Month: December 2008

  • UK: Ruling frees asylum seekers to work

    UK: Ruling frees asylum seekers to work

    Jamie Doward and Gaby Hinsliff

    The Observer, Sunday 14 December 2008

    A landmark legal ruling has paved the way for thousands of asylum seekers in the UK to be allowed to work. The High Court has ruled that current laws preventing an Eritrean asylum seeker from taking a job are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

    Last night legal experts said the test case would have major ramifications for others seeking asylum.

    The Eritrean man, called Tekle, who cannot be returned to his home country because it is considered too dangerous, has been in the UK for seven years while his case is considered. Thousands of asylum seekers from other countries also considered too dangerous to return to – including Iran, Iraq, Somalia and Zimbabwe – are in a similar position.

    The ruling has no bearing on the 300,000-plus asylum seekers whose applications are being fast-tracked because they do not come from countries considered no-go areas. But Caroline Slocock, chief executive of the Refugee Legal Centre, said the ruling would affect a significant category who found themselves destitute and in limbo. ‘We expect it to be in the thousands,’ she said.

    Mr Justice Blake ruled that a blanket ban was ‘unlawfully over-broad and unjustifiably detrimental to claimants who have had to wait as long as this claimant has’. He said the Home Office’s policy breached article 8 of the convention, which guarantees the ‘right to respect for private and family life’.

    The ruling comes as the former Tory leader, Iain Duncan Smith, prepares to publish a report tomorrow suggesting that failed asylum seekers should be given the right to work here if they cannot return home.

    Source:  www.guardian.co.uk, 14 December 2008

  • Foreigners and Turks in Germany

    Foreigners and Turks in Germany

    Fifty years ago the number of foreigners living in Germany was less than 700,000. Today it is 6.7 million. This is 8.2 percent of the total population of 82 million.

    Of these 6.7 million foreign residents 1.7 million (one quarter) are Turkish citizens. (see table 1)

    The number of German Turks, however, is much higher: besides Turkish citizens it includes naturalised Turks and children of Turkish citizens: this number is today estimated at some 2.7 million (see table 2).

    In 1980 the number of Turkish citizens who received German citizenship was only 339. In 1990 it rose to 2,000;by 1999 it had reached more than 100,000. Today, the total number of Turkish-turned-German citizens is 755,000. (see table 3)

    Following the amendment of the German citizenship law in 2000 it is now easier to become a citizen. Children of foreign parents can now obtain German citizenship at birth. This explains the drop in the number of Turkish citizens after 2001.

    via Picture stories – ESI.

  • Turkey Confronts a Disputed Period in Its History

    Turkey Confronts a Disputed Period in Its History

    Turkey Confronts a Disputed Period in Its History

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 5 Issue: 240
    December 17, 2008
    By: Saban Kardas
    A group of Turkish intellectuals have taken a bold step to open a public debate on the disputed events of 1915, when the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire were forced to relocate, leading to the death of scores of people and the beginning of what the Armenians claim was genocide. Turkey officially denies claims of genocide and maintains that both peoples suffered from interethnic conflicts. The group led by leading academics, writers, and journalists, who are known for their critical position on the official Turkish thesis, has initiated a campaign inviting the Turkish people to sign a petition to apologize for the suffering of the Ottoman Armenians.

    Having first collected signatures from other intellectuals, the initiators of the campaign, including Baskin Oran, Ahmet Insel, Ali Bayramoglu, and Cengiz Aktar, started to solicit signatures from Turkish citizens on the internet on December 15 (www.ozurdiliyoruz.com). The website is named “Ozur Diliyoruz” (we apologize). The short and precise petition offers a personal apology yet falls short of demanding the Turkish state to do likewise. The text reads as follows:
      

    My conscience does not accept the insensitivity toward and the denial of the Great Catastrophe that the Ottoman Armenians were subjected to in 1915. I reject this injustice; and for my share, I empathize with the feelings and pain of my Armenian brothers and sisters. I apologize to them (www.ozurdiliyoruz.com).
      
    The text calls on the Turkish people to confront a controversial episode in their history. The organizers say the signatures are a demonstration of the reaction of individual to their historical responsibility. In their view, many Turks’ knowledge of the deportation of Armenians is based on hearsay, and there is an urgent need to offer people an objective account of the events. Although official history presents these events as mutual massacres, according to the organizers, the reality is much different. They believe that Turkish citizens have a right to learn history outside the official theses, and this campaign might be a step in that direction (Vatan, December 4).

