A Turkish court has ordered Nobel Prize-winning novelist Orhan Pamuk to pay 6,000 liras (about 4,000 USD) to six individuals—1,000 liras each—in compensation for insulting their “Turkishness” after citing the number of Kurds and Armenians killed in Turkey. He has two weeks to appeal the case.
Orhan Pamuk (Photo by Martin Godwin)
In February 2005, Pamuk told a Swiss newspaper, “Thirty-thousand Kurds and one million Armenians were killed in these lands, and nobody but me dares to talk about it.” Six individuals launched a lawsuit against the novelist, including the ultra-nationalist lawyer Kemal Kerincsiz who is a suspect in the alleged Ergenekon coup plot against the Turkish government. The five others are said to be relatives of soldiers killed during Turkey’s fight against “terrorism.” They claimed Pamuk “accused all Turkish people” in his words.
Initially, the suit was rejected by the court in Sisli, a district in Istanbul. The plaintiffs then appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals. In 2009, the court deemed the case worthy of consideration. The Sisli court then reevaluated the case, and on March 27, 2011, ordered Pamuk to pay compensation to the plaintiffs.
Some Turkish writers and intellectuals have expressed their outrage at the court’s decision. They have pointed out that Pamuk did not even use the word “Turk” in his comment. “So why did they file a lawsuit against him? And what will happen if everyone decides to file a lawsuit against Pamuk? Will he pay compensation to all of them? It is hard to accept the fact that we are pushing an author who brought the Nobel Prize to Turkey into a corner,” Oral Calislar, a journalist, writer, and one of the initiators of the apology campaign launched by Turkish intellectuals in December 2008, told the Sunday Zaman.
A world-renowned writer, Pamuk received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2006. His books have been translated into about 50 languages. His widely acclaimed novel Snow was translated into Armenian by the Hamazkayin Armenian Educational and Cultural Society in 2009, becoming the first literary work by a Turkish author to be translated into Armenian since the country regained its independence from the Soviet Union.
Bedrosyan: Searching for Lost Armenian Churches and Schools in Turkey (1,391)
Erdogan ‘Apologizes’ for Dersim Killings, Insults Diaspora (548)
Mouradian: Voir Ani et Mourir: Dispatches from Turkey (Part V) (518)
Vehanoush Tekian
April 4, 2011
Why on earth is Pamuk being ‘punished’ for speaking the truth, as he sees it? He has closed the chapter on it by embracing total silence about the issue.
I was present when he gave an interview at Columbia University, NY, right after winning the Nobel Prize. Apparently he was scared for his life, for almost a year and a half then he was hiding at an undisclosed location in the vicinity of Columbia U.
During the event, in front of a packed audience, when he was asked by his interviewer, a philosopher (!!!) why did he have to use the word “Genocide” instead of reaction to revolutionaries or deportation or simply a bi-product of WWI? Pamuk answered the he said what he said, what he had written down as a writer of integrity, and that he was amazed and dismayed at the reaction of the Turkish government. “But this is over” he said. OVER.
In subsequent interviews he avoided answering questions about the Armenian genocide. He pulled out his bank account from Istanbul and settled in the United States. Then he started advocating that Turkey be included in The European Union.
What happened to your reasoning and writer’s integrity, Pamuk?
The incident raises two questions:
(a) If the position of the Turkish justice system is to never forget “a mistake” against the Turkish dignity or the nation as a whole, why does it expect that we forget what happened to the lively and already being exploited minority of Armenians in Istanbul, in Anatolia? It was “a mistake” one and a half million times over, and counting….
(b) If they have all the time and sense of responsibility to try and come up with a stupid decision of imposing fine on the writer who has dared to hurt the ‘dignity’ of some Turkish citizens, why have they failed, as to this day, to come up with a verdict (or even a decent trial) for the MURDER of our foremost journalist in Istanbul, the citizen Hrant Dink? The dignity of Dink’s family, his colleagues, and that of concerned Armenians all around the world – including a good number of decent Turkish intellectuals - has been hurt, damaged, crushed six million times over!
You see? The ratio is one against millions.
Turkish policies against Eupropean Union principles.
