Author: Baghdasarian Karlen

TURKISH AMBASSADOR: POPE’S DESCRIPTION OF 1915 EVENTS ‘BIG SURPRISE’

Anadolu Agency, Turkey
April 13 2015

13 April 2015 22:28 (Last updated 13 April 2015 22:30)

It is a big surprise because, when the Pope visited Turkey in November
2014, his remarks were quite different

PARIS

The description given by Pope Francis for the events of 1915, which he
termed as “genocide,” came as a big surprise to Turkish authorities,
Turkey’s Ambassador in ParisHakki Akil said Monday.

“It is a big surprise because, when the Pope visited Turkey in November
2014, his remarks were quite different,” the ambassador said.

“Moreover, the Vatican’s ambassador in Ankara had ensured that the
Pope would not use the word ‘genocide’ and that he would deliver a
humanitarian message to help improve Turkish-Armenian relations.”

Akil was speaking at a gathering organized by the Diplomatic
Correspondents Association in Paris.

“It is the job of the international court to decide whether the
incidents were ‘genocide’ or not,” he said, adding that Turkey shares
the pain of the Armenians.

Pope Francis had said on Sunday that “the first genocide of the 20th
century” struck the Armenians.

His statement led Turkey to recall its ambassador to the Vatican and
also to summon the Vatican’s envoy in Ankara.

Turkish PM Ahmet Davutoglu said on Sunday that the Pope’s statement
was “unfortunate,” “incorrect” and “inconsistent.”

Davutoglu added that the remarks were not just about reading history
incorrectly, but also “lent credence to the growing racism in Europe.”

On Monday, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu also criticized
the Pope’s remarks and said they contradict historical and legal facts.

From: Baghdasarian

ERDOGAN CONDEMNS POPE FOR #ARMENIA ‘GENOCIDE’ COMMENT

MWC – Media With Conscience
April 15 2015

Wednesday, 15 April 2015 08:21

Turkish president warns pontiff not to repeat comments on 1915
killings, but US urges Ankara to admit “historical fact”.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has condemned Pope Francis
for calling the 1915 mass killing of Armenians genocide, and warned
him not to make such a statement again.

“We will not allow historical incidents to be taken out of their
genuine context, and be used as a tool to campaign against our
country,” Erdogan said in a speech to a business group on Tuesday.

“I condemn the pope and would like to warn him not to make similar
mistakes again.”

The pope became the first head of the Roman Catholic church to publicly
call the killing of as many as 1.5 million Armenians “genocide” on
Sunday, prompting a diplomatic row with Turkey, which summoned the
Vatican’s envoy and recalled its own.

Muslim Turkey agrees Christian Armenians were killed in clashes with
Ottoman soldiers that began 100 years ago on April 15, 1915, when
Armenians lived in the empire ruled by Istanbul, but denies hundreds
of thousands were killed and that this amounted to genocide.

While other Turkish politicians, and now Erdogan, have lashed out at
the pope, some ordinary Turks have dismissed the row as empty politics
and voiced a desire to leave history be.

Pope Francis appeared to refer to his use of the term “genocide”
on Monday, saying in a sermon that “today the Church’s message is
one of the path of frankness, the path of Christian courage”.

Erdogan’s comments are likely to put a focus on whether the United
States, a traditional ally of NATO-member Turkey, will eventually
use the term “genocide” for the mass killings.

Full, frank acknowledgement of facts

Unlike almost two dozen European and South American states that use
the term, Washington avoids it and has warned legislators that Ankara
could cut off military cooperation if they voted to adopt it.

On Tuesday, the US State Department called for a “full, frank”
acknowledgement of the facts surrounding the mass killing of Armenians
in World War I, but shied away from calling it “a genocide”.

“The president and other senior administration officials have
repeatedly acknowledged as historical fact, and mourned the fact,
that 1.5 million Armenians were massacred or marched to their deaths
in the final days of the Ottoman empire,” State Department acting
spokeswoman Marie Harf said.

