Let’s Kick Genocide Denialist Bill Shuster out of Congress


By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

I reported last week on the Armenian-American community success in securing cancellation of Los Angeles City’s $845,000 contract with the Gephardt Group, for lobbying on behalf of Turkey against adoption of the Armenian Genocide resolution by Congress.

I expressed the hope that Armenians would continue their efforts to have the remaining 200 clients of the Gephardt Group terminate their contracts so that Mr. Gephardt would pay a steep price for his denialist lobbying.

Energized by their major victory in Los Angeles, Armenian-Americans should now expand their political activism to make an example of Cong. Bill Shuster (Republican-Pennsylvania) who has written an outrageous letter to members of Congress asking them not to support the pending Armenian Genocide resolution.

In a “Dear Colleague” letter sent by Cong. Shuster to all 435 House Members last month, he shamelessly urged them “to refrain from cosponsoring a resolution taking sides in a historical dispute concerning events which occurred a hundred years ago on the other side of the world.” I wonder how the Congressman feels about the Holocaust that also took place “on the other side of the world” more than 60 years ago!

In his brazen letter, Cong. Shuster casts doubt on the veracity of the Armenian Genocide, by alleging that there are “two competing narratives about what happened during the First World War to Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire.” In his twisted logic, the Congressman claims that “the events of 1915…did not constitute genocide,” because “over two million Ottoman Kurds, Arabs, and Muslims…also suffered in this conflict.” His reference to the suffering of “over two million Ottoman Kurds” during World War I is the latest lie scripted by one of the many lobbying firms working for the Turkish government.

The Pennsylvania Congressman also falsely claims that the Armenian Genocide resolution “would alienate one of our last allies in the region [Turkey] who is working hand in hand with US soldiers and our allies to combat ISIS.” Cong. Shuster must have been hiding in a cave for the last couple of years not to have known that this “important NATO ally” has orchestrated the infiltration of thousands of ISIS terrorists into Syria and supplied them with arms, ammunition and logistics. The Congressman ridiculously alleges that “adopting this [Armenian] resolution would be cataclysmic and undermine US interests.” If Turkey is such a good U.S. ally, why would it want to undermine America’s interests? Would passing a resolution condemning the Holocaust result in Germany — our other NATO ally — undermining US interests in Europe?

Cong. Shuster ends his letter by calling the mass murder of 1.5 million Armenians a mere “incident,” urging his colleagues “not [to] take sides in a battle to reinterpret history” and “to think twice before signing on to legislation that could cause significant damage to our relations in the region.” No wonder, the incongruously named ‘Turkish Institute for Progress’ immediately issued a statement applauding the Congressman’s letter denying the Armenian Genocide.

The Turkish Sabah newspaper reported on February 27 that two House members from New York, Democrat Yvette Clarke and Republican Lee Zeldin, have also announced their opposition to the Armenian Genocide resolution. It is noteworthy that the Armenian National Committee of America gave an F- grade to Cong. Shuster, and C- to Cong. Clark. Cong. Zeldin has not yet been graded by the ANCA as this is his first term in office.

Armenian-Americans have a year and a half until the next congressional elections to develop an effective plan to make an example of one or more of these three genocide deniers in Congress. If at least one of them is defeated, other members would think twice before playing the immoral game of genocide denialism.

Not surprisingly, Shuster, Clarke and Zeldin are three of the 130 members of the Congressional Turkey Caucus. In addition, Shuster is the Co-Chair of the Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus. After one of these three unprincipled politicians is kicked out of Congress, the Armenian community should then devise a strategy to go after all 130 members of the Turkey Caucus, down from its peak of 157 members in 2012. Applying such pressure would cause more of them to leave the Turkey Caucus, and make others reluctant to join, once they realize that they too would be targeted for defeat.

Zero tolerance for genocide denialists in Congress!

Los Angeles Cancels $845,000 Contract With Turkey’s Lobbyist Gephardt Group


By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

I wrote a column last August warning that the Armenian-American community and all people of good will would boycott the products and services of Anheuser-Busch, Boeing, Chevron, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, General Electric, Goldman Sachs, Google, Los Angeles Airport, National Football League, Port of Oakland, and United Airlines, unless these companies cancelled their contracts with the Gephardt Group, one of Turkey’s notorious lobbying firms.

Ironically, former House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt had championed recognition of the Armenian Genocide during his long years in Congress. Yet, soon-after his retirement, Gephardt became a staunch opponent of Armenian issues by peddling Turkish denials of the Armenian Genocide. The latest contract on file with the U.S. Justice Department reveals that the Gephardt Group is paid $1.4 million a year to lobby for Turkey in Washington.

Documents filed by the Gephardt Group with the Justice Department under the ‘Foreign Agent Registration Act’ indicate that Gephardt and his colleagues contacted dozens of House and Senate Members last year to lobby against: 1) congressional resolutions on the Armenian Genocide and return of Christian Churches by Turkey, and 2) revelations that Turkey supported Islamic Jihadists during their invasion of the Armenian-inhabited town of Kessab in Syria.

More ominously, Justice Department records show that just before April 24, 2014, Janice O’Connell, Gephardt’s colleague, contacted Brian McKeon, Chief of Staff of the National Security Council at the White House and Chad Kreikemeier, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs, to modify Pres. Obama’s annual statement on the Armenian Genocide, following Prime Minister Erdogan’s deceptive and disingenuous apology for all victims of World War I in Ottoman Turkey.

Justice Department’s records also reveal that Gephardt and O’Connell traveled to Istanbul and Ankara on Turkish Airlines on March 3, 2014 to meet Turkey’s National Security Advisor. Gephardt flew from Paris to Istanbul and Ankara at a round trip cost of $1,513, while O’Connell flew from Washington, DC to Istanbul and Ankara at a round trip cost of $6,986. The two lobbyists stayed at the Conrad Hotel in Istanbul for three nights at the cost of $710 each. While in Turkey, they spent $600 on limousine service.

Last month, the Armenian National Committee of America, Armenian Assembly of America, and Armenian Youth Federation (Eastern and Western U.S.) sent over 200 letters to businesses, universities, and NGOs that are clients of the Gephardt Group and four other lobbying firms for Turkey: Dickstein Shapiro, LLC; Greenberg Traurig; Alpaytac; and LB International. One such letter asked the United Airlines to demand the lobbying firm to end its contract with the Turkish government, if not, the airline should then terminate its own contract with the lobbying firm. If neither action is taken by Feb. 28, Armenian-Americans would carry out a protest campaign against both the lobbying firm and United Airlines.

The efforts to counter Turkey’s lobbying firms already bore its first fruits. On February 23, ANCA-WR announced that Los Angeles World Airports [LAWA], a wholly-owned entity of the City of Los Angeles, has decided to terminate its contract worth over $845,000 with the Gephardt Group, after ANCA called upon Mayor Eric Garcetti last December, “to end any ties between the City of Los Angeles and Dick Gephardt.”

ANCA-WR Chair Nora Hovsepian applauded “LAWA and City of Los Angeles officials for their principled stand enforcing a zero-tolerance policy against deniers of genocide. LAWA’s action reflects the highest standards of good governance and reinforces the proud standing of Los Angeles as a leader — nationally and internationally — on issues of genocide prevention and human rights. As a genocide denier, Gephardt does not deserve a single dollar from the citizens of Los Angeles, and should have no association with our city.”

According to U.S. Government documents obtained by ANCA-WR, the Gephardt Group “had a contract worth over $845,000 with LAWA, which was agreed to in 2012 during the term of former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Since the approval of the contract with LAWA, the Gephardt Group has been drawing over $23,000 a month for its work for the airport, while simultaneously representing the interests of the Turkish Government against the interests of the Armenian-American community.”

After this first major victory, Armenian-Americans should continue urging the remaining 200 companies that are clients of the Gephardt Group and other lobbying firms hired by Turkey to terminate their contracts, because hiring genocide denialists is patently unethical and bad for business!

Who is Responsible for Turning Erdogan into a Fanatical Tyrant?


By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

When the Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power in 2002, its founder, Recep Tayyip Erdogan appeared like a devout Muslim seeking to eliminate corruption and improve the standard of living of Turkish citizens.

During the last 13 years, Erdogan gradually turned into a corrupt despot, assuming the airs of a modern-day Ottoman Sultan. Was he a wolf in sheep’s clothing to start with, or was he spoiled by the international community’s blind support and lavish praise? Notably, Pres. Obama had called Erdogan one of five world leaders with whom he felt especially close. Obama and other heads of state have finally realized that the monster they created is out of the bottle and out of control! The primary victim of misplaced trust in Erdogan was none other than Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad.

To show how arrogant Erdogan and Turkey’s top leaders have become, here are excerpts from their recent public pronouncements, as documented by The Middle East Media Research Institute:

In a speech on January 21 at the Parliamentary Union of Islamic Countries in Istanbul, Erdogan, sounding like an ISIS leader rather than President of a NATO member state, urged Muslim countries to “unite and defeat the successors of Lawrence of Arabia who seek to disrupt the Middle East.” He went on to accuse the West of plotting against the Islamic world and causing Muslims to kill one another.

During his recent visit to Djibouti, Erdogan boasted: “Turkey is a powerful country. If you [European Union] still see Turkey as a country that would beg at your [EU’s] door, Turkey is not a country to beg.” In response to earlier European criticism of media crackdowns in Turkey, Erdogan told EU leaders to “keep your insights to yourselves,” and added: “Take the trouble to come to Turkey, so that Turkey can teach you a lesson in democracy.”

Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus, while accompanying Erdogan on his African trip, shamelessly played the race card, telling the locals: “For the first time since the Ottomans left, Africans are seeing a white hand that does not exploit, enslave or punch them in their heads; a white hand that does not exploit their mines, eliminate their values, assimilate them or see them as subhuman. They are seeing the white hand of Turkey, which sees them as equals and as brothers…. We are trying to help the rebirth of these black-skinned but warm-hearted people.” Kurtulmus was probably hoping that his African listeners would be unaware that Erdogan frequently uses the derogatory and racist term ‘zenci’(black) to describe lower class people!

