Turkey suspends all ties with France after approval of Armenian genocide bill

[News_Editor]

Turkey suspends all ties with France after approval of Armenian genocide bill

2011-12-23 11:00:20 GMT+7 (ICT)

ANKARA/PARIS (BNO NEWS) -- The Turkish government on Thursday suspended all ties with France after the lower chamber of its parliament approved a draft bill which would criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide during World War I, officials said.

Lawmakers in France's National Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favor of the draft law, which proposes a prison sentence of up to one year and a fine of 45,000 euros ($58,000) for those who deny or 'outrageously minimize' the 'genocide' of Armenians by the Ottoman government during World War I. It also criminalizes other genocides recognized by France.

Turkey has reacted with outrage to the approval of the draft bill and immediately suspended all economic, political and military meetings with France. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan also said Ankara would cancel permission for French military planes to land and warships to dock in Turkey.

Erdogan said the proposed law is 'too heavy and difficult' and opens old wounds. "There is no such thing as a genocide in our history," the prime minister said, claiming the bill is based on 'racism, discrimination and xenophobia.'

"I ask the following question: Is there freedom of thought in France, is there freedom of expression? I am giving the answer: no. This is a free discussion environment being eliminated," Erdogan added. "Unfortunately, the French Revolution, known as a symbol of liberty, equality and fraternity, has been trampled on by the parliament of France today."

Meanwhile, the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs accused France of using the genocide bill for 'electoral purposes' ahead of next year's presidential elections in which President Nicolas Sarkozy faces a tough re-election battle.

"This law proposal constitutes a grave example of politicization of history on account of narrow political calculations and stifling of freedom of expression by a democratic institution," a spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said. "France has thus preferred to ignore the universal values which it had a share in developing."

The spokesperson pointed out that the proposed law restricts the freedom of expression of all academics and researchers who are looking at historical events from different perspectives. The Ministry said the law will be unable to prevent the expression of views developed on scientific bases, and said Turkey cannot accept the 'unilateral imposition of memory.'

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it has recalled its Ambassador to France for consultations in Ankara. "In the forthcoming period, which constitutes a test for France, we expect that necessary actions will be taken before the damage caused by this initiative on our bilateral relations reaches more severe dimensions, and we hope that ultimately common sense and reason will prevail," the spokesperson added.

Others have also expressed concern about France's plans to criminalize genocide denial. "I fully acknowledge the humanitarian intentions of those members of the National Assembly who authored and supported this proposal," said Dunja Mijatović, the Representative on Freedom of the Media at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). "However, I believe that the final adoption of these legal amendments would raise serious concerns with regard to international standards of freedom of expression."

Mijatović said the French bill could also have international effects. "It could set a precedent internationally for politically construed, ad-hoc criminalization of public debates," she said. "Criminalization of debates on history's true course, even of obviously false and offensive statements about a nation's tragic moment, is not conducive to a better understanding among people, communities and authorities of OSCE participating States."

Mijatović further said she fears the passing of this law by a nation with a great history of press freedom might prompt other countries in the OSCE region to follow France's example and similarly criminalize historical statements in violation of their OSCE commitments which aim at encouraging free discussion on issues of public interest.

"A proliferation of national prohibitions on particular statements related to the culture and history of different nations and regions would render international free-speech standards inapplicable and subordinate them to a plethora of fragmented national strategies on regulation of speech and expression," she added.

The French Senate, the upper house of parliament, will debate the bill next year before it goes before a vote.

It is estimated that between 600,000 and 1.5 million people of the Armenian population were killed by the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1923, but Turkey has refused to use the word 'genocide' to describe the events. Numerous countries have officially recognized the Armenian Genocide, including France.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-12-23

[Steely Dan]

It truly is amazing how far Turkey is able to spit it's dummy out of the pram. The words about press freedom and freedom of expression are particularly rich considering how many journalists Erdogan has thrown in jail for not towing the party line, alas given time he will completely reverse Turkey's position as the first and only Muslim democracy which Ataturk took decades to build.