Harf added that “nations are stronger and they progress by
acknowledging and reckoning with pretty painful elements of their
past”.

Such moves were “essential to building a different, more tolerant
future,” she said.

However, she refused to term the mass killings a genocide, even
though during his 2008 campaign for the White House, then senator
Barack Obama had pledged to “recognise the Armenian genocide”.

From: Baghdasarian

PROF. THERIAULT: IT IS POINTLESS TO ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE UNLESS ARMENIANS CAN HAVE EQUAL FOOTING WITH TURKS

14:21 16/04/2015 >> INTERVIEWS

Nvard Chalikyan from Panorama.am has spoken with Professor Henry C.

Theriault – Chair of the Armenian Genocide Reparations Study Group
(AGRSG) about the recently published report of the Group titled
Resolution with Justice: Reparations for the Armenian Genocide
(Armenian and English versions of the executive summary and full
report are available here.

See Part 1: Henry Theriault: Armenia is suffering from legacy of
Genocide; Armenia’s long-term security and viability depend on
reparations

See Part 2: Prof. Theriault on Genocide Reparations Report:
Azerbaijan’s treatment of Armenians was the result of Genocide not
dealt with

Part 3

Nvard Chalikyan: Judging from your own experience, how would you say
the Turks who recognize the Genocide approach the reparations issue?

Prof. Henry Theriault: The process typical Turkish people would
have to go through to be able to talk about reparations may be very
long and complex, given that their government and educational system
obviously are doing everything to prevent that. But I can say I have
had the good fortune in the last five years to connect with a number
of Turks working on these issues and they completely understand that
reparations are central for dealing with the Genocide. For instance,
I just gave a talk as part of the Hrant Dink commemoration in Ankara
in January 2015 and reparations were on the agenda. Even in 2010
when I was in Ankara at a big conference on Armenian Genocide held
there, I was stunned by how openly many of the Turkish speakers were
discussing reparations, treating it as a fundamental issue.

Of course, there are other Turks who recognize the Genocide or at
least that there was harm done to Armenians in 1915, if they won’t
use the correct term, and who stop there. On the one hand, I can
understand. After all, just recognizing the Genocide, even without
the term, can provoke negative reactions, even legal prosecution, in
Turkey. At the same time, it seems that recognition of the Genocide
in a true sense means not just recognizing the historical facts but
their wrongness and, thus, the obligation that wrongness entails
for today’s Turkey. Accepting the need for reparations is, really,
part of genuine recognition of the Genocide.

While perhaps some of these Turks might say that reparations could
possibly be discussed later, but doing so now will just alienate Turks,
I disagree. I believe that holding back from discussing an issue in
its full sense prevents progress on the issue. Martin Luther King did
not spend his days as a leader asking for better segregated schools
for blacks or some half-way measure like that. Even though much of
white America absolutely did not want to hear that segregation should
be ended completely and blacks’ full equality recognized, Dr.

King made this clear again and again. This pushed whites to rethink
their positions, instead of allowing people to avoid the hard issues.

Similarly, average Turks need to be exposed to the issue of the
Genocide in its fullest light, not some easy, reduced version that
will make them feel comfortable. Serious engagement with genocide is
never comfortable.

I believe there is a significant number of Turks who have an
internal conflict between a genuine sense of morality – they want
to do right by Armenians – and the impact of nationalist forces on
their psychology and individual identity. This impact is strong, and
makes it psychologically difficult to question the official version of
Turkish nationalist history. As long as such individuals are presented
with unchallenging approaches to the Genocide and not pushed to a
level of discomfort, they can balance these conflicting psychological
demands. It is pushing the issue that can help them finally tip the
balance in favor of good ethical principles . . . trend that can also
free them up to rethink and reconfigure Turkish identity in positive
new ways.

N. C: What percent of Turkish scholars and activists who recognize
the Genocide do you think accepts that Turkey should pay reparations,
and what percent of them would consider land reparations acceptable?