Not to be outdone by Erdogan and Kurtulmus in arrogance or religious fanaticism, Prime Minister Davutoglu told a large Turkish gathering in Zurich last month: “Islam is Europe’s indigenous religion, and will continue to be so. Despite the roadblocks, prejudices and many provocations, Turkey will continue to walk on the road to EU membership…. With Allah’s grace, we will never bow our heads. We are the grandchildren of the heroes who fought at Gallipoli, who never bowed their heads. In 2002, when we came to power, they [EU] said that Turkey was too poor, too weak a country that would become a burden on Europe. Thank Allah, today Turkey is the rising power of the world…. We are not a burden for Europe. Turkey is the cure for Europe! Turkey is the cure for their disease of racism. We are the cure to their economic slowdown. We are the cure to their loss of power…. From Andalusia [Spain] to the Ottomans, and, half a century ago with the holy march of our people who came here from every corner of Anatolia, the sound of the azan [Muslim call to prayer] brought these heroes to Europe. The domes of the mosques with which they dotted this continent will be protected; we will continue to fight against the hands that reach out to harm them. I kiss the foreheads of my brothers who carried the Tekbir [the prayer call ‘Allahu Akbar’] to Zurich…. How holy those people were who came and sowed the seeds here which will, with Allah’s help, continue to grow into a huge tree of justice in the center of Europe. No one will be able to stop this!”

Davutoglu persisted in making absurd and arrogant statements last week, this time in Ankara, telling minority representatives: “We will teach a lesson to racists in Europe.”

Pedophile Cover-up: Did Hampstead Police, Social Services, Courts brainwash whistleblower kids?

Child_abusePedophile Cover-up: Hampstead  Police, Social Services, Courts brainwash whistleblower kids, send mother & legal helper into exile, protect Satanist abuser father

Here is the video:


VANCOUVER, BC – According to news inside out, in an interview from Germany with Sabine Kurjo McNeil, the “McKenzie Friend”[1] or legal helper to Ella, the mother of two Whistleblower children, Gabriel an 8 year old boy and Alisa his 9 year old sister, whose video documenting a sustained pedophile ritual sexual abuse abuse at the hands of their father and at the Christ Church Primary School they attended in Hampstead UK, NewsInsideOut.com has learned the following developments, evidence of a deep and powerful cover-up of sexual crimes toward children from deep within the UK Police and Social Services structure. NZ Justice Lowell Goddard, newly in charge of the UK Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, has been notified of this case and has not responded as of this writing.[2]

  • Gabriel and Alisa, the Whistleblower children have been placed in State Social Services care two hours away from London in Kent, UK and after a number of days of sustained brainwashing by representatives of Social Services have been forced to renounce their allegations of ritual sexual abuse by their father and by staff of the Christ Church Primary School they attended in Hampstead UK;
  • Ella, the children’s mother suffered an illegal home invasion by 10 police without a warrant. Fortunately, the mother’s barrister was present who demanded a warrant and the illegal home invasion could not proceed. Under threat of immediate arrest by UK police intent on continuing a cover-up of child sexual abuse networks of the father and of widespread sexual abuse at the school, the child’s mother fled into exile in Europe.
  • McKenzie Friend legal helper Sabine Kurjo McNeil was forced into exile in Germany after being threatened with malicious prosecution for posting the videos of the Whistleblower children online. It was as a result of the posting of the children’s whistleblowing videos that the attempts by all UK police, social services, school staff and courts to date to cover this matter up have failed, as an international outcry on the Internet and social media has arisen.
  • No criminal investigation has been launched against the children’s father, despite the clear testimony of the children and the children’s mother. The father is a reported member of a ritual child abuse and perhaps child sacrifice network.
  • No criminal investigation has been launched against the Christ Church Primary School in Hampstead UK despite the children’s clear testimony, and the testimony of other parents, such as the following report from a parent at the school: “everything is completely true i am from the local Hampstead area and my children used to attend christ church primary, they would often come home telling me about weird encounters such as specific kids getting taken out of class by the head mistress katy forsdyke for no apparent, and how the staff touch the kids and manipulate them, I was first approached to join the cult in an after school meeting and when declined I was subtly told that if I told anyone about it then there would be severe consequences on my behalf.
  • Vicar: Revd Paul Conrad,10 Cannon Place, London, NW3 1EJ. Tel: 020 7435 6784. Email paulconrad@btinternet.com, he seems like a lovely guy when you meet him, would never of guessed he holds several secret rooms in the church to carry out untold practices.
  • 47 Hollycroft avenue nw3 is the current address of these kids father, i know him personally, he is a very successful and very wealthy man, hence why he has allot of higher member of authorities working with him to brush under the carpet
  • Details of school: Christchurch Hill, London NW3 1JH 020 7435 1361, there are several teachers with heavy involvement, but the headteacher is the main instigator of these horrendous acts in school.  my child has also told me the school are often setting up any sort of pointless after school class and extra curriculum activity as an excuse to get their hands and do awfull things to these poor children, its only a selected amount of kids undergoing it, because he parents have to be in on it too and the parents who decline get threatened if they tell.


South London news- Mums

Serap_pollard_girlsPress Release

On a cold cloudy Saturday in South London, ten mothers gathered together
to take part in a modelling shoot for a new range of shoes. Normally
attired in Ugg boots and flatties and trainers this was like Christmas
morning when Santa had been particularly generous. Confronted with a
room full of lace and suede and leather and sparkles, they were asked to
pick one pair that they liked best, which proved an impossible task for
some. None of them were used to “strutting their stuff” in front of a
camera and they were cautious at first. Turn left, put your arm up, put
it down, don’t look at the camera! It was an orgy of limbs in high
heels. But whether it was the glass of bubbly beforehand or just the
great feeling a wonderful pair of shoes can give you, they were soon
putting Cindy Crawford, Helena Christianson and Kate Moss to shame.
Laughter filled the room as they bent and twisted into unnatural
positions in heels that made them feel and look gorgeous. It all goes to
prove you don’t have to be a famous celebrity to wear great shoes and
feel fantastic. You can dress any outfit up with a great sexy pair of
shoes and feel a million dollars. These women knew that and were more
than reluctant to give them up at the end of the shoot.

Who is Serap Pollard

Serap Pollard London was established in 2011.
They believe that behind every successful woman lies an exquisite pair
of shoes.
She says;
“Our shoe collection offers a striking blend of designs, displaying
grace and beauty. We believe in shoes, for they’re a great and wonderful
thing, the source of much pleasure and pain (on both feet and the bank
balance) turning a casual look into smashing, gorgeous, elegant, and
high-quality sophistication, presenting a new meaning to women. ”
Instagram- Serappollard
Email- info@serappollard.com
Phone: 00 (44) 208 286 0369 / 0044 7791321623











Three women arrested during Valentine’s Day screening of Fifty Shades

Grosvenor_cinema_fifty_shades_of_greyWitnesses claim drunk women were vomiting in the aisles of the Grosvenor cinema in Glasgow’s west end on Saturday night

According to the Telgraph A Valentine’s Day cinema screening of Fifty Shades of Grey ended in chaos when three women were arrested for attacking a man.

Witnesses claim the bust-up started after the victim asked the “worse for the wear” women to quieten down during a viewing on Saturday evening.

Police then rushed to Grosvenor Cinema in Glasgow’s west end where they arrested three women.

Cinema visitors also claimed the man had been glassed and that staff were forced to wipe blood from seats before the next screening of the film.

But police have dismissed suggestions that glass was used in the assault.

Investigations are now taking place to determine the exact circumstances, but it is understood no-one suffered serious injuries in the incident.

Michael Bolton, 33, from Glasgow, who had gone to see the raunchy flick with his wife, Yvonne, 32, said he saw three women being arrested when he arrived.

He said: “Besides being the worst film I have ever seen, three women were getting arrested and put in a police van when we arrived.

“A woman came out the theatre and said that a guy had been glassed.

“One woman was in handcuffs and another two women were in tears. She said that three or four girls had been very loud and were shouting.

“The man had asked them to shut up and he was glassed. It’s a cinema where you can buy drink.

“Only in Glasgow are police called to the cinema. This type of behaviour happens at pubs and nightclubs, but you don’t expect that at a cinema.

“The guys at the cinema were tidying up the blood before going in. They were wiping down seats before the start of the 8.20pm film.

“There were also several incredibly drunk women vomiting in the aisle and corridor and several complaints from the other screen about drunk and rowdy folk.”

A local barman, who did not wish to be named, said: “We knew there was an incident but we didn’t expect it to be at Fifty Shades of Grey.

“We heard that a guy had asked women to quieten down because they were spoiling the film and one of them hit him with a bottle.

“A guy who had been in the cinema said it was pretty much unprovoked and the victim was shocked.”

Another worker on Ashton Lane said the women looked “worse for wear with drink” as she was bundled into the police car.

He said: “There were three women being led outside and I’m sure on of them was cuffed.

“She looked the worse for wear with drink.”

A spokeswoman for Grosvenor cinema said: “I can confirm that an incident occurred on Saturday 14 February following an early evening showing of 50 Shades Of Grey.

“This was an isolated incident that was dealt with rapidly by cinema staff and stewards, as a result of which, Police Scotland attended and made an arrest.

“Despite press reports, nobody was glassed and a wine bottle was not used as a weapon. Those involved did not require hospital attention.

“We welcomed nearly 2000 customers over the weekend, including four further showings on Saturday night which passed without incident.”

Police sources said no glass was used in the assault.

A spokesman for Police Scotland said: “At approximately 8pm on Saturday 14 February police responded to reports of a disturbance at the Grosvenor cinema.

“Three women have been arrested for alleged disorder offences and inquiries continue to determine the full circumstances surrounding the incident.”

End of the Ottoman empire

Ottoman_soldierHow the decision to enter the first world war led to political collapse, bloodshed and the birth of the modern Middle East

According to Marc Mazower from Financial Times, before the first world war, the term “Middle East” was virtually unknown. The Ottoman empire had ruled for centuries over the lands from the Sahara to Persia but did not refer to them as part of a single region. Coined in the mid-19th century, the phrase became popular only in the mid-20th. It reflected the growing popularity of geopolitical thinking as well as the strategic anxieties of the rivalrous great powers, and its spread was a sign of growing European meddling in the destiny of the Arab-speaking peoples.

