NICOSIA, Cyprus (A.W.)—The Cypriot Parliament passed a resolution today making the denial of the Armenian Genocide a crime, reported Cyprus Mail.
“Today is a historic day. It allows parliament to restore, with unanimous decisions and resolutions, historical truths,” speaker of Parliament Yiannakis Omirou was quoted as saying by the Mail.
The bill, which was passed unanimously, will penalize denial of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes with a prison sentence of 5 years and a fine of 10,000 Euros, according to Armenpress.
A delegation led by Armenia’s National Assembly President Galust Sahakyan is on an official visit to the island, according to the official website of the National Assembly. The delegation, which arrived on April 1, met with representatives of the Armenian community, and visited the Armenian Genocide Memorial Complex in Nicosia. National Assembly Vice President Eduard Sharmazanov, deputies Vahram Baghdasaryan, Armen Mkhitaryan, Mikayel Manukyan, and Lyudmila Sargsyan are also part of the Armenian delegation.
Bravo, Cyprus!
These resolutions and laws always make me laugh:
“The bill, which was passed unanimously, will penalize denial of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes”
NO, Cyprus. You’re criminalizing Armenian genocide denial and taking a shot at Turkey. That’s what you’re doing. Who do they think they’re fooling? Passing a genocide criminalization bill on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, perpetrated by their joint mortal enemy? Do they really think we can’t see through what they really did by passing the law with an all encompassing language?
Just be honest about it, why is that so hard? Be honest and say “on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, we are criminalizing denial of this crime.” I would have welcomed the move by Cyprus had they just been open and honest about it. The same thing happened in France in 2011. That law was directly aimed at the Armenian genocide and Turkey. They also didn’t have the courage to be fully open and honest.
First of all, a nation that was also subjected to genocide at the hands of the Turks is more than justified to acknowledge and criminalize the Armenian Genocide at the hands of the same common racist enemy. Whether this move by Cyprus was politically-motivated or not is secondary.
What’s much more interesting and quite amusing is the reaction of a pseudo-Turk to this law. It seems like the cunning Turks are more than willing to dish it out to their victims but unable to take it. In any event, it appears the Turks just got a big dose of their own poisonous medicine shoved down their throats.
As long as we want to be honest about things, let’s take a closer look at the following:
1. Honestly, did Turkey close borders with Armenia in 1993 and in support of her pseudo-Turkish Azerbaijani step-cousins-in-crime and their artificial gas-station OR found a perfect opportunity and an excuse to punish the Armenians for their tenacious pursuit of justice against Turkey in the international arena for the preplanned and state-sponsored genocide of 1,500,000 Armenian women and children in 1915?
2. Honestly, did Turkey close borders with Armenia in support of her pseudo-Turkish Azerbaijani genocide collaborators or did it for cheap Azerbaijani oil?
3. Honestly, are the Turks and pseudo-Turkish Azerbaijanis “two nation, one state” when even the artificial gas-station of Azerbaijan herself doesn’t recognize the illegal Turkish republic of Northern Cyprus OR is this false motto merely a euphemism for pan-Turkism, which led to the deaths of millions of indigenous Christians on their homeland confiscated by the Turks, and an anti-Armenian nonsense exploited for their joint political aims against a common Armenian enemy?
4. Honestly, was the enactment of the Article 301 of Turkish Criminal Code about “Insulting Turkishness” OR the catalyst for permanently silencing, through planned murder, of the Turkish-Armenian journalist and editor-in-chief of Agos newspaper Hrant Dink who exercised his freedom of expression in “democratic’ Turkey to start a peaceful dialogue between the Turks and the Armenians about the Armenian Genocide?
5. Honestly, was the case against the racist Turkish politician Dogu Perincek, who adopted for his anti-Armenian organization the name of Talat Pasha the author and mastermind of the Armenian Genocide, before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) about his rights to freedom of expression in a foreign country when the citizens of his own country are denied of the very same rights he is seeking OR about the right to deny the Armenian Genocide?
5. I can go on but I think you catch my drift.
If you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen!
To RVDV
I don’t know what to call you. You don’t even have the courage to come out with a NAME like most of us DO.
Its the beginning. Bravo Cyprus.
Ararat: my point clearly went over your head.