H. Theriault: The issue of group territorial claims is quite
complicated – the percent of those who would accept group land
reparations is extremely low. There is small but higher percentage
for substantial material reparations, including return of individual
or community properties such as churches to their owners but retention
within the Turkish state. I believe that overall the number who accept
material reparations is steadily increasing.

As this and my answer to the previous question suggest, there is a
distinction between those scholars who are actually dealing with the
issue (and use the word “genocide” in public) and those so-called
“progressives” who are very soft on the issue. The latter avoid hard
questions and often try to resolve their sense of what is right with
not displeasing the powers that be. I’m not sure this balancing act
is possible. In Turkey Baskin Oran is a good example of this.

There seems to be a growing debate between the stronger scholars in
Turkey I have worked with and so-called “progressives” who aren’t
dealing responsibly with the question. As the former push the issue,
there does seem to be a trend toward a real discussion in Turkey not
just about acknowledging something in 1915 but how this should be
done with meaning.

N. C: Doesn’t the Turkish government use these “progressives” to
control the discussion on the issue? Is there an agenda?

H. Theriault: I am not an expert on the details of the internal
political dynamics of Turkey, but there is certainly an agenda on
the part of the government; they are trying to play a very careful
game by appearing to be open, but keeping things under control and
not allowing them to get beyond a certain limit. For instance, there
is another Turkish scholar, Halil Berktay, a sort of “progressive”
scholar whom I have written critically about. His treatment of the
Armenian issue appears to be imperialistic, even though he is supposed
to be progressive, possibly even a Marxist, and all of that. It is
interesting that he is becoming one of the leaders on this issue; the
government seems to be working with him at some level and he seems to
be an important voice in relation to the Turkish government’s efforts
to deal with the Genocide. It’s obvious that they are picking that
kind of scholar or activist over those whose engagement with the
legacy of Genocide is more open and positive.

N. C: In your view what risks does the Armenian-Turkish dialogue have
for Armenians?

H. Theriault: To put it in very simple terms, any dialogue initiatives
have been meant to prevent frank discussion about recognition of the
Genocide, let alone reparations. If that is the goal of the dialogue,
then it is both pointless and insulting for Armenians to engage in it.

Even some apparently well-intentioned Turks seem interested in having
a dialogue simply to feel good about themselves morally; they want
Armenians to like them, but they don’t want to admit what happened.

There is another important point to note. Conflict resolution models
treat dialogue between a victim group and a perpetrator group as
if they were equal in power. This is incredibly dangerous. The
problem is that Turkey has the power while the Armenians don’t have
the power, and when they engage in a dialogue they are in a very
uneven relationship. Unless there is a mechanism to give Armenians
equal footing with Turks, it is pointless to engage in that kind
of dialogue. I think the Republic of Armenia probably needs to do
a better job of using international law and international public
relations to get itself support for balancing the power issue in
dealing with Turkey.

That said, if the power imbalance and problematic agendas can be
addressed, dialogue can be very productive. The Report addresses
the question of dialogue by proposing the idea of Armenian Genocide
Truth and Rectification Commission (AGTRC) designed to give a real
alternative to a sort of false dialogue just discussed, of which
perhaps the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) is the
best-known example. There are many people in Turkey who understand
that there is a human rights issue they need to deal with. With these
people Armenians should talk on a societal level.

That doesn’t mean that they all need to agree; they just need to have
a common framework of respect for human rights and acknowledgement of
the history of the Genocide to open the possibility of moving forward.

The AGTRC could be the mechanism for providing opportunities for this
kind of productive dialogue. We consider it, in fact, the best route
toward a productive inter-group relationship with dialogue that can
actually transform Turkish society away from its legacy of genocide
and the various ways in which genocidal elements remain present within
its institutions, social practices, etc.

N. C: What is the role of the Republic of Armenia as a state in
raising and pursuing the question of reparations internationally?

