France passes genocide bill, angry Turkey cuts ties

[asianobserve]

Erdogan believes that the West is irreversibly on the decline and that Turkey is well positioned to take over the power vacuum created by this decline. So if his calculation is correct, most of the time he is right, then be prepared guys for a Turkish rule on the ME, Pakistan's pride.

 

[ejazr]

But do the French deny their history ? Armenian genocide is denied in Turkish history books (somewhat like Pakistan denying the Bangladeshi genocide)

Does France have a law that makes it a criminal offense to deny the Algerian people were butchered when the demanded independence. We are talking upwards of 2 million Algerians here much more than the Armenian genocide figures. Or what about the massacres during the French occupation of Indo-China which later resulted in the US intervention in which millions of Vietnamese died, and many millions were disfigured and suffered disabilities. AFAIK, it doesn't, but I could be wrong.

I am glad you brought up the Bangladeshi example, and we see that when this massacre was happeing, the French were siding with Pakistan instead of India. And do you think they have a bill on the cards for making the denial of the Bangladeshi genocide a criminal offence. No, because there are no French Bengali votes that Sarkozy has to cater for.

Are you equating the Armenian genocide to what happens in Kashmir ?

The comparison as clearly stated in my post was regarding making the denial of the genocide a criminal offense to please a particular vote bank. There is ofcourse no comparison between the 1 million Armenians killed during WW1 or the 2 million+ Algerians killed by the French colonialists or the 3million+ Bengalis starved to death by the British during WWII and the 40-5000 deaths in the 20 year Kashmir conflict of which about half are really civilian deaths and the rest are combatant deaths.Even the civilian deaths include majority Kashmiri Muslims killed by Pakistan based militants who didn't tow their line.

But the idea that instead of focusing on their own atrocities first, it doesn't make any real-politik sense to antagonize a NATO ally. Is'nt this hurting French long term interests for the sake of the next elections? Compare this to what the Germans did by making denial of the holocaust of Jews a crime. Or like the Australians, that recognized the atrocities committed by the British against the Aboriginal population and promised them compensation and an official apology from the govt. and PM for the actions done against them. This would be the way to go for France by recognizing its own history and correcting the wrongs done by it.

In short, my example was to show that a realist view would make it natural for the Turks to be angry on being singled out on the Armenian genocide bill, particularly when it is so obvious that he is catering to some half a million Armenian voters in a tightly contested French election. You may not be aware but there are constituencies in Britain that is dominated by Mirpuris from POK that form a considerable chunk of the voters. And there have been attempts to "recognize" a Kashmiri genocide and 36 UK parliamentarians actually signed a pledge that basically damns India on this account. Now, if there was no other counter-force that kept his madness at bay and for some reason the UK parliament did actually pass such a resolution, do you think GoI would welcome it or take a harsh diplomatic stand against it and ask the UK to first recognize the atrocities it has committed under its Colonial rule?

 

[ejazr]

A million victims who died in a deliberate carnage for alleged treachery cannot be compared to victims of collateral damage.

The comparison does not make sense.

Its a crime to deny Holocaust in West Europe..one more comparable genocide is added to the list.

BTW I think Turkey is punching above its weight. A big facepalm to Erdogan.

I am not passing a comment on the Armenian genocide and wether it actually happened or not. What I am describing is from a geopolitical perspective, the saneness of having a law that makes it a criminal offence to deny that is occurred. How can you even discuss this event when a contrary view point is a criminal offense. The massacre is said to have occurred as part of the First world war in a conflict zone. In the same war, roughly a 250,000Turks were also killed in the neighboring Balkan and Russian allied states and a million ethnic Turks expelled from these countries. After all, until WWII, it was called the great war and many terrible tragedies happened and a lot of civilians lost their lives in both wards. The Dresden bombings of Germany is an example where within 3 days, continuous allied bombing created firestorms and killed an estimated 300 000- to half a million Germans. In just three days!

But leaving aside the morality and history aside, my main point again was from a realist perspective of International Relations, targeting Turkey, a NATO ally in such a way doesn't make sense unless France wants to worsen relations with Turkey. Lets take a look at another example. When Pakistan committed a genocide - certainly larger than the Armenian given that there was no World war going on at that time as well, not a peep was heard from the Western governments. Infact, India was declared the aggressor and the US, UK and France brought in resolutions to charge India as such which was vetoed away by the USSR. On the other hand, in the 92-93 when the Kashmir insurgency was at its peak, Pakistan tried to bring a resolution to condemn India for a far less situation in terms of number of deaths and systematic extermination that was taking place in East Pakistan and had full western backing for it. It was only Iran pulling out in the last minute from the sponsored resolution that prevented it from going through.

For intellectual and moral reasons, the massacres and genocides should be discussed in a free atmosphere with no laws that makes it a criminal offence to either deny or propose that it took place. But when it comes to International Relations, the genocide card has been used as a tool to further geopolitical interests were convenient. And that is just a fact of life. Even for example when the USSR invaded Afghanistan which resulted in millions of Afghans being killed later, India under Indira although against the invasion never took USSR to task publicly about it, because geopolitical, USSR was the only superpower that was standing by us at that time. It might be morally wrong to have done that, but when you look at Geo-politics, you can always be morally right. And the way western countries behave on this is an example of that.