[Scott]

If Erdogan goes to France, will he be subject to jail time and fine for minimizing the genocide?

[Orac]

It does seem to be a politically motivated piece of legislation which will play well to the right wing in France and set Turkey up for a diplomatic set to with a major EU player and thus set them well back in any unlikely to be realised plans they have for joining the EU.

I suppose they could always get their own back by creating their own law making it an offence to deny that France collaborated with the Axis powers in World War II and assisted them in the rounding up of Jews in the unoccupied areas of France that they retained control over thus making them complicit in the Holocaust.

Though it is important to remember what happenned in the past it must be remembered that nearly all countries have been involved in horrific activities in their history - colonial powers possibly more than most - and for these incidents to be raked over for political gain is a dubious practice.

As for the Turks, I think it is sorry state of affairs when they are being criticised for something that happenned nearly 100 years ago when their current treatment of both their Kurdish population and the bombing of Kurdish areas over the border in Iraq is shocking and abhorent yet barely mentioned by most mainstream media outlets.

[nidieunimaitre]

If Erdogan goes to France, will he be subject to jail time and fine for minimizing the genocide?

NO.

HISO never take real action against other HISO.

At the best, they will organise a Great War, and let the LOSO at both sides die.

Once you are seeted in a pluche armchair, why would you make waves?

We call certain states Rogue or Terrorist or Ax of evil, and next organise buffets for their delegates.

Live and let die.

The LOSO will look and do nothing, perhaps winge.

Yes, my nickname is Kropotkin.

[Scott]

I don't remember who said it, but "When the rich make war, the poor die."

[Steely Dan]

If Erdogan goes to France, will he be subject to jail time and fine for minimizing the genocide?

You have a good point there. I'm reminded of a UK law change allowing universal jurisdiction for crimes against humanity, which was used by some to threaten to have Israeli politicians arrested if they set foot in the UK. I suspect the realpolitik of the situation is that Erdogan would be perfectly safe to travel to Paris and say what he likes, just as holocaust denier Ahmadinejad seems to have no trouble attending the UN meetings in New York.

P.S I didn't mean to report you to yourself, but the new format makes that possible especially when I can't find my reading specs.

[KKvampire]

The madness of France . Making it illegal and imprisonment for a year and or huge fine for someone who "denies" Or "outrageously Minimizes" a genocide in another country.

I maintain as a British Citizen that the PM David Cameron is a hero(as polls in the UK) for saying. "no " to Sarkozy and Merkel , but it makes his stand even better when the French President makes "juvenile" remarks and French Bankers stamp their feet at Britain showing some "independence" (at last).

As France likes to show it's "independent" foreign policy on an issue with Turkey a country the UK and others in Europe would like to join the EU , but surprise surprise , the Franco/German axis oppose, C'est La Vie

[geriatrickid]

If Erdogan goes to France, will he be subject to jail time and fine for minimizing the genocide?

No. Diplomatic immunity.

However, if he goes to attend a rally condemning Israel, they may give him the Legion d'Honneur

ok, folks relax, that's tongue in cheek humour.

[bkkjames]

Feel free to get out of cyprus too!

[KKvampire]

Good comeback by the Turks, France in Algeria, Hypocrites.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/23/turkey-accuses-france-genocide-algeria

[TAWP]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

[geriatrickid]

Good comeback by the Turks, France in Algeria, Hypocrites.

http://www.guardian....enocide-algeria

Not hypocrites. The French had a longstanding presence in Algeria and they were fighting a civil war. The French were not in some far off colony, but in a region that was proximate to their nation and that at the time presented a fear that a loss would result in national security issues. Turks were focused on removing the presence of the Armenian Christians period. The French have recognized their wrongs, while the Turks have not. French school texts acknowledge the Algerian history, Turkish school books do not recognized the state sanctioned starvation and death march of the Armenians. Algerians have since obtained large aid packages as compensation and have a large community that has settled and prospered in France. Algerians could settle in France and enjoy all the benefits of citizenship. A stark contrast from Turkey which still discriminates against Armenian Christians and has waged a longstanding campaign of hate against the beleagured community who's sole crime was that of their faith, of being Christian. The arab world has rallied to the side of Turkey, whilst the west has sacrificed the Armenian Christians to the mobs, perhaps because the Armenians looked too much like those pesky jew people that Europeans love to hate. The hypocrisy is also in the Christian community that has not spoken out against the Armenian genocide.