H. Theriault: It would be very helpful if Armenia could develop
legal and political cases internationally. It should of course also
consolidate the support and expertise of the Diaspora in pursuing
these cases – working together will create tremendous opportunities to
change global public opinion. The US, Argentina, and other countries
can also actually present legal cases to the ICJ or other appropriate
courts, but obviously Armenia is the right state to take the lead on
this. Otherwise, when Diasporans raise the issue in their countries
it becomes very difficult to be taken seriously as people want to
know why the Republic isn’t taking an advocacy role on this issue.

The question of whether and how to present the case in ICJ, European
Court of Human Rights, or another avenue is a complicated one, as
it can also backfire. For the Republic of Armenia it is now more
important to pursue political advocacy. Armenia also needs to be
working with other countries which are concerned about human rights
issues and maintain the position that their willingness to support
Armenia on this issue is an essential part of their relationship with
the Republic. It is difficult to do that but it is really important.

There are countries that the Republic can work with.

Interview by Nvard Chalikyan

Part 1: Henry Theriault: Armenia is suffering from legacy of Genocide;
Armenia’s long-term security and viability depend on reparations

Part 2: Prof. Theriault on Genocide Reparations Report: “Azerbaijan’s
treatment of Armenians was the result of Genocide not dealt with”

Henry Theriault is Professor in and Chair of the Philosophy Department
at Worcester State University in the United States. He has a Ph.D. in
Philosophy from the University of Massachusetts. His research focuses
on reparations, victim-perpetrator relations, genocide denial,
genocide prevention among other topics. He has published numerous
journal articles and chapters in the area of genocide studies and given
many lectures worldwide. Dr. Theriault is also a founding co-editor
of the peer-reviewed Genocide Studies International and co-editor of
Transaction Publishers Genocide: A Critical Bibliographic Review.

From: Baghdasarian

ERDOGAN WARNS POPE NOT TO LABEL ARMENIAN KILLINGS AS GENOCIDE

Al-Arabiya, UAE
April 15 2015

Staff writer, Al Arabiya News
Wednesday, 15 April 2015

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has slammed Pope Francis,
warning him not to repeat the “mistake” of describing the mass killings
of Armenians under Ottoman rule in WWI as “genocide.”

“Whenever politicians, religious functionaries assume the duties of
historians, then delirium comes out, not fact. Hereby, I want to
repeat our call to establish a joint commission of historians and
stress we are ready to open our archives. I want to warn the pope to
not repeat this mistake and condemn him,” the local Hurriyet Daily
News quoted Erdogan as saying Tuesday in a meeting.

While addressing the Turkish Exporters Assembly (TÄ°M), Erdogan
expressed his regret over Pope Francis’ statement, who leads the
Catholic world, when the latter described the killings of Armenians
in 1915 as “the first genocide of the 20th century.”

Recalling the pope’s visit to Turkey in 2014, the Turkish leader said
he thought the Vatican leader was “a different politician.”

He added: “I don’t say a religious functionary.

“His remarks display the appearance of a mentality different to that
of a religious functionary,” Erdogan explained.

But Erdogan vowed that he “won’t let historical events be brought out
of their own course and turned into a campaign against our country
and nation.”

The pope made his recent remark during a Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica
commemorating the centenary that was attended by Armenian Church
leaders and Sargsyan.

Meanwhile, the European Union on April 13 urged Turkey and Armenia
to normalize ties.

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIANS COULD BENEFIT FROM ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RECOGNITION PROCESS – GIRO MANOYAN

16:08 * 16.04.15

Giro Manoyan, Head of the Hay Dat (Armenian Cause) office, Armenian
Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutyun (ARF-D), commented on the
European Parliament’s resolution on the Armenian Genocide at a meeting
with reporters on Friday.

According to him, right steps would enable Armenians to benefit from
the general trends of recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

“The authorities must not make use of the recognition of the Armenian
Genocide to divert public attention from other problems nor should
the opposition forces make use of the issue,” he said.

According to him, the motive for this trend is also the fact that
Turkey is not so desirable for either its neighbors or western allies.

“Arabs, who worshiped Erdogan a few years ago, do not now consider
him a desirable ally,” Mr Manoyan said.

He points out an important role of the Armenians – both as a state
and as a people.