But Europe’s war changed more than just names. In the first place, there was petroleum. The British had tightened their grip on the Persian Gulf in the early years of the new century, as the Royal Navy contemplated shifting away from coal. The Anglo-Persian Oil Company opened the enormous Abadan refinery in 1912. The British invasion of Basra — a story of imperial hubris and cataclysmic failure that Eugene Rogan weaves superbly through The Fall of the Ottomans — thus marked the beginning of the world’s first oil conflict.

Second, there was the British turn to monarchy as a means of securing political influence. The policy began in Egypt, which British troops had been occupying since 1882. Until the Ottomans entered the war, Whitehall had solemnly kept to the juridical fiction that Egypt remained a province of their empire. After November, that was no longer possible and the British swiftly changed the constitutional order: the khedive Abbas II, who happened to be in Istanbul at the time, was deposed and his uncle, Husayn Kamil, was proclaimed the country’s sultan. In this way the British unilaterally declared an end to almost four centuries of Ottoman rule in favour of a puppet who would allow their continued control of the Suez Canal.

This was not the only way the British could have taken over: Cyprus, for instance, they simply annexed. But the Egyptian strategy was less of a slap in the face to the local population and this kind of imperial improvisation became the template for the region after 1918, when Hashemite princes were placed in charge of one new kingdom after another for no very good reason other than their likely subservience to British wishes. A fine system it was most of the time too, at least for the British, and it is not surprising that when the Americans took over in the region during the cold war, they did their best to keep it going.

Rogan, director of the Middle East Centre at St Antony’s College, Oxford, and author of The Arabs: A History (2009), has written a remarkably readable, judicious and well-researched account of the Ottoman war in Anatolia and the Arab provinces. The Fall of the Ottomans is especially good on showing the fighting across multiple fronts and from both sides of the lines, and it draws effectively upon the papers, memoirs and diaries of soldiers and civilians. The Basra notable Sayyid Talib, the Armenian priest Grigoris Balakian and the Turkish corporal Ali Riza Eti provide perspectives that rarely make it into mainstream narratives of the first world war.

They depict fighting of extraordinary intensity — from the trenches of the Gallipoli peninsula, where Mustafa Kemal (later Atatürk) made his name, to the mountains of the Caucasus, where thousands of Ottoman soldiers froze to death. We see the plight of the Armenians in all its grimness but also the starvation that swept across much of Syria as the war ended. Between the fighting on multiple fronts, the deaths from massacre and starvation, and the almost complete dislocation of economic life across swaths of Anatolia and the Arab provinces, the war that ended Ottoman rule also destroyed many of the institutions that had sustained it.

In the second world war, Turkey made sure it remained neutral. Could not the empire have done so in 1914? When hostilities broke out that summer across Europe, the Young Turk triumvirate in Istanbul did stay out of the conflict for a few months, holding back until deciding to throw their lot in with the Central Powers.

This decision precipitated the disastrous campaigns — along the Suez Canal, in eastern Anatolia against the Russians, and in the Dardanelles in defence of the capital Istanbul — that nearly destroyed the empire completely. By April 1915, the Russians had crushed Enver’s Third Army in the east and the British were landing thousands of troops on the Gallipoli peninsula. It was at this moment of maximal threat that the Young Turk leadership took the decision to massacre Anatolia’s Armenians, a story Rogan tells with sensitivity, insight and judiciousness.

The ongoing political controversy over the genocide — Rogan rightly deploys the word but does not make too much of the dispute, consigning it to an excellent endnote — has overshadowed some critical historical questions. The basic point is that the war created a crisis of legitimacy that was especially severe in the Ottoman lands. Imperial tax-raising power was limited and the Ottoman bureaucracy did not have the capacity to organise a proper rationing system. This weakness forced it to rely much more than other states on political intermediaries and thuggish, well-armed irregulars. At the same time, the prospect of defeat made the Young Turk leadership ever more suspicious of vast swaths of the population irrespective of religion — Ottoman loyalists, refugees settled from Albania, Bosnia and all the other lost lands of the Balkans, and, perhaps above all, the Arabs.

Rogan documents the wartime repression in greater Syria in particular, which alienated so many notables. Meanwhile, starvation claimed a staggering 300,000–500,000 lives in Syria and Lebanon alone. The sense of social collapse is palpable and must have been intensified by something that Rogan does not discuss — the influenza of 1918–1919, which may have cost Iran alone up to one-fifth of its population. The losses in greater Syria and Iraq were probably just as devastating. This story of the war’s impact on social life across the region still awaits its historian.

Territorially, the ending of the Ottoman empire created the present Middle East. The new republic of Turkey eventually won independence for itself, primarily in its Anatolian heartland. Elsewhere, the former imperial provinces were handed over to the war’s victors by the new League of Nations and ruled under fictions of conditional sovereignty that they called mandates. With the exception of the as yet non-existent Israel, the map of the region that emerged in the 1920s looks much as it does today. Yet drawing boundaries round the conference table was one thing; coping with the catastrophic repercussions of four years of war was quite another. Helping us to understand the difficulties the states of the Middle East have endured since then, and the challenges they continue to face, Rogan’s book takes us back to the moment of their birth, a moment in which one imperial order collapsed and gave way to another.

The Fall of the Ottomans: The Great War in the Middle East, 1914-1920, by Eugene Rogan, Allen Lane, RRP£25, 512 pages, published in the US in March by Basic Books

Mark Mazower is a professor of history at Columbia University and author of ‘Salonica, City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews’ (Harper)

Poor Richard- Greece can be Saved

Poor Richards Report

Greece can be saved and so can the rest of world.
If we forgive the interest rates and just ask that they repay. Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to regain the principal of a loan rather than losing everything?
The major banks would be the losers because they lose the benefit of compound interest or even simple interest. It is those interest payments that add up fast.
Another plus is that it would rein in the major banks as well. The loss of income for them means that they will be more careful making loans in the future, because many bankers would face salary pay cuts rather than living off government guarantees of deposits as they do now.

Support the Victims of Police Brutality in Armenia

According to İndigogo Men beaten, women & children attacked, cars destroyed, cameras & phones seized ….in Armenia. Why?


Appeal for Financial Support to Compensate Armenian Victims of State-Sponsored Terror Committed on January 31, 2015

Dear Friends,

The regime in Armenia and its subordinates in Stepanakert committed a large-scale state-sponsored terrorist act on January 31, 2015.  The police, including Special Forces units armed with sniper rifles and automatic weapons, brutally attacked the motorcade of “The Centennial Without this Regime”.  The participants of the motorcade, which included entire families, were completely peaceful.  Their point was only to distribute information and yet, the police who were supposed to protect them attacked them.

The police blockaded the peaceful motorcade on the Syunik to Artsakh highway. Despite the fact that the participants obeyed the demand of the police that the motorcade should turn around, the police attacked them as they were trying to turn around and leave.  Several, among them Artsakh war heroes and an independent journalist, were brutally beaten and required hospitalization.  Others, including women and children, were assaulted; all the while the vehicles themselves were being attacked and severely damaged.

As a result of this violent attack, organized by the regime, 20 vehicles were damaged, 3 professional cameras were seized from the journalists, numerous smart phones, which were being used to record the mayhem, were violently taken from the participants.  The total amount of the damages is around $40,000.00.

Most of the individuals who have suffered monetary damages have modest economic means, which makes it very difficult for them to replace or repair their material losses.  We must help them compensate their damages.  We must do it not just because they need and deserve it, but because whatever our beliefs we must keep Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Movement safe in Armenia.  The way to do that is to lend a helping hand to the innocent people who suffered only because they exercised what should be their right in their own country.

In whatever way you can, take this small but incredibly valuable moment to help, and share this story with your friends and family!

For those who can not make a donation with a Credit Card or PayPal through Indiegogo, you may contribute directly to Founding Parliament by other means provided at http://himnadir.am/donate

Below is the full video, clearly showing the despicable nature of the attack.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbF33yx8jpo:


Book Prospectus

(May 28, 2005)

The Nazis’ Gifts to Turkish Higher Education and Inadvertently to Us All: Modernization of Turkish universities (1933-1945) and its impact on present science and culture.


Arnold Reisman


In 1933



Reichstag  burning!


                                                                      In 1933


Gates to Istanbul University


Some 15 years later

This is a tale of individuals caught at the crossroads and in the cross-fires of history. Their native lands were in the throes of discarding them. Their lives were saved because an alien country was discarding a societal culture inherited from the Ottomans. Turkey recognized the need to modernize its society while Germany and Austria were literally throwing babies and much more, out with the bath water. The Nazis came to power.  Many of these intellectuals were Jewish.

The book documents a bit of history that is dimly lit and largely unknown. In the 1930s the new republic of Turkey badly needed western intellectual know-how to create a modern system of higher education and to modernize practice in various professions. In the west Fascism was rising. Much of the intellectual capital in German speaking countries involved individuals unacceptable to the new ideology and those for whom the ideology was unacceptable. Most had no other emigration options. For those who did, professional employment was not guaranteed. Turkey extended invitations to these desperate souls.  For certain chits, the German Reich allowed the emigrations to take place.  Germany needed Turkey’s neutrality to keep the Bosporus and Dardanelles open to its navy and shipping at all times – including war times. Throughout WWII the pressure was high to have these expatriates returned to the Reich along with all Turkish Jews. Turkey never caved in.


The system of higher education inherited by the Republic of Turkey in 1923, consisted of a few hundred Ottoman vintage (Islamic) madrasas, a fledgling university called the Dar-ül Fünun, and three military academies, one of which was expanded into a civil engineering school around 1909. With secularization enshrined in its constitution, the new government recognized a need for modernization/westernization throughout Turkish society and established a number of policies to bring this about. Indigenous personnel to do this were not to be had. Starting in 1933 and running through WWII, Turkey provided safe-haven for many intellectuals and professionals for whom the Nazis had other plans.


