Author: Aylin D. Miller

  • ACTION Alert: Demand that Gaza’s borders be opened!

    ACTION Alert: Demand that Gaza’s borders be opened!

    From: Maggie Coulter <[email protected]>

    Take Action:

    Gaza is in the grip of a human-made humanitarian crisis. Thousands of tons of food, medical and emergency shelter aid including blankets and mattresses, donated by countries including the United States and aid organizations, is being denied entry through crossings by both the Israeli and Egyptian governments. The Israeli navy is blockading Gaza’s sea front, preventing boats from delivering supplies Gaza, including a Lebanese ship with badly needed plasma.


    Call the White House, the Israeli Consulate, the Egyptian consulate, and Congress and demand that:
    – Israel and Egypt open all border crossings to Gaza,
    – Israel stop its blockade of the sea access to Gaza, and
    – Israel end all military action against Gaza (and its occupation of Palestine).


    Remind President Obama and Congress that a third of all U.S. foreign aid goes to Israel and Egypt so the U.S. is clearly in a position to put effective pressure on both countries to stop this ongoing assault on the people of Gaza.

    White House
    President Barak Obama, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20500
    Comments: 202-456-1111, Switchboard: 202-456-1414, FAX: 202-456-2461

    Email through website:

    Israeli Consulate
    Consul General of Israel, 456 Montgomery Street #2100, San Francisco, CA 94104

    Tel: (415) 844-7500 | Fax: (415) 844-7555,| [email protected]
    Consul General, Akiva Tor, (415) 844-7501, [email protected]
    For urgent press inquiries, [email protected]
    Office of Public Affairs, (415) 844-7506, [email protected]

    Egyptian Consulate
    The Egyptian Consulate General, 3001 Pacific Ave., San Francisco, CA 94115
    Tel: 415-346-9700 / 346-9702, Fax 415-346-9480, email: [email protected]

    Congressional Switchboard
    All Senators and Representatives can be reached through 202-224-3121

    More Information:

    Urgent call from Gaza to all social movements: Open Gaza Borders!
    International Solidarity Movement, 4 February 2009
    Website: www.palsolidarity.org.  Email:
    [email protected]

    We reiterate the need for a call from Palestinian community based organisations and the over 130 grassroots NGOs in the Palestinian NGO Network for an immediate opening of all border crossings currently controlled by Israel and Egypt.

    Gaza is in the grip of a man-made humanitarian crisis. Thousands of tons of food, medical and emergency shelter aid including blankets and mattresses, donated by countries including the United States and aid organisations, is being denied entry through crossings by both the Israeli and Egyptian governments.

    The United Nations has stated that 900,000 Gazans are now dependent on food aid following Israel’s 22-day assault on the tiny coastal territory. Only 100 aid trucks are being allowed into Gaza each day – 30 less than were being brought in last year and substantially less than before Israel’s operation ‘Cast Lead’: an attack that has left over 1,300 Palestinians dead, the vast majority of them civilians massacred in their streets and homes. With over 5,000 injured and 100,000 homeless, admittance of aid is crucial at this time.

    This is a fraction of the estimated 500-600 trucks deemed necessary to sustain the population of Gaza according to the United Nations. According to UNRWA, food trucks are delivering enough food to feed just 30,000 people per day.

    Hundreds of medical patients, the injured from this war and Israel’s previous invasions, are being prohibited from leaving Gaza for indispensable medical treatment. Over 268 people have died of preventable and treatable conditions after being denied access to treatment since the beginning of the ongoing siege two years ago.

    Israel and Egypt have designated February 5th as the final day for all foreign nationals to leave Gaza through the southern Rafah border.  Egypt has said it will close the Rafah border indefinitely. Despite a statement from the Egyptian Ministry of Health that humanitarian cases will be allowed through, many patients have already been turned back, before the closing of the border. Hundreds of patients and some of those wounded from ‘Cast Lead,’ are still waiting for permission to exit Gaza through Rafah for medical treatment.

    The Gazan community is concerned that Israel will be stepping up its’ economic, political, cultural and militarised stranglehold on Gaza in the upcoming weeks. Post Israeli elections, Gazans fear the Israeli government will
    conduct extra judicial killings and continue their deadly strikes on Palestinian governmental figures, targeting of social and economic infrastructure and indiscriminate killings of civilians in the process. Actions that have proven to not only end lives but successfully cripple Palestinian development including reconstruction of homes destroyed by Israeli bombings and bulldozing during and before Operation ‘Cast Lead’.

    Thousands of internally displaced people face an uncertain future residing in flimsy canvas tents reminiscent of the mass dispossession through the ethnic cleansing of 1948 when the state of Israel was first established on Palestinian land.

    A de-facto land grab and re-colonisation of Gaza is underway, with the demolition of hundreds of homes and destruction of farms in the Israeli defined ‘buffer zone’ areas of Rafah, Eastern (Shijaye) and Northern (Beit Hanoun) areas of Gaza. Killings, shelling and shootings of farmers and residents in border areas are continuing.

    The ‘buffer zone’ has been expanded to cut into Palestinian lands by one kilometre. Israeli occupation forces have shot at residents that have attempted to retrieve their belongings from the bombed and bulldozed remnants of their homes along the border of Beit Hanoun. The army also continues to fire at farmers planting their fields in village areas such as al Faraheen near Khan Younis.

    The Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture says Israeli occupation forces have destroyed 60% of Gaza’s agricultural land during this winter’s war.

    Effective international direct action and an escalation of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanction campaign is necessary to resist the intensification of the collective punishment, imprisonment and ongoing war on the people of Palestine.

    The situation is worsening: the stranglehold on the people of Gaza is tightening, humanitarian relief is being deliberately choked, trauma is deepening, people are being humiliated on a daily basis and development is not just blocked but in the process of being actively reversed.