“So it is necessary for us to benefit from the situation if we make
right calculations.”

It is admission of the fact of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey that
is a security guarantee for Armenia.

“The international recognition process that will force Turkey into
admitting the Armenian Genocide,” Mr Manoyan said.

Admission is not enough, and restitution must be ensured.

Independent Armenia does not exist in Turkey’s state purposes.

“If the Republic of Armenia exists, it must necessarily be dependent
on Turkey. This is their preference.”

From: Baghdasarian

ARMENIANS, ASSYRIANS, JEWS TARGETED IN VANDALISM OF SYDNEY GENOCIDE MEMORIAL

April 16, 2015

The Armenian National Committee of Australia condemns the vandalism
of the Assyrian Genocide Memorial in Fairfield, NSW.

This act of racial hatred, which has been directed towards the Jewish,
Armenian and Assyrian communities, has seen expletives used to refer
to the aforementioned ethnic groups. The monument has also been
desecrated with Nazi swastikas.

ANC Australia deplores such racist attacks in the multicultural state
of New South Wales. The vandalism of this monument – a monument
dedicated to the memory of the victims of the Assyrian Genocide –
was carried out hours after the NSW Jewish community gathered to mark
Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Remembrance, and days before the Centenary of
the Armenian Genocide.

There is no place for racial hatred and bigotry. The Jewish,
Armenian and Assyrian communities have suffered the worst form of
racial hatred in the last 100 years – genocide. Such memorials are
designed to pay homage to the extensive loss of life that has scared
the pages of humanity.

We call on authorities to full investigate this matter and hold the
perpetrators to account, and will be working with them to ensure this
is done.

Armenian National Committee of Australia

From: Baghdasarian

SEVANI ISHKHAN COMPANY TO INVEST AMD 3 BILLION IN ITS FISH-BREEDING BUSINESS

YEREVAN, April 16. /ARKA/. Sevani Ishkhan Company is now launching a
fish-breeding and fish-processing business in Armenia with intention
to invest AMD 3 billion in it, Armenian Economy Minister Karen
Chshmaritsyan said Thursday at a regular Cabinet session.

At the session, the Cabinet ministers provided VAT adjournment to the
company for import of the equipment worth more than AMD 200 million.

Chshmarityan said that AMD 2.7 billion from the amount mentioned
in the investment programs will be spent on providing the plant
with equipment necessary for processing Sevan trouts and releasing
high-quality products.

The plant is expected to release every year products totaling AMD
900 million.

The minister said that the plant’s output will not only cater for
the domestic market’s demand, but will also be exported.

He also said that the company is planning to open 150 new jobs with
an average salary of AMD 270,000 in 2015, AMD 290,000 in 2016 and
AMD 320,000 in 2017.

In September 2014, the Armenian government allocated 180 hectares
on Lake Sevan’s coastal areas in Lichk and Karchakhpyur villages in
Gegharkunik province for a fish-breeding business.

The company will breed trouts right in the lake. It intends to build
up fish output to 50,000 tons a year by 2023.

The whole project is estimated to cost AMD 66 billion (about $162
million).

The company is going to export 75% of its output – fresh, smoked and
canned fishes. ($1 – AMD 472.64). —0—-

From: Baghdasarian

POPE FRANCIS

CTV Television, Inc., Canada
April 12, 2015 Sunday
SHOW: CTV NATIONAL NEWS 23:00:00 ET

ANCHORS: SANDIE RINALDO

SANDIE RINALDO: Well it only took one word for Pope Francis to find
himself at the center of a diplomatic storm today. The word, genocide,
and Francis used it to describe the slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians
by the Ottoman Turks in 1915. No one disputes the deaths, but Turkey
strongly denies committing a crime. CTV’s Melanie Nagy explains.

