dimanche 31 août 2014


FEAR OF revealing the TRUTH
the reason for persecuting HUMAN RIGHTS defenders IN BAKU
by Orwellian “Big Brother”

AUTHOR: MG Hayk Kotanjian, Doctor of Political Sciences; Chairman of Political Science Association of Armenia; Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary

MG Hayk Kotanjian

Expressing Armenian colleagues’ any attitude towards the neighboring country’s human rights defenders persecuted with accusations of high treason by Baku authorities is extremely difficult. We are talking about the opponents with whom we had to argue over the fundamental issues of the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement at almost all international academic-expert forums organized under the auspices of the international community. On the other hand, these are the colleagues, who, for the most part, having certain professional qualification and adhering to international standards of independent academic studies, could not but understand that peaceful and fair resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is based on the political and legal fact of practical exercise of the right to self-determination by the Nagorno-Karabakh people with infallible use of legislative tools of direct democracy in compliance with the “USSR Law on Secession of a Soviet Republic from the USSR” which was in force in late 1991.[i]

At the same time, the neighboring country’s human rights defenders as a result of independent studies, and due to the very essence of the academic pursuit of the truth, could not but come to the unbiased conclusion that in context of Azerbaijan’s withdrawal from the USSR jurisdiction before the Karabakh referendum and the USSR’s breakup[ii], a consent obtained on the results of the legitimate plebiscite with the relevant authorities of Azerbaijan and the USSR lost its legislative imperativeness.[iii]

These experts, being committed to the requirements of academic objectivity, know that the legality of the right to self-determination, exercised by the Karabakh Armenians, is founded also on the fact of Azerbaijani minority’s equal involvement in the preparation and conduct of the referendum, which is established in verifiable documents. The human rights defenders in Baku as a result of unbiased research could not but reveal the truth consisting in the fact that the reason for Karabakh Azerbaijanis’ non-participation in the law-governed referendum was the decision of Baku authorities to boycott the Karabakh referendum.[iv]

Thus, the authorities’ awareness of objective provability of academic truth of the fact of legality of the Karabakh referendum and the subsequent process of the NKR’s institution-building as a de facto legitimate democratic state is the main reason for the persecution of human rights defenders carrying out studies within international academic-expert community.[v]

Thereby, the fundamental choice between the academic commitment to the truth or to its deliberate distortion has been put as a main reason for which the neighboring country’s human rights defenders are incriminated for the high treason. It should be noted that in these terms, to come out in favor of the colleagues persecuted by Baku authorities, is no easy task. Considering the realities of political persecution, and seeking the truth in support of the persecuted colleagues from Azerbaijan, we have to look to the "do no harm" principle.

Meanwhile, international support for Azerbaijani activists of "public diplomacy", subjected to repression by Baku authorities, drew the leading policymakers of the world and human rights organizations into its orbit. The arrest of Leyla Yunus, Director of the Institute for Peace and Democracy, charged with spying for foreign countries, attracts special attention. Baku authorities declared the lady to be secret service agent of the Republic of Armenia; the Main Intelligence Directorate, General Staff, Armed Forces, Russian Federation; and the State Department and CIA, US.

Many politicians and human rights organizations seem puzzled at the fact that Baku authorities having launched repressions against its own civil society activists involved in the academic-expert discussion of the issues of peaceful resolution of the Karabakh conflict, chair the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, designed to further cooperation among the European countries in the areas of developing legal standards of vital activity of the European community, human rights and democracy promotion.

The colleagues from international analytical community, representing think tanks and universities of the US, Europe, Eurasia and Russia, while commenting on the June 2014 speech by the head of the neighboring state and his answers to the questions in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe as to the facts of persecution of the human rights defenders in Azerbaijan, find parallels between the behavior of the Azerbaijani authorities and the dictatorship of "Big Brother" in the fictional state of "Oceania", described by George Orwell in his masterpiece pamphlet "1984".

As we know, Orwell describes a regime of total control not only over the political actions of the civil society members, but also their so-called "thought crime", which was a vile sin in "Oceania" and was punishable by death. Under such a dictatorship, not even a deed, but merely the very thought of it falls within the concept of "thought crime". Rules of behavior under these conditions run as follows - "thinking about an offense a person signs his own death sentence, which sooner or later, but always inevitably overtakes him within the walls of the “Ministry of Love”. The repressive body, uncovering “thought crime” is the "Thought Police". And the public censure of the “thought-crime” and “thought-criminals”, and justification of their cruel punishment under the dictatorship of its Head – "Big Brother" is provided by the "Ministry of Truth".

The colleagues from the international academic-expert community, indignant at repression against the human rights defenders in Baku engaged in "public diplomacy", see in their propagandistic denigration the hand of Baku’s "Ministry of Truth" which on the grounds identified by Orwell "destroys, alters or adapts the facts, if the figures, opinions or forecasts they contain do not comply with the requirements of "Big Brother". In the "Ministry of Truth" even the history is scraped out as an old parchment and written anew - as many times as needed. Then the scrape-out is forgotten, and the lie becomes the truth." Drawing parallels it can be stated that by conducting prejudiced checks of the participants of conferences and workshops held under the auspices of respected international organizations and covering the issues of peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, faults are found, inflated to the caliber of a criminal case, and then elevated to the category of felonies including high treason by Baku’s "Thought Police", "Ministry of Truth" and "Ministry of Love".