Zohrab: you’re a real hero, using your name. They should give you a medal or something.
Since 1915 Turkish government(s) used “Western Civilization” and democracy as a tool to justify and falsify Armenian Genocide, for their own term and survival. Today’s Turkey’s AKP leadership, and Rajab Erdughan is not different from the past Turkish ruling governments.
Of course, Cyprus is the victim of Turkish aggravated military adventurism, where they intervened against “weak ” Cyprus internal affair in 1974. Cyprus lost their northern historical part to newly decorated Ottomans with the help of world’s anti Soviet forces.
Same scenario happened during WW1 when a weak exhausted Armenia lost Western part to newly crowned Turkey with the help of Bolshevik Lenin and Uncle Joe!
latest Cyprus decision about AG denial, is a key to EU, where Cyprus is a
member, who will vote against Turkey to join with European Union!
Thank you, Cypriot Parliament, for unanimously passing this resolution.
to RVDV- WHAT ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT, THE TRUTH?
it keeps me up at night.
Mixed emotion I have I want to say thank-you yet as RVDV said making it a crime is dangerous waters in your face Ill show you type politics We can not look like hate filled unforgiving barbarians guilty they are but we cant take blows to their already arrogant prideful and hate filled attitudes you get more from honey than vinager an acknowledgement of what they know happened everyone knows might have been better
It depends. Is any recognition good recognition- like Israel, Egypt, Syria bringing up the issue after relations with Turkey soured? Or to take the moral high ground? I don’t have an answer, I’d say choose the latter, but I also dont think its my place to give Armenians advice on how to feel about their issue. Just something to think about.
RVDV,
When you say about Cyprus “You’re criminalizing Armenian genocide denial and taking a shot at Turkey”, you are admitting the criminal nature of Turkey in fact, because if Turkey was any kind of normal nation on solid footing as a lawful nation, it would not be a shot at Turkey, but rather Turkey would be thanking Cyprus and joining it instead.
But Turkey was founded by criminality, and it also exists on the foundation of the same. That is why Turkey needs its bloated military, because if the offensive capability provided by NATO of the criminal state was to wane, Turkey would collapse as a nation, since it has committed too many crimes which it has not answered to, and which it has gotten away with thanks to the NATO-Russia conflict. If this east-west conflict did not exist, Turkey would outlive its usefulness and serve no purpose other than continue to exist as a criminal nation founded by crimes against humanity.
“When you say about Cyprus “You’re criminalizing Armenian genocide denial and taking a shot at Turkey”, you are admitting the criminal nature of Turkey in fact..”
When have I ever denied the criminal nature of Turkey?
“If this east-west conflict did not exist, Turkey would outlive its usefulness and serve no purpose other than continue to exist as a criminal nation founded by crimes against humanity.”
Probably. But that’s a big IF. East-West conflict isn’t going anywhere.
Now about the European ideal of criminalizing Genocide denial. As Americans this is a concept which cannot be accepted since it violates the principle of “freedom of expression”. But in order to understand the European perspective, we need to realize that such laws are not “anti-freedom of expression” per se, but rather “anti-spread of hatred”. This latter is not much of a concern in the US, because the “mainstream media” is pretty much controlled by one entity, and the day-in and day-out indoctrination of the masses disguised as “news” is fairly consistent and cleverly manipulated to be one-sided while outwardly appearing to be “opposing viewpoints”.
In several European countries denial of the holocaust is a criminal offense. This is not acceptable to me so long as the same is not true of the Armenian Genocide, or other accepted genocides. Unless this law is consistent, then basically by criminalizing the denial of one genocide and not others, it is the same as propagating racism, hypocrisy, double standards, favoritism and corruption.
So I would also not have a problem if denial of the Armenian Genocide is not a criminal offense, so long as the same becomes true of the holocaust. Where truth is concerned, the Armenian Genocide is undeniable and thus, the law must not be contradictory but consistent.
I read RVDV’s post several times, and do not see why some compatriots are so upset.
I don’t see him objecting to the law itself, rather the fact that Turkey is not explicitly mentioned as the real target of the laws.
And therefore, somehow, it is less than courageous or honest.
He is wrong in his assessment, but I don’t see him being “….worried about the truth”.
He specifically wrote: “I would have welcomed the move by Cyprus had they just been open and honest about it”.
