Εμφάνιση αναρτήσεων με ετικέτα Cyprus; Turkey. Εμφάνιση όλων των αναρτήσεων
Εμφάνιση αναρτήσεων με ετικέτα Cyprus; Turkey. Εμφάνιση όλων των αναρτήσεων

Δευτέρα 18 Οκτωβρίου 2010

Greek FM : Region only gains from blooming bilateral ties


Israeli-Greek ties have improved over the past few months at about the same pace Israeli- Turkish ties have deteriorated, but Greek Foreign Minister Dimitris Droutsas believes the two sets of relationships are unrelated.

Droutsas told The Jerusalem Post in an exclusive e-mail interview just before his arrival on Sunday night that the recent bloom in Jerusalem’s relations with Athens “categorically” has no connection to the Israeli-Turkish crisis.

RELATED:
Israeli-Greco ties in bloom as Greek FM's arrival nears
Netanyahu set to visit Greece

International relations are not “a competitive game,” he said.

“We don’t see any competitive dimension between the relationship we are developing with Israel and our relationship with Turkey,” Droutsas said. “This is because each of these relationships has its own dynamic and its own historical background. What we are doing is writing new pages in the history of Greek- Israeli relations.”

Droutsas arrived Sunday night as part of a regional trip that will also take him to Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Egypt and Lebanon.

His visit comes about a year after George Papandreou’s center-left Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) came into power. Initially, there were concerns in Jerusalem about this government, since Jerusalem generally prefers more conservative governments in Europe, and since Papandreou’s father, Andreas, was known for pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel leanings when he was Greece’s prime minister from 1981-1989 and from 1993-1996.

But those concerns evaporated as the younger Papandreou altered his country’s relationship with Israel for the better.

For many years visits by Greek ministers were few and far between, but since a visit here by Papandreou in July, his tourism minister, minister of state, deputy foreign minister and now foreign minister have all visited.

Israeli officials have also been visiting Athens with greater frequency: Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu went to Greece in August, and Amos Gilad, head of the Defense Ministry’s diplomatic-military bureau, was there earlier this month. Last week the Israeli and Greek air forces carried out a joint exercise.

In addition, the Foreign Ministry, acknowledging the change in the tone from Athens, named as its new ambassador to Greece one of its senior diplomats, Aryeh Mekel, who served in the past as foreign policy adviser to Yitzhak Shamir, director- general of the Israel Broadcast Authority, and consul-general in Atlanta and New York.

Mekel, according to diplomatic officials, has in only a short time been able to establish a close working relationship with the high echelons in the Greek government.

The following are excerpts from the interview with Droutsas:

What is the purpose of your visit, so soon after the Greek prime minister’s visit in the summer and the state minister’s visit last week?
Still more visits will follow, have no doubt... My arrival here is a clear manifestation of our readiness to contribute to the promotion of the peace process, which is going through a difficult moment, and our interest in pushing forward Greek- Israeli relations.

To what do you attribute the sudden romance between Israel and Greece?
The friendship between our peoples is nothing new. It is old, tested through difficult times, and it constitutes a stable basis for strong relations between our countries.
This is the basis upon which we developed relations with Israel the last time we were in office, back in 1999 to 2004.
From the moment the new PASOK government took office – a little over a year ago – we started working again with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government on this strategic goal: to strengthen and deepen Greek-Israeli relations within a mutually beneficial framework. Our two countries have no competing interests and therefore cooperation comes naturally. I hope that we will soon be able to see the first results of our renewed relationship.

For years Greece was considered in Israel to be pro- Palestinian, and one of the more critical countries inside Europe towards Israel. Is the sudden change of government policy backed by the Greek public?
Greece has never been prejudiced – in favor of or against – any other people or any other state. Its foreign policy has always been a principled policy. It is based on the principles of international law, and more specifically on peace and on the resolution of disputes through dialogue.
This policy has the full and firm support of the Greek people. I am sure that the increasing number of Israeli tourists who experience Greek hospitality and have people-to-people contacts in Greece can confirm that.

There are those who say that the sudden bloom in the relationship is purely a result of the friction between Israel and Turkey, reflecting the notion that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” How much does the Turkey equation play in the relationship?
It doesn’t, and I mean that categorically. We don’t see any competitive dimension between the relationship we are developing with Israel and our relationship with Turkey. This is because each of these relationships has its own dynamic and its own historical background.
What we are doing is writing new pages in the history of Greek-Israeli relations. And – bearing in mind how close we are and how much we can do together – we have to admit that we are starting essentially from scratch.
So let’s not look at international relations as just a competitive game. I, at least, believe that everyone in the region stands to gain from the intensification of our bilateral relations.

Others say that given Greece’s difficult economy and need for Washington’s help, the feeling is that closer ties with Israel will help Athens in Washington. Is that a consideration – that the door to Washington goes through Jerusalem?
It is no secret that Greece has found itself in difficult economic straits this past year. But we are making an all-out effort – everyone, and particularly Greek citizens – to overcome and remedy the mistakes of the past.
And this effort is paying off.
The support we are getting from our friends and partners is invaluable, of course.
In particular with regard to the US, I must say that Greece – like Israel – already has close ties, both bilaterally and in the framework of NATO.
This is only natural. We are democracies who abide by the same rules and principles in international relations.
There is also a large Greek-American community that acts as a living bridge of friendship between the two countries. In this context, it is also natural that we help each other should the need arise.

Pro-Israel and pro-Greek lobbies in Washington recently worked together to push passage of a House resolution calling for protection of Greek Orthodox religious sites in Turkish-controlled northern Cyprus. Is that an indication of a growing alliance in Washington between the Greek and Jewish lobbies?
A common feature of our peoples is the strong diaspora all over the world, and more specifically in the United States. Another common feature is the close links we have with our communities abroad and the readiness of those communities to assist in the service of national interests.
These communities enjoy good relations and cooperate directly with each other.
The improvement in bilateral relations between our two countries can also be reflected in their direct contacts, which can only get closer.

Are the closer ties between Greece and Israel causing problems with Greece’s ties with the Arab world?
On the contrary. Closer ties between Greece and Israel improve Israel’s confidence in Greece, making the latter a more useful channel of communication with the Arab world, with which Greece already has traditional ties. Besides, Arab countries are very much aware of the fact that improving relations with Israel is not aimed against any other country.

Are these ties complicating matters between Athens and Turkey?
I would say, quite the opposite. Let me stress once again that the strengthening of bilateral relations among the countries of our region can only contribute to regional stability, given that bilateral ties are not aimed against any third country.

Will Turkey allow Israel Air Force planes to practice over Greece, as they did over Turkey a few years ago?
Development of military cooperation between Greece and Israel is a sovereign prerogative of the two countries.
All the more so when this cooperation is in full compliance with international law and is not directed against any other state.

Would Greece let flotillas heading for Gaza leave from Greek ports?
Greece fully understands Israel’s security concerns. At the same time, we should not forget the [Gaza] blockade’s serious implications on the humanitarian situation of the Palestinian people living in Gaza.
It is a fact – and the Israeli leadership acknowledged this by taking considerable steps in the right direction – that the unhindered flow of humanitarian aid into the area needs to be strengthened...
Beyond that, I must say that as a country with one of the strongest merchant fleets in the world, Greece has great respect for international law and the principle of freedom of – lawful, I would add – navigation.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said recently the EU should first solve its own problems before coming and preaching to Israel about how to solve the conflict with the Palestinians. What is your reaction to that comment?
It is my conviction that – besides any difficulties a club of 27 countries may face when dealing with such a delicate issue like the Middle East – the European Union can play a very constructive role in the region.
It is in a position to contribute, with a vast array of tools, to the achievement and consolidation of peace in the Middle East.
I believe that its presence is valuable to all sides. And I believe that the EU and Israel can improve their cooperation, which is mutually beneficial and can contribute to the peace-building process.

Are comments such as Lieberman’s leading to an increasing isolation of Israel in Europe?
In the end of the day, it is political decisions and actions that define the course of diplomacy. But statements like the one you refer to serve as a reminder of the necessity to work on improving our relations.