As described by the British author of the brilliant dystopian novels "1984" and "Animal Farm", "Big Brother’s" dictatorship principles in such regimes conform to the following formulae: "The purpose of repression is the repression. The purpose of torture is the torture. The purpose of power is the power."

The Orwellian formulation of "Big Brother’s" strategic priorities - "Who controls the past, he controls the future, who controls the present, he controls the past," etc. can serve as an exact explanation of the policy objectives of Baku’s dictatorship falsifying political and legal facts of the present and the past.

Now a few words about my personal impressions of Leyla Yunus, following the May 11, 1992 discussion of the fact of taking the town of Shushi by the Armenian forces (the night of 7th to 8th of May, 1992 may be the night of 8th to 9th) at Azerbaijan’s Permanent Mission in Moscow which I attended as a political columnist on Transcaucasia of the newspaper “Russia”, Supreme Council (Parliament) RF.

The victorious outcome of the military operation "Wedding in the Mountains" planned by the competent professionals of the Armenian army literally resulted in hysterical speeches of the present Azerbaijanis, who introduced themselves as sponsors of the war waged against the Nagorno Karabakh Republic by the Popular Front of Azerbaijan who has been coming in power in Azerbaijan.

Journalists from the Russian and foreign media were invited to the press conference at Azerbaijan’s Permanent Mission with notification of the planned meeting with Azerbaijan’s Minister of Defense Rahim Gaziyev. Judging by the violent criticism of the Azerbaijani audience it was the Minister of Defense Gaziyev whom they were looking to for explanations. However, he did not come. And Leyla Yunusova (now Yunus) assumed the burden of responsibility for the defeat. She spoke not from the standpoint of human rights protection, but as a representative of the Minister - "the culprit of defeat". Being appointed to the position of head of the Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Defense Information Service just four days before the victory of Armenians in Shushi, during two and a half hours she could withstand the attacks of the shocked Azerbaijani financial backers of the war against Karabakh.

Listening to Leyla Yunus and Azerbaijani participants of the press conference, dumbfounded by the political, legal and military impeccability of the Armenian sides activities, I, due to Shushi victory, consolidated my respect for the century-long martial traditions of Karabakh Armenians, having inscribed in the history of victorious wars the names of 5 Marshals and the Admiral of the Fleet of the USSR. Suffice it to mention that the Chiefs of Staff of the Soviet Navy and the Soviet Air Force at certain stages of the Second World War were Armenian commanders of Karabakh origin - Ivan Isakov, Admiral of the Fleet, USSR, and Armenak Khanfperiants-Khudyakov, Marshal of Aviation, USSR. [vi]

The leaders of the Karabakh national liberation movement jointly with the Nagorno-Karabakh Government-in-exile acting in Moscow,[vii] established at the initiative of the USSR People's Deputy Zori Balayan and the Head of Special Programs under the Government of Armenia Ashot Manucharyan, as a result of the punitive anti-Armenian operation "Ring" in Northern Artsakh, traced the challenges of the Ogarevo and Novo-Ogarevo processes, as well as the activities of the State Committee on the State of Emergency, and immediately after its downfall they launched institution-building process in line with the requirements of international law and the then effective Soviet legislation.[viii]

Now, after 22 years, in the aftermath of the recent failed attempts to demonstrate the power of Azerbaijan on the frontline I am again convinced of the far-sightedness of the Karabakh Armenians, who, in contrast to the neighboring country’s focus on fierce pogroms and armed violence, preferred law-governed solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in accordance with the legislation and political realities.

Political science in its independent and impartial application to the study of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict leads to the irrefutable truth of the de facto legitimate and democratic character of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.

Returning to the mass repressions launched against the human rights defenders by the instance of Leyla Yunus, I want to emphasize that here the main goal of the totalitarian regime of Azerbaijan is the elimination of the community of qualified independent analysts of internal and external political processes, including the peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Thereby, Baku authorities destroy the academic-expert ground for developing an impartial political and legal basis for the peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, ending in mutual recognition of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.[ix]

Baku’s "Big Brother" with his "Ministry of Truth", "Ministry of Love" and "Thought Police" should know that its policy of systemic distortion of facts of both the current events and the history, as well as justification of repression against the human rights defenders is strongly condemned by the international academic-expert community. Besides, it highlights the unacceptability of the fact that the Chairman of the Council of Europe’s decision-making body - the Committee of Ministers aimed at facilitating cooperation among the countries of Europe in the field of human rights and democracy promotion, in the case of Azerbaijan holds the banner of total dictatorship of "Big Brother" in his hands.

There may be only one conclusion: the reason for persecution of human rights defenders in Baku by Orwellian "Big Brother" is the fear of revealing the truth.