[BookMan]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

Nuttiness might not go away, but sometimes it can be muffled, to the benefit of the vast majority.

[elgato]

Ancient history! Let's move on to more recent events.

[geriatrickid]

Ancient history! Let's move on to more recent events.

Oh, you mean something like the persecution of the kurdish minority in Turkey today or the persecution of the remaining Greek Christian community in Turkey? That's the result of failing to recognize and take responsibility for a previous genocide. The refusal of the world to hold Turkey accountable for past acts allows Turkey to repeat the same behaviours. This is why it is important that genocides be dealt with and remembered. One of the greatest benefits of the Holocaust Musuem in Washington DC is that it serves to remind people of the horrors of WWII, the Cambodian killing fields, the Rwandan genocide etc. IMO the reason why theUSA was so quick to speak out on the genocide in Darfur was because of the work of organizations such as the Holocaust Memorial Musuem. What France is doing will benefit Turkey because it reminds Turkey that some people do pay attention and that the Armenians are not forgotten. It just might make the Turks think twice before they carpet bomb the Kurdish civilian population.

[TAWP]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

Nuttiness might not go away, but sometimes it can be muffled, to the benefit of the vast majority.

Yes, I have already noted that many of you think that Freedom of Speech isn't important at all.

[BookMan]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

Nuttiness might not go away, but sometimes it can be muffled, to the benefit of the vast majority.

Yes, I have already noted that many of you think that Freedom of Speech isn't important at all.

Freedom of speech has its limits in any society, surely you would agree with that?

[Steely Dan]

Sadly when anyone tries to point out the truth about events which happened 80 years ago they get death threats; and the Turks made high handed noises about French democracy.

http://www.thelocal.fr/2124/

The French parliamentarian who proposed a controversial genocide denial bill has received death threats and had her website attacked.

Valérie Boyer, a member of the governing UMP party, was successful in getting parliamentary approval for a bill that outlawed the denial of a massacre of Armenians by Ottoman troops in 1915.

How very democratic.

[TAWP]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

Nuttiness might not go away, but sometimes it can be muffled, to the benefit of the vast majority.

Yes, I have already noted that many of you think that Freedom of Speech isn't important at all.

Freedom of speech has its limits in any society, surely you would agree with that?

Absolutely not!

To outlaw speech ahead of its usage, aka force censorship, is not freedom of speech and is by the very definition proof that there is none.

[geriatrickid]

Absolutely not!

To outlaw speech ahead of its usage, aka force censorship, is not freedom of speech and is by the very definition proof that there is none.

There is no outlaw of speech, nor a denial of freedom of speech. Rather it is a preservation of the truth. All that the law says is that it is illegal to propogate incorrect and discriminatory statements that deny the genocide of Armenians. It does not forbid scholarly discussions, nor historical review. The reason why the law is needed is that France's approximate 400,000 citizens of Armenian heritage suffer persecution and discrimination at the hands of a much larger group of French citizens that do not accept the Armenian genocide. The law is intended to protect this minority group from the continued discrimination. The law is about discrimination in France and protecting the Armenian minority.

I really do not see how one can equate a law that restricts lying with the intent to do harm, to inflict pain and to mislead, as a restriction of free speech. With your logic, laws on false advertising are also a restriction of free speech.

Edited December 27, 2011 by geriatrickid

[BookMan]

Absolutely not!

To outlaw speech ahead of its usage, aka force censorship, is not freedom of speech and is by the very definition proof that there is none.

So you believe that freedom of speech should be absolute? Perhaps that is a part of a utopian society that you would like to see?

I don't know of any country or society that has unbridled freedom of speech, do you?