    We call on social movements, particularly No Borders networks, and people of conscience to target Israeli and Egyptian embassies, institutions, and corporations. Particularly in the coming days of intensified border closure, we must work to pressure both governments to abide by international law and open Gaza for the free movement of aid, goods and people.

    End the collective punishment of the Gazan people, open the borders.

  • Israel still dealing with international fallout

    Israel still dealing with international fallout

    AP – In this Jan. 9, 2009 file photo, Turkish demonstrators chant Islamic slogans as they set fire to an Israeli …

    JERUSALEM – More than two weeks after halting its Gaza offensive, Israel is still dealing with the international fallout, including a very public spat with the leader of Turkey, a slew of war crimes allegations and broken ties with Venezuela, Bolivia and Qatar.
    It’s not quite a major diplomatic crisis, but it is a serious public relations problem for the Jewish state, which once again finds itself on the defensive against an avalanche of accusations.
    Israel’s defenders say the country was acting in self-defense and charge that no other country would be singled out for the kind of criticism that has been slung in its direction since the beginning of the Gaza offensive on Dec. 27.
    The Foreign Ministry says Israel’s important relationships are unharmed and predicts the international mood will pass.
    The three-week offensive, aimed at halting years of rocket fire at Israeli towns from Gaza, killed some 1,300 Palestinians, at least half of them civilians, according to Gaza health officials. Thirteen Israelis were killed, including three civilians.
    Perhaps the most noteworthy outburst was Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan‘s spat with Israeli President Shimon Peres at the Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum, usually a refined get-together for the world’s most powerful.
    “You kill people,” Erdogan snapped at Peres, shortly after Peres offered an impassioned defense of the Israeli operation and shortly before Erdogan stormed off the stage.
    Despite hurried attempts at damage control from both sides, the flap has further disrupted the close alliance between the two countries. The hordes of Israeli package tourists who vacation in Turkey are reportedly staying home.
    The Davos incident came as a Spanish judge decided to open a war crimes investigation into a 2002 incident in which an Israeli F-16 killed a top Hamas mastermind in Gaza along with 14 other people, including nine children. Though it dealt with an earlier incident, the timing was clearly linked to the current violence.
    Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela expelled the Israeli ambassador at the height of the fighting and Israel expelled the Venezuelan envoy in response. Bolivia couldn’t expel the Israeli ambassador because it doesn’t have one, but followed Chavez’s lead by announcing it was cutting off ties.
    The small Persian Gulf state of Qatar said it was freezing ties and closed Israel’s representative office — a key Israeli foothold in the Arab world — while Qatar’s fellow Arab League member Mauritania suspended relations but let the Israeli ambassador stay. Syria called off the indirect peace talks it was holding with Israel through Turkish mediators.
    Those incidents followed weeks of protests in European capitals and across the Muslim world.
    The United Nations has called for investigations of Israel’s shelling of several of the organization’s compounds in Gaza, several rights groups have suggested Israel might be guilty of violating the rules of war and a group of U.S. professors is trying to organize an academic boycott.
    The Palestinian Authority has now recognized the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, a move aimed at paving the way for a war crimes investigation, though Israel has not ratified the treaty that established the court and thus cannot be prosecuted.
    On the other hand, Israel’s most important ally, the U.S., gave its backing, with both the outgoing president and his successor stressing Israel’s right to defend itself. Street protests aside, most world governments made do with only careful criticism.
    Yigal Palmor, a spokesman for Israel’s Foreign Ministry, said Israel’s key international alliances were unaffected and called the outpouring of anger “a temporary phenomenon.”
    “We have come under some criticism from some countries more than from others, but basically everything can be handled within the normal framework of normal relations,” he said.
    Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov, a professor of international relations at Jerusalem‘s Hebrew University, called the current climate a “crisis situation” attributable largely to an international double standard.

    “People are expecting from us to be more moral, more just, more nice in this kind of conflict and sometimes it’s indeed very difficult,” he said. He mentioned Russia’s war in Chechnya and Turkey’s war against Kurdish rebels as examples of conflicts that caused far higher civilian casualties but received less attention and criticism.

    Many Israelis were especially rankled by Erdogan’s comments, both because Israelis generally regard Turkey as friendly and because of Turkey’s own spotty human rights record.

    “It’s a shame to look at how this prime minister behaves. He doesn’t mention what he does to the Kurds,” the Turkish-born Bar-Siman-Tov said. The conflict between Turkey and Kurdish armed groups has claimed tens of thousands of lives since the 1980s, including thousands of civilians.

    Israel has been in this position before, most recently after its 2006 war against Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon. That war ended inconclusively, with some 1,000 Lebanese and 159 Israelis dead, and drew similar condemnations of Israel’s tactics and weaponry. Then, as now, Israel responded that it was attacked by guerrillas hiding among civilians and had no choice.

    The criticism this time resembles that of 2006, said Jonathan Spyer, an expert on international affairs at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center near Tel Aviv. Israel receives “vastly disproportionate” attention worldwide even in normal times, he said, “and in times of conflict it becomes accentuated.”

    There has been a slight change in tone, he said, because this time, unlike in the Lebanon conflict, Israel is not seen to have failed.

