Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Developments Around The Issue Of Church Property Return In Turke

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Developments Around The Issue Of Church Property Return In Turke

    NEW DEVELOPMENTS AROUND THE ISSUE OF CHURCH PROPERTY RETURN IN TURKEY

    02.10.2014

    Vahram Hovyan
    Expert, Centre for Armenian Studies, Noravank Foundation

    A New Bill of the US Congress

    The problem of preserving and returning church properties in Turkey
    seized from Christian minorities is time to time brought into the
    political agenda. Recently the US House of Representatives Foreign
    Affairs Committee adopted the bill H.R. 4347, a.k.a. Turkey Christian
    Churches Accountability Act 1 (on June 26, 2014 ordered to be reported
    unanimous consent), which once again made this issue a discussion
    subject in public/political and information dimensions.

    Contextually, this new bill is the logical continuation of the US
    House of Representatives Resolution H. Res. 306 2. As both documents
    are related to the same problem, i.e. returning the church property
    seized from Christian minorities, it can be stated that there is
    a functional similarity between the two. However, there are some
    differences in the problem statement depth:

    1. While the H. Res. 306 was related only to the church properties
    in Turkey, the H.R. 4347 also refers to the areas currently occupied
    by the Turkish military in northern Cyprus

    2. While the first one regarded Turkish government as an acting subject
    in the issue of returning the property confiscated from Turkey's
    Christian minorities, because it was ascribed with the responsibility
    to return the property, the new bill puts the responsibility also on
    the US government, as according to the bill the US government should
    work together with the Turkish government in resolving the issue of
    the church properties return.

    3. Unlike the previous one, where no control was stipulated over
    the process of church property return, the new Act does provide for
    such control. The new Act requires the Secretary of State to submit
    annual reports to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House
    of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
    Senate till 2021 on the status and return of stolen, confiscated,
    or otherwise unreturned minority properties.

    Edward Royce, Chair, Committee on Foreign Affairs of the US House
    of Representatives, substantiated the adoption of the new act by the
    fact that "situation with Christian sites in Turkey is deteriorating,
    and the churches are disappearing despite optimistic statements by
    the Turkish leadership."3 These motives are supported by arguments
    that rights and freedoms of Christian minorities in Turkey continue
    to be violated, which is manifested by the following:

    1. Christian minorities in Turkey are prevented from fully practicing
    their faith.

    2. They face serious obstacles to repairing their churches and
    monuments, or constructing new ones.

    3. The Christians are subjected to violence, including murder and
    other crimes.

    Attitudes of theStakeholders

    To foresee the prospects of returning the confiscated church
    properties, it is important to review the attitudes of involved
    stakeholders towards the adoption of this act. Such stakeholders
    include Armenian, Greek, and other ethnic minorities of the USA
    that face the problem of church property return in Turkey and have
    nation-states and national structures of their own, and Turkey.

    The Armenian, Greek and Assyrian communities of the USA welcomed
    the Act. Ken Hachikian, Chairman of the Armenian National Committee
    of America noted that "The adoption of this measure sends a strong
    signal to Ankara that it must stop its anti-Christian conduct and
    start coming to terms with its moral, material and legal obligations
    to Armenians, Syriacs, Cypriots, Pontians and other victims of Turkey's
    still unpunished genocidal crimes." 4

    The Armenian Apostolic Church also lauded the bill, describing it
    as an important step to protect Christian minorities in Turkey and
    their rights5.

    However, the Turkish response to the bill inspired no much optimism.

    It can be divided in two parts: reaction of the public/political
    circles reflected in media and official reaction by the Turkish
    Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It has to be mentioned that the media
    response and the official stance proceeded in unison and complemented
    each other.

    The Turkish media dubbed the H.R. 4347 a document acting against the
    interests of Turkey, adopted under pressure of the Armenian lobby6.

    The official stance indicated rejection of claims made in the Act, and
    showcased the traditional threatening style of the Turkish government.

    Generally, Turkey's official attitude toward the adopted Act can be
    boiled down to the following:

    1. The claims made in the Act are groundless accusations.

    2. Turkey has undertaken great efforts to protect the rights of
    Christian religious minorities.

    3.Adopting this this type of Act is damaging to the US-Turkish
    partnership in various areas.

    Those concerned with Turkish-American relations should support Turkey
    in this issue7.

    Thus, on one hand Turkey denies assessments made in the Act, on the
    other hand tries to pretend that it is interested in guaranteeing
    Christian minority rights and religious freedoms. However, in practice
    it continues the policy of setting legal and political obstacles8,
    through which the return of church property is actually obstructed.