Some say Israel is more isolated in the world, and in Europe, than it has been for 30 years. Do you agree with that assessment?
Israel has always had very strong historical and cultural ties with Europe. There are certainly ups and downs, but the overall trend in relations between Israel and Europe is on the rise. A lot more can be done, of course, and we are all working in that direction.

Do you think the Palestinians should recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people?
I am convinced that direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians are the only way to reach a peace agreement.
I also believe that leaders on both sides will spare no effort to overcome obstacles to achieving peace in the region.
We believe that the two-state solution, with a democratic, viable, peaceful and sovereign Palestinian state and Israel living side by side within secure and recognized borders is the only solution that can bring peace and stability in the whole area.

Have you sensed a marked increase in Israeli tourism to Greece following the deterioration in ties with Turkey?
It is true that the number of Israeli tourists to Greece has been much higher this year in comparison to the past. We welcome Israeli tourists to Greece... Tourism is a bridge of friendship between our peoples, which should grow ever stronger.

Τρίτη 7 Σεπτεμβρίου 2010

Surveying Turkish influence in Western Balkans


Surveying Turkish influence in Western Balkans
2 September 2010
From: http://europenews.dk/en/node/34965

Turkish President Abdullah Gul will visit Bosnia-Herzegovina from Sept. 2-3, amid rising tensions in the lead-up to Bosnian elections. Turkey has been able to use tensions among Bosnia-Herzegovina’s ethnic groups to exert influence in the Western Balkans by acting as mediator. This is part of Turkey’s plan to reassert itself geopolitically and show Europe that without Turkey, the Western Balkans will not see lasting political stability.

However, Turkey’s efforts face several obstacles, including a weak economic presence in the Western Balkans, suspicion inside the region about Ankara’s motives, and growing concerns in the West about Turkey’s power.

Turkish President Abdullah Gul will pay an official visit to Bosnia-Herzegovina from Sept. 2-3. The visit comes amidst largely expected rising nationalist rhetoric in the country due to the upcoming Oct. 3 general elections. Milorad Dodik, premier of Serbian entity Republika Srpska (RS), has again hinted that RS might consider possible independence, prompting the Bosniak (Slavic Muslims from the Western Balkans) leadership to counter by calling for RS to be abolished. Meanwhile, Croat politicians continue to call for a separate ethnic entity of their own, a potential flash point between Croats and Bosniaks.

Amidst the tensions between Bosnia-Herzegovina’s ethnic factions — as well as between the countries of the Western Balkans — Ankara has found an opportunity to build up a wealth of political influence in the region by playing the role of moderator. As such, Turkey is both re-establishing its presence in the region it dominated during the Ottoman Empire and attempting to become the main arbiter on conflict resolution in the region, thus obtaining a useful lever in its relationship with Europe.

Ultimately, the Balkans are not high on Turkey’s list of geopolitical priorities. Turkey has much more immediate interests in the Middle East, where the ongoing U.S. withdrawal from Iraq is leaving a vacuum of influence that Turkey wants to fill and use to project influence throughout its Muslim backyard, and in the Caucasus, where competition is slowly intensifying with Russia. The Balkans rank below these, but are very much on Turkey’s mind, especially as the Balkans relate to Ankara’s relationship with Europe.

However, three major factors constrain Turkey’s influence in the Balkans: a paltry level of investment on the part of the Turkish business community, suspicion from a major group in the region (Serbs) and Turkey’s internal struggle with how best to parlay the legacy of Ottoman rule into an effective strategy of influence without stirring fears in the West that Ankara is looking to recreate the Ottoman Empire.

Turkey’s history in the Balkans

The Ottoman Empire dominated the Balkans between the 14th and early 20th centuries, using the region as a buffer against the Christian kingdoms based in the Pannonian Plain — namely the Hungarians, and later Austrian and Russian influences. The Eastern Balkans, particularly the Wallachia region of present-day Romania, was a key economic region due to the fertile Danube basin. But the Western Balkans — present-day Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania — were largely just a buffer, although they also provided a key overland transportation route to Central Europe, which in the latter parts of Ottoman Empire led to growing economic importance (...)

Παρασκευή 3 Σεπτεμβρίου 2010

"Mad Vandalism": Turkey to Demolish Hotels of Outspoken Armenian Entrepreneur-Scholar



By: Nanore Barsoumian
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/09/01/mad-vandalism/

Sevan Nisanyan, the owner of Nisanyan Hotels, and a linguist, columnist, academic, and outspoken critic, is facing a demolition order on his hotels throughout Turkey. In a country packed with illegal constructions, the targeting of the Nisanyan Hotels speaks volumes about Turkey’s persecution of its minority citizens who dare to raise their voice against the government or its denialist policies.


'It is an act of mad vandalism, but I doubt very much that they will be able to carry it out.'
The Nisanyan Hotels are located in Sirince, Izmir, a village of around 600 inhabitants in the Aegean hills. Nisanyan moved there 15 years ago, and almost single handedly turned this small village with a dying agriculture into a booming tourist spot.

“I have been active in preserving the historic heritage of the village. It was mostly through my activities that Sirince has now become a well-known tourist destination,” he told the Armenian Weekly.

Nisanyan purchased and renovated many houses in Sirince, using traditional methods of building and preserving the aesthetics of the area. He then converted those house into what today is known as the Nisanyan Hotels.

“As far as I know, this is the first—and I think only—commercial establishment in the history of the Turkish Republic that carries an openly Armenian name,” he said.

Nisanyan is certainly a passionate and persistent man, and a stickler for justice when it comes to saving his “babies,” as he calls his houses. “The local bureaucracy regarded my activities with hostility from day one. I was harassed constantly, permissions were either denied or delayed by 10 years or more, I had to face more than 30 court cases, was fined repeatedly, arrested, jailed, and so on. I persevered, and my perseverance made them even angrier.”

His battle has been going on for 15 years, and now he may lose all that he has built. “They have passed a decision to demolish every single house I have built in 15 years. The governor of Izmir is behind the decision. He is a man notorious as the former governor of a Kurdish province where army-run assassination squads operated freely.”

“It is an act of mad vandalism,” he continued, “but I doubt very much that they will be able to carry it out.”

Nisanyan noted that to date, 16 criminal charges—carrying a 50-year prison sentence—have been brought against him, and all are related to “unauthorized construction,” “unauthorized repair work,” and “defying government orders.” Five cases have concluded, serving him with a total of 10.5 years in prison. His appeals are pending.

Add to those the demolition order, the court cases following his views that are often deemed as “insulting Turkishness,” and the threats he receives from individuals with ultra-nationalist mindsets, and a bleak reality emerges for the Armenian population of Turkey.

“Although there is much willingness now among the Turkish elite to revise Turkey’s traditional attitude toward minorities, the old habits die hard in the bureaucracy. There is instinctive hostility toward an Armenian. It turns rabid when that Armenian is also an outspoken critic of the Turkish system,” Nisanyan told the Weekly.


Sevan Nisanyan and his wife, Mujde—after renovating Mujde’s 'donkey shed' and turning it into their residence—bought and rebuilt a handful of other houses near ruin.
Nisanyan, who was awarded the 2004 Freedom of Thought Award by the Human Rights Association of Turkey, has often voiced views that are controversial in the tightly censored Turkish society. He has spoken publically about the Armenian Genocide, winning him more than a few enemies. His most recent comments, made during a Turkish television debate program, resulted in the punishment of the airing station by Turkey’s Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTUK), who claimed Nisanyan’s comments were excessively critical and that they “humiliated the Republic of Turkey.”

However, Nisanyan does hold on to a ray of optimism, and views this current obstacle as an opportunity for Turkey’s authorities to turn a new page in upholding and protecting minority rights.

“I believe this is a test case for the Erdogan government’s willingness to improve minority rights in Turkey. I believe it is also a test case that will show if Armenians can go on living freely and securely in this country, or whether the old system of state thuggery will go on unchanged,” he said.

Nisanyan Hotels and Sirince

Sevan Nisanyan and his wife, Mujde—after renovating Mujde’s “donkey shed” and turning it into their residence—bought and rebuilt a handful of other houses near ruin. Around the same time, Nisanyan published a guidebook to small hotels in Turkey, which turned out to be a big hit. The Nisanyans soon after decided that they, too, would operate a small hotel—and that they would do it right.