    “This time Israel is being portrayed as the nasty neighborhood bully, rather than as an incompetent, flailing monster,” he said.
  • Hacking history I: Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, Ankara

    Hacking history I: Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, Ankara

    ARMENIAN VIEWS

    Hacking history I: Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, Ankara

    by Ara Sarafian
    Published: Saturday November 22, 2008.
    Ankara, Turkey – Armenians have become a common topic of discussion in Turkey for some years now and this trend has picked up since Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan came to office in March 2003. In this new climate of more openness, liberal intellectuals have led a discussion of the Armenian Taboo of Turkey.
    Their discussions have led to a new awareness of Armenians and a gradual reinvention of Turkey’s Armenian heritage, which was destroyed in large measure in 1915 and its aftermath. The new positive discussions have touched on such issues as Armenian history, art, architecture, music, and cuisine in different publications, exhibitions, and public discussions.
    Fethiye Çetin’s book Anne Annem (My Grandmother: A Memoir ) has been reprinted in several editions. Osman Köker’s exhibitions and publications have reached thousands. Orhan Pamuk’s comments about the persecution of Kurds and Armenians are reported by the world media. All this suggests some tangible breaks with Turkey’s more ominous past.
    However, the more sympathetic treatment of Armenians has continued to take place alongside longstanding conservative, belligerent, and negative attitudes toward Armenians. These circles continue to slight, marginalise, and vilify Armenians as a matter of course.
    Their attitudes, supported by stock arguments, are the product of decades of Turkish nationalist indoctrination and its underlying ideology. Even in the last week we have heard Turkey’s Defense Minister Vecdhi Gönül applaud the “departure” of the native Armenian and Greek communities of Turkey, and Minister of Justice Mehmet Ali Sahin defend the utility of the infamous Article 301. He explicitly defended the prosecution of Temel Demirer under Article 301 because the latter had called Turkey a state that murdered its own citizens (with reference to Armenians and Kurds).
    Within the academic domain, the Turkish Historical Association and the Turkish military continue to prepare and publish overtly anti-Armenian books and DVDs – invariably denigrating Armenians and denying the Armenian Genocide of 1915. Various “think tanks,” such as the Ermeni Arastirmalar Merkezi (Armenian Studies Center) in Ankara remain actively anti-Armenian. Many small publishing houses still print the conventional Turkish nationalist position regarding Armenians.
    Attempts to reinvent Turkish Armenians in a more positive light are still undermined by significant sectors of Turkish society, including government ministries. The relative strength of the opposing conservative circles has still not been gauged, especially given their positions of power and influence in Turkey. While one cannot expect the Turkish conservative- nationalist position to change overnight, one does expect it to take some note of new discussions and revelations.
    Two weeks ago I decided to examine several museums in Turkey, all but one in historic Western Armenia, with one question in mind: “How are Armenia and Armenians represented in Turkish museums today?”
    The museums I picked were the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations (Ankara), Erzurum Archaeological Museum, Van Archaeological Museum, and Kars Archaeological Museum. All four are under the control of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture.
    Had the new debates on Armenians shaped representations of Armenians in Turkey? How did these state institutions acknowledge and contextualize Armenian history in their everyday endeavors, and what can we say about Turkey and its Armenian heritage based on these museums.

    First stop: Ankara

    My first stop was the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara.
    This museum uses the term Anatolia as coterminous with the territory of Turkey-in-Asia. Of course, Turkey is not a single landmass, but formed of several distinct geographical regions, such as the Aegean littoral, the Konya plain, the Pontic mountains on the Black Sea, the Taurus Mountains of the Mediterranean, the anti-Taurus further east, and of course the Armenian highlands.
    This museum is reputed to be one of the most important museums in Turkey today. It won the European Museum of the Year Award in 1997, and many tourists, schoolchildren, and academics visit it every day.
    The museum exhibition extends over two floors. It is well constructed and maintained, with excellent lighting and good human resources. Starting from the prehistoric era, the visitor is led through collections of Paleolithic, Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Early Bronze Age, Assyrian, Hittite, Phrygian, Urartian and Lydian, Greek, Roman, Seljuk, and Ottoman artifacts.
    The displays at the museum include statues, pottery, jewelry, and metalwork, and various panels discuss the collections in their broader historical contexts, with references to other civilizations such as the Medes, Scythians, Egyptians, and Persians.
    However, there are no artifacts, discussions, or references to Armenians in the museum.
    The obvious question is, therefore, why is there no mention of Armenia as a geographical entity or Armenians as a culture and civilization? After all, there was the empire of Tigran the Great in the first century B.C.E., the Armenian Kingdom of Vasbouragan on Lake Van in the 10th-11th centuries, and the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia in the Middle Ages. Armenia was a distinct part of the Roman and Byzantine Empires, and Armenians were one of the important pillars of the Ottoman Empire. Armenians played a major role in arts, crafts, and trade throughout the ages, and they developed their own distinct identity with their own alphabet from the 5th century in this area. Armenian literature, philosophy, art, and architecture are worthy of much comment, yet they do not appear in a museum dedicated to Anatolian civilizations.
    For the article click on:
    http://reporter. am/go/article/ 2008-11-22- hacking-history- i-museum- of-anatolian- civilizations- ankara
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    Erzurum, Turkey – Following my trip to the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara, I was curious to see how Armenians would be represented at Erzurum Archeological Museum, in eastern Turkey. I expected to see at least something, as Erzurum was the location of the ancient city of Garin (Karin) in historic Armenia.
    I flew into Erzurum early in the morning and went straight to the museum. In stark contrast with the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, this provincial museum was a modest one-floor establishment. The staff at the museum seemed surprised to see a visitor as soon as they opened. They were very polite and got on with their job.
    The museum has several sections, starting from the Paleolithic. The other sections are built around artifacts found at a number of excavations in the region, as well as some “emergency digs,” which were forced by the building of the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline across Erzurum province recently. The museum also boasts a donation of Urartian artifacts from Igdir. The excavations forming the core of the museum have yielded Roman, Byzantine, Seljuk, and some Ottoman artifacts that are displayed in the museum, but nothing Armenian is on display. There is also no mention of Armenians in the historical explanations printed on large panels around the various exhibits, except for a special display related to Armenians. This display occupies almost a third of the museum.