 

[mayfair]

You may not be aware but there are constituencies in Britain that is dominated by Mirpuris from POK that form a considerable chunk of the voters. And there have been attempts to "recognize" a Kashmiri genocide and 36 UK parliamentarians actually signed a pledge that basically damns India on this account. Now, if there was no other counter-force that kept his madness at bay and for some reason the UK parliament did actually pass such a resolution, do you think GoI would welcome it or take a harsh diplomatic stand against it and ask the UK to first recognize the atrocities it has committed under its Colonial rule?

The big difference is that there is NO such "Kashmiri genocide" carried out by the government of India or GOI agencies. The ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pundits from the valley was carried out by the Paki-backed terrorists. If the UK parliament ever does pass such a resolution, Indian government and the British people of Indian descent in the UK, would be fully justified in being outraged and condemning such an action.

The Turks ACTUALLY massacred Armenians so while they are fully justified in taking up a harsh diplomatic stand at being singled out by the French, whose own record is far from exemplary, it is totally different from the scenario you have posted above.

Heck, all countries do what is in their best interests, fairplay be damned. Some commentators in India have spoken about Nazis but have hardly uttered a peep against the slaughter of 10 million by Stalin (which included Russians, Ukranians, Latvians, Belarusians, Estonians, Tartars, Cossacks, Orientals among others), or the genocide of the Tibetans by the Chinese or the cultural revolution.

 

[ejazr]

The big difference is that there is NO such "Kashmiri genocide" carried out by the government of India or GOI agencies. The ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pundits from the valley was carried out by the Paki-backed terrorists. If the UK parliament ever does pass such a resolution, Indian government and the British people of Indian descent in the UK, would be fully justified in being outraged and condemning such an action.

I was comparing the reaction mayfair, not whether a Kashmiri genocide actually took place. If you don't like that example, lets say that UK passes a bill to make it a criminal offence to even deny that an "apartheid regime" against Dalits in India exists. How would GoI react? In fact, the UN actually published a report saying such in which the Indian delegation rejected the label. The Indian AG Ghoolam Vanhavati rejected the comparison of caste with racial discrimination. UN body slams India on Dalit violence - World News - IBNLive

The French ALREADY recognized the Armenian genocide back in 2001 and there was no reaction as such from the Turks then. The anger here is on the bill that makes it a criminal offense to even deny that it took place. This is quite rich particularly when you want to maintain freedom of expression as Armand mentioned. What I am doing here is asking Indians to put themselves in the same shoes by citing a few examples and consider whether the angry Turkish reaction was expected or not? Why should it be a surprise?

And of course completely agree with your last paragraph. It is a matter of convenience someones killings of civilians is collateral damage while for others its genocide. And we don't have to go back so far in history. In the 1990s, Iraq was under sanctions that resulted in the deaths of 500,000 children alone, let alone adults and that was not called a genocide or even a matter of concern because supposedly Saddam was so evil. When the sanctions in actual fact had not been affected by it at all.

 

[mayfair]

Agree with your points ejaz. Again your point about India being attacked with a caste stick, GoI can justifiably point out the measures they have taken post-independence to ameliorate the situation- affirmative actions, outlawing caste-based discrimination by statute, the rise of several political leaders from the oppressed classes tec. The situation is ahrdly different from what the US and other western democracies have done with respect to Blacks for instance. Discrimination still exists- againsts Dalits in India and the Blacks in the US. But this is not institutionalised.

Germans have apologised for the crimes of the Nazis. So have the Japanese to the Koreans. The Russians, the French, the British, the Turks and the Chinese have yet to express much regret for the acitions of their predecessors. I reiterate, the Turks are completely justified in their reaction, it's their prerogative, but comparing their situation with India is akin to apples and oranges. Turks are free to hit back with a resolution on Algerian genocide.

 

[LurkerBaba]

The big difference is that there is NO such "Kashmiri genocide" carried out by the government of India or GOI agencies. The ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pundits from the valley was carried out by the Paki-backed terrorists. If the UK parliament ever does pass such a resolution, Indian government and the British people of Indian descent in the UK, would be fully justified in being outraged and condemning such an action.

I was comparing the reaction mayfair, not whether a Kashmiri genocide actually took place. If you don't like that example, lets say that UK passes a bill to make it a criminal offence to even deny that an "apartheid regime" against Dalits in India exists. How would GoI react? In fact, the UN actually published a report saying such in which the Indian delegation rejected the label. The Indian AG Ghoolam Vanhavati rejected the comparison of caste with racial discrimination. UN body slams India on Dalit violence - World News - IBNLive

And of course completely agree with your last paragraph. It is a matter of convenience someones killings of civilians is collateral damage while for others its genocide. And we don't have to go back so far in history. In the 1990s, Iraq was under sanctions that resulted in the deaths of 500,000 children alone, let alone adults and that was not called a genocide or even a matter of concern because supposedly Saddam was so evil. When the sanctions in actual fact had not been affected by it at all.

