians. I have been dealing with the Armenian question for the past 30 years; I have not seen something similar: it is going directly to the people, to their pain, to the people suffering and trying to understand this and presenting condolences; you could not imagine this, let’s say 5 years ago … 10 years ago, never; 20 years ago, it was unimaginable. There is a change in the Turkish official position.

Why do you think it has taken so long?

I think that this government, from the beginning, tried to solve this question. Instead of fighting, arguing with the Armenians, they have been trying to find other ways. One of the very important elements on the subject was the proposal about the creation of a historical commission. Before, it was always Armenians saying something, and Turks saying ‘this is not right.’ The government tried another way, but they have not been successful until now.

With the centennial of 1915 approaching, I think the government had the idea to make something that would withdraw the people’s attention, especially the Armenians. I think this is the main cause.

So the Armenians will think their decades-long efforts of recognition are paying off.

Most of them will think that their efforts to convince that what happened is genocide are paying off; but the text of the PM’s message does not give this impression at all. The message says from the moral point of view, yes we understand your pain, but it did not say anything that can be interpreted as recognition of genocide

But do you think it was a positive step?

Yes, it is, but I don’t know whether it will be well received or not. But this kind of move takes a rather long time to be accepted; you cannot expect a result in a few days’ time. The government of Armenia did not say much. Most probably they are consulting each other and some countries first, like Russia for instance.

How do you think the Turkish public received it?

In general it was well received. The main opposition party was not against; this is important. The MHP [Nationalist Movement Party] was against it and that is expected. The Kurdish party opted to support the Armenian view about three years ago anyway and the AK Party represents above half of the population. I can say that there is not much of strong opposition to that message except from the MHP.

Do you think there is an evolution in the Turkish society’s approach to the issue?

In the beginning, Turkish society was not very much against the Armenians. First of all people, say they don’t know about the 1915 events. They became angry about these kinds of allegations; they took it as a personal offense. In time, they separated allegations and Armenians in the street. ‘I like my Armenian neighbor,’ they say, ‘but Turks would never commit genocide.’ But the message contains nothing controversial.

Do you think that the strong mandate Erdoğan received from the elections made it easier for him to take this step?

Without having such a big majority, no government would dare take this step.

You said previously that Turkish people were not aware of what happened to the Armenians; so do you think there is now awareness due to Armenians’ genocide recognition efforts?

Armenian terrorism is the main reason for the awareness. They began to shoot Turkish diplomats. And Turkish people were shocked and started asking questions.

What should be done as far as the next steps are concerned?

Turkey has made a great effort; normally, Armenians should respond. And then if there is a positive reaction, then additional steps could come. But if I were in the government, I would rather wait for the reaction from the Armenians, especially in Armenia.

Who is Ömer Lütem ?
Born in Istanbul in 1933, Ömer Lütem graduated from the Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Ankara in 1957 and became carrier diplomat the same year. His most important posts have been:

Turkish Consul General at Cologne, Germany (1975-1979) Director General of Intelligence and Research of the Foreign Ministry (1981-1983), Ambassador of Turkey to Bulgaria (1983-1989), Deputy Undersecretary of the Foreign Ministry (1989-1992), Ambassador of Turkey to the Vatican (1992-1995), Permanent Representative of Turkey to UNESCO (1995-1997). In 1998 he retired.

He was previously Director of the Institute for Armenian Research of the Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies (ASAM), 2000-2008 and 2009-2012 Director of the Center for Eurasian Studies (AVIM). He has been advisor of the center since 2013.

Lütem is the editor of the Review of Armenian Studies, Ermeni Araştırmaları (Armenian Studies) and Uluslararası Suçlar ve Tarih (International Crimes and History).

His works include: Türkiye Bulgaristan İlişkileri, 1983-1989 (Turkish-Bulgarian Relations 1983-1989) (ASAM-Ankara 2000); Balkan Diplomasisi (Balkan Diplomacy) (Co-Editor) (ASAM-Ankara 2001); Ermeni Sorunu El Kitabı (Handbook of the Armenian Question) (co-author) (ASAM- TEİMK, Ankara 2003), Armenian Terror (ASAM- Ankara, 2007), Armenian Question: Basic Knowledge and Documentation (AVIM- Ankara 2009).

Germany’s Gauck: Turkey’s condolences to Armenians ‘a new page’

April 28, 2014 By administrator

ANKARA

Germany’s President Joachim Gauck addresses the media at the Presidential Palace in Ankara April 28, 2014. REUTERS Photo

While urging Turkey to be bolder in its attempt to face its history, German President Joachim Gauck has backed Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s extension of condolences to the grandchildren of Armenians killed in World War I by Ottoman soldiers.

“In my opinion, the expression of a new style by a conservative politician like Mr. Prime Minister is a new page. This sounds very interesting, familiar and right to me,” Gauck said on April 28 in response to a question at a joint press conference following talks with his Turkish counterpart, Abdullah Gül.

“Can a self-confident society question itself and feel honored with its past or can it implement a symbolic peace-making policy? That’s why I believe no censorship should be applied when choosing words here,” Gauck said in remarks translated from Germanto Turkish through an interpreter.

In a statement issued on April 23, the eve of the 99th anniversary of the contested cause of the deaths, Erdoğan unexpectedly described the events of 1915 as “inhumane,” using more conciliatory language than has often been the case for Turkish leaders.

For his part, Gül said on many occasions in the past that he had described what was lived during that era as “common grievances,” and called Erdoğan’s statement “extremely appropriate and right.”

Genocide Scholar Ugur Ungor Wins Young Scientists Award (Video)

April 27, 2014 By administrator

The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) has selected five outstanding young scientists to receive the Heineken Young Scientists Awards on Sept. 27. This is the second time this biennial prize has been awarded.

The winners are the biologist Geert van den Bogaart, the medical specialist Linda van Laake, the sociologist/historian Uğur Ümit Üngör, the environmental scientist Tjisse van der Heide, and the cognitive scientist Floris de Lange. Each winner receives EUR 10,000 and a specially commissioned work of art.

Sociologist and historian Dr. Uğur Ümit Üngör, 31, is receiving the Heineken Young Scientists Award for History for his historical-sociological research on mass violence, nationalism, and the creation of states. Üngör has already received a number of prizes for his PhD research on the creation of the Turkish nation state in the period from 1913 to 1950, a politically sensitive issue. He has an impressive list of publications that includes three monographs, and has become an international authority in the field of genocide studies. Üngör is now a lecturer at Utrecht University and a lecturer/researcher with the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation (NIOD). He also writes satirical columns and essays on cosmopolitan life and on political and cultural boundaries. The jury calls Üngör an outstanding, dedicated researcher who has already achieved a great deal. Amongst other things, it praises his ability to preserve a balance as regards the politically troublesome research topic of genocide.

The Heineken Young Scientists Awards are intended for promising young scientists whose outstanding research means that they set an example for other young scientists. The Academy’s aim with the awards is to provide an additional incentive for talented researchers of the up-and-coming generation.

To read Dr. Üngör’s articles published in the Armenian Weekly magazines, click here.

Mel Gibson I know about Armenian Genocide

April 27, 2014 By administrator