Most countries have at least basic libel/defamation laws. That is a form of curtailing freedom of speech. I would argue that it is a good law in general.

Is there a democratic society you know of that allows incitement of violence? A general call to arms of the citizens against the government? Advocation of looting and pillaging? I cannot think of any, and in fact all democratic countries I know of have laws against publicly advocating all these things.

[Pakboong]

Absolutely not!

To outlaw speech ahead of its usage, aka force censorship, is not freedom of speech and is by the very definition proof that there is none.

There is no outlaw of speech, nor a denial of freedom of speech. Rather it is a preservation of the truth. All that the law says is that it is illegal to propogate incorrect and discriminatory statements that deny the genocide of Armenians. It does not forbid scholarly discussions, nor historical review. The reason why the law is needed is that France's approximate 400,000 citizens of Armenian heritage suffer persecution and discrimination at the hands of a much larger group of French citizens that do not accept the Armenian genocide. The law is intended to protect this minority group from the continued discrimination. The law is about discrimination in France and protecting the Armenian minority.

I really do not see how one can equate a law that restricts lying with the intent to do harm, to inflict pain and to mislead, as a restriction of free speech. With your logic, laws on false advertising are also a restriction of free speech.

Doesn't the matter have a lot to do with defining what actually is the truth and with whom the burden of establishing the truth actually rests? Since the Turks actually lost WW1 they do not get to write its history.

Academic review is a broad scope and has been shot down in several courtroom cases relating to academically reviewing the Jewish Holocaust of WW2.

[KKvampire]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

They have never been very politically correct in France, just rather superior, A nation who thinks it's open , multi cultural,pluralistic and then bans an item of clothing a particular religion wears, Yes Hypocrites,

http://www.smh.com.au/world/first-arrests-as-france-bans-burqa-20110412-1dbcg.html

But I think there will be lots of this in the run up to next years Presidential elections , as we have seen with Sarkozy's noises off against the British.

Edited December 27, 2011 by KKvampire

[geriatrickid]

Doesn't the matter have a lot to do with defining what actually is the truth and with whom the burden of establishing the truth actually rests? Since the Turks actually lost WW1 they do not get to write its history.

Academic review is a broad scope and has been shot down in several courtroom cases relating to academically reviewing the Jewish Holocaust of WW2.

This isn't about the Turks writing history. It is about a fact that some have gone to great lengths to deny. Please do you research. There are many Turkish Academics that believe the continued denial has caused more problems for Turkey than good. A genocide occurred. The cases to which you refer in respect to Holocaust deniers did not reflect genuine academic discussion. The arguments were used by people like Zundel and Irving to provide an excuse to promote their hateful and false polemics. No legitimate academic has ever been prevented from discussing the holocaust. You cannot name one, so why use a canard?

[geriatrickid]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

They have never been very politically correct in France, just rather superior, A nation who thinks it's open , multi cultural,pluralistic and then bans an item of clothing a particular religion wears, Yes Hypocrites,

http://www.smh.com.a...0412-1dbcg.html

But I think there will be lots of this in the run up to next years Presidential elections , as we have seen with Sarkozy's noises off against the British.

The law on the burqa was in respect to ensuring that France's public institutions retained their secular status. The intent of the law was to preserve France's right not to have religious views imposed on others. Many women were forced to wear the burqa. As well, the greater good of public security and peace of mind took precedence. It is unsettling to a great many people to be in the midst of those that conceal their identities. The fact of the matter, is that the burqa wearers knew that France was not Tunisia or Saudi Arabia when they arrive. The burqa law is very different from the protection of the Armenian minority law. As well, the Armenian genocide law is not forcing anything upon anyone.

[Steely Dan]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

They have never been very politically correct in France, just rather superior, A nation who thinks it's open , multi cultural,pluralistic and then bans an item of clothing a particular religion wears, Yes Hypocrites,

http://www.smh.com.a...0412-1dbcg.html

But I think there will be lots of this in the run up to next years Presidential elections , as we have seen with Sarkozy's noises off against the British.

