Tweet
"POLITICS BEHIND FRENCH GENOCIDE BILL"
Press TV
Jan 25 2012
Iran
Interview with Jahangir Mohammed, writer and activist
Turkey has condemned the approval of a bill that makes it illegal
to deny the act of genocide against Armenians by the Ottoman Empire
during World War 1.
In addition, Ankara has also said it could consider imposing permanent
sanctions on France.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Jahangir Mohammed, a writer
and activist in Manchester, to further discuss the issue.
The video offers the opinions of two additional guests: Paolo Raffone,
with the CIPI Foundation in Brussels and Oguz Demir an EU expert from
Istanbul Commerce University.
Following is a rough transcription of the interview.
Press TV: Let me bring a quotation from a newspaper in Turkey, Mr.
Mohammed. It does tell us that, "If France really wants to help
Turkey face her past, it needs to face up to her own past", and this
writer is telling us that the decision is a political decision and
it is misdirected.
What could be the political reasons for this decision in your view?
Mohammed: Well, I think you have highlighted quite accurately the
problem with the whole labeling of others as committing genocide,
which is the politicalization of genocide.
And in this case there is a direct political motive, I believe.
The French have been the most opposed to Turkish membership of the
European Union, saying quite strongly, that there are different
religious and cultural values. And Europe shouldn't allow Turkey
membership of the EU, whereas some other countries like Britain and
the United States also have been quite positive on the issue.
So I think there is a clear political motive behind what the French
are doing, the charge of genocide.
And in this case actually, it's not just denying people the chance
to debate or disagree with the Armenian genocide, but it also stops
them from minimalizing it.
So even if you dispute the numbers that the French are arguing who
were actually killed in the Armenian massacres, then you are liable
to be fined and imprisoned.
So effectively, it is imposing a French and a European view of Turkish
history on the Turks themselves. And really, it's on a matter which
isn't really a French affair.
And it also puts Muslims in France and particularly Turkish Muslims
in a difficult situation. Because many of them hold a different view
of what happened.
And now that in itself will become illegal and they will become
criminalized as a result of that, if they discuss, debate or even
dispute the figures.
Press TV: A lot has been said of course about the reasons why France
is taking this move. Of course, it was clear for France that this
is going to hurt Turkey politically, and that Istanbul would not be
satisfied with this.
So do you think some of this measure has something to do with issues
of contentions between the two sides, when it comes to foreign policy,
regional policy and even the EU membership bid of Turkey?
Mohammed: Yeah absolutely, I think the French will use this Turkish
non-acceptance of the French view, as a precursor to stop them
permanently entering into the EU at the appropriate time.
And we've seen this happen before with genocide. We saw it with Omar
Bashir, the Sudanese president has been indicted for crimes against
humanity, for committing genocide in Sudan when it hasn't yet been
established.
And the sole purpose of that was for him to give up the south to the
Animists and the Christians, which he's done.
So, there's clearly a political motive behind this which will emerge.
And under wider issue, I think the Turkish people have raised a very
important issue; the Genocide Convention only came into being in 1948.
How far do you go back with crimes of genocide?
You know, this is a hundred year old issue. If you can go back a
hundred years, why not further back?
Why not charge Western powers of crimes of genocide to do with the
slave trade, to do with the elimination of the Native Americans,
the Indians in South America, the Aborigines?
And you know, other crimes against other people, which are you know,
like the Algerian War of Independence, which might not be against a
particular race, but which was a major atrocity.
So how far do you go back with these is the question. And, you know,
why only some countries are charged with this label and not others?
And the real problem is that, you know, whilst we are talking about
freedom of opinion, stopping people talking about these issues, crimes
of humanity are going on every day, committed by Western powers in
Afghanistan, with the drone attacks, with Iraq.
Press TV
Jan 25 2012
Iran
Interview with Jahangir Mohammed, writer and activist
Turkey has condemned the approval of a bill that makes it illegal
to deny the act of genocide against Armenians by the Ottoman Empire
during World War 1.
In addition, Ankara has also said it could consider imposing permanent
sanctions on France.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Jahangir Mohammed, a writer
and activist in Manchester, to further discuss the issue.
The video offers the opinions of two additional guests: Paolo Raffone,
with the CIPI Foundation in Brussels and Oguz Demir an EU expert from
Istanbul Commerce University.
Following is a rough transcription of the interview.
Press TV: Let me bring a quotation from a newspaper in Turkey, Mr.
Mohammed. It does tell us that, "If France really wants to help
Turkey face her past, it needs to face up to her own past", and this
writer is telling us that the decision is a political decision and
it is misdirected.
What could be the political reasons for this decision in your view?
Mohammed: Well, I think you have highlighted quite accurately the
problem with the whole labeling of others as committing genocide,
which is the politicalization of genocide.
And in this case there is a direct political motive, I believe.
The French have been the most opposed to Turkish membership of the
European Union, saying quite strongly, that there are different
religious and cultural values. And Europe shouldn't allow Turkey
membership of the EU, whereas some other countries like Britain and
the United States also have been quite positive on the issue.
So I think there is a clear political motive behind what the French
are doing, the charge of genocide.
And in this case actually, it's not just denying people the chance
to debate or disagree with the Armenian genocide, but it also stops
them from minimalizing it.
So even if you dispute the numbers that the French are arguing who
were actually killed in the Armenian massacres, then you are liable
to be fined and imprisoned.
So effectively, it is imposing a French and a European view of Turkish
history on the Turks themselves. And really, it's on a matter which
isn't really a French affair.
And it also puts Muslims in France and particularly Turkish Muslims
in a difficult situation. Because many of them hold a different view
of what happened.
And now that in itself will become illegal and they will become
criminalized as a result of that, if they discuss, debate or even
dispute the figures.
Press TV: A lot has been said of course about the reasons why France
is taking this move. Of course, it was clear for France that this
is going to hurt Turkey politically, and that Istanbul would not be
satisfied with this.
So do you think some of this measure has something to do with issues
of contentions between the two sides, when it comes to foreign policy,
regional policy and even the EU membership bid of Turkey?
Mohammed: Yeah absolutely, I think the French will use this Turkish
non-acceptance of the French view, as a precursor to stop them
permanently entering into the EU at the appropriate time.
And we've seen this happen before with genocide. We saw it with Omar
Bashir, the Sudanese president has been indicted for crimes against
humanity, for committing genocide in Sudan when it hasn't yet been
established.
And the sole purpose of that was for him to give up the south to the
Animists and the Christians, which he's done.
So, there's clearly a political motive behind this which will emerge.
And under wider issue, I think the Turkish people have raised a very
important issue; the Genocide Convention only came into being in 1948.
How far do you go back with crimes of genocide?
You know, this is a hundred year old issue. If you can go back a
hundred years, why not further back?
Why not charge Western powers of crimes of genocide to do with the
slave trade, to do with the elimination of the Native Americans,
the Indians in South America, the Aborigines?
And you know, other crimes against other people, which are you know,
like the Algerian War of Independence, which might not be against a
particular race, but which was a major atrocity.
So how far do you go back with these is the question. And, you know,
why only some countries are charged with this label and not others?
And the real problem is that, you know, whilst we are talking about
freedom of opinion, stopping people talking about these issues, crimes
of humanity are going on every day, committed by Western powers in
Afghanistan, with the drone attacks, with Iraq.