E&O -30.08.2014

[i] См. Закон СССР "О порядке решения вопросов, связанных с выходом союзной республики из СССР" No 1410-1 от 3 апреля 1990 г." Ведомости Съезда народных депутатов СССР, Верховного Совета СССР", 1990, No 15; Закон АзР "об упразднении НКАО АзР", 26 ноября 1991 года. Ведомости ВС АзР, 1991, No 24;. Акт о результатах референдума о независимости Нагорно-Карабахской Республики, 10 декабря 1991г. г. Степанакерт, Нагорно-Карабахская Республика, Министерство Иностранных Дел): - (http://www.nkr.am/rus/facts/referendum.html).

[ii] Алма-Атинская Декларация, Алма-Ата, 21 декабря 1991 г. Юридическая Россия. Федеральный правововй портал (v.3.2.).


[iv] См.: ICES: Взаимное признание Азербайджана и Нагорного Карабаха - залог конструктивных переговоров. Гайк Котанджян, 2 декабря 2013: 

[v] EUROPE ET ORIENT”. “Institution-building in Karabakh: The NKR is a de facto legitimate democratic state” by Major General Hayk Kotanjian

[vi] Речь идет о следующих полководцах карабахского происхождения: Маршале Советского Союза Ованесе Баграмяне, Адмирале Флота СССР Иване Исакове, Маршале авиации Арменаке Ханферянце-Худяков, Маршале бронетанковых войск Амазаспе Бабаджаняне и Маршале инженерных войск Сергее Аганове.

[vii]Покойный Юрий Барсегов выполнял конфиденциальную миссию Министра юстиции правительства в изгнании Нагорного Карабаха: коллега”, 11.08.2008:

[viii] ”Институциональное строительство в Карабахе: НКР - де-факто легитимное демократическое государство”, 02.07.2014:

[ix] ICES: Взаимное признание Азербайджана и Нагорного Карабаха - залог конструктивных переговоров. Гайк Котанджян, 2 декабря 2013: 

mercredi 20 août 2014

Turkish blood money!

Former House Majority Leader
Sells His Soul for Fistful of Dollars
By Harut Sassounian
Washington has long-suffered from unethical politicians, but the prize for the top hypocrite on an Armenian issue goes to former Cong. Richard Gephardt who served as House Majority Leader from 1989 to 1995 and Minority Leader from 1995 to 2003.
After championing the recognition of the Armenian Genocide for over two decades, Gephardt retired from the House of Representatives in 2005, and began enriching himself by lobbying against the very issue that he had staunchly defended in Congress!
Taking advantage of Turkish paranoia on the eve of the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide, the Gephardt Group Government Affairs expanded earlier this year its long-standing lobbying relationship with the Republic of Turkey. The new contract, worth $1.4 million per year, includes subcontractors Dickstein Shapiro ($531,000 per year), Greenberg Traurig ($314,000 per year), Lydia Borland ($180,000 per year), and Brian Forni ($78,000 per year). The Gephardt Group and its subcontractors agreed to provide the following services to Turkey:
“(a) Proposing and pursuing passage of legislation and other U.S. government action that promotes Turkey's interests and provides a positive image of Turks, Turkey and the United States-Turkey relationship,
(b) Preserving and enlarging the Congressional Caucus on Turkey and Turkish Americans,
(c) Educating members of Congress and the Administration on issues of importance to Turkey,
(d) Promptly notifying Turkey of any action in Congress or the Executive Branch on issues of importance to Turkey,
(e) Preparing brief analyses of developments in Congress and the Executive Branch on particular issues of concern to Turkey,
(f) Identifying official gatherings and social events to which [Turkish] Embassy personnel ought, in the Gephardt Group's opinion, attend, including to the extent possible, obtaining the necessary invitations,
(g) Identifying and/or arranging speaking engagements locally and nationally for [Turkish] Embassy personnel or their appointed or suggested proxies in fora that will improve Turkey’s image and advance its causes on Capitol Hill. Such would be, if so directed by Turkey, coordinated with Turkey's existing public relations service provider(s), and
(h) Maintaining and forging alliances with other interest groups whose goals are similar to or shared by Turkey.”
Significantly, subcontractor Greenberg Traurig’s responsibilities include: “develop and utilize contacts at the State and Defense Departments, and the National Security Council to convey the seriousness of the genocide issue and the potential threat it poses to the U.S./Turkey relationship.”
While there are plenty of sleazy lobbyists in Washington, none can match Gephardt’s shocking transformation from a leading supporter of Armenian Genocide recognition to a genocide denialist! The early years of Gephardt’s shameful flip-flop on this critical moral issue was revealed by The New Republic in its July 23, 2007 article titled, “K Street Cashes in on the 1915 Armenian Genocide.” Throughout his 26 years in Congress, Cong. Gephardt co-sponsored several genocide Resolutions and repeatedly spoke on the importance of recognizing the Armenian Genocide. In 2000, Gephardt and two other House Democrats co-signed a letter to then-Speaker Dennis Hastert urging him to schedule an immediate vote on the Armenian Genocide Resolution.
In January 2005, barely days after leaving his House seat, Gephardt opened his consulting and lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. From 2005 to 2009, he became a strategic adviser on government affairs for the international law firm of DLA Piper, which was paid $100,000 per month to represent the interests of Turkey, including lobbying against the pending House Resolution on the Armenian Genocide! The New Republic reported that Gephardt arranged meetings between members of the Turkish parliament and House Democratic leaders, helped Turkey’s U.S. Ambassador to gain an audience with "a skeptical Nancy Pelosi," and circulated a booklet titled “An Appeal to Reason,” that denied the Armenian Genocide.
Armenian-Americans and all people of good will should not remain silent while Gephardt enriches himself with Turkish blood money! They should warn his lobbying firm’s clients -- Anheuser-Busch, Boeing, Chevron, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, General Electric, Goldman Sachs, Google, Los Angeles Airport, National Football League, Port of Oakland, and United Airlines -- that they will boycott their products and services unless these firms cancelled their contracts with the Gephardt Group. Letters of complaint should also be sent to Ford Motor Company and The Scripps Research Institute for giving Gephardt a seat on their Board of Directors.
Finally, readers should write directly to Dick Gephardt, Gephardt Government Affairs, 1101 K Street, N.W., Suite 310, Washington, D.C. 2005 or send an e-mail to dickgephardt@gephardtdc.com, admonishing him for his highly unethical behavior!