“At first they did not know what to do with their collection of refurbished donkey sheds. Then they concluded that, as the most dreaded hotel critics in the land, they might as well put their hand under the millstone—as they say in Turkish—and learn how to run an inn themselves. Nisanyan Houses were born in August 1999,” explains the blurb on their hotel website.

The hotels were a success, and they soon bought the main hotel building. It was an “ugly apartment building that some big shots from Ankara had started building years ago,” but had left incomplete. It was a huge eyesore—an “abomination”—and the largest construction in town (though only three stories tall). While renovating this main building, the authorities tried to put a stop to it, but Nisanyan refused to give in. The dispute went to court, and Nisanyan won on a technicality.

Nine more cases were filed against him. He won all but one. “They turned it into a lynching campaign,” he told the Planning Report in an interview.

Nisanyan eventually went to jail for a wall he had built in his own garden.

What is surprising is that the authorities would go to such lengths to stop a man who seems to be in love with this small village, with its historic Greek houses, and has exerted much time and effort in building and protecting it.

To remain true to the architectural heritage of Sirince, Nisanyan and his builders pulled apart ruined houses to study the materials, modes of construction, and intricacies of the earlier builders. He published this information in a booklet—a sort of hand manual—for builders in Sirince, written in a simple language, in an effort to continue the time-honored cultural and building traditions.

The village was declared a historic site in 1984, and no constructions or renovations were to take place in it. Many, however, went on with their business, building on and renovating their own properties. According to Nisanyan, there are at least 90 illegal building constructions in the village.

“When a place is declared a historical site, by law they have to produce a [zoning] plan for the village within a year. It actually took 23 years to produce the plan. It came into effect, finally, last year. Throughout this period, it was entirely impossible to build anything legally in the village,” Nisanyan told the Planning Report.

The long overdue plan is catastrophic, according to Nisanyan. The traditional structures in the building have basic mathematical proportions and a style that are entirely overlooked by the drafters of the plan. While the traditional village houses were made of stone and timber, the new plan allows the use of cement and permits 250 new houses in the village. For Nisanyan, the new zoning plan spells disaster for the village. And so he chose to defy it.



This unyielding campaign against Nisanyan and his hotels has made headlines before. In 2004, Hakan Ataman, in an article for Radikal, wrote: “There are 40,000 illegal buildings waiting to be demolished in Izmir; 70 percent of the buildings in Istanbul are illegal; 80 percent of [touristic] facilities in Olimpos are illegal; all of the buildings in Sirince are illegal. Turkey is a paradise of illegal buildings. Yet for some reason the Nisanyan houses are targeted.”

The reason, however, seems to have far less to do with the legality of the constructions than with the tolerability of Nisanyan within Turkish society. For a state so adamant in censoring all who dare to be critical of its policies—whether leaders of other sovereign states, or Google and its YouTube—a Turkish-Armenian who refuses to bend and parrot official Turkish discourse must seem like an insufferable thorn.

In Nisanyan’s own words to the Weekly, “The Armenian who openly defies the Turkish state is something they cannot tolerate.”

Παρασκευή 11 Ιουνίου 2010

Η Γάζα, το Ισραήλ, η Τουρκία κι εμείς


από: Το αρμενικό περιοδικό ARMENIAN WEEKLY
Απόδοση-μετάφραση - Μιλτιάδης Μπόλαρης
http://www.hairenikweekly.com/
Άρθρο του Γκαρέν Γιεγκπαριάν
Garen Yegparian

http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/06/09/yegparian-gaza-israel-turkey-and-we/

Το Ισραήλ τα θαλάσσωσε κυριολεκτικά με την επέμβασή του στα πλοία που επιχείρησαν να σπάσουν τον αποκλεισμό της Γάζας. Οτιδήποτε θα μπορούσε να αποκτήσει με την παρεμπόδιση της εισόδου του υλικού που επέλεξε να αποκλείσει από τη Γάζα, ξεπεράστηκε από τη διεθνή κατακραυγή που έχει συγκεντρώσει επάνω του. Αλλά αυτό δεν είναι θέμα, παρά γιά τους ακραίους υποστηρικτές της φιλο-Ισραηλίτικης πολιτικής. Τι πιο ενδιαφέρον για τους Αρμένιους είναι ο ρόλος και η θέση της Τουρκίας σε όλα αυτά, και ποιες θύρες είναι ανοικτές σε μας ως αποτέλεσμα.

Σίγουρα, κανείς δεν αμφιβάλλει ότι η απόφαση της Τουρκίας, καθώς και η απόφασή εκ μέρους του AK, γιά συμμετοχή σε όλα αυτά δεν είναι παρά ένα κυνικό, μακιαβελικό, ένα ακόμη τέχνασμα realpolitik από το οπλοστάσιο του διαβολικά ραδιούργου υπουργού Εξωτερικών της, για την επέκταση του διεθνούς κύρους του γενοκτόνου κράτους, και ιδιαίτερα μεταξύ των λαών και τα κράτη του αραβικού και μουσουλμανικού κόσμου.

Η τουρκική ομάδα υπεύθυνη οργάνωσης της νηοπομπής, συνεργάζεται με ομάδες που μπορεί κάλλιστα να έχουν άνομες διασυνδέσεις και εξαρτήσεις, αλλά δεν μπορώ να πώ περισσότερο για αυτό, ούτε και το πότε μπορώ να έχω πληροφορίες.

Ακούγεται ότι ήταν πολύ καλά οργανωμένη και χρηματοδοτούμενη και πήρε μέρος με το μεγαλύτερο πλοίο στον στολίσκο αρωγής, το οποίο υποδηλώνει την πιθανότητα συμμετοχής του (Τουρκικού) κράτους. Ήταν, επίσης, το πλοίο στο οποίο συνέβη η βία.

Οι δηλώσεις του Ερντογάν και του Νταβούτογλου έχουν λάβει ευρεία κάλυψη. Σαφώς, αυτό είναι μέρος της νεο-Ottomanist τις προσπάθειές τους για να γίνει η Τουρκία παίκτης στον ισλαμικό κόσμο, μεγάλο μέρος των οποίων αποφεύγει την Τουρκία για τις βαρβαρότητες και την κακοδιοίκηση που υπέστησαν οι συνθρησκοί τους μουσουλμάνοι υπό την οθωμανική κυριαρχία και τον αντι-ισλαμικών τάσεων Κεμαλισμός της. Επίσημα η Άγκυρα φαίνεται να προέβη σε υπολογισμό για το πως υπάρχουν πιό πολλά θετικά που μπορούν να αντλήσουν από το να έρθει η Τουρκία σε σύγκρουση με το Ισραήλ από το να συνεχίσουν την περαιτέρω ανάπτυξη της από δεκαετίες υφισταμένης μακροχρόνιας θετική σχέσης μαζί του.

Ανάμεσα τους καρπούς της της θετική ς αυτής σχέσης είναι και η βοήθειαι στους διαδρόμους της εξουσίας των ΗΠΑ, η καταπολέμηση του περάσματος του ψηφίσματος της Αρμενικής γενοκτονίας, καθώς και άλλα αντι-Αρμενικών προσπάθειών που προέρχεται από το Αζερμπαϊτζάν και την Τουρκία. Το ερώτημα επομένως είναι, μετά τα τελευταία συμβάντα, τα εν λόγω στοιχεία στο εβραϊκό λόμπι των ΗΠΑ που έχουν λειτουργήσει επανελλημένα εναντίον μας (και ακόμη περισσότερο οι με σωστα κριτήρια και με σωστή συνείδηση και γνώμονα συναδέλφους τους), έτοιμοι να έρθουν κοντά; Θα δουν επι τέλους ότι δεν υπάρχει μακροπρόθεσμο όφελος από την υποστήριξη ενός κράτους-αρνητή της γενοκτονίας; Είναι θυμωμένοι αρκετά για να υποβαθμίσουν ή και να διακόψουν την σχέση αυτή; Μου φαίνεται αυτή είναι μια πολύ κατάλληλη στιγμή για το αναπτέρωμα των προσπάθειών μας στις ΗΠΑ Ήρθε η ώρα για κάποια ανανέωση στις σχέσεις μας.