    Ungrateful Armenians relocated

    The special display starts by stating, “Anatolia was under the sovereignty of Umayyads from the end of the 7th century, who were followed by the Abbasids till the end of the 10th century.” Then, we are told, “Byzantium dominated the whole of Anatolia starting from the end of the 10th century.” The suggestion is that this region was called Anatolia at that time and not Armenia. The Byzantines, we are told, mistreated Armenians until the Seljuk Turks conquered this region. “Seljuk Turks showed tolerance to Armenians and other non-Muslim minorities.” This is the first mention of Armenians in the museum.
    The museum’s narrative continues by stating that Armenians prospered in the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century, when they began rising against the state. It says that Armenians formed revolutionary committees, provoked the 1895 and 1908 incidents [massacres], and finally organized an Armenian uprising against the Ottoman government during World War I. Because of these revolts, we are told, Ottoman authorities deported Armenians and settled them in safer places in the empire.
    (According to creditable sources, most Erzurum-Armenians were killed on their way to exile in June 1915. Some caravans were killed in Erzinjan, while others were wasted away on forced marches southward. The American consul in Harput gives harrowing descriptions of the Erzurum exiles as they passed by Harput, before at least some of them were killed near Lake Goljuk. He identified such victims because their identity papers could be found among their corpses.)
    Then the main point of this special section is made: During World War I Armenians committed atrocities against Turks in eastern Turkey. There are discussions of massacres at such locations as at Chavushoglu Samanligi village in Ercis (near Lake Van) or Subatan village near Kars. These sites were excavated in the 1980s and 90s. We are told that in Chavushoglu Samanligi, the victims could be identified as Turks because of forensic examinations, written data, or artifacts found with the bodies. “It is possible to identify [the] race [of victims] by measurement, index, and morphological observation of the skulls…. We calculate that the cephalic index which is the most prominent criteria in race studies. We took the measurements of the eight skulls. The indexes varied between 76 and 89. The results showed that four are mesocaphalic and the others are brachycephalic. .. all skeletons belonged to [the] Alpine group to which Anatolian Turks belong.”

    April 24, 1918

    In the case of Subatan village, we are told that a massacre took place there on April 24 1918, when Armenians were evacuating the area. This assertion is made on the basis of contemporary written records, plus an examination of the mass graves at the village. Subatan was a mixed village of Turks, Armenians, and Greeks. According to the museum, 570 people were killed there. Interestingly, the Subatan village massacre in 1918 is considered to be “one of the excavations of the mass-graves which aim shedding light onto the events happened in Eastern Anatolia between 1915 and 1918.” The inference is that the 1918 massacre of Turks in this village somehow explains what happened to Ottoman Armenians in 1915.
    (Kars was not part of the Ottoman Empire when World War I broke out. After the Russian revolution Armenians controlled the city. In April 1918 Turkish armies advanced against Armenians in Kars and there was intercommunal violence in the surrounding villages. It is possible that there was a massacre at the village of Subatan around April 24, 1918, though there has not been an independent assessment of either evidence or circumstances. )
    The museum also claims, more problematically, a massacre at Zeve (in Van province). We are told that this massacre took place in 1915 (no month is given), when 2,500-3,000 Turks-Muslims were brought to Zeve from eight other surrounding villages. These people were tortured and shot. “The most important findings of the excavations were daggers, cartridges, pieces of silk clothes, necklaces with beads displaying Sultan Reshad’s monogram, amulets covered with wax, copper coins and glass buttons.” Information about this claimed incident comes from an oral source (Ibrahim Sargin), but there is little further evidence offered about the claimed massacre, such as a more precise date of the incident and how the number and ethnicity of the victims was established. It is also not clear who the informant was, where the oral testimony might be found today, or who excavated the mass grave. If such a massacre took place after Russian occupation of this region (Spring 1915), we could investigate what Russian military units (with various Armenian, Muslim, and other soldiers) operated in this region.
    For the article click on:
    http://reporter. am/go/article/ 2008-12-01- hacking-history- ii-erzurum- archaeological- museum
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    Hacking history II: Erzurum Archaeological Museum

    by Ara Sarafian
    Published: Monday December 01, 2008.
    Erzurum, Turkey – Following my trip to the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara, I was curious to see how Armenians would be represented at Erzurum Archeological Museum, in eastern Turkey. I expected to see at least something, as Erzurum was the location of the ancient city of Garin (Karin) in historic Armenia.
    I flew into Erzurum early in the morning and went straight to the museum. In stark contrast with the Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, this provincial museum was a modest one-floor establishment. The staff at the museum seemed surprised to see a visitor as soon as they opened. They were very polite and got on with their job.
    The museum has several sections, starting from the Paleolithic. The other sections are built around artifacts found at a number of excavations in the region, as well as some “emergency digs,” which were forced by the building of the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline across Erzurum province recently. The museum also boasts a donation of Urartian artifacts from Igdir. The excavations forming the core of the museum have yielded Roman, Byzantine, Seljuk, and some Ottoman artifacts that are displayed in the museum, but nothing Armenian is on display. There is also no mention of Armenians in the historical explanations printed on large panels around the various exhibits, except for a special display related to Armenians. This display occupies almost a third of the museum.