    Next Steps

    Despite the existing problems and obstacles, the US Armenian, Greek,
    Assyrian and other communities that have to deal with the problem
    of church property return in Turkey should cooperate with their
    nation-states and national diaspora structures to use the opportunity
    and extract maximum benefits from the pressure imposed on Turkey.

    The bills adopted to date contained loopholes, lacked concreteness
    and were generalized, which allowed Turkey to maneuver and avoid from
    fulfilling its obligations. The only specific provision in H.R 4347
    is the requirement of comprehensive listing of all church property,
    which enables to identify the properties to be returned to Christian
    minorities.

    The Armenian, Greek, Assyrian and other interested communities must
    undertake efforts in their future discussions and documents to be
    adopted, in order to bring clarity to the issue. In particular,
    the following matters call clarification:

    1. The list of Christian minorities in Turkey: The officially
    recognized religious minorities in Turkey include adherents of
    the Greek Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic churches and Jews. However,
    there are also communities without official recognition, such as
    Armenian Catholic and Armenian Evangelical churches. The properties
    expropriated from them comprise part of the rich Armenian legacy.

    Hence, by clarifying the issue of the list of Christian minorities,
    it is a necessary to include communities with no official status in
    Turkey and extend the demand for return of confiscated property over
    them as well. This would expand the camp of allies by involving the
    Roman Catholic Church, Protestant churches, etc., because for example,
    the Armenian Catholics and Protestants, other than being ethnic
    Armenians are also part of the global Catholicism and Protestantism.

    2. Church properties to be returnedO~I The Turkish government is
    inclined to return only Christian properties that were confiscated
    after 1936, whereas most of the properties were lost before that,
    during the massacres and genocide. It is important the Act includes
    demands to return of all the lost properties, rather than just part
    of it.

    3. Property return procedureO~I The experience tells that
    politicization of the issue and bureaucratic hurdles are effective
    tools in Turkish government's hands to disrupt the return of properties
    of the Christian minorities. Quite often the Christian churches have
    to resort to litigation with the government so as to return their
    property9. Artificial difficulties created for return of property
    cause psychological stress to the Christian communities and make them
    feel that Turkish government is omnipotent and it is impossible to
    resolve their problems, which may dissuade the Christian communities
    from continuing the struggle for their rights. Therefore, resolving
    the issue requires developing a simple and clear procedure for church
    property return and making it part of the requirements to Turkey in
    the documents to be adopted.

    4. Deadlines for submission of applicationsO~I This is about having
    no deadlines at all, rather than determining deadlines. The law on
    returning church properties adopted in Turkey in 2011 stipulates
    a deadline of one year for accepting applications from Christian
    communities about returning their property. Given that application
    submission is a time-consuming and cumbersome process, the one-year
    limit makes the whole task of church property return impossible.

    Therefore the future documents to be adopted must stipulate a clause
    about unacceptability of any deadline for submission of church property
    return applications.

    5. Assessment and adequate compensation for appropriated church
    propertyO~I Although the above-mentioned law stipulates compensation
    for property taken from Christian minorities and appropriated from
    individuals, but the issue of the adequate compensation remains
    problematic. Hence, it is necessary to devise a clear formula for
    property assessment and include it as a requirement in any future
    documents.

    Only with these and other clarifications any significant results might
    be expected in the issue of returning church properties seized from
    Christian minorities in Turkey. Otherwise the bills on this issue
    will remain as documents simply describing situation and condemning
    Turkey, while in reality they would bring a restricted impact. They
    would have moral, rather than tangible significance. Taking advantage
    of abstract formulations, Turkey would continue making symbolic
    concessions to create an imitation of guarantees for the rights and
    religious freedoms of the Christian communities.

    1 H. R. 4347
    http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/sites/republicans.foreignaffairs.house.gov/files/HR
    4347_Turkey Christian Churches Accountability Act.pdf

    2 H. Res. 306
    http://www.atour.com/government/pdf/20110615-USCongress-BILLS-112hres306ih.pdf

    3 House panel adopts Turkey Christian Churches Accountability Act,
    http://news.am/eng/news/216498.html

    4 Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians of America welcome
    passage of the Turkey Christian Churches Accountability
    Act,http://news.am/eng/news/216512.html