    Despite the organizers’ optimism, the campaign has already led to divisions in Turkish society. As soon as the news about the petition drive came out, nationalist forces, the staunchest supporters of the official theses, reacted vehemently against the organizers, as reflected in nationalist daily Yeni Cag’s headline: “Ermeni Agziyla Kampanya” (A Campaign Mimicking Armenians) (Yeni Cag, December 5). Nationalist critics questioned the sincerity of the organizers, charging them with being on the verge of hysteria. In a stark response to the organizers’ call for reevaluating the official Turkish stand on the deportation, nationalists maintained that the organizers lacked a basic knowledge of the actual course of history. For the nationalists, the real victims of the 1915 events were the Ottoman Turks. “Every house has memories of people butchered by Armenians. I regard apologizing to the Armenians as an insult to the Turkish nation. People who call themselves intellectuals have not even been enlightened about their own history,” said Zeki Ertugay, a Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) deputy from Erzurum (Today’s Zaman, December 6).

    The MHP leader Devlet Bahceli was outraged by the campaign and issued a written statement. For him, there was no one to whom the Turks should apologize. “The dirty campaign” was “humiliating,” he said, and reflected the extent of “degeneration and decay” being imposed on Turkish society by so-called intellectuals working as collaborators of outside powers. Bahceli blamed the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government for creating a fertile environment for this situation. He lambasted the AKP’s recent openings to Armenia, because they compromised national priorities and created inside Turkey a pro-Armenian front that worked to undermine Turkish historical heritage (www.mhphaber.com, December 7; www.internethaber.com, December 16).

    Another response to the petition campaign came from a group of retired Turkish envoys who issued a counter-declaration on December 15. Around 50 diplomats, including former undersecretaries of the Turkish Foreign Ministry Sukru Elekdag, Korkmaz Haktanir, and Onur Oymen, maintained that the apology initiative was “unjust, wrong, and damaging to [Turkey’s] national interests.” Their declaration read:
      

    Such a false and one-sided initiative is tantamount to disrespecting our history and betraying our citizens who lost their lives due to the violence perpetrated by terror organizations during the last days of the Ottoman Empire [and] into the Republican era. Although the Armenian relocation, which took place under wartime conditions, resulted in tragic outcomes, the loss and suffering of the Turkish people due to Armenian rebellions and terror attacks were no less than those of Armenians (ANKA, December 12).
      
    The retired diplomats noted that a rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia could not be achieved by such one-sided “compromises,” but what was needed was mutual recognition of each other’s borders and suffering. They went on to challenge the organizers of the petition campaign: “Will there be an apology for the victims of Armenian terror?” Since the Turkish diplomatic corps lost some of its members to terrorism by the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA), the envoys’ sensitivity to this issue can be better understood.

    Although the apology initiative seeks to break taboos, the reactions so far indicate that it might actually re-ignite the controversy and deepen the preexisting divisions. Instead of conversing across the aisle, the parties prefer so far to fortify their dug-in positions on the 1915 events and continue to furnish contrasting “factual” accounts about what took place during that period.

  • Turkey did not commit any crime against Armenians

    Turkey did not commit any crime against Armenians

    “I can not understand those who launched this campaign. I can not understand this logic,” Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.

    Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan criticized a campaign of apology to the Armenians launched by the Turkish academics, writers and journalists recently, Turkey’s Time Turk news agency reported.

    “I can not understand those who launched this campaign. I can not understand this logic,” Erdogan said.

    Around 200 Turkish academics, writers and journalists launched a website issuing an apology to the Armenians regarding the 1915 incidents and calling for people to sign on in support. Over 5,000 people have registered on the website, Turkish media reported.

    Armenia and Armenian lobby worldwide state that in 1915 the Ottoman Empire, Turkey’s predecessor, committed genocide against Armenians living in Anatolia. Armenians striving to make their statements recognized worldwide have strengthened their propaganda of the so-called genocide in several countries and have achieved recognition of the “Armenian genocide” at several Parliaments.

    Turkish Prime Minister said this campaign will only create confusion. “”I neither accept nor support this campaign. We did not commit a crime, therefore we do not need to apologize,” Erdogan said.

  • Turkey-based apology net campaign

    Turkey-based apology net campaign

     

     
     

    Ankara-APA. A group of persons starting net campaign under title “I apologize” on so-called Armenian genocide in 1915 face dissatisfaction, APA reports.