MELANIE NAGY (Reporter): In St. Peter’s Basilica during mass, Pope
Francis used the word genocide in reference to the Armenians who were
murdered by Ottoman Turks 100 years ago. A powerful statement made
in the presence of Armenia’s president and several of the country’s
spiritual leaders. But it was also a controversial move, one that’s
angered Turkey. Around the time of World War I, up to 1.5 million
Armenians were killed in what’s now eastern Turkey.

ARAM I (Head of the Armenian Apostolic Church): Genocide is a crime
against humanity.

NAGY: But Turkey has long insisted those killed were the victims
of civil war, not genocide. From Istanbul, Turkey’s prime minister
lashed out, accusing the pontiff of inciting hatred.

ROBERT RIGGS (Religious Historian): The Turkish government is fighting
back against this because of its, you know, again legal, potential
legal consequences in the international court.

NAGY: This isn’t the first time a pope has referred to the Armenian
killings as genocide. In 2001, John Paul II used the term in
a declaration. But Francis went much further, publicly using the
word in front of a large audience. In Toronto, Armenian-Canadians
held a blood drive to mark the upcoming 100th anniversary of the
massacre. They applaud the pope’s comments.

ARMEN YEGANIAN (Armenian Ambassador to Canada): We have to address
the issue. We have to learn our lessons in order to learn how to
prevent it.

NAGY: Also today, a spokesperson for the prime minister’s office
reiterated Canada’s position referring to the events as a genocide. As
for Turkey, the country is now recalled its ambassador to the Vatican.

Sandie?

RINALDO: CTV’s Melanie Nagy in Vancouver.

From: Baghdasarian

‘THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY’

Mirror Spectator
Editorial 4-18 April 2015

By Edmond Y. Azadian

Detroit Public TV, which is in tune with the sentiments of the
mosaic of the ethnic groups that populate Michigan, recently took
the initiative to dedicate a full day’s program to the centennial of
the Armenian Genocide. The program not only sensitized the viewers
to the issue of the Armenian Genocide but it also proved to be a
successful fundraiser.

I was invited to be interviewed along with clergy from the four
area Armenian Churches. The interviewer was a highly professional TV
commentator. He had decided to rehearse his interviews before going
live on the air. He asked me how the Genocide impacted me personally
and what effect it had made on the Armenians collectively. As I
was heading to the conclusion of my statement, I reported that the
Genocide was continuing to this day with the blockade of Armenia by
Turkey and Azerbaijan and the destruction of Armenian Churches and
monuments in both countries.

He stopped me, warning me that we could not politicize the issue
during the interview, because there was nobody present to give “the
other side” of the story.

Stunned, I asked him, “Do you ever question Neo-Nazis while
interviewing survivors of the Holocaust? Of course not. Why should
there be ‘one side’ on the issue of the Holocaust and ‘another side’
when you take up the issue of the Armenian Genocide?”

Confused, he repeated my question.

Many journalists do not do their homework and believe the professional
cop-out is to present two opposing views. Those journalists are
derelict in their responsibilities, when the mission of the journalist
is to explore the facts and come out with a solid conclusion and
present the truth.

For example, why is there no “other side” for the courageous
British journalist Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent for
the Independent newspaper in dealing with the issue of the Armenian
Genocide?

When journalists resort to seeking the “other side” in dealing with
the Armenian Genocide, they try to disguise their dishonesty or
ignorance as professional objectivity, as there is no “other side”
on this issue. There is only one truth and the obfuscations spun by
the guilty side.

The journalistic gymnastics once again emerged throughout the
world news media on the occasion of the Genocide centennial. Most
of the journalists, once again, took cover under the refuge of the
disingenuous “objectivity” with a few informed and courageous ones
standing to be counted.

The anticipated centennial tsunami did not come from traditional
quarters; it came from the most unexpected quarters, ranging from the
sublime to the strange, with the sublime being Pope Francis’ powerful
pronouncement and the strange being the Kardashian clan’s pilgrimage
to Armenia. Both events caught the attention of world media, driving
Turkey’s leadership into panic mode.

On April 12, 2015, during a memorable and historic mass conducted at
St. Peter’s Basilica, the Pope unequivocally called a spade a spade.