Ταυτόχρονα, οι συνάδελφοί μας στη Μέση Ανατολή θα πρέπει να είναι να πείσουν τις κυβερνήσεις τους γιατο πόσο αναξιόπιστη είναι και πόσο πισώπλατα-μαχαιρώνει, και να αποδείξουν ότι τα πρόσφατα τερτίπια της Τουρκίας είναι καθαρός κυνισμός . Στο μέτωπο της μη διασποράς, η κυβέρνηση της Αρμενίας πρέπει να αναδεικνύει παρόμοια θέματα με τους συνομιλητές τους, ασχέτως εαν το θέμα είναι οικονομικό, το Αρτσάχ ή οι πραγματικές σχέσεις με την Τουρκία.

Αλλά αυτά είναι βραχυπρόθεσμα κέρδη. Εάν οι προσπάθειες της Τουρκίας φέρουν καρπούς, τότε θα έχουμε σοβαρά προβλήματα μακροπρόθεσμα. Θυμηθείτε που βρίσκεται η Αρμενία. Εάν η Τουρκία τραβήξει το Ιράν στην τροχιά της, θα έχοθυμε πρόβλημα. Αν οι αραβικές χώρες πέσουν θύμα εναγκαλισμού τών ψευδο-ηρωισμών της Τουρκίας, οι κοινότητές μας στις Αραβικές χώρες μπορούν να βρεθούν υπό πίεσιν. Μπορούν ακόμη και να βιώσουν κάποιον θετικό αντίκτυπο στην Ευρώπη με τον ψευδο-ανθρωπισμό τους. Είναι επιτακτική και άμεση ανάγκη να βγούν στην δημοσιότητα η ειρωνεία (και το υποβόσκον θράσσος) των τουρκικής σχολίων για τα κατεχόμενα (σκεφτείτε την Αρμενία και το Κουρδιστάν, ΚΑΙ ΤΗΝ ΚΥΠΡΟ! ΘΑ ΠΡΟΣΘΕΤΕ Ο ΜΕΤΑΦΡΑΣΤΗΣ) και Τις παραβιάσεις των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων (σκεφτείτε τις αγάπες με τον σφαγέα του Νταρφούρ, η την καταπίεση των ίδιων των μειονοτήτων της, τις σφαγές, κ.λπ.).

Για τους τρεις τελευταίους αιώνες, η Οθωμανική Αυτοκρατορία / Τουρκία έχει επιβιώσει μέσα από πολύ επιδέξια διπλωματία, παίζοντας τον έναν εναντίον του άλλου δυνάμεις πολύ μεγαλύτερες απο την ίδια, χρησιμοποιώντας την βασική γεωγραφία της Μικράς Ασίας. Χρησιμοποιούν τα εδάφη μας εις βάρος μας και εις βάρος του υπολοίπου κόσμου. Δεδομένου του ότι έχουμε στερηθεί κρατικής υπόστασης για όλους εκτός από τον τελευταίο αιώνα (εκτός της πολύ ασταθούς, και ουσιαστικά υποταγμένη ςστους σοβιετικούς κρατικής οντότητας), δεν έχουμε το ίδιο βάθος διπλωματική / πολιτική ιστορία, εμπειρία, δεξιότητες, και τον πολιτισμό να αντλήσει. Τώρα είναι η τέλεια στιγμή για να μάθουμε να ελισόμαστε και να πιέσουμε την κατάσταση προς τα άκρα. Δεν έχουμε τίποτα να χάσουμε, αλλά τεράστιες ευκαιρίες γιά να κερδίσουμε

Ελπίζω πως εμείς, η διασποράς και η κυβέρνηση της Αρμενίας (ειδικά μετά το φιάσκο του Αρμενοτουρκικού πρωτόκολλου) έχουμε μπροστά μας μιά πρόκληση. Ας εκθέσουμε την Τουρκία για το τι απάτη είναι και πρεσβεύει.

Πέμπτη 10 Ιουνίου 2010

Mouradian: Post-Flotilla Ties Between Turkey and Israel: Irreparable Damage or Just a Hiccup?


Άρθρο του Αρμένιου-Λιβανέζου δημοσιογράφου Χατσίγκ Μουραντιάν. Δημοσιευμένο στο ARMENIAN WEEKLY
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/06/03/post-flottila/

By: Khatchig Mouradian


BEIRUT, Lebanon—I have been following with horror the news on the Israeli attack on the flotilla of ships carrying aid to Gaza. The outrage here in Lebanon and the Arab world is palpable. What is even more evident is the pride with which people here speak about Turkey’s “heroic stand” in the face of Israel.


Erdogan: International law has been trampled underfoot
On May 31, the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement in which it protested “in the strongest terms the use of force by the Israeli Defense Forces against the civilians from many countries who want to transport humanitarian assistance to the people in Gaza.”

The Turkish Foreign Ministry wrote that “Israel has once again clearly demonstrated that it does not value human lives and peaceful initiatives through targeting innocent civilians…such actions against civilians who are involved only in peaceful activities cannot be accepted. Israel will have to bear the consequences of these actions which constitute a violation of international law.”

In turn, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, “It should be known that we will not stay silent and unresponsive in the face of this inhuman state terror,” according to Hurriyet Daily News. “International law has been trampled underfoot,” Erdogan added.

Irony alert?
Of course, most Arab commentators said nothing about the irony in the statements above, and the many similar statements coming out of Turkey these days. That is not surprising. After all, Turkey—a strategic ally of Israel—has, in recent years, reached out to the Islamic world and presented itself as a defender of the Palestinian cause. Why rock the boat?

Some intellectuals, however, highlighted the hypocrisy of the Turkish state and of most Turkish commentators. On one online discussion board, Stergios Kaprinis, a psychiatrist from Greece, wrote: “There is no doubt that the events are tragic. The Freedom Flotilla attack by Israeli commandos can only be described as an act of piracy. However, I have been following the reactions of the Turkish government and I must say that I am appalled at their hypocrisy at the expense of the Palestinians. In the past 15 years, the Turkish government has ethnically cleansed large parts of Turkey’s ethnically Kurdish southeast, has invaded Iraq more than a few times, and keeps occupying and colonizing the northern half of the Republic of Cyprus, a sovereign country, member of the UN and the EU. Yet today, the Turkish government has somehow managed to proclaim itself the defender of international law and protector of the oppressed.”

In an article published in the Huffington Post, Israeli writer Dana Agmon, noted: “And finally, a word to the sponsors—Turkey—did anyone float into Turkey when it murdered over a million Armenians? Or did anyone do it when you arrested hundreds of Kurds, including children, merely four years ago and violated their rights? Or maybe when you invaded Cyprus?”

An intellectual from Turkey told me that had the Kurds in Turkey had access to sea, “God knows what kind of horrors would befall on those who tried to support them.” Another noted how the discourse on the Palestinians in Turkey on one hand, and the Armenians and Kurds on the other, are so disparate, even among progressive Turkish intellectuals, that “the double standards sicken me to my stomach. States are, by definition, hypocritical. But when intellectuals who present themselves as the beacons of enlightened thought engage in such hypocrisy, is there any hope left?”

Irreparable damage?
On June 3, Turkish President Abdullah Gul said, “From now on, Turkish-Israeli ties will never be the same. This incident has left an irreparable and deep scar.”

The myth of “irreparable relations” seems to be floating around the entire Islamic world since the attack on the flotilla. Arab news sources and analysts in the Middle East continue to insist that Turkish-Israeli relations have been damaged beyond repair. Regardless of what Turkish officials declare in their public statements, this is naiveté and wishful thinking at best.

What the Arab world fails to see is that the Turkish state cannot and will not bury its strategic relations with Israel because of the flotilla attack or in solidarity with the Palestinian people. Ankara is playing an ambitious political game in the Middle East. Yes, its tactical maneuvers are already reaching beyond the bounds of its strategic capabilities (and it might soon be forced to fold back), but to view the Turkish state—or even the current government—as the extension of the Turkish street is self-deception.

Turkey and Israel will soon repair the damage done to their relations. There’s no two ways about it.

