SIMON BAHCELI’S ARTICLE ON THE RENOVATION OF THE OLD SOURP ASDVADZADZIN CHURCH IN TURKISH-OCCUPIED NICOSIA FAILED TO REVEAL A NUMBER OF TRUTHS BY THE TURKISH-ORIGIN JOURNALIST
Alexander-Michael Hadjilyra
Gibrahayer
27-05-2009
Nicosia
Dear Gibrahayer readers,
I am writing this letter regarding Simon Bahceli’s article on the
renovation of the old Sourp Asdvadzadzin church in Turkish-occupied
Nicosia, in the interest of revealing a number of truths the
Turkish-origin journalist failed to write.
To begin with, Bahceli contacted me on 5 May, informing me on
his intend to write the article in question. We met on 8 May
and I personally took him to Dr. Antranik Ashdjian’s office, the
Armenian Prelature of Cyprus and Nareg Elementary School, devoting
a whole morning for him; it was also I who provided him with the
B/W photographs he used in his article, as well as a large amount of
historical information. Sadly, he neglected to include my name, or the
names of Dr. Ashdjian – with whom he spoke for about an hour -and Mr
John Guevherian, with whom he also spoke at the Arachnortaran. Also,
I stressed to him, in person, on the phone and over e-mail that it
is very important that also he speaks with the Representative, Mr
Vartkes Mahdessian, which I very much doubt he did.
Not only that, Bahceli failed to mention that we attempted to visit the
chu rch on 14 May, after claiming he20was told by the UN we could. Upon
arriving at the gate, the guard (an illegal Turkish settler) told us
we needed a permit to enter. Bahceli phoned the UN and the UN told
him to phone EVKAF, but unfortunately it was not made possible to
enter the church site. He did, however, wanted to take pictures of
the church, so we went behind the Melikian mansion, where we saw two
Turkish-speaking persons inside the compound, claiming to be bidders
for the restoration. Asking them how they got inside, they told him
they had entered through a passage. We went back to the guard to ask
him if he could let us in too, since they were obviously in, and to
my utter surprise and fury the guard, together with two trespassers,
told us that they entered the site by themselves, he couldn’t kick
them out, but he couldn’t let us in either…
Now, with regard to the article itself, an unsuspected reader will get
the idea that there was never a problem with the Turkish Cypriots,
and that Armenian Cypriots left only because they felt safely in
the Greek Cypriot side of Nicosia… However, there is more to that
story (simply ask Manoug Mangaldjian, he will tell it to you as he
remembers it). Moreover, I was there when the people were speaking
to Bahceli, and I know that much more was said. Not to mention the
complete absence of any reference to the Armenian Genocide monument,
for which everyone he spoke with made mention, including myself.
Another thing: southern Nicosia for the government-controlled parts
but simply Nicosia for the Turkish-occupied parts of Nicosia? The
use of this makes not only the journalist but also the newspaper,
Cyprus Mail, responsible for this illegality.
Historical inaccuracies are also observed: the Armenian presence in
the area is about 500-600 years old, NOT 1000 years, and the church
was re-built in 1308, not the 13th century.
Geographical inaccuracies also exist: the church compound is NOT
located in the Arabahmet, but in the Karaman Zade quarter; this is
not a simple mistake, as the Turkish pseudo-state calls the whole area
Arabahmet, in the same way it designates 3 of the 4 Turkish-occupied
Larnaca district villages as belonging to the so-called "LefkoÅ~_a
kaza" district and 1 to the so-called "Gazimagusa kaza". Upon our
conversations, I stressed to Bahceli this fact, which he blatantly
ignored. And one more thing: why would the church not hold that much
importance for the Greek Orthodox? A church is always a church.
Finally, again stressing his T/C outlook, it is Ottoman Armenians
NOT Anatolian Armenians he should refer to.
I am very upset for this whole thing, and I hope the newspaper never
allows such mistreatment of the truth again.