“In the past century, our human family has lived through three massive
and unprecedented tragedies,” the Pope said, commemorating the 100th
anniversary of the Genocide. He added, “The first genocide of the
20th century struck your own Armenian people,” referencing a 2001
declaration by Pope John Paul II and the head of the Armenian Church.

A Vatican expert, Marco Tosati, said, “By quoting John Paul II, he
strengthened the church’s position, making it clear where it stands
on the issue.”

Many Vatican observers believe that the Pope’s pronouncement was in
line with his philosophy of giving a voice to the voiceless. In that
respect, the Pope added that it was his duty to honor the memory of
those who were killed, adding, “concealing or denying evil is like
allowing a wound to keep bleeding without bandaging. … Today we too
are experiencing a sort of genocide created by general and collective
indifference.”

The Turkish government’s reaction was predictable — violent and
panicky. When the French legislature passed a resolution recognizing
the Armenian Genocide as a historic fact, Turkey recalled its
ambassador and threatened to cancel the military contracts with
France, but the Pope has no army and no such military contracts with
which it can be blackmailed. However, his message is powerful and
may create a domino effect, contrary to Stalin’s sarcastic question:
“How many battalions does the Vatican Pope command?”

Ankara recalled its ambassador to the Holy See, Mehmet Pacaci,
for a “consultation” and the Vatican’s envoy to Ankara Archbishop
Antonino Lucibello was summoned to the Foreign Ministry to provide
an explanation on the Pope’s statement.

All major figures in Turkey’s leadership made angry comments, including
President Erdogan, Prime Minister Davutoglu and Foreign Minister Mevlet
Cavusolgu. And then, the Foreign Ministry circulated a press release,
characterizing the Pope’s statement as “unacceptable,” “one sided”
and so on, using the devalued currency of denial.

Every time any government passes a resolution in support of recognizing
the Armenian Genocide, Turkish leaders react by stating that other
government’s legislatures are not the proper venue to pass judgment on
the 1915 events. This time around, Mr. Cavusoglu angrily criticized the
Pope, accusing him of being “out of touch with both historical facts
and legal basis” adding that “religious offices are not places through
which hatred and animosity are fueled by unfounded allegations.”

Even after the official pronouncement of 120 of the most prominent
genocide scholars around the world, Turkey’s leaders have pinned their
hopes on a few hired guns posing as bona fide historians on some US
campuses and they avoid the issue proposing to assign the task to a
panel of historians to come up with “the truth.”

That truth is once again tortured in the media, giving credence to
Ankara’s denialist policy. Here are some statements culled from the
media. For example, CNN reported: “Armenian groups and many scholars
say that Turkey planned and carried out a genocide. …. Turkey
officially denies that a genocide took place, saying that hundreds
and thousands of Armenian Christians and Turkish Muslims died in
intercommunal violence around the bloody battlefields of World War I.”

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, not to be outdone, wrote,
“Armenians say up to 1.5 million of their kin were killed between
1915 and 1917. … However, Turkey rejects the claims, arguing that
300,000 to 500,000 Armenians and Turks died in a civil strife.”

Sky News even goes one step further, casting the blame for what deaths
were admitted to on the victims: “Armenians say up to 1.5 million of
their people were slaughtered as the Ottoman Empire fell apart. …

Turkey argues that 300,000 to 500,000 Armenians and Turks died in
the civil war when Armenians rose up against their Ottoman rulers
and sided with the invading Russian troops.”

Even the “most trusted” and “objective” news corporation, the BBC,
has fallen into the same trap when it reported: “Armenia and many
historians say up to 1.5 million people were killed by Ottoman forces
in 1915. But Turkey has always disputed that figure and said that
the deaths were part of a civil conflict triggered by World War I.”

After listening to all these news outlets, one gets the impression
that these reporters and commentators never consult history books.

Reading Captain Sarkis Torossian’s memoirs, these writers may receive
a wake-up calls that even those Armenians who fought at Gallipoli in
the Ottoman Army found their families slaughtered, let alone spinning
fiction about siding with the advancing Russian army.