Le retour au foyer

Arméniens : le retour au foyer

Jean V. Guréghian
18 août 2014     

L’appel récent de Charles Aznavour pour les réfugiés de Syrie et d’Irak, en souhaitant les installés dans les villages abandonnés en France, est intéressant et louable. Il dit entre autres : « … Pourquoi ne pas confier ces « villages fantômes » à ces chré­tiens, ces Kurdes, ces Yezi­dis, ces Armé­niens ? Ils auraient pour obli­ga­tion de les recons­truire, de les faire revivre, de labou­rer à nouveau des terres dont la ferti­lité ne fait aucun doute. Ils pour­raient ainsi vivre en paix, quasi­ment en autar­cie. Je réponds, en parti­cu­lier, de mes compa­triotes. Je sais qu’ils sont très travailleurs. »

Mais n’y a-t-il pas une autre solution pour les réfugiés arméniens de Syrie et d’Irak (notamment pour ceux de Syrie), qui serait peut-être moins réalisable, néanmoins plus logique : celle qui consisterait à demander leur retour… dans leurs propres villages, en Cilicie, d’où ils furent chassés en 1922, et dont la France a une grande part de responsabilité ! En effet, la plupart des Arméniens diasporiques du Moyen-Orient sont originaires de Cilicie.  

Il est très probable que le gouvernement turc répondrait négativement à une telle démarche, n’empêche qu’il serait peut-être opportun de profiter de l’occasion pour revendiquer.
Carte extraite de « La Cilicie au carrefour des empires » de Claude Mutafian, 
Les Belles Lettres Histoire, 1988

Extrait du livre de Jean V. Guréghian « Histoire d’Arménie », Y. Embanner, 2011 :

… Après la victoire, la Cilicie obtient une autonomie, sous mandat français, en mai 1919. Près de 160.000 survivants du Génocide retournent dans leur foyer. L’économie du pays se redresse peu à peu, on construit des écoles, les ports sont restaurés. Mais les autorités françaises vont dissoudre la Légion arménienne, en privant la population de ses défenseurs.
De son côté, Mustafa Kemal, qui refuse toute création d’autonomie arménienne, va profiter de la faible présence de l’armée française et de l’indécision des autorités de Paris pour attaquer en force. À Marach, en janvier 1920, les forces de Kemal vont massacrer 11.000 Arméniens, environ 8000 réussiront à prendre la fuite. Au mois d’avril, le général Andréa résistera héroïquement à Aïntab, devant l’ennemi supérieur en nombre, et sauvera les 18.000 Arméniens de la ville de l’encerclement et du massacre programmé. À Yenidjé, le général Gracy repoussera les forces ennemies. Les renforts demandés par les généraux français de Cilicie resteront malheureusement sans réponse du gouvernement. Ces batailles coûteront quand même la vie à plus de 6.000 jeunes soldats français, qui accompliront souvent des actes héroïques et se battront à un contre dix, pour sauver des populations civiles. 

Dans les régions éloignées, comme à Zeïtoun et à Hadjin, les Arméniens seront seuls devant les forces kémalistes et les Français refuseront de venir en aide. Zeïtoun tombera rapidement, la totalité des 1050 rescapés du Génocide revenus dans leur foyer sera massacrée. Hadjin tombe en octobre 1920, après huit mois de résistance. Les 6000 habitants survivants retournés dans leur foyer (sur les 35.000 avant le Génocide) seront massacrés par les Turcs. Seuls 305 combattants perceront les lignes turques et échapperont au massacre.