    A group of persons started campaign under title “We wait for apology” against above-mentioned campaign. They created an analogous website like www.ozurdiliyoruz.com established by persons, who demanded apology from Armenians and allocated many photos related to Khojaly massacre. www.ozurbekliyorum.com website covers a list of Turkish diplomats killed by Armenian terrorists, archives of Turkish Armed Forces on Armenian terrorism, persons, who wait for apology from Armenians for their genocide committed against Turkish People. As of today, Over 6000 people joined campaign under title “We wait for apology”. The campaign started three days before and less than 6000 people have signed internet letter by now.

  • MAKING AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES AFFORDABLE

    MAKING AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES AFFORDABLE

    It was reported on December 3, 2008 in the media that the costs of the universities have been rising at more than twice the rate as the cost of living. Thus, universities are no longer affordable. If nothing is done, the cost will be prohibitive, but still more people will apply and will keep them open. It is a supply and demand situation. A better idea is of course to analyze the various costs of learning, discard the unnecessary, and reduce the cost to an affordable level.

    I made my high school education in Turkey and my university education in Germany. My high school education was equivalent to the French high schools of 1930’s which were the best in Europe. With what I learned in h igh school, I got directly in Chemical Engineering at the Technical University in Darmstadt.

    Unfortunately the American High school is much weaker and a four-year college is needed to bring the high school graduate to a level at which he can be starting a professional studies. [See: Allan Bloom, “The Closing of the American mind”, Simon & Schuster, 1987]

    Thus, a first cost–cutting would be possible by strengthening the high school to the level of a European high school and thus, saving at least a few years. That would include a course in philosophy in 12th grade. That is perfectly possible. My grand-daughter Erin took university-level courses in high school and now has done the 4-year college in three years. But the highest gain would be obtained, when high school level courses would become strong enough not to need the 4-year college. At present rates, this would be a saving o about $120,000 per student. Youngsters would also eliminate four years from the duration of their education. They would start four years earlier in life.

    A big difference between a German University and an American one, is that in Germany the university is just a place of learning. The living is done outside and outside of the interest of the university. Students live in private homes., as a sort of guests.. Many families have extra rooms they can rent. If one is lucky, as I was, one can be treated almost like a family member.

    In American universities, learning and living are done in the same campus. Students, at least the first year, live in a new student society, where excessive drinking, hazing, and similar youthful acts are common. I propose to get rid of the campus living , primarily to cut costs. The together-living during the first year has also some advantages. One makes friends, just like in a boarding school or in the army. Eating together in the same cafeterias or restaurants will do just as well and Campus living can be eliminated. I understand that fraternities and sororities are not in the University budget.

    Information coming from one nearby university indicates that fighting the energy waste might tremendously reduce operating costs. As example, the elimination of cafeteria trays is mentioned. The washing of the trays is eliminated which is an energy-intensive operation. Also, without trays, students do not take things they are not going to eat and food waste is reduced.

    At Lehigh University, in Bethlehem, PA., some of my friends professors were experimenting with a new idea. They thought that, in stead of teaching the students by many second-class teachers, it is better to teach them by videos, or DVD’s, of the best professors and have an assistant present to answer questions. This too would save considerable money and besides, improve the teaching. Universities would then retain only a few of the very best professors. Those DVD’s would have to be often up-dated.

    Of course teaching methods can be improved to cut costs. I remember one Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering in the U.S. who spent his time in class in developing and integrating complex differential equations. Since he was not teaching mathematics, he could have given us prints that show how the integration is done, and he could have taught the chemical engineering facts that he was supposed to teach during that time. If he would do that, he would need to teach a one hour a week course, in stead of three. Of course there are all sorts of other ways to cut costs by planning the lectures intelligently.

    One of the heavy expenses of an American University are its sports teams and a high salaried coach in every sport. I propose to form an outside sports club and get the sports out of the university budget. Students who are interested in sports will become members of the Club. I was told that Football is a generator of income. I still think that show-sports should be divorced from the university.

    These are some of the cost cutting ways that came to my mind. I am sure there are others too. I will conclude that it is perfectly feasible to make the universities affordable.

    T H E  O R HAN  T A R H A N  L E T T E R

    (Issued twice a month by M. Orhan Tarhan and distributed free by e-mail ).

    Article No: 142 December 15 , 2008

    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..

    To Readers’ Attention: Any one who wishes to receive THE ORHAN TARHAN LETTER should sent an e-mail to [email protected] with his/her full name, e-mail address , and PLEASE phone number, in case there is an interruption caused by the server, or in case of e-mail address change. It is free. Comments are welcome. These LETTERs are also published in AmericanChronicle.com