    5 Õ~DÕ¡ÕµO~@ Õ¡Õ©Õ¸Õ¼ Õ~MÕ¸O~BO~@Õ¢ Ô·Õ"Õ´Õ"Õ¡Õ®Õ"Õ¶Õ¨
    Õ¸Õ²Õ"Õ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¸O~BÕ´ Õ§ Ô±Õ~DÕ~F Ô¿Õ¸Õ¶Õ£O~@Õ¥Õ½Õ"
    Ô±O~@Õ¿Õ¡O~DÕ"Õ¶ Õ°Õ¡O~@Õ¡Õ¢Õ¥O~@Õ¸O~BÕ©ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ ¶Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ"
    Õ°Õ¡Õ¶Õ±Õ¶Õ¡ÕªÕ¸Õ²Õ¸Õ¾Õ" Õ¸O~@Õ¤Õ¥Õ£O~@Õ¡Õ® H. R. 4347 Õ¢Õ¡Õ¶Õ¡Õ±O~GÕ¨,
    http://www.aravot.am/2014/06/27/475133/

    6 Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡ÕµÕ" Ô±Ô³Õ~F-Õ¶ Õ¡O~@Õ±Õ¡Õ£Õ¡Õ¶O~DÕ¥Õ¬
    Õ§ Ô±Õ~DÕ~F Ô¿Õ¸Õ¶Õ£O~@Õ¥Õ½Õ" Õ°Õ¡Õ¶Õ±Õ¶Õ¡ÕªÕ¸Õ²Õ¸Õ¾Õ"
    Õ¨Õ¶Õ¤Õ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¡Õ® Õ¢Õ¡Õ¶Õ¡Õ±O~GÕ"Õ¶,
    http://ermenihaber.am/?lang_id=2&news_=9&cur_news=478

    7 Ibid.

    8 Õ~@Õ¸Õ¾ÕµÕ¡Õ¶ Õ~N., ÔµÕ¯Õ¥Õ²Õ¥O~AÕ¡Õ¯Õ¡Õ¶ Õ£Õ¸O~BÕµO~DÕ"
    Õ¾Õ¥O~@Õ¡Õ¤Õ¡O~@Õ±Õ´Õ¡Õ¶ Õ­Õ¶Õ¤Õ"O~@Õ¨ Ô¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ¡ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ´,
    Â"Ô³Õ¬Õ¸Õ¢Õ¸O~BÕ½Â", 2013, Õ©Õ"Õ¾ 1, Õ§Õ" 38-41O~I

    9 Õ~OÕ¥Õ~[Õ½, O...O~@Õ"Õ¶Õ¡Õ¯, Õ~MÕ¿Õ¡Õ´Õ¢Õ¸O~BÕ¬Õ" Õ¤Õ¡Õ¿Õ¡O~@Õ¡Õ¶Õ¨
    Õ´Õ¥O~@ÕªÕ¥Õ¬ Õ§ Õ°Õ¡ÕµÕ¸O~A ÕºÕ¡Õ¿O~@Õ"Õ¡O~@O~DÕ¡O~@Õ¡Õ¶Õ"Õ¶
    Õ¾Õ¥O~@Õ¡Õ¤Õ¡O~@Õ±Õ¶Õ¥Õ¬ Â"Õ~MÕ¡Õ¶Õ¡Õ½Õ¡O~@ÕµÕ¡Õ¶
    Õ¿Õ¸O~BÕ¶Õ¨Â"http://ermenihaber.am/?lang_id=2&news_=9&cur_news=479

    "Globus" analytical bulletin, No. 7, 2014

    Return ________________________________ Another materials of author

    KESSAB EVENTS: AN OUTLOOK FROM YEREVAN[19.05.2014] CONTEMPORARY
    PROBLEMS OF CENTERS FOR ARMENIAN STUDIES ABROAD[07.04.2014] THE
    ARMENIAN SCIENTIFIC AND ANALYTICAL COMMUNITY IN RUSSIA[20.01.2014]
    ON THE MODERN CHALLENGES THE ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN LEBANON
    FACES[19.09.2013] TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE ARMENIAN DIASPORA:
    CHALLENGES AND POSSIBILITIES[17.06.2013] ON POLITICAL VIEW OF THE
    ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN SYRIA [06.05.2013] ISSUE OF RETURNING CHURCH
    PROPERTIES IN TURKEY[07.02.2013] THE ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITIES
    IN THE MIDDLE EAST[24.10.2012] THE ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN GREECE AT
    THIS STAGE[04.06.2012] ARMENIAN EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY IN URUGUAY
    [06.02.2012]

    http://www.noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=12923


    From: Baghdasarian
Working...
X