Related Articles
Counter-Flotilla ‘to Aid Turkey’s Oppressed Kurds, Armenians’
Sassounian: Erdogan Deserves Medal as Fake Friend of Palestinians
Mouradian: ‘Missing Hitler’s Spirit’: The Problematic Post-Flotilla Discourse in Turkey
Turkish Ruling Party at Odds on Military Ties with Israel
Erdogan: We Should Not Confuse Gaza with Darfur
Recent Articles
Rivas Comes in 7th at Eurovision
Jewish American Support for Turkey Declining
Yegparian: Gaza, Israel, Turkey, and We
Hamazkayin Dance Ensemble at Skokie Festival of Cultures
Teacher Turned Pariah, Avagian Behind Bars

Share This:Twitter Digg Stumble Upon Reddit Delicious FacebookKhatchig Mouradian
Khatchig Mouradian is a journalist, writer and translator. He was an editor of the Lebanese-Armenian Aztag Daily from 2000 to 2007, when he moved to Boston and became the editor of the Armenian Weekly. He is a PhD student in Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Clark University. He has lectured extensively and participated in conferences in Armenia, Turkey, Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria, Austria, Switzerland, Norway and the U.S. He has presented papers on genocide and the media at several academic conferences.View all articles by Khatchig Mouradian

58 Comments
Karekin
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
How about listening to a Palestinian instead of Israeli propaganda for a change? There are lessons here for Armenians, as well:

I don’t write poems but, in any case, poems are not poems
Ghassan Hage 6/2/10 http://australiansforpalestine.com/
Long ago, I was made to understand that Palestine was not Palestine; I was also informed that Palestinians were not Palestinians; They also explained to me that ethnic cleansing was not ethnic cleansing. And when naive old me saw freedom fighters they patiently showed me that they were not freedom fighters, and that resistance was not resistance. And when, stupidly, I noticed arrogance, oppression and humiliation they benevolently enlightened me so I can see that arrogance was not arrogance, oppression was not oppression, and humiliation was not humiliation. I saw misery, racism, inhumanity and a concentration camp. But they told me that they were experts in misery, racism, inhumanity and concentrations camps and I have to take their word for it: this was not misery, racism, inhumanity and a concentrations camp. Over the years they’ve taught me so many things: invasion was not invasion, occupation was not occupation, colonialism was not colonialism and apartheid was not apartheid… They opened my simple mind to even more complex truths that my poor brain could not on its own compute like: ‘having nuclear weapons’ was not ‘having nuclear weapons’, ‘not having weapons of mass destruction’ was ‘having weapons of mass destruction’. And, democracy (in the Gaza strip) was not democracy. Having second class citizens (in Israel) was democracy. So you’ll excuse me if I am not surprised to learn today that there were more things that I thought were evident that are not: peace activists are not peace activists, piracy is not piracy, the massacre of unarmed people is not the massacre of unarmed people. I have such a limited brain and my ignorance is unlimited. And they’re so f**king intelligent. Really. Ghassan Hage

Krikor
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
Listen, Enver Turk, or whatever cursive name has been given you. Hateful comments against the Turks, you said? Well, if you find them hateful they’re well justified: you stole my ancestral homeland of Western Armenia in 1915-1921 and slaughtered, as barbarians, millions of innocent people, deported them to starve to death in the desert, portray the Armenian artifacts as Turkish, and continue to deny your crime against humanity. Can we be hateful or you expect us to give you hugs and kisses for that? And you dare to give me shame for my rightful indignation over your crime?! What a joke! Racists are those who annihilate the whole race, as your forefathers did, and not those who demand justice for the mass murdered people. There was Greater Armenia l-o-o-o-n-g before your predecessors: nomadic savages of Seljuk and Mongol origin, invaded Asia Minor. Where have the Turks been 3000 years ago, might you know? Armenians don’t have to kill all the Turks in order to return our lands and our civilization, we are not barbarians, like you, to slaughter innocent women, children, and the elders. This is a typically Turkish mentality: ‘you have to kill, KILL, in order to gain something.’ A nomadic, savage mentality in the 21st century. Nothing has changed from the times your hordes of nomads appeared in the region in the 11th-13th centuries AD. Nothing! A land means honor for a Turk? Wow! What a brilliant idea we’re hearing from a Turk. Have you ever thought that a land could also mean honor for those indigenous peoples, like Armenians, Greeks, and Assyrians, who inhabited it for millennia? Or you see things only through your narrow-minded Turkish perspective?


teyleirian s
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
Yes, Murat, I know that ‘a blockade means something different than closing borders.’ I gave you an internationally-accepted definition of the blockade in my older post, which the Turkish blockade of Armenia obviously falls under.

So you think that blockading a third country ‘in response to the brutal invasion of Karabakh, lands of a close ally, was a rather mild and proportional response?’ Wow! Look who’s talking! A representative of a nation-state internationally known as brutal ethnic cleanser of indigenous peoples—Assyrians, Greeks, Armenians, Alawis, Kurds—of Asia Minor. A representative of a nation that brutally occupied a sovereign UN member-state of Cyprus in 1974 and established TRNC in contradiction of the terms of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee.

Let me clarify some things for you. Armenia did not invade Artsakh (Karabakh). The overwhelming majority of Christian Armenians inhabiting Artsakh for centuries, a region that was unjustly and illegally placed under Azerbaijan’s jurisdiction by unilateral decision of Stalin in the 1920s, voted to exercise the universally-accepted right of the people for self-determination. It is essentially a conflict between Artsakh and Azerbaijan as it responded to Armenians’ petition by constant shelling and slaughters of Armenian residents in Sumgait and Baku. Where do you see Turkey in this conflict, may I ask? What does relationship between other nations have to do with Turkey so it imposed blockade of Armenia? Has Cyprus been a historically Turkish territory? Has it been populated by majority Turks at the time of invasion? Has it been transformed from Turkey to, say, Greece by an illegal decision? Your juxtaposition of a self-determination struggle, as in Artsakh, and an explicit application of military invasive Turkish force, as in Cyprus, would amuse erudites and intellectuals. Do you know that the UN General Assembly has adopted a resolution 3314 (XXIX) with the Definition of Aggression annexed to it, following the Turkish invasion of Cyprus? No? Adopted on 14 December 1974, the Definition reads as follows: ‘Invasion of a State by the armed forces of another State, with or without occupation of the territory.’ The issue of self-determination was singled out in the resolution as a different case in a clause in article 7 of the said resolution. A territory of a sovereign state of Cyprus must be 100% and not 60% in the Greek Cypriots’ hands. It’s THEIR country. Whether they live rather nice lives thanks to whatever is THEIR business. Whether the same can or cannot be said of Turkish residents or whether they are isolated or not, doesn’t matter: Turks are not the native inhabitants of Cyprus, they’re invaders.

Turkey is applying a blockade of Armenia regardless whether Armenia has control over its borders and airspace, because blockade, I repeat it for you once again, is ‘isolation of a nation, area, city, or harbor by hostile ships or forces in order to prevent the entrance and exit of traffic and commerce.’ This is exactly what Turkey does: it prevents the entrance and exit of traffic and commerce. Shall I repeat the international norm again or you understood from the second attempt?

I don’t have to preoccupy my mind with what would or wouldn’t happen to Iraq when it entered Kuwait or imagine what the U.S. response would be if a part of Israel were to be run over by one of its enemies. Relationship between the third states should not bother Armenia, just as the relationship between the third states should not bother Turkey.

As for Kurds, are you reading reports by a multitude of human rights organizations and advocacy groups regarding brutal suppression and mass murdering of Kurds in Turkey or you live on the moon? Had Kurds not been blockaded and deprived by the Turks, why does your government attempt to suppress their struggle for liberation, captured Ocalan, emptied their residential areas in the south and south-east, and qualify them not as Kurds but as ‘Mountain Turks’? Why do you commit these acts if the Kurds live unblockaded, unsuppressed, and privileged? Might you know?