Karekin
April 4, 2011
Karo…do you think no one ever slanders Armenians with umbrella statements? It happens quite a bit in republican Turkish history. Until 1915 or so, Armenians are often cited as valuable contributors to the Ottoman Empire, but from that point on, courtesy of the the CUP and the ultranationalists, we became internal traitors, murderers, terrorists, etc. Don’t you reject that kind of verbiage as garbage? I would hope so. It is in that vein that I urge caution, but it seems that you already know as much.
Avery
April 4, 2011
Arsen:
Right, just as I suspected: very cultured and civilized of you, resorting to calling me names – ‘xenophobic’ : thank you very much.
I could return the favour (British spelling: thought you’d appreciate that), but I won’t.
My first clue was this sentence from your post: “….the Brits’ traditional policies in the broader Middle East or their alleged meddling in the Karabakh conflict,”
It’s not ‘alleged’: it’s a fact, Jack.
Here is the link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/british-mercenaries-for-azeri-war-government-turns-blind-eye-to-illegal-programme-to-supply-men-and-arms-for-conflict-between-two-former-soviet-republics-tim-kelsey-reports-1408968.html
It’s from your own, THE INDEPENDENT. You can read the entire article yourself, and see how much ‘allegation’ and evidence there is. However, here are some relevant passages:
[British mercenaries for Azeri war: Government turns blind eye to illegal programme to supply men and arms for conflict between
two former Soviet republics. Tim Kelsey reports TIM KELSEY Monday, 24 January 1994]
[THE GOVERNMENT has given tacit support to an illegal scheme to supply Azerbaijan with military backing in its war with Armenia,
according to a British peer who has admitted his own involvement. The Foreign Office also agreed yesterday that it knew of the project.]
As to ‘historical evidence’: your British overlords still have not recognized the Historical Fact of the Armenian Genocide.
Neither has my adopted country, USA – another, quote, ‘non-supporter’ of Turks and their denialist agenda.
So maybe historical evidence in the British eyes is not historical evidence if it does not suit their Imperial agenda ?
Or, historical evidence that supports their Imperial agenda – is neither historical nor evidence ?
And just to burst your bubble: there are a great many things I admire about the English/Anglo-Saxon people. The two that I always remind people of, as their unique contributions to humanity:
[1] The Rule of Law, all the way from Magna Carta to today: still an unequalled achievement.
[2] The US Constitution, conceived and implemented by Anglo-Saxons: a revolutionary, unprecedented document and idea in human history.
Boyajian
April 4, 2011
Nicely put, Vehanoush. Sadly, Turks self-righteously defend their insulted dignity in the face of truth, but after 96 years still can’t see that they owe the Armenian nation a sincere apology for virtually eliminating the Armenian presence on the Armenian Plateau of Asia Minor.
Murat
April 4, 2011
Every Turk I know also thinks that this harassement of our Nobel prize winner is embaressing and demeaning not to him but to the whole country and exposes once again the broken system of justice.
One wishes at least some of the hipocrytes here who jump up and down on their soap boxes here, would show the same sensitivity when folks who express opinions and even state facts about the Armenian myths are persecuted in various parts of Europe.
I personally disgree with Pamuk’s position on this issue, not to mention how embaressing for him to also so publically contradict well established facts of the matter as someone who is supposed to be more than familiar with historical topics. I can also sympathize with the mothers and fathers who lost a son or more in the war against the Kurdish insurgents, and millions of lives, mostly Kurdish, who were impacted by the PKK brutality. Another soldier was blown to pieces just this week. Pamuk Bey has never shed a tear for these boys yet.
All this makes Pamuk’s statement offensive but hardly a crime. Regardless, while folks are fully entiteled to their opinions but not their facts, freedom of speech should be protected for all. Turkey has a long way to go in this regard obviously, who can argue with that?
Avery
April 4, 2011
Murat:
“…..and even state facts about the Armenian myths.”
Care to list some of those, quote, ‘Armenian myths’, so we can discuss ?