… Mais alors que les choses vont s’améliorer sur le terrain, Franklin-Bouillon va signer pour le gouvernement français, le 20 octobre 1921, à Ankara, un accord avec les forces Kémalistes, selon lequel La France cède la Cilicie aux Turcs et retire ses forces. Les Arméniens et autres chrétiens pris de panique vont s’enfuir, pour la plupart, vers la Syrie et le Liban, d’autres vont émigrer à Chypre, en Égypte, en Grèce, etc. Le rêve d’une Arménie cilicienne s’évanouit pour longtemps. 

Paul du Véou, témoin de l’époque, a écrit un livre remarquable sur cette tragique épopée, « La Passion de la Cilicie 1919-1922 » (450 p. éd. P. Geuthner, Paris, 1954). Voici les toutes dernières lignes émouvantes de son livre : « …il n’est pas au pouvoir des hommes d’empêcher Pâques de succéder à Ténèbres. Ainsi l’Arménie cilicienne, un jour ressuscitera par la France : ‘l’Arménie expire, disait Anatole France, mais elle renaîtra.’ Alors les drapeaux tricolores flotteront sur elle à nouveau, car les siècles de gloire et d’amour créent des unions qui ne peuvent dissoudre si aisément. Et elle groupera ses familles, bien diminuées, hélas ! Autour de ses évêques, sur son sol plus riche que le delta du Nil, son ‘Égypte avec des Alpes’. Sa légion et nos régiments veilleront encore sur son repos, la France lui donnera des charrues; nul ne la troublera dans sa foi, et elle vénérera dans son panthéon Tchalian, héros de Hadjin, et sur ses autels le Père Philippe et l’abbé Niorthe, martyrs français. Mais quand ? Mais quand ? »…

Rappelons que (jusqu’en 1915) le peuple arménien vivait sur ses terres ancestrales depuis près de 3000 ans et que l’Arménie fut le premier État au monde à adopter le christianisme, en 301 (ou en 314).

Une utopie ?
Bien que le souhait du retour des Arméniens rescapés du Génocide (en Cilicie comme en Arménie historique) soit considéré comme une utopie, ce souhait a été néanmoins formulé par des intellectuels turcs. Pour sa part, le maire de Diyarbakir (ville importante au sud-est de la Turquie), Osman Baydemir, avait fait en 2012 appel aux Arméniens en les invitant à revenir dans leurs foyers. D’ailleurs la cathédrale arménienne Saint-Kirakos a été récemment restaurée dans cette ville (comme l’église d’Aghtamar) et des messes y ont été célébrées. Autre phénomène (impensable il y a encore quelques années), on voit apparaître dans l’Est de la Turquie (Arménie historique) des panneaux rédigés… en arménien ! Ils indiquent la direction de monuments historiques pour les touristes arméniens qui viennent de plus en plus nombreux.

Alors serait-il absurde de revendiquer le retour des Arméniens de Syrie et d’Irak, dont la vie est en danger, dans leur propre foyer (dans le cas bien sûr où ces derniers le désireraient) ?

Nous sommes conscients que la réponse n’est pas simple et que la Turquie n’est pas encore prête à tendre la main aux Arméniens.


lundi 18 août 2014

CHP'nin misyonu kesin bir biçimde sona erdi

CHP'nin misyonu kesin bir biçimde sona erdi


CHP üzerine son 20 yıldır o kadar çok ciddi siyasi yazı yazıldı ki artık söylenecek söz pek kalmadı. Bu yazıların da çoğu özetle “CHP nasıl dönüşmeli ve sol bir parti olmalı?” üzerineydi. Yazıların sayısı ve sol talebin dozu arttıkça, CHP'nin darbeciliği ortaya çıktı, militarist olduğu deşifre edildi, sonunda da milliyetçi (faşizan sos ağırlıklı) ve muhafazakâr (islamcı soslu) adaylarla özdeşleşmeye gidecek kadar seviye düştü. Tablo bu olunca artık “CHP sol parti olsun!” diye hala yırtınmanın bir anlamı da kalmadı. Ama insanlar hala bunun için debeleniyor. Durum patolojik vaka görünümünde olduğu için, artık biz siyaset bilimcilerin değil, psikologların ve psikiyatrların işi.

Peki niye böyle oldu? Çünkü artık CHP'nin misyonu kesin bir biçimde sona erdi. Yeşilçam filmleri gibi sado-mazo bir SON! Zaten otoriter rejimi kuran ve bunu savunan bir parti için anormal uzun yaşadı. Tam 91 yıl. Bu hayatı uzun kılmak için çok mizansen yaptılar, Nazi hayranı İsmet Inönü bile “solcu” yapıldı. Yani halkı aldatmak için numaralar bitmedi, dezenformasyon ve yalan zirve yaptı. Siyasette yalan bir tek islamcıların tekelinde değil ve onlarla da başlamadı. Siyasette yalan insanlık tarihi kadar eski. İslamcılar daha 12 yıllık, biz ise burada 91 yıldır süren yalandan bahsediyoruz. Zavallı kendi seçmeni de, bu kadar yalan dolan ve mizansenden sonra bu partiyi sol bir parti sandı. Halâ da sanmaya devam ediyor. Aynen Cumhuriyet'i hala sol bir gazete sanmak gibi! Laik bir sosyal demokratın, islamcı bir adaya oy atmasının ne kadar büyük bir şizofreni ve travmatik bir durum olduğunun farkında bile değiller. Bunu bile yaptırdılar. E, o zaman artık anahtarı paspasın altına koyup dükkanı kapama zamanı gelmis demektir. Yani siyasi iflas hali.