    Ungrateful Armenians relocated

    The special display starts by stating, “Anatolia was under the sovereignty of Umayyads from the end of the 7th century, who were followed by the Abbasids till the end of the 10th century.” Then, we are told, “Byzantium dominated the whole of Anatolia starting from the end of the 10th century.” The suggestion is that this region was called Anatolia at that time and not Armenia. The Byzantines, we are told, mistreated Armenians until the Seljuk Turks conquered this region. “Seljuk Turks showed tolerance to Armenians and other non-Muslim minorities.” This is the first mention of Armenians in the museum.
    The museum’s narrative continues by stating that Armenians prospered in the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century, when they began rising against the state. It says that Armenians formed revolutionary committees, provoked the 1895 and 1908 incidents [massacres], and finally organized an Armenian uprising against the Ottoman government during World War I. Because of these revolts, we are told, Ottoman authorities deported Armenians and settled them in safer places in the empire.
    (According to creditable sources, most Erzurum-Armenians were killed on their way to exile in June 1915. Some caravans were killed in Erzinjan, while others were wasted away on forced marches southward. The American consul in Harput gives harrowing descriptions of the Erzurum exiles as they passed by Harput, before at least some of them were killed near Lake Goljuk. He identified such victims because their identity papers could be found among their corpses.)
    Then the main point of this special section is made: During World War I Armenians committed atrocities against Turks in eastern Turkey. There are discussions of massacres at such locations as at Chavushoglu Samanligi village in Ercis (near Lake Van) or Subatan village near Kars. These sites were excavated in the 1980s and 90s. We are told that in Chavushoglu Samanligi, the victims could be identified as Turks because of forensic examinations, written data, or artifacts found with the bodies. “It is possible to identify [the] race [of victims] by measurement, index, and morphological observation of the skulls…. We calculate that the cephalic index which is the most prominent criteria in race studies. We took the measurements of the eight skulls. The indexes varied between 76 and 89. The results showed that four are mesocaphalic and the others are brachycephalic. .. all skeletons belonged to [the] Alpine group to which Anatolian Turks belong.”

    April 24, 1918

    In the case of Subatan village, we are told that a massacre took place there on April 24 1918, when Armenians were evacuating the area. This assertion is made on the basis of contemporary written records, plus an examination of the mass graves at the village. Subatan was a mixed village of Turks, Armenians, and Greeks. According to the museum, 570 people were killed there. Interestingly, the Subatan village massacre in 1918 is considered to be “one of the excavations of the mass-graves which aim shedding light onto the events happened in Eastern Anatolia between 1915 and 1918.” The inference is that the 1918 massacre of Turks in this village somehow explains what happened to Ottoman Armenians in 1915.
    (Kars was not part of the Ottoman Empire when World War I broke out. After the Russian revolution Armenians controlled the city. In April 1918 Turkish armies advanced against Armenians in Kars and there was intercommunal violence in the surrounding villages. It is possible that there was a massacre at the village of Subatan around April 24, 1918, though there has not been an independent assessment of either evidence or circumstances. )
    The museum also claims, more problematically, a massacre at Zeve (in Van province). We are told that this massacre took place in 1915 (no month is given), when 2,500-3,000 Turks-Muslims were brought to Zeve from eight other surrounding villages. These people were tortured and shot. “The most important findings of the excavations were daggers, cartridges, pieces of silk clothes, necklaces with beads displaying Sultan Reshad’s monogram, amulets covered with wax, copper coins and glass buttons.” Information about this claimed incident comes from an oral source (Ibrahim Sargin), but there is little further evidence offered about the claimed massacre, such as a more precise date of the incident and how the number and ethnicity of the victims was established. It is also not clear who the informant was, where the oral testimony might be found today, or who excavated the mass grave. If such a massacre took place after Russian occupation of this region (Spring 1915), we could investigate what Russian military units (with various Armenian, Muslim, and other soldiers) operated in this region.
    For the article click on:
    http://reporter. am/go/article/ 2008-12-01- hacking-history- ii-erzurum- archaeological- museum
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    Hacking History III: The Archaeological Museum of Van

    Hacking History III

    by Ara Sarafian
    Published: Thursday December 11, 2008
    Van, Turkey – The Archaeological Museum of Van is a small, two-story provincial museum. It became notorious in the 1980s when its upper floor housed an overtly anti-Armenian exhibition of human remains, bullets, and spent cartridges, all of which, the museum explained, was evidence of a genocide committed by Armenians against Turks during the First World War.
    This exhibition was the only reference to Armenians in the entire museum. As far as the museum was concerned, Armenians had no other presence in this area and there certainly was no genocide of Armenians in 1915.
    Many local Kurds mocked the museum, and some guidebooks to Turkey even ridiculed it for its anti-Armenian exhibition.
    When the Turkish government announced the renovation of Holy Cross Cathedral on Aghtamar Island near Van in 2005, I was interested to see how Turkish authorities were going to explain the presence of the 10th-century Armenian church without making any reference to Armenia or Armenian history in the museum of Van. This renovation was a high-profile event and was packaged as a peace offering for better relations with Armenians at a time when Turkey was making renewed efforts to join the European Union.
    If hundreds of foreign dignitaries and journalists were going to come to the opening ceremonies in 2007, how would the Turkish authorities avoid the embarrassment of this museum?
    When I visited Van in June 2006, the museum was closed. The word on the street was that the government objected to the anti-Armenian exhibit and wanted to remove it, while the military insisted that it stay. Given this impasse, the government simply closed down the museum “for renovations” until earlier this year.
    The museum thus remained closed when Holy Cross Cathedral was officially opened as a museum in 2007. Turkish and foreign dignitaries were thus saved the embarrassment of observing the discrepancy between the denial of Armenian history in the museum of Van and the praise Turkish authorities elicited from commentators for their work at Aghtamar Island.

    After the renovation

    Now that the museum is open, we can make our own assessment of the renovation it underwent between 2006 and 2008.
    The ground floor remains very much the same, with wonderful Urartian artifacts that include pottery, metalwork, jewelry, and furniture. There isn’t a great deal, but what one can see is both fascinating and beautiful.
    The “Armenian atrocities” section on the upper floor is removed. It is replaced with more Urartian artifacts, as well as ethnographic materials, such as kilims, period costumes, Ottoman swords, rifles, and revolvers, as well as household items and Korans.
    Considering all the effort that has gone into the removal of the “Armenian atrocities” section of the museum, and all the thought that must have gone into the content of the newly designed upper floor, one is disappointed to see that Armenians have been made invisible in this new museum: there is nothing that refers to Armenia or Armenians anywhere. Although there is a map of the region showing a number of churches and monasteries, they are not identified as Armenian churches or monasteries, nor is there any explanation anywhere in the museum that mentions either Armenia or Armenians in a historical context.