Is there something in the post I am not seeing others do ?
Regarding the names used by posters:
I have seen this raised on many previous occasions by various people.
Again, what is the big deal here ?
Sometimes people use a pseudonym, or the full name, or just the first, or initials, or….whatever.
What difference does it make ?
Do people really think that someone cannot make up a fake full name and post under it ?
Regarding RVDV:
For those who do not know him: RVDV has told us previously that he was born a Kurd in Turkey, but for various reasons of his own, chooses to be identified as a Turk*. He lives in the US now.
He has been posting @AW for quite some time, maybe a couple of years, and makes no secret that his sympathies lie with the country of his birth, Turkey, and the people of Turkey.
But RVDV has been uniformly fair in his comments re Armenians vis-à-vis Turks & Turkey.
He regularly and proactively challenges AG denialists that occasionally show up @AW (…without any prompting from our side).
The tone of his writings indicate to me that he genuinely abhors what Turks have done to Armenians during the AG.
RVDV:
I think you are being unrealistic in demanding that “Turkey” be specifically mentioned in the laws.
You know quite well that diplomatic language is by design ambiguous.
Same with the law: legislature writes the law in such a way that is somewhat ambiguous: not too broad, not too narrow.
Then, the courts get to hash it out for years and years before it becomes crystallized – if ever.
Turkey knew it was the target of the French AG law, that is why it pulled all stops to kill it: very strange behaviour, considering Turkey denies any guilt re AG.
And I think considering the real military and other threats Republic of Cyprus faces from Turkey, it was very courageous of that little country to pass that law. Turkish leadership knows very well which genocides the Cypriot law refers to: Armenian, Assyrian, and Pontic Greek.
Furthermore, if you look up the language of the Holocaust Denial laws of several countries, few mention “Holocaust” specifically.
In particular, the French Gayssot Act, which is considered a Holocaust Denial punishment law, does not mention either Holocaust or Jewish in its language at all: it punishes “… those who have disputed the existence of one or more crimes against humanity”.
Surely there is no Nazi Germany for the French to fear: so why wouldn’t they specifically mention Jewish Holocaust ?.
So there you have it.
—-
* not an exact analogy, for obvious reasons, but when I was growing up in Armenia, there were ethnic Russians who were born in Armenia, and who insisted they be called ‘Armenian’: they felt they were Armenian.
“I think you are being unrealistic in demanding that “Turkey” be specifically mentioned in the laws.
You know quite well that diplomatic language is by design ambiguous.”
Maybe by countries like France which have important economic and NATO ties to Turkey but Cyprus? Turkey occupies 40% of the island as it is. I doubt mentioning Turkey specifically could do any more damage to relations. Yes there’s a military threat, situations got tense over Cyprus drilling for oil recently, but what’s Turkey going to do? Invade the rest of Cyprus? No way.
Question for RVDV:
I have never believed that Turks really, truly protest the attribution of Genocide to ancestors. Turks brag of martial prowess and name their kids Cengiz even though the Mongols killed their cousins w gusto.
I believe this is stagecraft. I think the key to understanding denialism is also not really economic. That is a gov concern.
The reason the Turk in the street denies the Genocide is because it pertains to what turks view as a dhimmi subhuman Christian race – us. Because Diasporans, other Christians and Europeans also look down on Turks we do not realize Turks in the Kemalist and post Kemalist ages see themselves as a superior people.
We heard from our families about what amount to Turkish uneducated Hillbillies. However, our ancestors who came from Bolis had a more accurate and worldly view of the Turks in the capital. Even the OE rulers looked down on the Turk Hillbilly. Ataturk elevated the Turk’s view of himself with risible racial science and goofy jingles, but it stuck. Turks think they are a superior race. We are the Jews of this scenario.
I think that is the source of denialism – how dare these infidels embarrass us in the world. They don’t know their place.
jda: you asked a very similar question in another thread and I think you may not have seen my reply, here it is:
——-
I think you’re right in how Turks of today are being taught to view themselves. We descend from a the rulers of an empire, who conquered east and west, and that sort of stuff. This despite things like the Ottoman elite referring to themselves as “Ottomans” and referring to the Muslims in the fields and villages as “Turks.” The same thing happened in the early Republican era, the elite in Istanbul and Ankara were “white Turks” and the Anatolian commoners were “black Turks.” But then again, falling victim to retroactive self-glorification and sanitizing history isn’t a uniquely Turkish attribute/problem.