This book discusses the impact of these émigré professors, on Turkey’s higher education in the sciences, professions, and humanities, and also on its public health, library, legal, engineering, and administrative practices. The multi-faceted legacy of this impact on present Turkish society with all its richness is documented if but in part. Some of the socio-economic reasons for Turkey’s not taking full advantage of the second and third generation progenies of its modern higher educational system, and the ensuing “brain drain,” are analyzed. Lastly, the book briefly addresses the impact on American science and higher education of the Turkish-saved professors, many of whom subsequently re-emigrated to the US.

Acknowledgments:  The author is grateful to an old and dear friend Aysu Oral, for her knowledge of Turkish history, language, and culture, which greatly contributed to finding, abstracting, and translating  much text from Turkish language documents;  to graduate students, Ismail Capar and Emel Aktas who provided some of the Turkish material; the troika of  Eugen Merzbacher, distinguished physics Professor Emeritus, University of North Carolina, Matthias Neumark of Charlottesville, VA, and Andrew Schwartz of Acton Mass., both retired businessmen who provided many insights because they were there at the time, were not too young to understand events nor too old to recall and retell their stories; to Rita and Marek Glaser of Tel Aviv, Israel, also old and dear friends, for searching archival information and contacting Holocaust survivors for personal experiences that are relevant. Clearly, a number of scholars, archivists, and institutions have provided much of the information contained herein. Among these are Anthony Tedeschi and Becky Cape, Head of Reference and Public Services, The Lilly Library, Indiana University; Samira Teuteberg, AHRB Resource Officer, Centre for German-Jewish Studies; University of Sussex; Dr Norman H. Reid, Head of Special Collections, University of St Andrews Library, Scotland and to J. J. O’Connor and E. F. Robertson , Department of Mathematics and Statistics of the same university; Andrea B. Goldstein, Reference Archivist, Harvard; Viola Voss, Archivist, Leo Baeck Institute, New York; Ralph Jaeckel and staff of the von Grunebaum Center for Near East Studies, UCLA; Chris Petersen, the Ava Helen and Linus Pauling Papers, Valley Library, Oregon State University; Stephen Feinstein, University of Minnesota; Rainer Marutzky, Braunschweig Institute for Wood Research; Dr. Klaus Kallmann, New York Natural History Museum (Ret); Prof. Dr. Johannes Horst Schröder, Institut fur Biologie, Munich (Ret); Meg Rich, Archivist and Daniel J. Linke, University Archivist and Curator of Public Policy Papers, Seeley G. Mudd, Manuscript Library, Princeton University; Marcia Tucker, Historical Studies-Social Science Library, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton; Ken Rose, Assistant Director, Rockefeller Archive Center; Paul G. Anderson, Archivist, Becker Medical Library, Washington University in St. Louis; Julia Gardner, Reference/Instruction Librarian, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library; Virginia G. Saha, Director, Cleveland Health Sciences Library;  Nejat Akar MD, Professor of Pediatric Molecular Genetics, Ankara University, Faculty of Medicine; Professor Arin Namal, University Istanbul Medical Faculty Department of Medical Ethics and Medical History; Kyna Hamill, Tisch Library Archives, and  Amy E. Lavertu, Information Services Librarian, Hirsh Health Sciences Library at Tufts University; Historian Tuvia Friling of Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel, an expert on Jewish issues in the Balkans and Turkey during the relevant period; Daniel Rooney, Archivist, National [US] Archives and Records Administration; and especially to Ron Coleman, Reference Librarian, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, who went beyond the call of duty in providing references and did so in a most timely fashion.
Key words: Turkey; History; History of science and technology; Development; Technology Transfer; Educational Policy; Government Policy; Higher education; Nazi persecution; Nazism; Holocaust; Shoah; Migration; Diaspora; Exile.



Arnold Reisman received his BS, MS, and Ph.D. degrees in engineering from UCLA.  He is a registered Professional Engineer in California, Wisconsin, and Ohio and has published over 200 refereed papers and 14 books.  After 27 years as Professor of Operations Research at Case Western Reserve University, he chose early retirement in 1994.  During 1999-2003 he was Visiting Scholar in Turkey at both Sabanci University, and the Istanbul Technical University.  His current research interests are; technology transfer; epistemology of knowledge generation; meta research; and most recently, the history of German speaking exiled professors starting 1933 and their impact on science in general and Turkish universities in particular.  He is also actively pursuing his life long interest in sculpting.  He is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in the World, American Men and Women of Science, and Two Thousand Notable Americans and is a Fellow of the American Association for Advancement of Science.

Book Length

Text length and number of visuals are negotiable. Manuscript delivered in nine (9) months or less of contract signing.



  1. Introduction
  2. The Builders

         Architecture and City Planning

  1. The Preservators


Library Science and librarianship


Botany and zoology

  1. The Creators

Performing arts

Visual arts

  1. The Social Reformers



  1. The Healers



  1. The Scientists


Biology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry

Mathematics and Engineering Science

Philosophy and Science




  • University histories


Ankara University

Istanbul Technical University

Istanbul  University


    1. Problems the emigres encountered


  • Correspondence and memoirs


  1. Legacy left behind

Selected biographies of first-generation Turkish elite educated by the émigré professors.

Selected biographies of second-generation Turkish elite educated by the émigré professors.

Oral histories

First generation: Turkish elite educated by the émigré professors.

Surviving spouses

  1. Turkey’s post-war policies and practices: Effects limiting the legacy’s    

impact potential.

  1. After their re-emigration, Turkey-saved professors’ impact on:

         American science and higher education

German science and higher education




Sample chapters available on request.

British Turkish Cypriot NGOs launch an informative lobby campaign concerning Maraş / Varosha in the UK Parliament

marasTuesday 10th February 2015: The British Turkish Cypriot Association & Southwark Turkish Cypriot Association, both members of the Council of Turkish Cypriot Associations (UK), jointly hosted three events on the issue of ownership of Maraş / Varosha.

A synopsis of the subject matter presented is as follows:

The issue of ownership of Maraş / Varosha is no longer a local issue.  In addition to being the most important dispute of the Cyprus problem, this controversial town has also become a major international issue. The aim of the conference is to shed light on land and property issues in Cyprus and to determine the lawful property ownership rights in the resort town of Famagusta within a legal and historical perspective.  As such, the ownership assessment shall be based on locally and internationally recognised legal documents.  The centre of discussion shall be the Evkaf Foundation, the greatest landowner of Cyprus.  The Evkaf Foundation, a member of Brussels-based European Foundation Centre, is a constitutionally acknowledged philanthropic organization founded in the year 1571.  According to constitutional and legal provisions in force since 1571, no one can acquire the ownership of Foundation immovable properties under any pretext or on any ground.  The Laws of Cyprus confirm that foundations are irrevocable, perpetual, inalienable and to be compensated for loss of revenue.

Cetin Ramadan


British Turkish Cypriot Association

Letter to Harut Sassounian (California Courier)

Dear Mr. Sassounian!

Re: Prof. Auron Blasts Israel’s President For Calling ‘Armenian Genocide’ a Massacre, dtd. 10. February 2015

I really am sorry for you that you have to live through these rather frustrating times. Your terrorism (ASALA) didn’t work. Supporting the PKK lead to nothing.Your propaganda since 1958 seems to have failed miserably too. Depression is a fruit of frustration, and hopefully it doensn’t kill you.You might think that what doesn’t kill you, makes you strong! But don’t you worry, those who die early are dead longer.

Why do I think you must be frustrated? After the official refusal by the governments of Australia, Germany and the UK, you now have the State of Israel refusing to acknowledge your historical myth. Considering all your futile efforts in the so called centennial, it must not only be frustrating but hurtful and agonizing. Such bad luck! Yes, hard luck old chap.

If there was a grain of decency in you Sir, you would at least acknowledge and show sadnes about the indescriminate atrocities committed by Armenian armed forces in the 20th century
on innocent civilians in Kochali and other parts of Karabag.

You, Sir, have made a habit of labelling everyone who do not agree with your version of history as “Genocide Deniers”. Interesting also how you misuse the position of an Israeli academic who works for an Armenian University in Yerevan. I can imagine what could happen to him should he dare disagree with the Armenian version of the story! Even poor Hasan Cemal got his portion of Armenian fanaticism during a recent lecture in Armenia.

Mr. Sassounian; you are not the youngest anymore, do yourself a favour and get rid of your evil thoughts, because your thoughts become actions, your actions then become a habit, and your habits determine your character. What sort of heritage are you going to leave behind for future Armenian generations? At your age, I would think of that intensively and sincerely.

Kufi Seydali

Kufi Seydali

MEHMET SUKRU GUZEL ” Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide as a Threat to World Peace and Security”


Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide as a Threat to World Peace and Security [1]

On 29 January 2015, The Armenian State Commission on the Coordination of Events Dedicated to the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, in consultation with its regional committees in the Diaspora gave a declaration, which is by itself a crime against humanity. [2]

This declaration is also a threat to world peace and security and is null for the United Nations system and the World international law order.

When Armenia applied for the membership in the United Nations, Levon Ter-Petrosian on behalf of the Republic of Armenia declared that the Republic of Armenia accepted the obligations contained in the Charter of the United Nations and solemnly undertakes to fulfil them. [3] With this declaration, Armenian state instead of fulfilling his responsibilities to the United Nations Charter is breaking the Charter of United Nations seriously and this can only be described as a threat to world peace and security.

In paragraph 10 of the Declaration, it is written that “ the role and significance of the Sevres Peace Treaty of 10 August 1920 and US President Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award of 22 November 1920 in overcoming the consequences of the Armenian Genocide.”

The Pan Armenian declaration in fact is a threat to international peace and against the spirit of United Nations’ all efforts to establish peace in the world as the report is against the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Turkish Republic. This declaration is null according to United Nations Charter and the international legal order.