    The state has the power

    How might one interpret these apparent contradictions about the official Turkish attitude to Armenians? While Turkish authorities maintain their wish for better Turkish-Armenian relations and insist on their positive sentiments behind the renovation of Holy Cross Cathedral, the museum of Van reflects a more sinister attitude that is not lost on Armenian visitors: the Turkish state has the power to do whatever it wants, including writing people in or out of history. This sinister message is in evidence even within 20 miles of Aghtamar, where more than a dozen Armenian churches and monasteries have been devastated.
    After my visit, I introduced myself to some museum officials. Once again they were courteous, even pleasant. They were also quite knowledgeable and perhaps a little embarrassed. They were quite cognizant of Armenian history. When talking about Armenian artifacts, they made reference to beautiful Armenian khachkars in the province and the need to preserve them “in situ,” in their natural environment. “One should not drag them to museums” was a comment, though they were aware that these khachkars were almost always smashed or desecrated.
    “Some of this damage is done by Armenians, from Armenia” I was told.
    “You have to understand that we can not protect everything. There is so much of it” was another comment. “Even mosques are damaged by people.” Indeed, I have personally seen some abandoned mosques in the old city of Van, surrounded by beer bottles and covered with graffiti (in Turkish). I have also seen the example of the Seljuk cemetery in Gevash, on the way to Aghtamar, which is well protected and preserved behind walls. It has a beautiful kumbet-mausoleum that has been renovated. But no such care has been taken of anything Armenian, except for the recent renovation of Holy Cross Cathedral on Aghtamar Island. The fact remains that everything Armenian has been damaged, and most of it completely destroyed.

    Buried gold

    “Part of the problem is that people are ignorant and think Armenians buried gold everywhere, so it is quite common to go grave-robbing. ” Indeed, grave robbing is a major problem, but the government has allowed it to continue for decades. It complements the destruction of the churches and monasteries in the province, such as the monasteries around Gevash (within minutes of the Seljuk cemetery), or the complete demolition of the entire monastic complex at Nareg.
    “Is there nothing else Armenian that could be placed in the museum?” I asked. The answer was no, nothing that we’re aware of.  Did they not find other artifacts related to Armenians? The answer was no.
    For the article click on:
    http://reporter. am/go/article/ 2008-12-11- the-archaeologic al-museum- of-van
    == = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

    Hacking History IV: The Museum of Kars

    by Ara Sarafian
    Published: Friday January 09, 2009.
    Kars – I am always amazed when I see the desolation of Kars plain with its vast expanses of emptiness dotted by a few villages here and there. And then, there is the city of Kars, built at the base of a height, shadowed by a citadel on top. Like other parts of eastern Turkey, this area nurtured Armenian civilization, along the great trade routes between east and west, with the ancient city of Ani nearby.
    Today Kars is being groomed as the future gateway to Armenia, with a border crossing nearby, as well as an old railway line to Gyumri, Armenia. There is every expectation that the opening of the border will bring prosperity to this poor backwater of Turkey. Now there are shops crammed with cheap goods: plastic pails, fishing rods, bars of soap, children’s toys, plates, piles of clothes, all made in China or western Turkey.
    As one enters the city of Kars, one cannot avoid seeing a new monument that is being built opposite the old fortress above the city. This is supposed to be a peace monument, symbolizing friendship among the people of this region, notably Turks and Armenians. At the base of the monument is a pool, in the shape of an eye, with a teardrop breaking away. Is this a tear of joy or sorrow? I ask myself. Perhaps it is both.
    The Museum of Kars is within the city limits. It looks like a modest building from the outside, but inside it is quite something else: well lit, spacious, built of marble, covering two floors, I am impressed at first sight. It is not huge, but big enough and welcoming.
    In the grounds of the museum, there are some 16th-century Turkish steles; so they have been marked, but I could not miss the tombstones with Armenian writing on them. They are probably from the turn of the 20th century, and they are also inscribed in modern Armenian.
    A bullying message
    Inside, once more, as in Erzurum and Van, there are exhibitions from the Urartian, Greek, and Roman periods to the Byzantine, Seljuk, Ottoman, and Turkish. There is the familiar absence of Armenians as well, though there are references to the Bagratids in Kars and Ani – without mentioning Armenians except twice, in passing, in Turkish. Yet Ani was the jewel of medieval Armenian art, architecture, and culture.
    There is an exhibit that identifies 10-12 century “Christian coins” and a glass cage of crosses from the “Christian era”. It is not clear what period that is. Some of these crosses are clearly Russian, and some are clearly Armenian, though no mention is made of either. Armenians remain invisible.
    Then there is a rather bizarre exhibit, towering over onlookers. These are two huge church doors, with unmistakable Armenian crosses carved on them, plus a dedication in Armenian. The exhibit is simply identified as a church door from Kars. There is no additional explanation, such as the name or denomination of the church. Why would museum officials bother to put these doors on display, and purposefully say nothing of any substance about them? Surely the museum is aware of the message this display conveys. It is a bullying message to Armenians: your absence in this museum is on purpose.
    Some of the walls also include pictures of nearby ruined churches, but there is no additional explanation, except their names in Turkish.
    The upper floor of the museum has an ethnographic section, with the standard Turkish nationalist narrative of an Islamic-Turkish past, and no mention of other cultures, such as Armenians, Russians, Kurds, or Georgians – all distinct in their own right.
    A paradox
    As one leaves the museum, one is left with the paradox of reconciling the monument of peace towering above the town, and the silent, hostile message of the Museum of Kars. Should one simply accept Turkey as a land of contradictions that is going through a period of adjustment? Should one hope that these contradictions will be resolved for the better one day? Or are the contradictions more permanent? Perhaps they are not contradictions at all: perhaps the combined message of the museum and monument are complimentary, that the Turkish peace offered to Armenians today is contingent on Armenians accepting the dictates of Turkish power. Those dictates include accepting a Turkish narrative of history that denigrates or denies the existence of Armenians.
    So, how should I summarize my visit to Turkish museums? When I planned my proposed trip to Turkish museums in October 2008, I expected an “Armenian-friendly” experience. After all, I knew that the Museum of Van had been closed down for a long time and I expected it to reopen without the “Armenian Genocide of Turks” section. I also knew that Aghtamar had been renovated. I even had an idea that a Turkish artist was building a peace monument in Kars. Because of these indicators, I expected to see complimentary changes in the content of the museums I planned to visit. Obviously I was being too optimistic. By no means has Turkey turned the corner as the museums, among many other examples, still represent some of the worst aspects of “old Turkey” in terms of intolerance, prejudice, and aggression.
    Before I left Kars, I visited the construction workers at the peace monument. They were a jovial bunch of people, from different parts of Turkey. They asked me why I came to visit Kars. I told them I was Armenian and that I came to visit the museum as well as the old mosque that used to be an Armenian church (Holy Apostles Cathedral).
    One of the workers, a simple man, interjected and raised his voice. “I am a Muslim! I am a Muslim! And I say as a Muslim that they should turn that mosque back into a church. It is shameful to keep it as a mosque!” As he spoke up, his fellow workers listened. I was surprised and moved by the sincerity of his words.
    For the article click on:
    http://reporter. am/go/article/ 2009-01-09- hacking-history- iv-the-museum- of-kars