Armen
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
An article by Dov Fischer posted on FrontPage magazine reads as follows:

Flotilla “supported financially by Hamas and peopled primarily by their Turkish allies” intended to transport 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid, while Israel supplies Gaza with 15, 000 tons of food and humanitarian aid every week,In the context of Turkey’s indignation with blockade of Gaza the author proposes to have a look at Turkey’s attitude towards Armenians, Christians and Kurds. “Does her treatment of religious and ethnic minorities model Western humanitarian values?” Fischer wonders.
Turkey has refused to recognize the Genocide perpetrated against Armenians in the beginning of the 20th century, he notes. Ankara did not apologize or even acknowledged it. Israel regretted publicly for killings of Turkish citizens in attack on humanitarian ships, though “Turkey still denies the Armenian Genocide ever happened.”
As regards Kurds, they do not have a right to give their children Kurdish names. The Turkish government restricts educational efforts of ethnic minorities, including Greeks and Armenians.

gayane
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
WOW.. WOW.. WOW.. that is all i can say after I read Turks’ replies…

my idea of putting likes of Murat, Enver Pasha, Kurt on a big ship and sending them away sounds better and better…

G

Karekin
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
Please don’t be so quick to embrace Dov Fisher’s comments, people….or that the Israelis/Jews are using the genocide to serve their own purposes at this moment. If you can’t realize that you’re being used, only to be thrown away once they are done, then think again.

Armen
June 7, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
Noone ‘embraces’ Dov Fisher’s or anyone else’s comments. Just posting them. In politics, everyone’s using someone else or some other issue to serve their own purposes. No action is needed in this stand-off. Just observance.

Karekin
June 8, 2010 | Permalink | Reply
We do not need this kind of ‘help’…

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3899835,00.html

Τετάρτη 9 Ιουνίου 2010

Gaza, Israel, Turkey, and We


from: THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY

http://www.hairenikweekly.com/
Η Γάζα, το Ισραήλ, η Τουρκία κι εμείς
Γκαρέν Γιεγκπαριάν
Garen Yegparian

http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/06/09/yegparian-gaza-israel-turkey-and-we/

Israel screwed up in its response to the ships attempting to break its blockade of Gaza. Anything it might have gained by preventing the entry of material it chooses to exclude from Gaza is far outweighed by the international opprobrium it has garnered. But this is not at issue except by extreme spinners of pro-Israel policy. What’s more interesting for Armenians is Turkey’s role and position in all of this, and what doors are open to us as a result.

Certainly, no one doubts that Turkey’s, and its ruling AK Party’s, involvement in all this is nothing but a cynical, Machiavellian, realpolitik ploy in its devilishly competent Foreign Minister’s bag of tricks to expand the genocidal state’s international stature, and particularly among the peoples and states of the Arab and Muslim worlds. The Turkish group cooperating with the efforts may also have connections to unsavory outfits, but more on this if and when I can get details. I’m told it was very well organized and funded, and delivered the biggest ship in the relief flotilla, which suggests the possibility of state involvement. It was also the ship on which the violence occurred.

Erdogan’s and Davutoglu’s statements have received wide coverage. Clearly, this is part of their neo-Ottomanist efforts to become a player in the Islamic world, much of which shuns Turkey for the brutality and misrule heaped upon fellow Muslims under Ottoman rule and Kemalism’s anti-Islamic bent. Official Ankara seems to be making the calculation that there’s more to be gained by clashing with Israel than further developing a decades-long positive relationship.

Among the fruits of the positive relationship has been help in the halls of U.S. power, fighting passage of the genocide resolution, and other anti-Armenian efforts emanating from Azerbaijan and Turkey. The question is, after the last few incidents, are those Jewish lobby elements in the U.S. that have worked against us (and even against their more right-minded and conscience-driven colleagues) ready to come around? Do they see yet that there’s no long-term benefit to supporting a genocide-denying state? Are they irate enough to downgrade or sever the relationship? It seems to me this is a very opportune moment for our efforts in the U.S. It’s time for some renewed outreach.

Simultaneously, our colleagues in the Middle East should be conveying to their governments how untrustworthy, back-stabbing, and cynical Turkey’s recent ploys demonstrate it to be. On the non-diaspora front, Armenia’s government should be playing up similar themes with their negotiating partners, whether the issue is economics, Artsakh, or actual relations with Turkey.

But this is all short-term gain. If Turkey’s efforts bear fruit, then we will have serious problems in the long term. Remember where Armenia is situated. If Turkey pulls Iran into its orbit, it’s a problem. If the Arab countries become enamored of Turkey’s pseudo-heroics, our communities in there may become constrained. They may even get some traction in Europe with their faux-humanitarianism. It is imperative and timely to publicize the irony (and the underlying temerity) of Turkish comments about occupation (think Armenia and Kurdistan) and human rights abuses (think coddling Darfur’s butcher, abuse of its own minorities, massacres, etc.).

We have to play very hard. For the last three centuries, the Ottoman Empire/Turkey has survived through very skillful diplomacy, playing off against one another powers far greater than it, using Asia Minor’s pivotal geography. They’re using our lands to our, and the world’s, detriment. Since we’ve been deprived of statehood for all but the last century or so (and a very shaky, mostly Soviet-subservient statehood at that) we don’t have the same depth of diplomatic/political history, experience, skills, and culture to draw on. But this is a perfect time to learn by doing and pushing to the edge. There’s not much to be lost, but tremendous potential for gain.

I hope we, the diaspora and Armenia’s government (especially after the protocols fiasco), are up to the challenge. Let’s expose Turkey for the fraud that it is.

Turkey votes against Iran nuclear sanctions, breaking UN unanimity

H Τουρκία απομακρύνεται ακόμη περισσότερο από τις Αμερικάνικες επιλογές στα θέματα που την αφορούν άμεσα. Με το να υθποστηρίζει το Ιράν, στην ουσία προετοιμάζει το δικό της έδαφος γιά πυρηνική αυτοτέλεια. Ηλεκρονικό άρθρο των Τάϊμς της Νέας Υόρκης:

The New York Times
Wed, June 09, 2010 -- 11:39 AM ET
-----

U.N. Security Council Adopts New Sanctions Against Iran Over Nuclear Program

Moving firmly away from the Obama administration's previous
emphasis on wooing Iran, the United States pushed through a
new round of United Nations sanctions against Iran on
Wednesday because of its nuclear program.

The new sanctions, a modest increase from previous rounds,
are mainly aimed at the Iranian military and took months to
negotiate. But they do not carry the symbolic weight of a
unanimous Security Council decision, because two of the 15
nations now on the council -- Brazil and Turkey -- voted
against the measure. Lebanon abstained.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com?emc=na

Τρίτη 8 Ιουνίου 2010

Obama unveils his national security strategy


Posted on June 7, 2010
by The Global Realm
Obama unveils his national security strategy

The Voice of Russia
Jun 7, 2010
http://theglobalrealm.com/2010/06/07/obama-unveils-his-national-security-strategy/

In the Voice of Russia World service we present a new program Red Line.


Strokan: Welcome to the Voice of Russia and its weekend program Red Line. Every weeken we, Sergei Strokan and Mira Salganik, discuss the most significant events of the week. We are joined in the discussion by Russian and foreign experts, political, academic or cultural figures sharing or opposing our views on the vast and increasingly interdependent world. We want the program to be personal, provocative and, above all, honest. Mira, it was by no means a quiet week, wasn’t it?

Salganik: Well, it was certainly not a quiet week at all. When we met here last weekend, I couldn’t imagine the coming week would be quite so turbulent and tragic also. I mean Gaza carnage and Andrei Voznesenski’s death is mourned far beyond Russia, I mean given his caliber and international popularity.

Strokan: So, here we go. Beyond the headlines – this is Red Line first heading to discuss the world mainstream event. After more than a year of deliberations, President Obama finally unveiled his much-awaited national security strategy. The document spells out ABC of American and global security as it is seen by the present US administration. This 52-page text book of Obama’s vision of the world sparked worldwide debate on what would be the impact of the new Obama’s policy on America’s standing in global developments. Let me briefly remind you the key Obama’s points. “As we fight the wars in front of us, we must see the horizon beyond them,” the document says “To get there, we must pursue a strategy of national renewal and global leadership — a strategy that rebuilds the foundation of American strength and influence.” The next observation sounds provocative and gives even more food for thought – military superiority must be maintained and the United States remains the only nation able to project and sustain large-scale military operations over extended distances, the document says. But when we overuse our military might, it says, our military is overstretched. Mira, do you believe that Obama’s national security strategy is a clear break with a notorious President Bush’s security doctrine of 2002.