CHP Faşizm Üzerine Kuruldu

CHP ile ilgili söz bitti ancak yazılacak bir tek bu yazı kaldı: Parti kendini feshetmeli! Burada partiler tarihi yazmıyoruz, ayrıca teoriye (demokratik sosyalizm) de fazla girmeyeceğiz çünkü solla ilgisi olmayan bir vaka ve siyasi dejenerasyon karşısındayız. Ama milletin bir anda kendine gelmesi için şuradan başlayabiliriz: CHP faşizm üzerine kurulmuş bir partidir. Buyurun.

CHP'nin kurulduğu dönemde Avrupa'da çok moda olan iki devrimci hareket vardı: Faşizm ve Komünizm. Faşizm, patenti Benito Mussolini'ye ait olan bir ideoloji ve doktrindi. Devrimciydi; çünkü parlamenter rejime karşıydı, aynı zamanda iki ideolojiye düşman (liberalizm ve sosyalizm) olan tek siyasi hareketti, tek adam üzerine (Duce) kuruluydu ve bu rejimde Duce, parti ile, o da devletle özdeşleştiği için totaliterdi. Mustafa Kemal, CHP'yi kurarken faşizm modaydı ve kitleleri peşinden sürüklüyordu. O da parti genel sekreteri Recep Peker'i “git bakalım bir incele!” diye Roma'ya yolladı. İşte Mussolini faşizminden 6 okun çalınması da böyle başladı. İtalyancada “fascio” ok demektir. Yani Faşizm kelimesinin temelinde ok vardır. Geçmise öykündüğü için Romalı liktörlerin okları... Mussolini'nin ideolojisi, yazarı olduğu Faşizmin Doktrini adlı yaklaşık 100 sayfalık kitapta, tam 12 ok olarak yer alır. CHP bu oklardan altısını seçmiştir: Devletçilik, milliyetçilik, cumhuriyetçilik, devrimcilik, halkçılık ve laiklik. Bu kitabı 1975 yılında Paris'te siyasal bilgiler okulunda öğrenciyken okudum, inceledim ve şok geçirdim. Yani, CHP adlı partinin prensipleri faşist prensiplerdi ve logosu da faşist bir logoydu. Faşizm konusunda çok okumamın ve bu konuya hakim olmamın nedenlerinden biri de budur. Peki 40 yılda bu partide ne değişti? Hiçbir şey! Değişemez çünkü ideolojisi ve kuruluşu faşizme dayanan bir partiden bahsediyoruz. Artık anakronik olmuş bir ideolojiden. Onun için CHP kendini yenileyemez, çünkü faşizm yenilenmez, ancak çöpe gönderilir. Demek ki, CHP'yi sola çekmek için didinmek abesle iştigaldir. Çünkü faşizmden ne yapılırsa yapılsın sol çıkmaz. Ama faşizmin bir biçiminden (örnegin Nazizm'den) ırkçılık çıkar, ayrımcılık çıkar, darbecilik çıkar, militarizm çıkar, halkçılık ta çıkar. Nitekim bu hastalıkların hepsi CHP'nin Kemalizm'den gelen eklektik ideolojisinin (artık ona da ideoloji denirse!) içinde vardır. Kısaca kuruluşunda faşizmden beslenen, hala aynı prensipleri savunan bir partinin de tek sıfatı olur: Anakronik; yani cağdışı. Böyle bir parti de yok olmaya mahkumdur.

Otoriter Cumhuriyetin Misyonu Bitti

CHP'nin Türkiye Cumhuriyeti ile özdeşleşen tarihi de artık bu misyonun bittiğini gösteriyor. Yani otoriter cumhuriyet misyonunun. CHP bu cumhuriyetin otoriter kalabilmesi için elinden geleni ardına koymadı, bugüne kadar statükoyu korudu, devletle özdeşleşti ve sonunda cumhuriyet kavramı değil ama otoritarizm çöktü. Üstelik bu otoritarizm bugün yerini islamcı otoriterliğe bıraktı. Cumhuriyeti demokratikleştirmediği için de CHP'nin siyasi bir özelliği kalmadı. Laikliği de devlet kontrolünde (Diyanet) otoriter bir biçimde uyguladığı için, o alanı da tamamen islamcılara kaptırdı. Halbuki laiklikte devlet bütün dini inançlara eşit mesafede durur ve hiçbirini desteklemez. Üstelik bugün artık laiklik demokrasi demek. Demokrasi laikliği garanti ediyor, ama tam tersi mümkün değil. İşte CHP türü dejenere laikliğin bizi getirdiği durum. Ama CHP'nin derdi hiçbir zaman demokrasi olmadığı için ne cumhuriyeti demokratikleşti, ne de laiklik demokrasiyi kurmak için kullanıldı. CHP 21. yüzyılda iki kavramı da muazzam biçimde ıskaladı: Cumhuriyet ve laiklik. Yani CHP'nin savunduğu cumhuriyet ve laiklik türü (her ikisi de anakronik kaldı) siyasi anlamda iflas etti. Bu fay hattını iyi kullanan islamcılar da iktidar oldu, özellikle de 2011 seçimlerinden sonra. CHP’nin askerle beraber demokratik olmayan bir rejimin bekçiliğini yapması ve laikliği dejenere etmesi İslamcıların karşı-devrimine zemin hazırladı ve onların iktidarı ele geçirmesine yardımcı oldu. Ülkenin çağdaş olabilmesi için gerekli olan demokratik cumhuriyetin kurulması ve gerçek laikliğin uygulanmasında CHP artık tamamen devre dışı. Sonuç olarak, CHP ile birlikte, kurduğu biçimiyle otoriter cumhuriyetin kullanım tarihi kesin bir biçimde sona erdi.