Diran
April 5, 2011
The elephant in the room is Turkey’s allergic response to any truthful treatment of how and why it has insinuated itself into the good graces of European interests [read: Libya]. Let there be no mistake: neither Great Britain nor any other European government had any intrinsic interest in what Armenians suffered as subjects of the Ottoman Empire. Their interests were only pecuniary, and, despite the widespread outrage among the English public regarding the Armenian massacres, their leaders pressed forward with a completely amoral policy in relation to Turkey, one which ultimately enabled the Genocide. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deceiving himself/herself. We should insist on the truth while avoiding the folly of believing that any “great power” will sacrifice its material interests to take a moral stand.
Karekin
April 5, 2011
Karo – please check Murat’s post….see what I mean? Garbage propaganda went in for the last 90 years and now garbage comes out as facts, at least according to him and those who think like him. The actual myths he should be attacking are all related to creation of republican Turkey, the founders and the supporters – most of whom were criminals, murderers and thieves. Their creation myths exist only in Turkey and in the minds of their ardent supports, nowhere else. They post a photo of the supreme non-Turk in every shop, office and establishment…and no one can utter any truths about him, because he began the myths of the new Turkey and fostered them during his lifetime. Worshipping a fascist/racist leader who drank himself to death is unbecoming, but hey…why not? When a country is built entirely on lies, it all makes sense.
Boyajian
April 5, 2011
“One wishes at least some of the hipocrytes here who jump up and down on their soap boxes here, would show the same sensitivity when folks who express opinions and even state facts about the Armenian myths are persecuted in various parts of Europe.”
Murat, first of all, what myths and what persecution? Please give specific examples instead of making unproductive, provocative statements. Secondly, do you honestly wonder why Armenians find it satisfying when genocide deniers are held accountable by other nations and governments? Stop obfuscating and deal with the 96 years of denial of historical truths.
Where are the two million Armenians who lived in Asia Minor in 1915? Who killed them? Who is pretending they died because of ‘civil war’ and ‘unfortunate consequences of deportation?’ Who has tried to disguise historical Armenian remnants as ‘Seljuk ruins?’ Who is turning Armenia’s ancient churches into museums where worship is suppressed? Who ‘turkified’ countless Armenians in an effort to homogenize Turkey? Who teaches false history to their school children? Who is so afraid to admit the truth of what happened to the Armenians that they prosecute even their own Nobel Prize winners for daring to speak of it? And who truly believes that this truth can be denied much longer?
This ‘hypocrite’ is not on a soap box and sincerely wants to know, if you would be so kind…
gaytzag palandjian
April 5, 2011
Why their own Military Tribunales in constantinople(Now, Istanbulla) judged and condemned the heads of the then Ottoman State for the crimes committed by them.
They were to b e executed-but even then-the deep state within the so called Empire,helped them escape the country…
So why that much time spent by these latter day turkish so called intellectuals in defense of the CRIME.Simple:-
They know and are scared that the riches confiscated,lands usurped will be ordered by FUTURE MILITARY OR NON Military Tribunals to return to lawful owneers…
Arsen
April 5, 2011
Avery –
I didn’t call you names. Re-read my post: “History cannot be ‘seen differently’ for someone’s xenophobic motivations.” Just restated the universal truth. Someone may be me as much as it may be you or Jack. If you took it as a personal insult, that’s essentially your problem.
I consider myself an independent observer and I’d like to see Armenians employing evidence-based information while debating with the Turks or with fellow Armenians. I believe from the historical perspective we have a vast arsenal of facts supporting the Cause. Therefore, to me, there’s no need to invent something in support of what’s already an established fact. Such a stance doesn’t make me xenophilic having some “British overlords.” History cannot be tailored to the ethnocentric challenges of the present day. In Armenians’ case, it doesn’t have to. Because a wealth of historical evidence exists proving unambiguously what foreign players did what to the Armenians throughout our history. Whenever their role was positive, be so kind and call things by their names. Whenever their role was negative, do the same. There’s no need for an intellectual to paint everything in black or white colors.
As you could see, I responded only to correct a false statement re: the 19th and 20th-century role of Anglo-Americans in the Armenian history, not their role in the modern times of which you seem to be an expert. Anything is alleged until proven. I don’t do the present, but would be interested to know (sincerely) if British or American men and arms were supplied to the NK conflict or in what ways their military backing was realized, as The Independent speculates. We’ve seen evidence of the Russian, Ukrainian, Turkish, Afghan, Chechen supplies of men and arms in the conflict. I’m not sure (that’s why the term “alleged” was used), if we ever saw British or American men and arms on the ground, but I’d rely on your wisdom on the issue because, like I said, I take little interest in the present.