Turkey can never hope to find the truth on the “other side” of the
story, because there is none. The only hope is to interject some
reasonable doubt in a court of law to render the Armenian Genocide
a “controversial” issue. And what those journalists are doing is
providing ammunition to Turkey’s denialist machine.

The Armenian reaction to the fury of Turkish leaders was predictably
mild. Only Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian has commented
to one Italian news outlet: “Denial is not opening the door to
reconciliation.”

The exaggerated demonstration of anger by Turkish leaders is a studied
and rehearsed performance, reaching beyond Pope Francis to President
Obama, warning him of what might happen if he follows the Pope’s lead.

But better than any journalist, President Obama himself has properly
defined the issue by stating in 2008: “My firmly-held conviction [is]
that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion
or a point of view, but rather a widely-documented fact supported by
an overwhelming body of historical evidence. … As President I will
recognize the Armenian Genocide.”

This statement was made when he was himself. After his election, he
seemed to have lost his moral compass. As a peacemaker in Latin America
and in the Middle East, we hope he demonstrates some consistency in
his policies and he returns to his old self to pronounce the truth.

Pope Francis’ powerful message has inflamed the imagination of
millions, in the meantime prompting some courageous journalists to
come up with their own blunt statements.

Indeed, while many reporters and editorials are grappling with the
truth and ruminating on historic facts, the Jerusalem Post and the
Los Angeles Times have come up with incredibly honest editorials. The
Jerusalem Post wrote: “Exhibiting his characteristic moral clarity,
Pope Francis referred to Turkey’s brutal massacre of about 1.5 million
Armenian men, women and children during World War I as a genocide.”

Hitler and the Nazi regime looked to Turkey’s moral wound for
inspiration for their own genocide. … Israel has an obligation to
live up to [its] legacy by using its political sovereignty to prevent
genocide not just against Jews but against any group … Pope Francis
has publicly recognized the Armenian Genocide. Now it is Israel’s
turn.” (4/13/15)

On the same day, the Los Angeles Times published an equally frank
editorial under the title, “US Has to Call the Armenian Genocide by
its Name.”

“Insistence on the truth about the Ottoman Empire genocide should
not imperil US-Turkey partnership. Denial about the Ottoman Empire
Genocide of the Armenians a century ago only compounds the crime.”

The editorial has a lesson to all the politicians who cite the
Turkish-American alliance as a reason to fight the Genocide resolution
as it states, “It is true that US-Turkey relationship is very important
one and one worth nurturing and protecting, but not at the expense
of denying history. … The president should take his cue from Pope
Francis and include the word genocide in his annual message marking
the carnage a century ago. Enduring friendships require such honesty.”

After much soul-searching, those two publications have discovered
that there is no “other side” to the genocide story. We hope their
stand becomes contagious, paving the way for other publications and
statesmen to arrive at the same conclusion.

From: Baghdasarian

TASHNAG: THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY MUST RECKON WITH ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

National News Agency Lebanon (NNA)
April 10, 2015 Friday

NNA – The International community must finally reckon with the Armenian
Genocide, Tashnag party students petitioned German ambassador
Kristian Klages during their march at the embassy today. With
the Centenary of the Armenian Genocide on the 24th of April 2015,
Tashnag students recall a Reichstag bill of motion recognizing the
barbarities perpetrated by the Ottoman Sultanate on Armenians at
the height of the 1915 Genocide amid total complicity of the then
German Reich. As the Federal Republic of Germany acknowledged the
complacency of the Reich, Tashnag students do hereby appeal to the
German Reichstag to take the initiative and criminalize all denial of
the Genocide; pressure must also be applied on the Turkish government
to acknowledge the Ottoman role in the massacres and, by arranging
to pay compensations to the Armenian victims, the petition said. As
grandsons to Genocide survivors, we vow to clamor for justice in quest
of our people’s rights which could never die with the passing of time,
the petition concluded. =====G.G./R.K.

From: Baghdasarian