CHP Soykırımcı Bir Partidir

Faşizmin yanı sıra, CHP ayrıca soykırımı uygulamış olan bir partidir. Bilen bilir de, resmi tarihin patenti de CHP de olduğu için bu gerçek saklanır. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti'nde yalanı icat eden parti olmak kolay mı? Hatta daha da ilginci, CHP kanunla soykırım yapan dünyadaki ilk partidir. Soykırımlar gizli yapılır, iz bırakılmaz, resmi belge ortalıkta dolaşmaz; sonradan inkâr edebilmek için. Ama CHP öyle yapmadı: Mustafa Kemal ile birlikte 1937 ve 1938'de iki kanunla alevi kürtlere karsı Dersim Soykırımı'nı uyguladı. Gerçekten ne cesaret, ne yüzsüzlük ve ne barbarlık! Dünya tarihinde kanunla soykırımın yapıldığı sadece bir örnek daha var: Fransız devrimcilerin gerçekleştirdiği 1792 Vandée Soykırımı. Fransız parlamentosunda halâ iki kanun teklifi bu soykırımın tanınması için sırasını bekliyor. Dersim Soykırımı, kavramın mucidi Lemkin'in kriterlerine tamamen uyan tipik bir soykırımdır ama örneğin bu partinin hem Alevi, hem de Kürt olan genel başkanından bu konuda tık yoktur. Yani siyasi şizofreni bu değilse nedir? Yani sen kurban olarak, celladının partisinde, sahte cellat rolüne soyunuyorsun. Hem de kurban ve patron cellat, aynı kişide. Söz bitti.

Şimdi su sıfatlara bir bakalım: Faşist, soykırımcı, ırkçı. En ağırlarını aldım. Militarist, milliyetçi, devletçi, darbeci, ayrımcı olanları (üstelik sanki çok hafiflermis gibi) bir kenara bıraktım. Sıralanan sekiz sıfat solun düşmanıdır ve sol ideoloji ile (demokratik sosyalizm, sosyal demokrasi, sosyalizm) hiçbir ilgisi yoktur. İlk üç sıfat günümüz dünyasında ne durumda? Peki, aynı üç sıfat 1950'li yıllarda ne durumdaydı? O günden, bugüne dek her üç sıfatın uğradıgı muamele hep aynı oldu: Kanunla mahkum edildiler. Bu nitelikteki insanlar daha çok neo-nazi hareketlere yamandılar. Bizde ise bu üç sıfatla, söz konusu partinin sola çark etmesi bekleniyor! Geçiniz. Çok ilginçtir bu partinin kadroları, seçilmişleri ile ona oy atanları kendilerine “ama bu yaptığınız faşizm ve ırkçılık” dendiğinde hayrete düşerler ve sinirli bir biçimde reddederler. Yani CHP'liler faşist ve ırkçı olduklarından bihaberdirler. Örneğin Kürtlere karşı hala önyargılı davranmaları hem ırkçı olduklarının kanıtını oluşturur, hem de Dersim Soykrımı için özür dilemediklerinden, soykırımcı eğilimin hala sürdüğünü gösterir.

Aleviler eğer Stokholm sendromunu aşar ve cellatına oy atmayı bırakırlarsa CHP önümüzdeki ilk genel seçimde biter. Kürdistan'da nasıl silindiyse aynısı olur. Eğer Alevilerin bir bölümü yine mazoşizm içinde yüzerse, o zaman CHP iki seçim sonra tamamen yok olur. TSK'nın sivil uzantısı olan CHP'ye de atsa atsa bir tek pırpırlılar oy atar. CHP'nin yok olması da gerçek demokrasiye giden yolda, sahici sol partinin önünü sonuna kadar açar.

Otoriter Türkiye Cumhuriyeti artık yerini resmi olmayan bir Sünni İslam Cumhuriyeti’ne bıraktı. Bunun resmiyete dönüşmemesi amacıyla İslamcılardan kurtulmak için, gerçek sol dışında bir ikinci yol da zaten yoktur.