Lucine Avakian
April 5, 2011
Turkish censorship lives on..with the current arrest of Turkish Journalists who dare write the Truth about Gulen’s Islamic Army (author Sik) there have been over 60 Turkish Journalists assaulted and arrested within the last 12 months.
The world has their eyes on Turkey. It is lack of democratic behaviors such as these that will get Turkey farther and farther away from the European Union and from Western values.
We may not always like what our journalists have to say but the day we jail, fine or condem them for speaking the truth is the day we might as all forget about democracy and freedom of speech.
Lucine Avakian
April 5, 2011
Please do not refer to the Armenian Genocide as “Armenian Myth” my grandparents were orphaned as part of this brutal ethnic cleansing that not only happened to the Armenians but Pontic Greeks, Greeks, Assyrians, Lebanese Maronites, Kurds and other indigenous people of the Ottoman invaded lands.
Do not call our ancestors liars. Everyone suffered many Turkish people have Armenian blood in them because of these barbarian acts of the Ottomans. Up to and including civil rights Turkish lawyer Fethiye Cetin who discovered her grandmother was in fact an Armenian Orphan.
Same to fellow Armenians, do not forget there were many decent Turkish, Circassians, Kurds who adopted our children or helped to feed some of the persecuted Armenians who were herded like cattle and told to leave their homes, churches, businesses – their possessions, daughters and farms taken from them.
Don’t ever call my grandparents liars. they suffered till the day they died, witnessing atrocities that no child should ever have to witness.
Tigran Mosesian
April 5, 2011
Famed Turkish Writer and 2006 Nobel Peace Prize writer Orhan Pamuk, discusses his views on the Armenian Genocide and the dark days of the Ottoman Empire. This documentary is excellent it speaks volumes of Pamuk’s trial in Istanbul for violating Article 301 and the need for more freedom of speech and religion in Turkey.
http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2006/turkey_pamuk_200k.asx
arm_k
April 5, 2011
Tigran Mosesian, thanks for the link. Orhan Pamuk is a great Turkish intellectual and a world-class novelist. How can a nation persecute her own Nobel Prize winners? What does this tell about modern-day Turks? Has anything changed in their Seljuk/Ottoman mentality? Anything at all?
Avery
April 6, 2011
Arsen:
(Part 1)
re the paragraph [I consider myself………black or white colors.]
The gist of your thinking and worldview is encapsulated in this paragraph, so I’ll address that:
You seem to have an unwarranted belief that presentation of your evidence-based information will carry the day: I don’t.
We are not in a US Federal Court, with an unbiased Federal Judge following Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
In the real world – things are very different. Nobody really cares – unfortunately – who is in the right or who is in the wrong, who has better evidence and who doesn’t.
You are right, we do have a “…a vast arsenal of facts supporting the Cause.” But even in a courtroom, you may lose your case, despite overwhelming evidence for your side, if you do not present and pursue your case aggressively.
You may want to treat the world of politics, and debates with Turks, as a US Courtroom: I don’t.
If there is any circumstantial allegation, not even evidence, that some entity is out to exterminate or hurt Armenians, or provides assistance to former, I am going for the jugular: I say they are guilty – let them prove themselves innocent. Armenians today don’t have the luxury of being 100 million strong nor a landmass of 300,000 sq. miles. to afford to play nice. Jews and Israel, who are not remotely as in danger as Armenia and Artsakh, are don’t cut anyone any slack: why should we ? No one in the West would dream of doing anything that would remotely endanger Israel. My goal is to create the same kind of atmosphere: they should walk on eggshells when it comes to Armenia and Artsakh.
I will never accuse an innocent bystander. And I am certainly not advocating becoming an Azeri or a Turk, manufacturing ‘evidence’ out of thin air, nor lying with a straight face. However, when a mainstream British newspaper says Brits were involved in the Azeri attempt to exterminate Armenians in Artsakh – that’s good enough for me: I am going to scream bloody murder.