Agree, there is no such thing as absolute morality. Countries just preach morality to to justify their agenda. I would love if India drops it's idealistic moral lecturing to ALL issues

 

[Zebra]

Turkey, France Row May Jeopardize Missile Sale

By PIERRE TRAN , Published: 23 Dec 2011 08:01

PARIS - Turkey's suspension of military cooperation with France may make it harder to sell the Franco-Italian Aster 30 air defense missile to the Turkish authorities, a defense executive said Dec. 23.

Ankara froze bilateral defense cooperation and recalled its ambassador to France in retaliation to a new French law making it illegal to deny that genocides took place, including the deaths of Armenians in 1915.

"It doesn't make things easier, that's for sure," the executive said. "That makes relations tense with France."

Eurosam, a joint venture between French electronics company Thales and European missile maker MBDA, is prime contractor for the Sol-Air Moyenne Portée/Terrestre (SAMP/T) ground-based air defense system.

The SAMP/T system is competing in Turkey's tender for a long-range air and missile defense system. It is ranged against the Patriot missile from Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, the S300 from Russia's Rosoboronexport, and the HQ-9 from China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corp. (CPMIEC).

MBDA's team in Turkey is led by its Italian side, as there are strong industrial ties between Italy and Turkey, including cooperation between AgustaWestland and Turkish Aerospace Industries on the T-129 light attack helicopter.

"The SAMP/T offer in Turkey is officially made by Eurosam "¦ but MBDA's Italian arm has effectively been the front office for the offer for a while now due to the ongoing friction between Turkey and France due in part to the genocide issue," said an Italian industrial source.

The SAMP/T is based on the MBDA Aster 30 missile and Thales Arabel multifunction radar. France and Italy were launch customers of the SAMP/T.

Between 2006 and 2010, France delivered a total 203.6 million euros of arms to Turkey, the latest annual report to parliament on French foreign military sales showed.

That made an annual average 40 million euros, or around 1 pct of average annual sales of 4 billion-5 billion euros.

As part of Ankara's response to the new law, French military aircraft cannot overfly or land on Turkish territory, French warships may not dock at its ports, and joint military exercises are canceled.

"From now on, we are revising our relations with France," Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, AFP reported.

French lawmakers adopted the new law Dec. 22.

Turkey, France Row May Jeopardize Missile Sale - Defense News

 

[Zebra]

Israel Cancels Air Surveillance Deal With Turkey: Paper

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE , Published: 22 Dec 2011 16:19

JERUSALEM - Israel has cancelled the sale of air surveillance equipment to Turkey over fears that it might fall into the hands of countries hostile to the Jewish state, the Haaretz daily said Dec. 22.

The report said that the contract was signed in 2008 with Elbit Systems and worth some $140 million.

Ynetnews, reporting the same story, said both the defense ministry and Elbit had confirmed the cancellation.

Haaretz's website said the decision was made "out of security concerns, principally in consideration of Turkey's ties with enemy states of Israel, particularly Iran."

It said the defense ministry highlighted that "we do not allow such advanced technology to fall into other hands, in this way the system can fall into enemy hands."

Export of any military equipment or defense technology is subject to ministry approval.

Haaretz said that, when asked about the cancellation, a security official said "ties with Turkey are extremely important to the state, but we have a security responsibility over any product that is given approval for export."

Once-flourishing Turkish-Israeli ties plunged into deep crisis last year when Israeli forces killed nine Turks in a raid on a Turkish ferry, part of an activist flotilla carrying aid to Gaza.

Israel Cancels Air Surveillance Deal With Turkey: Paper - Defense News

 

[Ray]

Turkey does not recognise that there was a genocide perpetuated on the Armenians.

 

[Tshering22]

Erdogan believes that the West is irreversibly on the decline and that Turkey is well positioned to take over the power vacuum created by this decline. So if his calculation is correct, most of the time he is right, then be prepared guys for a Turkish rule on the ME, Pakistan's pride.

Well the West is indeed on a decline as a whole but Individual western countries like France and Germany aren't. In fact, Germany is still growing at 2%, which in face of recession is a big thing. While West might be declining, Turkey must know that 100% of its weapons are either Western or rely on western inputs being locally made. Which means that while they are moving towards self reliance (much faster than us Indians), they still cannot take such an adamant stand on short term basis.

Whatever reasonable attitude Turkey got after Ottoman collapse was because of adhering to Kemalist thinking. While Pakistanis are suicidally unthoughtful and have nothing to lose except lives, Turkey cannot afford to do that with the stability and development they worked all these years for. In fact, Erdogan's calculation if gone wrong can cause a big problem within Turkey' divided polity. While Greece and Armenia are miles behind Turks today, their internal disagreements will cause more problems. Removing nationalist generals, rational military personnel, declaring Ergenekon as parallel to PKK, etc is only going to piss at least 50% of Turkey which is not pleased to have Erdogan. Which is why to deviate attention, I believe Erdogan meddled with Israel at a time when internal disillusion was catching up with his party AKP with that Flotilla Incident.

 

[Tshering22]

But one thing I admire in Turkish current regime is that they have the political will and dedication to take the hard decisions; something which our current fake regime lacks in India.