Speaking to Tert.am, Head of the National Assembly’s Committee on Foreign Relations Artak Zakaryan (Armenian Republican Party) said “It first of all contains a huge legal, political and value base: a memory, rebirth, gratitude, as well as reclamation which – in solidarity with one another – successively reflect the Armenian nation’s concerted efforts, including international recognition campaign, state-building, diaspora formation, maintenance of values, the Armenian national identity, accountability demands for legal consequences of genocide prevention on the international agenda and in international law, as well as the efforts to move ahead with the highest pan-national values.,” [4]

The Pan-Armenian Declaration specifies Armenia s territorial claims against Turkey. This is what Director of Modus Vivendi Center, political scientist Ara Papyan said during a February 2 press conference. Ara Papyan said “I believe the Pan-Armenian Declaration serves as a step forward in terms of formulating our claims against Turkey. I attach special importance to the part of the Declaration that recalls the Treaty of Sevres and Woodrow Wilson s Arbitrary Verdict dated 22 November 1920, Papyan said, adding that he doesn’t t remember a time when the issue of territories is emphasized and valued on behalf of the President of the Republic of Armenia. “[5]

With this declaration, Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora tries to legitimize their claims for the conquest of the lands in Turkey by using “Tabula Rasa Doctrine” [6] in a soulful text on Genocide claims without mentioning the killings of more than 500.000 Turkish civilians by the Armenian non-state armed groups. Armenian non-state armed groups aimed of depopulation of Turks in the territories for which they aimed to form an independent state by killing of the civilian Turks and today, we give the name, Ethnic Cleansing by Massacres for the acts of the Armenian non-state armed groups.

Through the wording “the role and significance of the Sevres Peace Treaty of 10 August 1920 and US President Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award of 22 November 1920”, the Declaration tries to indicate that the Treaty of Moscow 16 March 1921 and the Treaty of Kars 13 October 1921 where Turkey’s east borders, as well as those of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan decided, must be “ex iniuria ius non oritur “; a non-recognition which was based on the generally accepted Roman law, illegal acts cannot produce legal results or rights.

Armenians after 1991 claims that their republic is a clean state (Tabula Rasa) and a new bilateral agreement must be made to define frontiers between Armenia and Turkey. [7] This Declaration also aimed to legitimize this effort by sending a copy to the Secretary General of United Nations.

The Armenian report tries to take, without mentioning, the example of the USSR annexation in 1940 of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania that resulted from the secret agreements of the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact of 1939. The majority of states did not recognize the USSR annexation of the Baltic States. This act of non-recognition was due to the application of the Stimson Doctrine of Non-Recognition. [8]

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania declared their independence and separated from the crumbling Russian Empire in 1918. Peace treaties were signed with USSR in 1920 and Soviet Russia recognized all sovereign rights over the territories of the Baltic States which had formerly belonged to the Russian Empire.

All three Baltic States were admitted as members of the League of Nations, as was the USSR.

Acquisition of territory by force was recognized as the legitimate right of the conqueror until the end of World War I. Efforts were made to limit the acquisition of territory by force through the use of the provisions of the Covenant of the League of Nations in 1919, but this was applicable only amongst the members of the League of Nations. [9]

Not very long thereafter, when Nazi forces had crushed Poland, and the Red Army had seized its part of Poland’s territory, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were pressured to conclude Pacts of Mutual Assistance with USSR, which established Soviet Military bases on Baltic territories, and practically signaled the end of sovereignty for the Baltic nations.

After the fall of Paris and the collapse of France in the 2nd World War, the USSR presented ultimatums to all three Baltic States, which resulted in their total occupation by the Red Army. A masquerade of elections under dubious conditions and the supposedly voluntary joining of the Baltic States to the USSR followed this. After the cease of the sovereignty of the Baltic States in such a manner, the League of Nations expelled the USSR from membership according to the Article 16 of its Covenant in June 1940. [10]

The annexation of Baltic States to the USSR was illegal not according the treaties that were signed between the parties, but was illegal mainly to the fact that they were all member of the League of the Nations. Such an annexation was against the Covenant of the League of Nations.

International community legally recognize the borders of Republic of Turkey from the signature of the Lausanne Peace Treaty. Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora claim that in the Lausanne Peace Treaty, the east borders of Turkey is not defined and try to mention in all the documents and in this Declaration, the Sevres Peace Treaty of 10 August 1920 and US President Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award of 22 November 1920 to legitimize their demand of conquest for the east of Turkish territory.

When Turkey becomes a member of the League of Nations, the other members of the League of Nations who were also the signatories of the Sevres Peace Treaty of 10 August 1920 like England, France, Italy and Japan, not only recognized the east borders of Turkish Republic, which was not mentioned in the Lausanne Peace Treaty of 1923 but also they become a guarantor to the territorial integrity of Turkey as written in the Covenant of the League of Nations..

Under international law, recognition of a state by another state until the formation of the League of Nations did not mean to give a guaranty for the territorial integrity and the independence of a state. This is why the League of Nations expelled the USSR from membership according to the Article 16 of its Covenant in June 1940 for the forcible annexation of the Baltic States.

As the Lausanne Peace Treaty, for England, France, Italy and Japan did not give any responsibility for the territorial guaranty to Turkey until Turkey`s membership to the of League of Nations. The majority of states did not recognize the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States as this act of non-recognition was due to the application of the Stimson Doctrine of Non-Recognition. The Stimson Doctrine of Non- Recognition of the annexation of the Baltic States to USSR was also recognition of the territorial guaranty of the Turkish Republic by United States of America before forming of United Nations after the 2nd World War.

After formation of the United Nations, all member states obliged to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations

With the Declaration, Armenian State acted against article 1 and article 2 of the United Nations Charter. The principle of territorial integrity is an important part of the international legal order and is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, in particular in Article 1 and 2.

Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter requires all member states to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. While the Charter does not define what it actually means by “territorial integrity”, it is now well recognized and reflects the fundamental international objective in the stability of boundaries. In 1986, a chamber of the International Court of Justice considered the principle as one of general international law. [9] This view was confirmed by the “Badinter Commission” regarding the former Yugoslav republics, stating that whatever the circumstances, the right of self-determination must not involve changes to existing frontiers at the time of independence. [12]

The Declaration is against to many resolutions of United Nations such as Declaration on Principles of International Law, concerning Friendly Relations and Co-Operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations 2625, the Definition of Aggression of 3314, Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty 2131 .

Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide is a threat to world peace and security as the text not only made racial and religious discrimination by not mentioning the killings of more than 500.000 civil Turks by the Armenian non-state armed groups but also the text contents territorial demand form Turkey.

Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora should give a 2nd Declaration and must clarify that the 1st Declaration does not include any territorial demand with the sentence “the role and significance of the Sevres Peace Treaty of 10 August 1920 and US President Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award of 22 November 1920 in overcoming the consequences of the Armenian Genocide” to prevent any misunderstanding. Also in the 2nd Declaration Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora should mention the killings of more than 500.000 Turks by Armenian non-state armed groups. With this form, Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide is not only a crime against humanity but a threat to world peace and security as well.


Mehmet Sukru Guzel

Switzerland Representative of Center for International Strategy and Security Studies


[1] Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocidehttp://www.mfa.am/en/interviews/item/2015/01/29/pan_arm_dec_armgen/ 10.02.2015

[2] Mehmet Sukru Guzel, “Pan Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide as a Crime against Humanity “, http://www.usgam.com/en/index.php?l=844&cid=1267&bolge=0, 10.02.2015

[3] United Nations General Assembly Document No. A/46/847

[4] http://www.tert.am/en/news/2015/02/04/artak-zaqaryan/1577961 10.02.2015

[5] http://en.newhub.shafaqna.com/AM/305299-2nd-ODI-Pakistan-Vs-New-Zealand 10.02.2015

[6] Clean state rule (tabula rasa doctrine upon state succession the new sovereign is absolutely free of any it’s predecessor`s obligations; this theory stresses the discontinuity of all rights and obligations completely and automatically upon state succession. Bello, E.G. “Reflections on Succession of States in the Light of the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties”, German Yearbook of International Law, (1980) v. 23, pp. 296-322,p 297, The basic concept is that a newly independent state begins its existence free of the obligations of its predecessor state. Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties article.17, article 24.

[7] Vladimir D.Vardanyan, “The Issues of Legal Validity of Peace Treaties of Armenia and relating to Armenia: An International Legal Analysis”, Armenian Review, Volume 52, No.1-2, Spring-Summer 2010

[8] Robert Langer, “The Stimson Doctrine and Related Principles in Legal Theory and Diplomatic Practice”, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1947, p. 313.

[9] Covenant of the League of Nations, 28 April 1919;

Article 10

The Members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League. In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled.

Article 11

Any war or threat of war, whether immediately affecting any of the Members of the League or not, is hereby declared a matter of concern to the whole League, and the League shall take any action that may be deemed wise and effectual to safeguard the peace of nations. In case any such emergency should arise the Secretary General shall on the request of any Member of the League forthwith summon a meeting of the Council.

It is also declared to be the friendly right of each Member of the League to bring to the attention of the Assembly or of the Council any circumstance whatever affecting international relations which threatens to disturb international peace or the good understanding between nations upon which peace depends.

[10] Article 16

Should any Member of the League resort to war in disregard of its covenants under Articles 12, 13 or 15, it shall ipso facto be deemed to have committed an act of war against all other Members of the League, which hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all trade or financial relations, the prohibition of all intercourse between their nationals and the nationals of the covenant-breaking State, and the prevention of all financial, commercial or personal intercourse between the nationals of the covenant-breaking State and the nationals of any other State, whether a Member of the League or not.

It shall be the duty of the Council in such case to recommend to the several Governments concerned what effective military, naval or air force the Members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League.

The Members of the League agree, further, that they will mutually support one another in the financial and economic measures which are taken under this Article, in order to minimize the loss and inconvenience resulting from the above measures, and that they will mutually support one another in resisting any special measures aimed at one of their number by the covenant-breaking State, and that they will take the necessary steps to afford passage through their territory to the forces of any of the Members of the League which are co-operating to protect the covenants of the League.

Any Member of the League, which has violated any covenant of the League, may be declared to be no longer a Member of the League by a vote of the Council concurred in by the Representatives of all the other Members of the League represented thereon.