Son bir tespit ile noktayı koyalım. Evrensel anlamda ifade özgürlüğünü kısıtlayan bir parti demokrasiden bahsedemez ve demokrasi sözünü ağzına alamaz. Yeni TCK’da 159. Maddenin yerini alan ve AKP’nin icadı olan 301. Maddeye CHP de destek vermiştir. Böyle bir partinin otoriterlik konusunda rakibi AKP’den bir farkı kalmaz, kuracakları (zaten kurmuş oldukları) sistem 40 katır mı, 40 satır mı ikilemine düşer ki buradan ancak otoriter bir rejim çıkar. Bunu savunan bir parti de zaten sol olamaz, hiçbir zaman da olmadı.

lundi 11 août 2014

Sanctions russes : l’autopunition européenne

Sanctions russes : l’autopunition européenne

Jusqu'où faudra-t-il démolir nos économies pour complaire à l’hybris expansionniste de "l’hyperclasse euraméricaine" ?

Jean-Michel Vernochet 


L’Europe – enfin, ce qu’il convient de nommer ainsi –, cette hydre informe et sans tête pensante, a-t-elle décidé de se punir elle-même pour avoir tenté de suborner l’Ukraine, encouragé la crise du Maïdan, l’éviction de Ianoukovitch et l’actuelle guerre civile du Donbass ? La sagesse eût pourtant voulu que l’on s’efforçât de calmer le jeu. Au lieu de ça, après le retour de la Crimée à sa terre d’origine (de grâce, cessons de parler d’annexion), la surenchère verbale et militaire n’a cessé d’aller crescendo. Ainsi les sanctions de niveau trois qui nous font entrer de plain-pied dans la guerre économique. Au demeurant, une arme à terrible double tranchant.
Editions Sigest, 2014.

En visant désormais les secteurs vitaux de l’économie russe, Bruxelles prend à l’évidence des risques non exactement calculés. Car ce qui paraît habile sur le papier peut avoir de curieuses incidences. Ainsi, les économies russe et européenne étant étroitement liées, le COREPER (Comité des représentants permanents de l’Union européenne) évalue les dommages immédiats consécutifs aux sanctions à 23 milliards d’euros pour l’économie russe, et à près de 40 milliards d’euros pour les pays de la zone euro. Est-ce très judicieux en période de stagnation ? Il est vrai que la différence entre les deux ensembles économiques rend incomparables des pertes du simple au double. Il n’empêche !
Prenons quelques chiffes pour mieux comprendre les enjeux et les non-profits à venir. En 2013, 47 % des obligations émises par la Fédération de Russie l’ont été sur les marchés européens, soit 7,5 milliards d’euros. Le volume des ventes d’équipements militaires entre la Russie et l’Union européenne se monte, bon an mal an, à 3,2 milliards d’euros dont 300 millions d’euros d’importations par la Russie. En outre, l’Union européenne exporte pour 4 milliards d’euros de biens à double usage (militaire et civil), notamment électroniques, et aussi pour 150 millions de matériels sensibles à destination des pétroliers. Quant à la guerre agricole, cela peut prêter à rire, mais elle fera assurément des dégâts. Sont prohibés « lait, fromage, oignons d’Ukraine, pêches de Grèce, prunes de Serbie, pommes et choux de Pologne, viande d’Espagne, poulets nord-américains, tous produits qui contiennent des substances nocives ou sont infectés par des bactéries potentiellement dangereuses ou encore ne respectant pas les normes réglementaires », dixit l’Agence de sécurité alimentaire russe.
Autre exemple. Le 6 août, Moscou annonçait ses propres mesures de rétorsion dans le domaine aérien suite aux restrictions imposées à Dobrolet (Добролёт), filiale économique d’Aeroflot (Аэрофлот). Or, en deux jours seulement, les compagnies aériennes américaines et européennes supportent déjà un manque à gagner de quelque 4,5 milliards de dollars, soit les pertes liées à la baisse de leur cotation en Bourse. Si Aeroflot doit renoncer à 300 millions de dollars cette année, Lufthansa doit, elle, s’attendre à la perte d’un milliard de dollars… par trimestre. Les fins stratèges de la guerre économique n’ont, en effet, apparemment pas tenu compte de l’immensité géographique russe, 1/7 des terres émergées… et en conséquence de sa place dans les échanges mondiaux en tant qu’espace de transit. Prudents, les dirigeants russes n’entendent cependant pas interdire en totalité leur espace aérien, mais renouveler au compte-gouttes certaines autorisations temporaires de vol, en particulier pour les charters de passagers et de marchandises.
En dernier lieu, la Chambre de commerce et d’industrie franco-russe indique que 1.200 sociétés françaises sont implantées en Russie et 6.000 autres y exportent… Qu’en sera-t-il dans quelques mois, sachant que les sanctions votées par l’Union européenne réduisent notablement l’accès des investisseurs étrangers aux banques d’État. Cela se chiffrera à n’en pas douter par un supplément de chômeurs, 150.000 dit-on. Alors jusqu’où faudra-t-il démolir nos économies pour complaire à l’hybris expansionniste de « l’hyperclasse euraméricaine » ?