  • “TURKISH-AMERICAN RELATIONS FROM THE REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE”

    “TURKISH-AMERICAN RELATIONS FROM THE REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE”

    GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY
    ICC – 305-E
    Date: February 12, 2009
    Time: 7:00 PM

    * Please RSVP to Duygu Ozcan at [email protected]
    * Refreshments will be served

    ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION
    To be sure, a new chapter in the U.S.-Turkey relations will once again
    be written in 2009. Following the Gaza crisis in Israel, the tension
    between Israel and Turkey has been increasing. The upcoming local
    elections in Turkey might be the underlying reason of Turkish Prime
    Minister Erdogan’s strong stance on the Gaza crisis; however, its
    implications on the U.S.-Turkish relations are still indefinite. The
    future will present new challenges for the U.S.-Turkey relations once
    President Obama takes its position on the foreign affairs arena.

    KEYNOTE SPEAKER
    Murat Karagoz, First Counselor, Embassy of Turkey, Washington, D.C.

    Yurter Ozcan, President, ARI Foundation, discussion moderator

    KEYNOTE SPEAKER BIOGRAPHY
    Murat Karagoz is a First Counselor at the Embassy of Turkey in
    Washington, D.C. Between 2004-2006, Karagoz also served as a private
    advisor to the Undersecretary of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
    Turkey. Prior to assuming that position in September 2004, Karagoz
    worked as the First Secretary, then Counselor at Turkish Permanent
    Mission to the U.N. in New York (2000-2004) and served as a Second
    Secretary at Turkish Permanent to NATO in Brussels (1995-1997) and as
    a Third Secretary at Turkish Embassy in Sofia, Bulgaria (1992-1995).
    He received his Bachelor’s degree in Economics from Istanbul
    University in 1989 and attained his Master’s degree in Political
    Science from University of New York in 2007.

  • Help Khojaly Victims

    Help Khojaly Victims


    Call To Action

    Dear and all USTN members,

    This is USTN’s first grassroots advocacy campaign this year. The tragedy of Khojaly happened 17 years ago before the eyes of many of us. Today, the perpetrators of this single largest massacre of the Karabakh war, are leading the Republic of Armenia, namely former president Kocharyan and current president Sarkisyan. Others, like ASALA terrorist Monte Melkonian, are worshipped as national heroes.

    For the second year in the row, USTN is commemorating the victims and their families by doing what it can — spreading the message, informing the US policy- and decision-makers, as well as media, about this horrible tragedy, and demanding action. This is a critical time — with the new Congress and Administration, it is important that they ALL hear us loud and clear, that more articles about Khojaly appear in US press, that more Congressmen make speeches for the record, join our Caucus, and pressure Armenia to end its occupation, and appologize to the victims and their families.

    Please do your part — take one minute to send this free email and fax to your media and officials via USTN. The sooner we start, the more chances we have to properly remember, honor, and recognize the victims of Khojaly. And the more impact we will in anticipation of the unprecedented efforts by the Armenian lobby to pass its anti-Turkic resolutions.

    USTN Board of Directors

    A grave crime was committed against innocent Azerbaijani civilians by the Armenian army, on February 26, 1992, which became and remains the largest massacre of modern times in the region of South Caucasus and Caspian Basin. On that day, the military units of Armenia, seized the town of Khojaly, in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, and committed a massacre, which was the culmination of the Armenian aggression and occupation of Azerbaijan. On that day, the Armenian government’s efforts to rid Nagorno-Karabakh of its ethnically Azerbaijani population, resulted in almost 2,000 of innocent civilians, mostly women, children, and elderly, being killed, wounded, or taken hostage by the Armenian military forces.

    The crime against peaceful residents of Khojaly was condemned worldwide, including by the U.S. government, and broadly covered by national newspapers and magazines. Some of the American and Western journalists and groups who eye-witnessed or extensively covered the Khojaly massacre, were: Hugh Pope, Thomas Goltz, Tom DeWaal, and Human Rights Watch. Congressman Dan Burton (R-IN), a Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, had the following appeal: “This is not the ringing condemnation that the survivors of Khojaly deserve, but it is an important first step by an international community that has too long been silent on this issue. Congress should take the next step and I hope my colleagues will join me in standing with Azerbaijanis as they commemorate the tragedy of Khojaly. The world should know and remember.”

    February 26, 2009, is a Memorial Day for the people of Azerbaijan. All Azerbaijani people will forever remember where they were on February 26, 1992, like all Americans will forever remember where they were on the tragic morning of September 11, 2001.  Having experienced terror firsthand, Azerbaijan has become a staunch ally of the United States in the War on Terror and a member of the Coalition, with Azerbaijani battle-ready peacekeepers serving side-by-side with Americans in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq.