[11] International Court of Justice, Opinion No. 2; ILM (1992) 1497; 92 ILR 167; referring to the internal boundaries of the former Republic of Yugoslavia

[12] http://www.unwatercoursesconvention.org/the-convention/part-ii-general-principles/article-8-general-obligation-to-cooperate/8-1-3-territorial-integrity/ 10.02.2015


Epigraphs of ancient Turkic people discovered in Mongolia

July 17, 2013

By KUNIHIKO IMAI/ Senior Staff Writer

OSAKA–Two massive slabs of stone inscribed in ancient Turkic script have been found on the steppes of eastern Mongolia, the first such discovery in over a century, a Japanese researcher said July 16.

The epigraphs date from the mid-eighth century, said Takashi Osawa, a professor of ancient Turkic history at Osaka University’s graduate school.

He said the finds may offer invaluable clues to the political systems and institutions of the Gokturk people, who faced the Sui and Tang dynasties in China in times of peace and war as they reigned over the steppes of Central Asia.

Osawa said he and researchers from the Institute of Archaeology of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences discovered remnants of two giant epigraphs in May at an archaeological site called Dongoin shiree. It is near Mount Delgerkhaan, 400 kilometers southeast of Ulan Bator, the Mongolian capital.

The epigraphs measure 4 meters and 3 meters, respectively.

Combined, they are inscribed with 2,832 symbols, in 20 lines of ancient Turkic script.

Osawa, who deciphered the writing, said it describes the lamentation of people who have to leave their beloved families and homeland behind when they die.

“Oh, my home!” reads one inscription. Another reads: “Oh, my land!”

Signs engraved in the epigraphs indicate the artifacts likely represent epitaphs dedicated to members of the Ashina tribe, the reigning family of the Second Turkic Empire (682-744).

The Gokturks are the oldest nomadic people in Central Asia that left records of their own language in their own writing system.

The discovery is significant as it is the first of its kind since the three most renowned ancient Turkic inscriptions (Bilge Kaghan, Kol Tigin and Tonyukuk) were discovered in central Mongolia about 120 years ago, experts said.

“Other parts that remain buried in the ground may offer a record of the lives of the individuals commemorated,” Osawa said.

“Research on ancient Turkic script has centered on the re-reading of known inscriptions after a Danish linguist deciphered the writing in the late 19th century,” said Takao Moriyasu, a professor of Central Asian history at Kinki University. “The latest finds could help unravel new facts.”

The history of the Gokturk state started when Yili Kaghan founded the First Turkic Empire in 552.

Political maneuvering by the Sui Dynasty of China split the Gokturk nation into an eastern and a western part, with the East Turkic Empire succumbing to Tang China’s rule in 630. The Gokturks regained independence from Tang China to found the Second Turkic Empire in 682, only to be brought down by the Uighurs in 744.



Hampig Sassounian
Armenian Justice Commandos Assassin

Kemal Arikan
Turkish Consul General
to Los Angeles
Assassinated January 28, 1982

Lael Rubin
Los Angeles District Attorney
who Prosecuted Sassounian

On February 5, 2015, the California Department of Corrections Parole Board denied Hampig Sassounian release on parole, because he continues to pose a public safety risk due to his violent extremism in advocating the Armenian allegation of genocide. This was Sassounian’s fourth parole denial in ten years.

Sassounian, San Quentin Inmate C88440, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment for the assassination of Los Angeles Turkish Consul General Kemal Arikan on January 28, 1982, as Mr. Arikan was in his car waiting at a traffic signal. Sassounian and crime partner, Krikor Saliba, shot Mr. Arikan 14 times in the chest and head. The Justice Commandos of the Armenian Genocide (JCAG), the militant wing of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), an ultra nationalist Armenian political party, claimed responsibility. Saliba fled to Lebanon, while Sassounian was arrested hours after the assassination. After a two-month trial prosecuted by District Attorney Lael Rubin, a jury convicted Sassounian and committed him to prison on June 29, 1984. Sassounian is incarcerated at San Quentin Prison, which is a maximum security facility where notable assassins have been inmates: Sirhan Sirhan who assassinated Robert F. Kennedy and Jang In-hwan who assassinated American diplomat Durham Stevens.

On February 5, 2015, the Parole Board set the next parole eligibility hearing for 2018, concluding that Sassounian has not come to terms with his crime. The Commissioners observed that while Sassounian claims to support peace and nonviolence: (1) he has expressed militancy in Armenian publications such as the Armenian military magazine, Hay Zinyor; (2) he has done nothing in the public forum to denounce his heinous crime or show remorse, let alone correct reports in Armenian publications that refer to him as a “Hero of Holy War”; (3) he has continued to deny any connection to the JCAG and ARF and to conceal his sources of criminal support; (4) he has continued to conceal a third co-conspirator; and, (5) he has not offered to pay reparations to the Turkish Republic and the Arikan family.

The Parole Board expressed that there was nothing Sassounian can do to bring back Mr. Arikan, and that he took away a husband and a father forever, just because he wanted to silence Mr. Arikan for disagreeing with the Orthodox Armenian perspective of history. “This was an assassination; a crime against a public officer is a crime against the public”, concluded the Parole Board.


(Click here to watch Prosecutor Rubin’s Speech) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_95OD09nZI


The Turkish Republic appeared at the Parole Hearing represented by Consul General R. Gulru Gezer, and with Gunay Evinch of ATAA and the firm of Saltzman & Evinch. Los Angeles District Attorney Tom Wenke appeared on behalf of the State of California. Importantly, top Turkish American, Turkish and US leaders submitted letters in opposition to parole:

1. ATAA Past-President and California Resident Ergun Kirlikovali
2. Retired Los Angels District Attorney Lael Rubin
3. U.S. Congressional Turkish Caucus Member Pete Sessions
4. U.S. Congressional Turkish Caucus Co-Chairman Ed Whitfield
5. Turkish Ambassador to the United States Serdar Kilic, including correspondence from Secretary John Kerry and Attorney General Eric Holder.


As in the prior three parole hearings, the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA) submitted a Statement in Opposition to Parole. Similarly, ATAA had appeared at the Criminal Sentencing Hearing of Mourad Topalian, former Chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), which is the US representative of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), on weapons and explosives charges the federal authorities linked to at least four terror attacks by the Justice Commandos (JCAG) on American soil. ATAA’s statement, which was supported by evidentiary documents and a detailed report on Armenian terrorism and violent extremism, read in pertinent part:

“Sassounian lacks genuine remorse for his crime. In the Armenian military’s Hay Zinvormagazine, Sassounian wrote: ‘I am the soldier of the Motherland until death; my Armenian blood taught me this.’ His lengthy diatribe in Hay Zinvor, Sassounian shows how he sees the killing of Mr. Arikan and his incarceration as a part of a larger mission to give a message that the use of violence is justified and that after his release from prison he will continue to use violence, and that this is all about justice for himself and the Armenian Cause, not justice for the family of Mr. Arikan. Sassounian concludes, “The way for justice is long, and I will pass it with self-sacrificing, devotion, patience.”

Prof. Auron Blasts Israel’s President For Calling ‘Armenian Genocide’ a Massacre


By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier

Israel’s President Reuven Rivlin generated a major controversy after his January 28 speech at the UN General Assembly in New York.

As Speaker and member of the Knesset (Parliament), Revlin had led the struggle for many years to have Israel recognize the Armenian Genocide. But, after becoming President, like Pres. Obama, Revlin has been reluctant to reconfirm his principled position on this issue.

Last month, Pres. Rivlin delivered a powerful speech at the UN General Assembly’s annual International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust. Regrettably, Israel’s President made two serious errors. He called the Armenian Genocide a massacre and, to balance those comments, referred to the Azeri deaths in Khojalu during the (Karabagh) Artsakh war.

Here is an excerpt from Rivlin’s UN remarks: “In 1915, when members of the Armenian nation were being massacred, Avshalom Feinberg, a leading member of Nili, the Jewish underground which cooperated with the Allies during the First World War, wrote the following, and I quote, ‘My teeth have been ground down with worry, whose turn is next? When I walked on the blessed and holy ground on my way up to Jerusalem, I asked myself if we are living in our modern era, in 1915, or in the days of Titus or Nebuchadnezzar? Did I, a Jew, forget that I am a Jew? I also asked myself if I have the right to weep over the tragedy of my people only, and whether the Prophet Jeremiah did not shed tears of blood for Armenians as well?’Avshalom Feinberg wrote that exactly 100 years ago — 100 years of hesitation and denial! But in the Land of Israel of that time, in the Jerusalem where I was born, no one denied the massacre that had taken place. The residents of Jerusalem, my parents and members of my family, saw the Armenian refugees arriving by the thousands — starving, piteous survivors of calamity. In Jerusalem they found shelter and their descendants continue to live there to this day.”

Distinguished scholar Yair Auron, Professor at Open University of Israel, was irate at his President’s choice of words, despite his personal friendship with him. Auron is a long-time advocate of Armenian Genocide recognition by Israel and author of several books on this subject. He is currently teaching at the American University of Armenia.

On January 31, while I was delivering a lecture on the Armenian Genocide at the newly-opened Komitas Museum in Yerevan, Prof. Auron approached me and asked if he could address the audience. After obtaining my consent, he read a personal statement, titled: “Apology to my Armenian brothers”:

“The President of Israel, Reuven Rivlin, made a remarkable speech with very touching sentences, identifying honestly and profoundly with the suffering of the Armenian people. But, intentionally, he did not use the term Armenian Genocide, neither in Hebrew nor in English.” Prof. Auron went on to disclose that Pres. Rivlin had told him personally that “he had not changed his opinion, but that he cannot declare it [genocide] as President of Israel. This, I can understand. But, in the last minute before the speech, somebody, probably from the Foreign Ministry of Israel, maybe even the Foreign Minister of Israel, Avigdor Lieberman, told him to include this terrible sentence: ‘Is our struggle, the struggle of this Assembly, against genocide, effective enough? Was it effective enough then in Bosnia? Was it effective in preventing the killing in Khojalu?’”

