Tweet
TURKEY'S POST-ASSASSINATION CON GAMES
By David B. Boyajian - a freelance writer based in Massachusetts in the USA
Noyan Tapan
March 15 2007
Make no mistake: Turkey and its friends are turning the assassination
of journalist and human rights activist Hrant Dink to their advantage.
With few exceptions, the international community and media have put
most of the blame on the destructive atmosphere created by Turkish
"nationalists" and "ultra-nationalists."
True, Prime Minister Recep Erdogan and his Islamic AKP Party came
in for some criticism, but only because these allegedly "moderate,"
"reformist" sweethearts were supposedly not standing up to the big,
bad "nationalists."
It's the old "good cop - bad cop" routine: We're now all supposed to
trust the "good cops," Erdogan and the AKP.
Never mind that the AKP is a strongly conservative, right-of-center
- hence nationalist - political party. Never mind that it was an
AKP-majority parliament that enacted Article 301, the law against
"denigrating Turkishness" under which Dink had been convicted.
Never mind that Erdogan has called for a beefed-up campaign of
Genocide denial. Never mind that he's dispatching AKP member and
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and AKP parliamentarians to the U.S. to
demand that Congress defeat the Armenian Genocide resolution.
Con Games
Another con game that Turkey's friends are playing goes like this:
'Yes, Dink's murder was unfortunate. But it's just a bump in Turkey's
road to reform.
The Turkish government needs your sympathy and the help of the European
Union (EU) more than ever.'
That's no exaggeration. Read part of the EU's reaction to the slaying:
"Turkey will steadfastly continue along the path towards ... freedom
of expression."
And like much of the media, the Wall Street Journal Europe remained
in a state of denial: "Turkey's democracy is as healthy and vibrant
... as never before." Fascinating. Assassinations and prosecutions
of dissidents are apparently signs of political health.
Count on the West to continue babbling about "reforming" Turkey while
providing it ever more political support, money, and weapons.
Not Just 301
Governments and media worldwide are attempting another
post-assassination con job by calling for repeal of Article 301,
as if that would be a cure-all.
As if prior to 2005, when 301 was enacted, Turkey was a shining
example of freedom.
Turkey has long had numerous laws that stifle dissent. Laws against
separatism, for instance, are used to prosecute Kurdish political
activity. And Article 216, which outlaws "enmity ... towards
another group," is currently used against those who acknowledge the
Genocide. Even Turks point out that the government has plenty of laws
it can use if 301 is repealed.
For some Armenians, Dink's huge funeral march of Turks, Armenians,
Kurds, and others, stirred hopes for cooperation and reform.
The march was mainly about Turkish civil rights in general, however,
not necessarily Genocide acknowledgment or Armenia. Moreover, nearly
200 years of Turkish "reforms" have proven disastrous for Armenians.
Reform's Tragedies
Turkey's Tanzimat decrees of 1839 and 1856 promised equality for all
Ottoman citizens, including Armenians. They were largely failures.
The Ottoman Armenian National Constitution, approved in 1863,
did little to improve the lives of ordinary Armenians. The Turkish
Constitution was suspended soon after it was proclaimed in 1876.
The Treaty of Berlin (1878) promised European oversight of reforms
in the Armenian provinces. It, too, failed. Continuing "reforms"
culminated in the 1890's massacres of 300,000 Armenians.
In 1908, the empire's Armenians, Turks, and other ethnic groups raised
banners hailing the "reformist" Young Turk revolution and literally
embraced in the streets. Somewhat like the Dink funeral procession.
The following year saw 30,000 Armenians slaughtered in Adana. Eerily
similar to what Erdogan would do 98 years later, the Young Turks
apologized - insincerely - but blamed ultra-nationalists.
A European plan to supervise reform in the Ottoman Armenian provinces
in 1914 never got off the ground. Under the cover of WW I, Turkey
then used genocide to "reform" the Armenian provinces.
After the war, Kemal Ataturk, the well-known "modernizer" and
"reformer," massacred and expelled most remaining Armenians and
attacked the just-born Armenian Republic.
"Modern" Turkey continued mistreating its remaining Christians using
discrimination, labor camps, riots, and confiscation, down to the
present day.
Imagine that each of the foregoing example of "reform" were to take
place in today's Turkey. The world - including some Armenians - would
stand up and clap. As we can now look back and see that tragedies have
followed each Turkish "reform," it might be wiser to hold the applause.
Nevertheless, will the EU successfully reform Turkey, and might Turkey
then amend its policies toward Armenia?
The EU Looks East
Though the EU has affirmed the Genocide, it has rejected any
requirement that Turkey itself must do so before joining. That shows
bad faith towards Armenia.
Reforming Turkey isn't the EU's primary interest anyway. Rather, the
EU - pushed along by Washington and London - wishes to use Turkey
to reach into the massive oil and gas reserves of the Middle East,
Caspian Sea basin and Central Asia, and to surround Russia.
The EU will subsidize and re-invigorate the Turkish economy. Turkey's
value to the West, as well as its military power and belligerence,
can only grow.
But might Turkey, as an EU member, orient itself to Europe and thus
turn away from adventures to the east that could harm Armenia? Probably
not. As the West wishes to dominate the Caspian, Turkish policy will
necessarily be directed even more assertively to the east, where sits
Armenia. Such an eastern orientation bodes ill as the West has always,
in the final analysis, sided with Turkey against Armenians.
It would be tragic if the prospect of Turkish reform, and the hope now
felt by some Armenians over the amity displayed during Dink's funeral,
made them forget the hard lessons of history.