    In the wake of the 17th year anniversary of Khojali massacre, all Turkic-Americans join in calling upon Congress to properly recognize and commemorate this tragedy (on the floor of the Congress, in the Congressional Record, and by attending a vigil), and to pressure the Armenian government to accept its responsibility for this massacre and withdraw its troops from the occupied regions of Azerbaijan.

    More about the Khojaly Massacre: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=117709366&title=Khojaly_Massacre

    Click the link below to log in and send your message:

  • Washington Post: Turkey’s Turn from the West (Soner Cagaptay)

    Washington Post: Turkey’s Turn from the West (Soner Cagaptay)

    oninstitute. org/templateC06. php?CID=1225

    Turkey’s Turn from the West
    Soner Cagaptay

    Washington Post, February 2, 2009

    Turkey is a special Muslim country. Of the more than 50 majority-
    Muslim nations, it is the only one that is a NATO ally, is in
    accession talks with the European Union, is a liberal democracy and
    has normal relations with Israel. Under its current government by the
    Justice and Development Party (AKP), however, Turkey is losing these
    special qualities. Liberal political trends are disappearing, E.U.
    accession talks have stalled, ties with anti-Western states such as
    Iran are improving and relations with Israel are deteriorating. On
    Thursday, for example, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan walked out
    of a panel at Davos, Switzerland, after chiding Israeli President
    Shimon Peres for “killing people.” If Turkey fails in these areas or
    wavers in its commitment to transatlantic structures such as NATO, it
    cannot expect to be President Obama’s favorite Muslim country.
    Consider the domestic situation in Turkey and its effect on relations
    with the European Union. Although Turkey started accession talks,
    that train has come to a halt. French objections to Turkish
    membership slowed the process, but the impact of the AKP’s slide from
    liberal values cannot be ignored. After six years of AKP rule, the
    people of Turkey are less free and less equal, as various news and
    other reports on media freedom and gender equality show. In April
    2007, for instance, the AKP passed an Internet law that has led to a
    ban on YouTube, making Turkey the only European country to shut down
    access to the popular site. On the U.N. Development Program’s gender-
    empowerment index, Turkey has slipped to 90th from 63rd in 2002, the
    year the AKP came to power, putting it behind even Saudi Arabia. It
    is difficult to take seriously the AKP’s claim to be a liberal party
    when Saudi women are considered more politically, economically and
    socially empowered than Turkish women.

    Then there is foreign policy. Take Turkey’s status as a NATO ally of
    the United States: Ankara’s rapprochement with Tehran has gone so far
    since 2002 that it is doubtful whether Turkey would side with the
    United States in dealing with the issue of a nuclear Iran. In
    December, Erdogan told a Washington crowd that “countries that oppose
    Iran’s nuclear weapons should themselves not have nuclear weapons.”

    The AKP’s commitment to U.S. positions is even weaker on other
    issues, including Hamas. During the recent Israeli operations in
    Gaza, Erdogan questioned the validity of Israel’s U.N. seat while
    saying that he wants to represent Hamas on international platforms.
    Three days before moderate Arab allies of Washington, including
    Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, gathered on Jan. 19 in Kuwait to
    discuss an end to the Gaza conflict, Erdogan’s officials met with
    Iran, Syria and Sudan in Qatar, effectively upstaging the moderates.
    Amazingly, Turkey is now taking a harder line on the Arab-Israeli
    conflict than even Saudi Arabia.

    For years, Turkey has had normal relations with Israel, including
    strong military, tourist, and cultural and commercial ties. The Turks
    did not emphasize religion or ideology in their relationship with the
    Jewish state, so Israelis felt comfortable visiting, doing business
    and vacationing in Turkey. But Erdogan’s recent anti-Israeli
    statements — he even suggested that God would punish Israel — have
    made normal relations a thing of the past. On Jan. 4, 200,000 Turks
    turned out in freezing rain in Istanbul to wish death to Israel; on
    Jan. 7, an Israeli girls’ volleyball team was attacked by a Turkish
    audience chanting, “Muslim policemen, bring us the Jews, so we can
    slaughter them.”

    Emerging anti-Semitism also challenges Turkey’s special status. Anti-
    Semitism is not hard-wired into Turkish society — rather its seeds
    are being spread by the political leadership. Erdogan has pumped up
    such sentiments by suggesting Jewish culpability for the conflict in
    Gaza and alleging that Jewish-controlled media outlets were
    misrepresenting the facts. Moreover, on Jan. 6, while demanding
    remorse for Israel’s Gaza operations, Erdogan said to Turkish
    Jews, “Did we not accept you in the Ottoman Empire?” Turkey’s tiny,
    well-integrated Jewish community is being threatened: Jewish
    businesses are being boycotted, and instances of violence have been
    reported. These are shameful developments in a land that has provided
    a home for Jews since 1492, when the Ottomans opened their arms to
    Jewish people fleeing the Spanish Inquisition. The Ottoman sultans
    must be spinning in their graves.

    The erosion of Turkey’s liberalism under the AKP is alienating Turkey
    from the West. If Turkish foreign policy is based on solidarity with
    Islamist regimes or causes, Ankara cannot hope to be considered a
    serious NATO ally. Likewise, if the AKP discriminates against women,
    forgoes normal relations with Israel, curbs media freedoms or loses
    interest in joining Europe, it will hardly endear itself to the
    United States. And if Erdogan’s AKP keeps serving a menu of
    illiberalism at home and religion in foreign policy, Turkey will no
    longer be special — and that would be unfortunate.

    Soner Cagaptay is a senior fellow and director of the Turkish
    Research Program at The Washington Institute, and author of Islam
    Secularism and Nationalism in Modern Turkey: Who Is a Turk?