I think you are correct in that a fair deal of politicking is behind this, but this did not happen in a vacuum; France has a large (even by European standards) and problematic immigrant population and multi-culturalism has clearly failed, so much so that French elections are now effectively between the right and the far right. I would be in favour of no laws against free speech, provided there is a basis in fact concerning what is said, but when it comes to dirty laundry I suspect that those complaining about this ' anti-free speech' legislation have far more to cover up themselves and Turkey has a record of locking up people who don't tow the party line.

Edited December 27, 2011 by Steely Dan

[KKvampire]

France is another EU nation falling for the social-fascism step of legislating PC and hoping that nuttiness goes away.

They have never been very politically correct in France, just rather superior, A nation who thinks it's open , multi cultural,pluralistic and then bans an item of clothing a particular religion wears, Yes Hypocrites,

http://www.smh.com.a...0412-1dbcg.html

But I think there will be lots of this in the run up to next years Presidential elections , as we have seen with Sarkozy's noises off against the British.

The law on the burqa was in respect to ensuring that France's public institutions retained their secular status. The intent of the law was to preserve France's right not to have religious views imposed on others. Many women were forced to wear the burqa. As well, the greater good of public security and peace of mind took precedence. It is unsettling to a great many people to be in the midst of those that conceal their identities. The fact of the matter, is that the burqa wearers knew that France was not Tunisia or Saudi Arabia when they arrive. The burqa law is very different from the protection of the Armenian minority law. As well, the Armenian genocide law is not forcing anything upon anyone.

wow, you really like to spin it your way, Many women came out in demonstration against the banning of the Burqa. whatever "Frances Intention" was it took away a persons right to wear some clothing connected to their religion, If there's one way of stirring up trouble with religion this was it.

And with regard to events with the Armenians, it's France inflaming the situation by deciding to make 'denial'of what it saw as a massacre, of any sort a criminal offence. Of course the French not exactly tactful , but we will see what racist overtones arise in the new year when politicians vying for votes when the Elsysee palace is up for grabs.

[Steely Dan]

wow, you really like to spin it your way, Many women came out in demonstration against the banning of the Burqa. whatever "Frances Intention" was it took away a persons right to wear some clothing connected to their religion, If there's one way of stirring up trouble with religion this was it.

And with regard to events with the Armenians, it's France inflaming the situation by deciding to make 'denial'of what it saw as a massacre, of any sort a criminal offence. Of course the French not exactly tactful , but we will see what racist overtones arise in the new year when politicians vying for votes when the Elsysee palace is up for grabs.

Burqas are not the issue here, as it stands they are banned from public places in Turkey due to the sterling job Attaturk did to get religion out of government, alas Erdogan is showing signs of reversing this process, which would be a crying shame.

[geriatrickid]

wow, you really like to spin it your way, Many women came out in demonstration against the banning of the Burqa. whatever "Frances Intention" was it took away a persons right to wear some clothing connected to their religion, If there's one way of stirring up trouble with religion this was it.

And with regard to events with the Armenians, it's France inflaming the situation by deciding to make 'denial'of what it saw as a massacre, of any sort a criminal offence. Of course the French not exactly tactful , but we will see what racist overtones arise in the new year when politicians vying for votes when the Elsysee palace is up for grabs.

Many women did not come out in protest over the Burqa restriction. It was the same group of Islamic zealots that protest anything in France perceived as interfering with the attempt to impose Islamic customs on a secular nation. The French are morally correct in addressing the continued propagation of hate speech and lies that seek to deny the Turkish state sanctioned and planned genocide of Armenians. The law is no different than laws in respect to false advertising. The assumption that France has done this for political means is incorrect. The deputy that introduced the bill has a long history of campaigning against genocides and human rights. There are approximately 5 million French nationals with origins in the Islamic world.Compare that to the estimated 400,000 French nationals with some Armenian heritage. Now throw in the approximate 350,000 French nationals of Turkish origins. To suggest that the French did this to win the election requires one to ignore that this will most likely cost the French government the support of the Islamic voting block.

Edited December 28, 2011 by Scott
formatting