Salganik: Well, I think there are few differences in substance and many in tone. But it would be wrong to say this is a break with the past. After all, U.S. interests and values are long-standing and the tools it possesses for pursuing them are stable too. For all the rhetoric or distancing, there is more continuity with Bush and other presidencies than most people perceive.

Strokan: Well, Mira you know I would prefer to make special emphasis on differences rather than continuity. At least, it gives the world another chance to look at America with different eyes.

Salganik: For some time now, it has been clear that the United States’ national security strategy needs rethinking. The September 11 attacks, the global economic crisis, cyber-terror threats and even the environmental catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico underscore that the challenges America faces in 2010 have changed even from just a decade ago.

Strokan: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton timely calls it “smart power”. She discussed the new strategy report in her speech at the Brooklyn institutions in Washington the other day. She said the United States is moving from the direct exercise of power to what she called “a more sophisticated and difficult mix of indirect power and influence.” But we have not yet touched upon the American and world reaction to the doctrine. We were really flooded with comments this week. What do you think of it, Mira?

Salganik: Well, actually it is the timing of the document’s release which plays crucial role in American reaction to it. And the reaction is predictably mixed. for instance, Richard Fontaine as senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, which is a nonpartisan national security think tank in Washington, writes in The Guardian: “Democrats and Republicans, particularly the neoconservative variety, have endorsed a hyperactive American foreign policy which sees every problem as an opportunity for America to exercise leadership (in other words, to call the shots). The majority of the Washington foreign policy establishment, no matter its partisan hue, tends to believe that American leadership abroad is necessary to be unlimited, no matter its financial cost or the level of domestic support.” On the other hand, the attitude of political elite seems to be at variants with what may be called the broader public opinion. Man in the street with Vietnam memory still lingering at the back of his mind, not at all happy with the too long drawn wars, terrorism, economic crisis, and now the Gulf of Mexico disaster too. That man should be supportive of President Obama’s concept of reconciling foreign policy objectives with its domestic priorities.

Strokan: To sum up the discussion, let’s ask our experts. Now we are joined by Alexander Goltz, Moscow-based military analyst and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of a weekly online journal. Alexander, you are one of those Russian analysts who are watching the evolution of American national security doctrines for nearly three decades. Do you think it would be appropriate to say that the new Obama doctrine is a radical departure from the vision of President Bush?

Goltz: It’s no doubt that the existing military doctrine is a real departure from President Bush’s concept, and it is obvious. Truly speaking, the doctrine has the same goals as the previous one – the American leadership, but instruments to promote this leadership are totally different. In President Bush’s vision, America had role of a “lonely sheriff” in the world. Obama’s approach is totally different. He wants to reach American leadership on base of different coalitions and alliances. And what is very important for me, it is not only traditional alliances such as NATO, U.S.-Japan Alliance and so on. Obama’s vision is much wider. He is speaking about coalitions of those who are important, about special relationship and cooperation with China, India and Russia, with the South African republic and Brazil. Obama is fulfilling the approach of Russian diplomats in his doctrine, except the idea of a multi-polar world.

Strokan: Well, it sounds convincing enough, thank you, Alexander. And let’s hear what an American expert says. Ivan Eland, senior fellow and director of the Center on Peace and Liberty. Mr. Eland, as President Obama spelled out his basic ideas on how to enhance national and global security, there is ongoing debate about whether this President, who came to office on a promise of changing American foreign policy, has actually delivered a new vision of U.S. role in the world. Do you agree that the new doctrine reveals Obama’s radical departure from the vision of President Bush?

Eland: I think there are important changes in the doctrine – it deemphasizes nuclear weapons and “the war on terror”, focusing on the war with al-Qaeda, which is really what the U.S. need to do now. Al-Qaeda is still too wide, with many local affiliates worldwide, like those in Iraq or in the Arabian Peninsula and perhaps the U.S. should not make more enemies. Focusing on Al-Qaeda, it is narrowing the focus from worldwide war on terror. So I think these are the changes in the doctrine. But we still have two wars going – Obama is supposed to be pulling out of Iraq, but he is also escalating Afghanistan. So, there will be now more sanctions on Iran, and perhaps later on North Korea, but this hardship policy as well resembles Bush’s. But I think basically there is certainly a new tone and in US-Russian relations Obama has made a lot of progress.

Strokan: And let me ask you another question. The new doctrine calls for comprehensive engagement with new power-centers, like Russia, China, India or Brazil, and also principal engagement with adversaries. What should be really done to make comprehensive engagement really work?

Eland: I think, in particular the case of China and Russia, the US has to give up this idea that we need to contain them, because the Cold War is still sort of going on in Europe, as well as Asia, because US still has all these alliances, both NATO over in Europe that are encroaching on Russia’s borders and in Asia with Taiwan and South Korea. I think a US ally has to blockage the containment policy of China and Russia and also its alliances, and determine if it is relevant for this post-9/11 world where we are overextended economically and militarily, because of our economic difficulties and our big budget deficit.

Strokan: I think what Mr. Ivan Eland says sounds convincing enough. And let’s come to our second heading – Between the Lines to discuss the most significant publications of the past week. Israeli newspaper “Haaretz” strikes a bit unusual tone unlike other Jewish state media criticizing the military sea operation which, according to some sources, left nearly 20 people dead and evoked unprecedented global scandal (inaudible) and international pressure on Israel mounting with every passing day. Israel has forgotten the lessons of “the Exodus”, claims Yossi Melman in “Haaretz” paper. According to Yossi Melman, despite having its eyes wide open, Israel fell into a trap. Israel knew that the organizers of the flotilla wanted to present the Israel defense forces to the world as an army that doesn’t hesitate to revert to force. The flotilla organizers wanted deaths, casualties, blood and billow smoke. This is exactly what it gave them, says “Haaretz”. According to the paper, Israel’s decision makers should have revised memories if Israel’s own history. It shows just how short is historic memory the Prime Minister, Defense Minister, Chief of Staff and Navy Commander all have. They don’t remember the story of the “Exodus” ship in 1947, says “Haaretz”. Mira, do you think this is an appropriate historic parallel at all?

Salganik: In a sense, it might be relevant to recall it. As far as I remember, 60 years ago the British mandate authorities imposed a blockade too on the shores of the land of Israel. And Jewish leaders believed it was their right. The Jewish immigrants on the ship called “Exodus” decided to forcibly oppose every attempt to stop them. Jewish leaders wanted to arouse the world consciousness and gain a victory in the battle for the international sympathy. I guess nowadays Hamas leaders attempt to employ similar tactics for similar ends. Without getting into the question of justice or logic or the blockage imposed on Gaza and its residents, it was clear that they saw it as their natural rights to oppose attempts to stop the ships.

Strokan: Mira, in 1988 when the Palestinians organized the ship named “The Return” to be sent to Israel with Palestinian refugees, Israel chose a different method to stop it. It sent Massad agents and naval commandos to Cyprus to sabotage the ship before the passengers had embarked. The ship was damaged, but no one was hurt. Israel should have considered a similar approach, but apparently, the days in which Israeli agents could operate freely in friendly countries are gone. And now we are joined by Alexander Rytov, Associate Professor with Moscow-based Institute of International Relations. Alexander, international humanitarian mission in Gaza unexpectedly turned into a bloody carnage these days. As Israel and the world community have different points of view, whose message sounds more convincing to you?

Rytov: The situation with the flotilla is really very strange and complicated, because of course there is a new factor which is involved in the story. This new factor, and very important one and very significant one is Turkey, because as far as all of us know Turkey and Israel are considered allies and friends, the friendly relations between them have very long historical roots. That is why this new engagement of Ankara into the Middle East story sounds like an absolutely new accent in the developments in the Middle East. To my mind, the flotilla formed and supported by Turkey and inspected by the Israeli commandos, is a beginning of new contradictions in the district. To my mind, it is an attempt of Turkey to show the European community that the delay in confirmation for the future association and inclusion of Turkey to the European Union and the rejection of Turkey as a possible member of the EU, can turn to the drifting of this country to the other world – to closer relations with the Arab world, to the involvement into the middle East conflict and of course ignoring the interests of its allies, which represent Europe in the Middle East. And this country is Israel. And Israel, understanding that, of course is very tough, it doesn’t want to be the Turkish argument in this dispute with the EU. It shows from the very beginning that it will never ally any country to support trends and movements and political organizations, which can represent any harm, any new problem for Israel. That’s why the sharpness and the decisiveness of the Israeli commandos was aimed, to my mind, to show Ankara that Israel should be excluded from the Turkish game, and the attempt to show the EU that Turkey can be more distant from the European values and should be associated with the Middle East conflict.