“They saw themselves as conquerors of lesser peoples, especially Christians, but Arabs too. I think that the true source of Turkish opposition to Genocide recognition is not the supposed offense of calling Grandpa a murderer”
I’m not sure if I agree. The view of Turks being a superior race and nationalist tendencies like that surely play a role but the murderer ancestor thing is more significant than you give it credit for. It’s not just the desire to not call grandpa a murderer. To accept that the Armenian genocide happened, is, as many scholars have pointed out, is to accept that our “Turkish nation” is founded on murder. Germany existed before the Nazis, the Young Turks and its members literally created Turkey. The narrative we are taught is that our glorious forefathers saved us from the puppet Ottoman regime, evil foreign influence, invasion, and occupation. WE are the good guys in that story. WE fought off evil. If you accept the Armenian genocide, the founding myth of the Turkish republic comes crashing down.
of course the greeks would criminalize blindly they were the ones that wanted to unit cyprus with greece kick out the natives that have lived and coexisted with each other but,
wernt the greeks the ones that wanted exclusivity over all others on the island if turkey hadn’t have landed it definitely would have been a far worse bloodbath , the sos’s were coming flowing in from cyprus turkey investigated went to the brits went to the greeks in greece and implored them went to zurich and the USA and requested that the 3 gaurentors that they all together jointly go to Cyprus and stop the nationalist violence and terrorist EOKA as there were greek killing greeks supporters of the makarios the priest/polotian from cyprus and samsun the military man from greece whom were both trying to gain control samsun by assassination attempts on makarios and makarios by gaining the peoples support and his efforts .
the turks had exhausted all avenues of gaining any support to intervene in the esculating violance and deaths of greeks and turks ,viligers etc the greeks first started ther campain bombing the brits as they were staitioned there so they could go and leave just the turk cypriots and greeks to there own affairs ,the turks didnt want this and supported the brits ,so the greek terrorists eoka started agression on the turks ,the turks wernt just going to stand there and get massacred so they fought back the best they could but it was not enough ,the greek cypriopts were somewhat at odds with the greek junta from greece as they felt there hostile nature before they left due to the turkish going in alone ,
dont be fooled there more to cyprus excepting than you think , greeks did it unto thereselves ,the turks have a law that the greeks can go and reclaim there homes when ever they feel yet they wont they want the turkish army to go turks in the north say ,what so when they go you’ll get rid of us in time , cyprus was always meant to be shared but greek politicians and men in power ended that,the last paradise were you could leave your door open and go and come back and everything is still ok .
my grandparents only spoke greek .
{“ greece kick out the natives”}
That’s a good one, Uyguroğlu.
Turks are not quote ‘native’ to Cyprus.
Never were and never will be.
Turks are invaders from East and Central Asia.
Foreigners, not natives.
Invaders who massacred and ethnically cleansed natives of Cyprus centuries ago.
Turks are native to Uyguristan, near China.
[Davutoglu first visited the tomb of Mahmud Kashgari and then they toured the tomb of Yusuf Has Hajib as well the 500-year-old Id Khah Mosque, the largest mosque in China.
“We are visiting the land of our ancestors,” Davutoglu said.] (28 October 2010)
What fact requires so much protection? None.
Those Greeks are such peace loving people and they have no intentions other than assuring a future devoid of any crimes against fellow humans. Yea, sure. Have you ever checked into modern history of Greeks and Greek Cypriots.
You fail to see the irony and insult here.
Yeah, sure: Turks are the most ‘peace loving’ ethnos in the world.
And flocks of pigs fly over Cyprus every day.
And whatever alleged ‘crimes’ Greeks have committed against fellow humans, they don’t hold a candle to the invasions, thefts, arsons, looting, abductions, gang rapes, paedophilia, child rapes, child abductions, child murders, mass murders, murders, massacres, and genocides nomad Turks from Uyguristan have committed against the indigenous peoples of Asia Minor, Balkans, and Cyprus – amongst others.
Have you ever checked the ancient and modern history of Turks ? It is one long, uninterrupted crime story since 1000AD, Türkoğlu.