By David B. Boyajian - a freelance writer based in Massachusetts in the USA
Noyan Tapan
March 15 2007
Make no mistake: Turkey and its friends are turning the assassination
of journalist and human rights activist Hrant Dink to their advantage.
With few exceptions, the international community and media have put
most of the blame on the destructive atmosphere created by Turkish
"nationalists" and "ultra-nationalists."
True, Prime Minister Recep Erdogan and his Islamic AKP Party came
in for some criticism, but only because these allegedly "moderate,"
"reformist" sweethearts were supposedly not standing up to the big,
bad "nationalists."
It's the old "good cop - bad cop" routine: We're now all supposed to
trust the "good cops," Erdogan and the AKP.
Never mind that the AKP is a strongly conservative, right-of-center
- hence nationalist - political party. Never mind that it was an
AKP-majority parliament that enacted Article 301, the law against
"denigrating Turkishness" under which Dink had been convicted.
Never mind that Erdogan has called for a beefed-up campaign of
Genocide denial. Never mind that he's dispatching AKP member and
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and AKP parliamentarians to the U.S. to
demand that Congress defeat the Armenian Genocide resolution.
Con Games
Another con game that Turkey's friends are playing goes like this:
'Yes, Dink's murder was unfortunate. But it's just a bump in Turkey's
road to reform.
The Turkish government needs your sympathy and the help of the European
Union (EU) more than ever.'
That's no exaggeration. Read part of the EU's reaction to the slaying:
"Turkey will steadfastly continue along the path towards ... freedom
of expression."
And like much of the media, the Wall Street Journal Europe remained
in a state of denial: "Turkey's democracy is as healthy and vibrant
... as never before." Fascinating. Assassinations and prosecutions
of dissidents are apparently signs of political health.
Count on the West to continue babbling about "reforming" Turkey while
providing it ever more political support, money, and weapons.
Not Just 301
Governments and media worldwide are attempting another
post-assassination con job by calling for repeal of Article 301,
as if that would be a cure-all.
As if prior to 2005, when 301 was enacted, Turkey was a shining
example of freedom.
Turkey has long had numerous laws that stifle dissent. Laws against
separatism, for instance, are used to prosecute Kurdish political
activity. And Article 216, which outlaws "enmity ... towards
another group," is currently used against those who acknowledge the
Genocide. Even Turks point out that the government has plenty of laws
it can use if 301 is repealed.
For some Armenians, Dink's huge funeral march of Turks, Armenians,
Kurds, and others, stirred hopes for cooperation and reform.
The march was mainly about Turkish civil rights in general, however,
not necessarily Genocide acknowledgment or Armenia. Moreover, nearly
200 years of Turkish "reforms" have proven disastrous for Armenians.
Reform's Tragedies
Turkey's Tanzimat decrees of 1839 and 1856 promised equality for all
Ottoman citizens, including Armenians. They were largely failures.
The Ottoman Armenian National Constitution, approved in 1863,
did little to improve the lives of ordinary Armenians. The Turkish
Constitution was suspended soon after it was proclaimed in 1876.
The Treaty of Berlin (1878) promised European oversight of reforms
in the Armenian provinces. It, too, failed. Continuing "reforms"
culminated in the 1890's massacres of 300,000 Armenians.
In 1908, the empire's Armenians, Turks, and other ethnic groups raised
banners hailing the "reformist" Young Turk revolution and literally
embraced in the streets. Somewhat like the Dink funeral procession.
The following year saw 30,000 Armenians slaughtered in Adana. Eerily
similar to what Erdogan would do 98 years later, the Young Turks
apologized - insincerely - but blamed ultra-nationalists.
A European plan to supervise reform in the Ottoman Armenian provinces
in 1914 never got off the ground. Under the cover of WW I, Turkey
then used genocide to "reform" the Armenian provinces.
After the war, Kemal Ataturk, the well-known "modernizer" and
"reformer," massacred and expelled most remaining Armenians and
attacked the just-born Armenian Republic.
"Modern" Turkey continued mistreating its remaining Christians using
discrimination, labor camps, riots, and confiscation, down to the
present day.
Imagine that each of the foregoing example of "reform" were to take
place in today's Turkey. The world - including some Armenians - would
stand up and clap. As we can now look back and see that tragedies have
followed each Turkish "reform," it might be wiser to hold the applause.
Nevertheless, will the EU successfully reform Turkey, and might Turkey
then amend its policies toward Armenia?
The EU Looks East
Though the EU has affirmed the Genocide, it has rejected any
requirement that Turkey itself must do so before joining. That shows
bad faith towards Armenia.
Reforming Turkey isn't the EU's primary interest anyway. Rather, the
EU - pushed along by Washington and London - wishes to use Turkey
to reach into the massive oil and gas reserves of the Middle East,
Caspian Sea basin and Central Asia, and to surround Russia.
The EU will subsidize and re-invigorate the Turkish economy. Turkey's
value to the West, as well as its military power and belligerence,
can only grow.
But might Turkey, as an EU member, orient itself to Europe and thus
turn away from adventures to the east that could harm Armenia? Probably
not. As the West wishes to dominate the Caspian, Turkish policy will
necessarily be directed even more assertively to the east, where sits
Armenia. Such an eastern orientation bodes ill as the West has always,
in the final analysis, sided with Turkey against Armenians.
It would be tragic if the prospect of Turkish reform, and the hope now
felt by some Armenians over the amity displayed during Dink's funeral,
made them forget the hard lessons of history.