Prof. Auron continued his criticism: “Mr. President, you used the name of Khojalu in the context of genocide. You know well the difference between genocide and massacre. … Who proposed to you, Mr. President, who asked that you make this terrible error? You do not use the term genocide regarding the Armenian Genocide itself. Using the term genocide, in the context of one village in Nagorno-Karabagh, as if it was genocide, is unacceptable…. You do not dare to use the term genocide regarding the Armenian Genocide, and you define the massacre of this village, that I am sure you did not know its name just a few minutes before [your speech], as genocide. It is sacrilegious, and by it, you betray the legacy of the Holocaust and its victims.”

The righteous professor concluded his heartfelt remarks by pledging: “Let me, my Armenian brothers, apologize in my name and on behalf of many Israeli Jews. We are with you. We will not stop our struggle till Israel recognizes the Armenian Genocide.”

Secret life of professor Vahakn Dadrian defender of Alleged Armenian Case














Sexual harassment in educational institutions remains a pressing

issue in many countries, including the USA. The recent scandalous

Jerry Sandusky case, which sent shockwaves through the American society,

demonstrated how persistent ignoring of the reports about sexual abuse

in order to protect the reputation of the university allowed the predator to

continue his criminal activity for many years. However, this case is not

the first and is just one of the many, and sexual predators operated in

university environment for decades.

One such example is Vahakn Norayr Dadrian,

Director of Genocide Research at a think tank called

Zoryan Institute, who has a long history of sexual abuse.

We tried to shed some light on the obscure facts from Dr Dadrian’s past.
While getting into the details of Dr Dadrian’s biography,
we also found weird contradictions in the information he provided
about his early years, and we made a parallel research on that subject as well.


for continuation of the article  please go to

















Above picture shows four defenders of Armenian case

with Elif SAfak and Taner akcam on the right…

Among them,  three carries Prof. Titles without any

recorded knowledge of History.



Armenian “Settled History Syndrome”: An affliction that runs deep in the media

By Ferruh Demirmen

Anyone who tries to see or instill a measure of balance or open mindedness in the Western media on the question of Armenian “genocide” will soon discover he/she is out of luck. For the phenomenon, which I call the “Settled History Syndrome,” is not only palpable, but also widespread. It runs deep in the media across Europe and America. It is not new, but deserves special recognition under a name of its own – hence the term coined here. It is the product of year-in, year-out incessant propaganda perpetrated by the Armenian lobby on the so-called “Armenian genocide.”

The syndrome explains how a group of certain historians or scholars, supposedly open minded, gather to discuss Armenian “genocide,” but colleagues who disagree are kept away as misguided renegades.

It explains why anyone who challenges the Armenian version of history is labeled “Genocide denier,” often citing a self-appointed group called ”The International Association of Genocide Scholars“ as the infallible arbiter.

It explains how minds are frozen, debate is stifled, and freedom of opinion is trampled upon – truth being the ultimate casualty.

It explains how money and influence, fed by prejudice, create a cadre of ill-informed politicians and general public. The media, itself thrown into deep freeze, commonly plays the role of the facilitator.

Turks who want to fight unfounded accusations from the Armenian side must first deal with this mindset affecting the media.

Examples are myriad. I will first relay an anecdote, then continue with a recent example, both from America. No doubt, what goes on in America also goes on in Europe, with some mutations.

The PBS Episode

Time is early 2006. PBS, the national Public Broadcasting Service in America, is planning to air on April 17 a supposed TV documentary called “Armenian Genocide.” The film, directed by Andrew Goldberg and bankrolled by more than 30 largely Armenian foundations in America, will surely be an anti-Turkish diatribe based on distorted history. I and a small group of Turks and Turkish Americans contact the PBS headquarters in Alexandria , Virginia, to protest the screening of a one-sided story. (As it turned out, the film shamelessly started with a macabre scene of human skulls taken from a 1871 painting by a Russian artist. For a fuller account, see F. Demirmen, Turkish Daily News, April 24, 2006). We argued that, if PBS decides to go ahead with the screening, it should also show, as a balancing act, “The Armenian Revolt,” a newly released documentary directed by Marty Callaghan.

The PBS headquarters did not change its mind. And the screening of “The Armenian Revolt” was out of consideration.

I then took my case to the affiliate of PBS in Houston Texas, which was also planning to air “Armenian genocide.” Commenting on the film, the channel’s website carried the statement: “The International Association of Genocide Scholars affirms that the number of Armenian deaths at the hands of Ottoman Turks …” It was a reminder to the viewers that the “genocide” was a shut case.

Nonetheless, I thought I should still try to educate the Houston channel, that what they would be airing was a prejudiced and distorted story. To that end, I contacted the programming director and sent him some archival material. After back-and-forth correspondence, I had my fingers crossed. At the end, the channel didn’t change its plans, but the programming director made an admission, which was revealing. He remarked that until I contacted him, they had assumed that “genocide” was a “settled history.”

It was a Lilliputian victory. But it showed what the Turkish side is against: a mindset more or less frozen on its track.

Pasadena Star Episode

Fast forward 9 years. On January 15, 2015, the Pasadena Star in California published a news article titled: “Ground broken on Pasadena Armenian Genocide Memorial.” It was an announcement that the monument would be completed on April 18, ahead of the “100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide on April 24.” Pasadena happens to be next door to Los Angeles, a hotbed of Diaspora activism.

As the Star put it, the monument would take “the form of a 16-foot-tall tripod … with water drops dripping … to represent each of the 1.5 million lives cut short by the Ottoman Turks in the Armenian Genocide of 1915 to 1923.” The droplets would “fall every 21 seconds, so that 1.5 million drops will fall annually.” The tripod would represent “similarly shaped structures which Armenian leaders were hanged from during the Armenian Genocide.” Surrounding the tripod and stonework would be “12 pomegranate trees, representing each of the 12 lost provinces of Armenia.”

Pictures of Armenian clerics solemnly praying at the ground breaking ceremony and an artist’s rendition of the tripod-shaped monument were included in the news.

The description and symbolism were chilling; but infused in all was a prejudiced and distorted history. Particularly notable in the article was the absolutist tone in the language. “Genocide” was treated as a fact, with no hint as to its disputable character.

Considering their mindset, I hesitated contacting the Star to express my disagreement that Armenian “genocide” is a fact. But the invitation at the end of the article, for readers to engage in “insightful conversations,“ was too good to resist. I also thought that, instead of sending a short blog, I should lay out my arguments in a full article so as to enlighten them. I informed the Star of my intention to submit a dissenting view, and proposed that they publish it as a stand-alone contribution by a guest writer. Their initial reaction was encouraging. They asked me to send in my article.

In the article I took special care to acknowledge Armenian sufferings and losses, but also mentioned sufferings and losses on the Muslim side. I pointed to certain facts, and made corrections to some of the allegations in the article. I also tried to strike a conciliatory note, referring to the calls of Armenian religious leaders in Turkey, and pointed to the poisoning effect such a monument would have on the Armenian-Turkish relations in America. It was an appeal for “peace.” While I did not expect they would agree with my views, my expectations were high that the Star would publish my article – if for no reason than journalistic curiosity and respect for dissenting views.

The response from the Star was an eye opener:

“Yes. We don’t print op-eds by Holocaust deniers, nor articles denying the settled history of the Armenian genocide, recognized now by 23 countries and by the vast majority of scholars and historians not in the pay of the Turkish government.”

So, I was a “Genocide denier,” and Armenian “genocide” was a settled history, the arbiter presumably being the all-knowing International Association of Genocide Scholars. Case shut. Opinions and facts brought forward by others will not change anything.

The response was the embodiment of a frozen mind. Frozen in time, frozen in space. Here was another example of the “Settled History Syndrome.”

MEHMET SUKRU GUZEL: Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide as a Crime Against Humanity

mehemet-rayen-reynaldo-300x200Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide as a Crime Against Humanity


(Switzerland Representative of Center for International Strategy and Security Studies)


On 29 January 2015, Armenian State Commission on the Coordination of Events Dedicated to the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, in consultation with its regional committees in the Diaspora, gave a declaration. [1]

This declaration is in fact a crime against humanity based on racial and religious discrimination. This declaration is a crime against humanity by non-mentioning the killings of more than 500.000 Turks by Armenian non-state armed groups between the years 1914 -1921. As all historian and international politicians knows that for a specific date and specific place of historical events based on religious and racial issues, if only a portion, or one side of the specified events is to be mentioned and only one side is side to be accused of the same actions, this is a discrimination on religion and racial origin. And this is the legitimization of crimes of the other side on religious and racial reasons which is a crime by itself.

No normal person can believe then more than 500.000 civilians Turks could be killed including children, woman and older people on self-defense actions of Armenian non-state armed groups. By not mentioning of the killings of more than 500.000 Turks in the declaration, this should be accepted as the legitimation of the war crime acts of Armenian non-state armed groups and this is a crime against humanity.

International Court of Justice gives the definition of Crimes against Humanity as:

Include any of the following acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: murder; extermination; enslavement; deportation or forcible transfer of population; imprisonment; torture; rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; persecution against an identifiable group on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious or gender grounds; enforced disappearance of persons; the crime of apartheid; other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering or serious bodily or mental injury. [2]

Armenian non-state armed groups made many acts of this definition and the Declaration itself is persecution against the Turkish people on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious or gender grounds.

In the paragraph 4 of the declaration, it is written that “recalling the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948, whereby recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”

In the paragraph 5 of the declaration, it is written that “ guided by the respective principles and provisions of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 96(1) of 11 December 1946, the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 9 December 1948, the United Nations Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity of 26 November 1968, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966 as well as all the other international documents on human rights,”

As mentioned in the declaration paragraph 4 and 5, all other human rights international documentations, we can give examples of the International Committee of the Red Cross study on customary international humanitarian law rules made a significant contribution to the process of identifying fundamental standards of humanity by clarifying, in particular, international humanitarian law rules applicable in non-international armed conflict. Furthermore, adoption by the Human Rights Committee of general comment 31 on article 2 of the International Covenant Civil and Political Rights as well as the International Court of Justice’s Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and its judgment in the Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo reaffirmed the applicability of international human rights law during armed conflict and addressed the relationship between international humanitarian law and international human rights law. [3]

Also the International Court of Justice in the 1985 Nicaragua case recognized that certain minimum humanitarian standards apply during internal armed conflict. [4]

On February 26, 2007, the International Court of Justice issued its judgment in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The International Court of Justice did conclude that Serbia, through its continued support of Bosnian Serbs in light of the probability that some of them would commit the crime of genocide, had “violated the obligation to prevent genocide in respect of the genocide that occurred in Srebrenica in July 1995. [5]

We have to remember that Bosnian Serbs were a non-state armed group and they committed crime of Genocide.