Our enemies fabricate total lies out of thin air, and many of them gain traction in the Western public mind, which finds its way into the minds of members of US Congress, and which affects their attitude and voting patterns for or against Armenia&Artsakh. Evidence matters little in world affairs: it’s the constant repetition and dissemination of disinformation or information. Doesn’t always work, but works often enough.
Example ? Azeris have succeeded in convincing pretty much everyone in the West, with rare exceptions, that, quote, “Armenians are currently occupying 20% of Azeri land”: real figure of liberated lands outside of original NK ASSR is 13%. Everyone repeats the same mantra – 20%, 20%, 20%. This 20% is nothing more than creative accounting. We are not even talking about liberated lands. Azeris consider the original Nagorno-Karbagh ASSR territory ‘occupied’ by its indigenous Armenian population: which they add to the liberated lands to come up with the magic 20%, conveniently forgetting to subtract the parts that they occupy, e.g. parts of Shahumian region. Azeris occupy about 15% of original Nagorno-Karabagh ASSR territory: how is it that this hard evidence has gained no traction ? So, how far does your evidence-based approach go in the real world ? Not far.
The latest manufactured meme that has been planted is – “Armenian sniper kills 9 year old Azeri boy”. Despite all the proof by Artsakh Defense Force officials that an Armenian sniper could not possibly have done it – never mind the absurdity of the notion itself – a US Government official, Amb. Bryza, immediately issued a “Regret”, without any hint of questioning the Azeri version.
Avery
April 6, 2011
Arsen:
(Part 2)
re: “someone’s xenophobic motivations”
Who else were you referring to ? Myself and you were the only ones engaged on this thread regarding Anglo-Americans.
I was the one that posited that Anglo-Americans had consistently supported Turks and Turkey for the past 200 years.
The only other poster that mentioned ‘Great Britain’ was Diran, and he posted after your post where you introduced xenophobia.
So clearly the label xenophobic was directed at me: you don’t want to own up to it, that’s fine.
And the statement {“History cannot be ‘seen differently’ for someone’s xenophobic motivations.” Just restated the universal truth} is certainly not a universal truth.
I believe you honestly believe it is, but it isn’t: I’ll give you two examples, that refute its universality;
[1] Anglo-Americans, including the vast majority of the ordinary civilian populations, honestly believe that Anglo-Americans, the West, defeated Nazi Germany.
People of USSR, and now the Russians, Armenians, Georgians, etc, believe that the Red Army defeated Nazi Germany.
The evidence is overwhelmingly on the side of Soviet Union. Yet I challenge you find a single Anglo-American mainstream historian that will accept the Soviet version of the history.
Some honest Americans, e.g. Eric Margolis, have written that in fact it was the Red Army that broke the back of the Nazi War machine. But it’s rare.
[2] In 1967 USS Liberty was attacked by Israeli jets and torpedo boats. 34 American crew members were killed. Official US version of history is that Israelis made an honest mistake: that position has not changed all these years. All evidence and eyewitness accounts (some still alive) clearly say otherwise; that it was a deliberate attack. Which version do you believe ?
Arsen
April 6, 2011
Avery –
Re: “someone’s xenophobic motivations. Who else were you referring to?” Anyone who attempts to tailor historical evidence (i.e. primary material such as treaties, official correspondence, photo-, audio-, and video material, verifiable witness accounts, accounts of the contemporaries, peace agreements, declarations of war, governmental statements or decrees, etc.) to fit his or her views motivated by the modern-day considerations or xenophobic attitudes towards a nation or a group of nations. As Armenians, we don’t have to do this. It looks cheap and ludicrous for one of the most ancient civilizations inhabiting the Earth and one with a just cause that’s gaining broader international recognition. It’s similar to how it looks when a newly popped-up nation of Azeris does it. I understand it’s hard not to become overwhelmed by a counter-propaganda when your enemies are spreading lies, but I don’t think we must mimic the Azeris in making up something that didn’t exist, such as “Anglo-Americans’ strong support for Turkey in the past 200 years.” I suspect even the Turkish intellectuals, if you ask them, will deny that their nation enjoyed “strong Anglo-American support” throughout the past 200 years. I based my view on several treaties, official governmental declarations, declaration of war, official negotiations, and the American mandate—all of which has been duly recorded. What primary material did you base your argument on? This said, I’d agree that at the times of the first Democratic Republic of Armenia and the Cold War there was a strong support for Turkey by Britain and the US.
