!ßÈÀ face="Verdana" size="2">Last week the first debates were held in Germany on the motion the CDU-CSU had presented to Bundestag on the Armenian “massacre,” and the SPD and the Greens have become a party to the motion, too. The Turkish TV crew that wanted to cover the debates was not permitted to enter the hall. Those Turks that entered the hall as visitors later said that the speakers’ knowledge about the incidents was, obviously, at a poor level. One understands from the nature of the interventions made by German deputies that these deputies were inspired by the only example of genocide they know about: the Holocaust.

Gündüz AKTAN
  Last week the first debates were held in Germany on the motion the CDU-CSU had presented to Bundestag on the Armenian “massacre,” and the SPD and the Greens have become a party to the motion, too. The Turkish TV crew that wanted to cover the debates was not permitted to enter the hall. Those Turks that entered the hall as visitors later said that the speakers' knowledge about the incidents was, obviously, at a poor level. One understands from the nature of the interventions made by German deputies that these deputies were inspired by the only example of genocide they know about: the Holocaust.

  At a meeting I attended in Cologne I saw that Turks were outraged. That issue has united the fragmented Turkish community in Germany, turning them into a veritable diaspora. They feel rightful indignation now that, in addition to the German political parties, the German media and public has easily accepted the, “Armenian genocide,” claims, refusing to hear out the Turkish side.

  Almost all of the Turks in Germany are convinced that Germany is using the Armenian problem to prevent Turkish membership in the European Union. When we hear and read what some Germans opposing our membership say, we see that they can hardly hide the pleasure they get from having found an issue that makes us extremely upset.

  It seems that this time the Turks will struggle hard. Germany has created trouble for itself.

  In France, President Jacques Chirac placed flowers at a monument and bowed together with Armenian President Robert Kocharian on April 24. That was a grave gesture directed against Turkey. One could argue that there is nothing inconsistent about the president's move since the French parliament had passed in 2001 a law that recognized the, “Armenian genocide.” However, that law had been, in a way, deceptive. Despite that law the French courts are not able to mete out punishment to those who deny that the, “Armenian genocide,” happened.

  Meanwhile, according to the Gayssot Act passed in 1994, denying the Holocaust is punishable by law in France. This is because the Gayssot Act makes a reference to the verdicts in the Nuremberg trials held at the end of the World War II. The French parliament's aforementioned law regarding the, “Armenian genocide,” is a different story. That decision has not gained legal effect in the absence of a genocide judgment delivered by a competent court in line with Article 6 of the Genocide Convention.

  Now, the Socialist Party is suggesting a new bill that would make denial of the, “Armenian genocide,” punishable by law. They must have an important reason to violate international law in such a manner. Indeed, the latest reports coming from France indicate that Chirac is gradually dissociating himself from supporting our membership in the EU. He, too, is moving towards the idea that Turkey should be given a privileged partner status rather than full membership. It is more likely than not that he will seek re-election as president. To be able to compete with his probable opponent Nicolas Sarkozy, who gains points by opposing Turkish membership, Chirac had to act in the same manner. Would the Socialists ever let themselves be left behind?

  Meanwhile, President Bush made his April 24 statement. His not using the word “genocide” this time either has been welcomed. Yet, the reference he has made to the ICTJ report, in reality, amounts to an indirect recognition of the, “Armenian genocide.” Unfortunately, such a miserable report has gained for itself a place in a U.S. presidential statement. It might be good, though, if on this occasion we were able to find out who had written that report and how much money he had received for it and from whom exactly.

  Van Krikorian, a former member of the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC), was telling the truth when he said that Reagan had already described the incidents as genocide. Also, the non-legal terms other U.S. presidents have used in place of the word, “genocide,” in fact, mean that the Armenians have been, “destroyed.” In the latest instance the president talked about, “mass killings,” apparently staged by none other than the Ottoman administration. Turkey cannot accept all these accusations and rejoice just because the word, “genocide,” has not been used.

  The U.S. president is an extremely important figure of political authority but he is not a moral authority. Furthermore, there is no way he can deliver a judgment on this issue, a judgment that would have legal effect -- by putting himself in the place of a competent court.

  Leaving alone two vitally important countries that do not accept the genocide claims (Britain and Israel), one could say that we are faced with a political attack from the West. Regardless of the price to be paid, Turkey will never accept these allegations. Our struggle must gain the dimensions of a national struggle. Incidents are forcing us to take measures that would go beyond the joint commission of historians we proposed to Armenia. Article 33 of the U.N. Charter points at other ways of reaching a peaceful solution. From now on our interlocutor is not Armenia alone.

  Let us be prepared.