In fact, if the word “ Genocide “ is to be used for the 1st World War period, Armenia should accept that the 1st Genocide of the 1st World War was made by non-state armed Armenian groups in the 1877-78 Ottoman-Russian War lost territories of the Ottoman Empire Kars, Ardahan and environs. Ottoman sources reported some 30,000 Muslim civilians killed; more recent scholarship has pointed to an even higher number, as many as 45,000 in the Chorokhi valley alone in. Traveling the Ardahan-Merdenek road in Ardahan province in early January 1915, an Azeri Duma deputy, Mahmud Yusuf Dzhafarov, witnessed “mass graves of unarmed Muslims on both sides of the road.” Whatever the exact number of victims, the wave of Christian vengeance killings against Caucasian Muslims was serious enough that the long-serving viceroy of the Caucasus, Count I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, issued a series of decrees forbidding further atrocities while also ordering the deportation of about 10,000 Muslims from sensitive areas near the front lines to the Russian interior. [6]

When we think of Srebenica and the International Court of Justice confirmed that genocide had been committed in Srebenica. If a single massacre satisfies the criterion of Article 2 of the Genocide Convention, certainly the Armenian massacres against the Turks in Russian control territory before the deportation decision of Armenians in Ottoman Empire would qualify as the 1st Genocide of the 1st World War. Non-state armed Armenian groups made more massacres to the Turks at the back of the war frontier in different parts of Anatolia as well should be recognized as Genocides also.

In the article 8 of the Declaration, it is written that “Calls upon the Republic of Turkey to recognize and condemn the Armenian Genocide committed by the Ottoman Empire, and to face its own history and memory through commemorating the victims of that heinous crime against humanity and renouncing the policy of falsification, denialsm and banalizations of this indisputable fact” forms crimes against humanity.

Article 8 of the declaration was written with the concept of racial and religious discrimination. Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora deny the fact of the war crimes of Armenian non-state armed groups and their genocides to Turks as Genocide and afraid to face in fact their own history and memory through commemorating the victims of that heinous crime against humanity and renouncing the policy of falsification, denialsm and banalization of this indisputable fact forms crimes against humanity.

A demand of blaming only one side for what had happened in the past means a demand from international community to accept acts of so-called in an orientalist understanding as superior civilized Armenian non-state armed groups acts against to Muslims Turks, as a Holy Christian War as was in the old times of the Crusades by which no one can blame the Armenian non-state armed groups acts of genocides against the Turks.

The logic of Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora Declaration is a threat to world peace and security.

Someone can use the same logic of religious and racial discrimination as an example for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and try to legitimize the war crimes acts of ISIS by not mentioning in a written text and blame some wrongful acts Iraqi Government as genocide or war crimes in the same text.

If Armenian State and Armenian Diaspora condemn Ottoman Empire without mentioning war crimes acts of Armenian non-state armed groups, this is a crime against humanity. This is also valid for all other states and other racial politicians or historians. Without mentioning the killings of more than 500.000 Turks by the Armenian non-state armed groups, to recognize so-called Armenian Genocide is a crime against humanity.

Turks and Armenian share a “common pain” inherited from their grandparents. A joint commission composed of Turkish and Armenian historians can be formed to study the events of 1915. The findings of the commission, if established, would bring about a better understanding of this tragic period and hopefully help to normalize the threat to world peace and security. If not, by only blaming the Turks of the past events means approving the killings of more than 500.000 children, women and older Turks by Armenian non-state armed groups can only be described as a crime against humanity.

For example, if US President Obama is to recognize so-called Armenian Genocide without mentioning the killings of the more than 500.000 Turks by Armenian non-state armed groups; this will be a crime against humanity. Turkey can go in such a condition to the United Nations Security Council as this act should be described as a threat to world peace and security as this one sided recognition of the so-called Armenian genocide is illegal according to Article 103 of United Nations Charter.

Mehmet Sukru Guzel

Switzerland Representative of Center for International Strategy and Security Studies


[1] Pan-Armenian Declaration on the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide, http://www.mfa.am/en/interviews/item/2015/01/29/pan_arm_dec_armgen/ 01.02.2015

[2] http://www.icc- cpi.int/en_menus/icc/about%20the%20court/frequently%20asked%20questions/Pages/12.aspx 01.02.2015

[3] United Nations Document. E/CN.4/2006/87, paragraphe 30


[4] Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua, pp. 101-102, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/70/6503.pdf, 01.02.2015


[5] Dermot Groome, “Adjudicating Genocide: Is the International Court of Justice Capable of Judging State Criminal Responsibility?”, Fordham International Law Journal, Volume 31, Issue 4 2007, pp-912


[6] Sean McMeekin, The Russian Origins of the First World War, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2011, p.160


Fethullah Gulen: Turkey’s Eroding Democracy


SAYLORSBURG, Pa. — It is deeply disappointing to see what has become of Turkey in the last few years. Not long ago, it was the envy of Muslim-majority countries: a viable candidate for the European Union on its path to becoming a functioning democracy that upholds universal human rights, gender equality, the rule of law and the rights of Kurdish and non-Muslim citizens. This historic opportunity now appears to have been squandered as Turkey’s ruling party, known as the A.K.P., reverses that progress and clamps down on civil society, media, the judiciary and free enterprise.

Turkey’s current leaders seem to claim an absolute mandate by virtue of winning elections. But victory doesn’t grant them permission to ignore the Constitution or suppress dissent, especially when election victories are built on crony capitalism and media subservience. The A.K.P.’s leaders now depict every democratic criticism of them as an attack on the state. By viewing every critical voice as an enemy — or worse, a traitor — they are leading the country toward totalitarianism.

The latest victims of the clampdown are the staff, executives and editors of independent media organizations who were detained and are now facing charges made possible by recent changes to the laws and the court system. The director of one of the most popular TV channels, arrested in December, is still behind bars. Public officials investigating corruption charges have also been purged and jailed for simply doing their jobs. An independent judiciary, a functioning civil society and media are checks and balances against government transgressions. Such harassment sends the message that whoever stands in the way of the ruling party’s agenda will be targeted by slander, sanctions and even trumped-up charges.

Turkey’s rulers have not only alienated the West, they are also now losing credibility in the Middle East. Turkey’s ability to assert positive influence in the region depends not only on its economy but also on the health of its own democracy.

The core tenets of a functioning democracy — the rule of law, respect for individual freedoms — are also the most basic of Islamic values bestowed upon us by God. No political or religious leader has the authority to take them away. It is disheartening to see religious scholars provide theological justification for the ruling party’s oppression and corruption or simply stay silent. Those who use the language and symbols of religious observance but violate the core principles of their religion do not deserve such loyalty from religious scholars.

Speaking against oppression is a democratic right, a civic duty and for believers, a religious obligation. The Quran makes clear that people should not remain silent in the face of injustice: “O you who believe! Be upholders and standard-bearers of justice, bearing witness to the truth for God’s sake, even though it be against your own selves, or parents or kindred.”

For the past 50 years, I have been fortunate to take part in a civil society movement, sometimes referred to as Hizmet, whose participants and supporters include millions of Turkish citizens. These citizens have committed themselves to interfaith dialogue, community service, relief efforts and making life-changing education accessible. They have established more than 1,000 modern secular schools, tutoring centers, colleges, hospitals and relief organizations in over 150 countries. They are teachers, journalists, businessmen and ordinary citizens.

The rhetoric used by the ruling party repeatedly to crack down on Hizmet participants is nothing but a pretext to justify their own authoritarianism. Hizmet participants have never formed a political party nor have they pursued political ambitions. Their participation in the movement is driven by intrinsic rewards, not extrinsic ones.

I have spent over 50 years preaching and teaching the values of peace, mutual respect and altruism. I’ve advocated for education, community service and interfaith dialogue. I have always believed in seeking happiness in the happiness of others and the virtue of seeking God’s pleasure in helping His people. Whatever influence is attributed to me, I have used it as a means to promote educational and social projects that help nurture virtuous individuals. I have no interest in political power.

Many Hizmet participants, including me, once supported the ruling party’s agenda, including the 2005 opening of accession negotiations with the European Union. Our support then was based on principle, as is our criticism today. It is our right and duty to speak out about government policies that have a deep impact on society. Unfortunately, our democratic expression against public corruption and authoritarianism has made us victims of a witch-hunt; both the Hizmet movement and I are being targeted with hate speech, media smear campaigns and legal harassment.

Like all segments of Turkish society, Hizmet participants have a presence in government organizations and in the private sector. These citizens cannot be denied their constitutional rights or be subjected to discrimination for their sympathy to Hizmet’s ideals, as long as they abide by the laws of the country, the rules of their institutions and basic ethical principles. Profiling any segment of society and viewing them as a threat is a sign of intolerance.

We are not the only victims of the A.K.P.’s crackdown. Peaceful environmental protesters, Kurds, Alevis, non-Muslim citizens and some Sunni Muslim groups not aligned with the ruling party have suffered, too. Without checks and balances, no individual or group is safe from the ruling party’s wrath. Regardless of their religious observance, citizens can and should unite around universal human rights and freedoms, and democratically oppose those who violate them.

Turkey has now reached a point where democracy and human rights have almost been shelved. I hope and pray that those in power reverse their current domineering path. In the past the Turkish people have rejected elected leaders who strayed from a democratic path. I hope they will exercise their legal and democratic rights again to reclaim the future of their country.