Frankly, I don’t understand what—from the political or ideological perspective—your half-truth gives to the Cause? If tomorrow Obama utters the word “genocide” or the Congress will adopt a long-awaited genocide resolution, will you change your stance about America’s “strong support” for Turkey in the past 200 years? I object seeing history from the perspective of modern-day political considerations. You think I have an unwarranted belief that presentation of my evidence-based information will carry the day. Not at all. First, I don’t present my evidence-based information so it carries the day. The Armenian Cause is so well-documented that there’s no need to adjust history to the skirmishes of the present-day politics. Second, I believe the presentation of your propaganda-based information, likewise, won’t carry the day. As you and I seem to have agreed, at the end of the “day”, all comes to a geopolitical or a geostrategic arrangement in which the interests of various players are reflected. Even if you repeat the mantra that “Turkey was given a strong support by Anglo-Americans throughout 200 years” for 1000 times, and Turko-Azeris will repeat the mantra that “Armenians are currently occupying 20% of Azeri land” for 2000 times, let’s put our hands on our hearts and admit: NONE of the two will be the univocal determinant of the possible outcome in the conflict.
Re: universality of the fact that history cannot be ‘seen differently’ for someone’s xenophobic motivations. The examples you brought up only demonstrate different visions of history. They don’t support the argument that by seeing their victory in WWII differently Americans are motivated by Russophobic feelings or that by holding their unique vision Russians are displaying Americophobia. In fact, there are several Western scholars who admit the decisive role of the Red Army. But, then, while admitting that the Red Army did play a decisive role in breaking the back of the Nazis, is it historically correct to disregard the French, Yugoslav, and Italian resistance movements or the D-Day and the involvement of several Western nations that also contributed to the victory? I’m glad you at least presented both versions re: WWII. Why can’t you do the same while assessing the amount of support Brits and Americans have given to the Turks during the last two centuries? Maybe it’ll turn out that the support was not that strong as you think it was?
manooshag
April 6, 2011
The truth is that the cycle of Genocides must be ended. All leaderships, too, their subsequent leaderships in their ongoing lies/denials shall know that they shall have to face world justice for their crimes.
For by ignoring and allowing ANY Genocides is indicative of the inhumanity of ALL the civilized nations of today who stand aside and observe the next Genocide that a killer has decided to vent upon humans. (OR have not civilized nations not still acquired humanity or, have not today, become truly civlized – yet)?
- ONLY when evil perpetrator states are brought to face their crimes,
- ONLY when evil perpetrator states end their policy of lies, violating, abusing humanity – eliminating peoples via their OWN convoluted and barbaric mentalties – as was a Hitler, as was a Stalin… and today, in Darfur (which Obama ignored ).
- ONLY when civilized nations’ leaders join together and outlaw the crimes of Genocides – worldwide - such as recent Sudanese Genocide of the Darfurians (where Sudanese reigned freely, followeng example of their ally, a Turkey).
Humanity and morals die when Genocides are allowed to continue. Humans have allowed the Genocides to continue – inhumanity of humans – against humans!
- The world’s civilized nations need to come together, to form an organization ready to reach any mentally deranged leaderships of ANY nations at any indication of their pursuit of slaughtering, raping, kidnappings and worse of humans – for ending the cycle of Genocides. Else, Genocides continue… for barbarity is still a lingering evil in the minds of those barbarians… against humanity.
If the UN had any guts, they’d have pursued this action – for, if the Turkish Genocide of the Armenian nation had been brought to justice in early 20th century, reparations due and owing made to the Armenians, then ALL THE GENOCIDES THAT FOLLOWED – SHALL NEVER HAVE BEEN. Despots, shall have known, the cycle of Genocides shall have been ended – forever!
Avery
April 6, 2011
Arsen:
Well, this thread had a good run.
There is new stuff on ArmenianWeekly, so I’ll move on from this one to next – whichever it happens to be.
We’ll let other posters judge which one of us two presented the better case.
Seervart
April 7, 2011
Murat, Armenian myths? Did I see it correctly? I don’t know why such a denylist is existing on these columns?