Strokan: Alexander, what role can world media play in defusing tensions?

Rytov: Of course, the media are interested in some hot news. The hot news is that it is the first maybe for many years direct clash, not only political, but also military between Israel and people presenting the project which was initiated by Ankara. This is the first serious contradiction between two countries. Of course, there were some other small diplomatic protocol incidents, some things which were not very serious. This one, with a lot of victims and with the attempt to send a second flotilla, can bring about real cooling in relations between Israel and Turkey. Of course, it will not last long, but it is one of the attempts of Turkey to show that the situation is deteriorating. And of course the mass media are discussing this story, not only as a new incident, as a new splash of the Gaza problem, but first of all, as absolutely unexpected and unique for the political developments of nowadays clash between Israel and Turkey, which is most interesting for them.

Strokan: And now let’s hear what heavyweight of Russian expert community, vice-president of Russian Jewish council and president of the Moscow-based Institute of Middle East Studies Yevgeny Satanovsky will say. The international humanitarian mission in Gaza unexpectedly turned into a bloody carnage. Mr. Satanovsky, do you think this is an attempt to compromise Israel?

Satanovsky: The problem of conflict around the so-called “Caravan of Peace” and the Israeli Army is a problem of geopolitical strategy of the Turkish Empire, new Ottoman Empire, which will be built by the Turkish government, by Prime Minister Erdogan, Minister of Foreign Affairs Davutoğlu and President Gul. It is not the question of conflict between the Palestine and Israel. So-called world community, if we name the groups of Islamists, antiglobalists, ultra-left parties form the team of the “Caravan of Peace” and the Israeli Army, is the question that in the new strategy of Ankara to be partner with Israel and be partner with Syria, Libya, Iran, the whole Islamic world and the historical territory of the Turkish Empire, is impossible (makes no sense-misture of two different sentences). In this balance of interests, Israeli-Turkish cooperation must be destroyed.

Not the last one will see much more serious conflict. The Israeli version of course is truth, but nobody is interested that this is truth, because this is the same situation which was in the Second World War with Czechoslovakia in Europe. Israel must pay its price for everything on the Middle East, from the view of Ankara, Tehran and the Muslims. All other aspects of conflict are not more than the side dish, with the main course of this military cooking is the Ankara strategy.

Salganik: Thank you, Dr. Satanovsky, it was certainly most interesting.

Σάββατο 5 Ιουνίου 2010

Ισραηλινοί ακτιβιστές σχεδιάζουν ταξίδι στην κατεχόμενη Κύπρο!

Από το ιστολόγιο "TAXALIA.BLOGSPOT.COM"
http://taxalia.blogspot.com/2010/06/blog-post_6430.html#ixzz0q37qLe7y
05 Ιουν 2010
"Σε "αντίποινα" με τα ταξίδι των Τούρκων ακτιβιστών με το Mavi Marmara, ομάδα ακτιβιστών, ετοιμάζει παρόμοιο ταξίδι στην κατεχόμενη Κύπρο, για να "ζυγίσει" τις Τουρκικές αντιδράσεις.
Στην αποστολή θα συμμετέχουν, ο Alex Goldfarb, ο Meretz, Har-Zahav και άλλοι Ισραηλινοί ακτιβιστές.
Την αποστολή χρηματοδοτεί πλούσιος Ισραηλινός, που θέλε να μείνει ανώνυμος, σύμφωνα με δημοσίευμα της Ισραηλινής εφημερίδας Jerusalem Pοst."














O πρόεδρος Χριστόφιας, παλιά καραβάνα στην γεωπολιτική, σε αντίθεση με τους Έλληνες κουφιοκέφαλους της Τουρκικης έμπνευσης και διοργάνωσης νηοπομπής γιά την Γάζα, με σύνεση αρνήθηκε να τσιμπήσει το Νεο-Οθωμανικής έμπνευσης και οργάνωσης δήθεν "φιλοπαλαιστηνιακό" και "ειρηνιστικό" δόλωμα. Ποιόν δουλεύουν οι Τούρκοι; Η Κύπρος φυσικά αρνήθηκε να επιτρέψει τα καράβια της νηοπομπής να προσεγγίσουν κάν τα λιμάνια της, αναγκάζοντάς τα έτσι (μαζί με τους δικούς μας, τους όσους συμμετέχοντες Έλληνες ανεγκέφαλους) να συναχτούν πριν την τελική πλεύση από την Κατεχόμενη πλευρά.
Η Ισραηλινή απάντηση δεν άργησε να φτάσει. Το μπρά ντε φέρ ξεκίνησε.
Το συνολικό άρθρο εδώ της Τζερούσαλεμ Πόστ εδώ:

By GIL HOFFMAN
06/04/2010
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177449

MKs on right slam cabinet for releasing all Turkish activists.

A group of angry Israelis announced on Thursday night that they will leave for Cyprus next week on a flotilla and call for an end to the Turkish occupation of half of the island and its reunification under Cypriot rule.

The group includes Alex Goldfarb, who was an MK in the Tzomet and Yiud parties in the 1990s, and Meretz activist Pinhas Har-Zahav of Modi’in.

An unnamed wealthy Israeli donor is subsidizing the initiative.

MKs on the Right accused the security cabinet on Thursday of buckling under Turkish pressure when it decided to release every Turkish passenger on the Gaza flotilla, even if there was explicit photographic evidence that they attacked IDF soldiers.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu urged the step in an effort to repair damaged relations with Turkey, and the security cabinet ministers obliged.

The Turkish activists were greeted as heroes when they returned to their country on Thursday. One even boasted that he made an effort to die as a martyr but was unsuccessful.

“I understand Netanyahu’s desire to minimize damage, but I cannot understand the betrayal of the soldiers who see the terrorists who shot at them and stabbed them leaving the country without trial,” National Union MK Arye Eldad said. “Israel has unjustifiably freed many terrorists from prison in the past, but I don’t remember an instance when terrorists who attempted to murder soldiers were not even brought to trial.”

United Arab List-Ta’al MK Ahmed Tibi responded to the departure of the Turkish activists by calling the charges against them baseless.

“There is no proof that they were carrying arms or that they attacked soldiers,” Tibi said. “Israel knows that the tragic result of firing on peace activists is rightfully seen by the world as a crime, so they are trying to cut their losses. Israel had no choice but to release these peace activists.”

Διαβάστε καί το προηγούμενο σχετικό άρθρο μου εδώ:
http://hellenikathemata.blogspot.com/2010_05_01_archive.html

Turkey's Hypocrisy


Από την ιστοσελίδα της αεικίνητης και αξιοθαύμαστης Αρμενική διασποράς στην Αμερική: να βλέπουμε και να μαθαίνουμε.

Turkey's shameless attempts to take the moral high ground despite its record of non-stop abuse at home and violence abroad:

1) Turkey aggressively denies the Armenian Genocide, pressuring America to remain silent on this crime, and prosecuting its own citizens who speak truthfully about this atrocity.

2) Turkey has been illegally blockading landlocked Armenia since 1993.

3) Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 and continues to occupy over a third of this nation.

4) Turkey has destroyed thousands of Kurdish villages, uprooting millions of Kurds, and denying tens of millions of its own Kurdish citizens of their basic human rights.

5) Turkey denies the Sudan Genocide and provides arms to the Sudanese government, led by Omar al-Bashir, who has been indicted for war crimes.

6) Turkey continues to impose official restrictions and unofficial pressure on the Armenian, Greek, Assyrian churches and on other minority religious groups.

7) Turkey's leaders foster domestic political support by taking anti-U.S. and anti-Israel stands: Among the best selling books in Turkey is Hitler's Mein Kampf; one of their most popular films, Valley of the Wolves, features a Turkish nuclear attack on Washington.


Published by the Armenian National Committee of America
1711 N Street NW, Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202) 775-1918, Fax: (202) 775-5648, E-mail: anca@anca.org, Web: www.anca.org