European Parliamentarians Differ on Armenian Genocide

PanARMENIAN.Net - Yesterday the European Parliament held a debate on the report on Turkey's progress organized by Dutch parliamentarian Camiel Eurlings. Opening the debate the rapporteur described his report as "fair but tough" and said its basic conclusion was that the EP regretted the "slowdown in reforms"  in Turkey, although he did compliment the Turkish government on its 9th reform package. Freedom of expression was the first problem area Mr Eurlings highlighted, saying that Article 301 of the Penal Code [on "insulting Turkishness"] must be changed or abolished.  This was important not just for the EU but for Turkish people.  Freedom of religion was another issue. Confiscated property must be restituted to monasteries and churches and they must be allowed to start training clergy once more. On the sensitive subject of the Armenian genocide, Mr Eurlings stressed that he wanted to preserve his own wording in paragraph 50 of the resolution, saying that recognition of the events was not a criterion for accession, although Turkey should seek to "come to terms with its past" by allowing inquiries into the events. 



For the Socialists, Jan Marinus Wiersma (NL) argued that the EU "needs Turkey as a partner".  The negotiation process was the best way to build better relations with the country and there must be no ambiguity: the aim of negotiations was to achieve Turkish membership.  He supported rapporteur Camiel Eurlings on the Armenian genocide: Turkey should "recognise" what happened but this could not be a sine qua non for membership as it was "not part of the Copenhagen criteria". On behalf of his group, Joost lagendijk (Greens/EFA, NL) said there was a big problem with one point of the Eurlings report in its present form: the paragraphs in which, following amendments instigated by lobby groups, recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey was described as a precondition for Turkey to join. He backed Mr Eurlings' effort to reinstate his original wording on this point.  More generally, he stressed the importance of being "critical but fair" towards Turkey.  The EP must "support people in Turkey who are fighting for the same things as us". Andreas Mölzer (AT), a non-attached MEP, said that progress on reform had been slow in Turkey.  The EU had extended the deadline for the recognition of Cyprus, but Turkey had still not done this.  The political reality was that Turkey was not ready to join because of Cyprus, the non-recognition of the Armenian genocide and the Kurdish question. Simon Coveney (EPP-ED, IE) stated that he had spent the previous week in Turkey with the Human Rights subcommittee.  He welcomed the draft report as "tough but fair".  On the Armenian issue, he said, that it should not be a new pre-condition for accession.  Mr Coveney said that he supported the principal of Turkish membership, nevertheless he was particularly concerned about the freedom of expression including Article 301 of the Penal Code and resolving the Kurdish question. Development Commissioner Louis Michel On the Armenian genocide, Mr Michel emphasized that this had never been a precondition and to impose it as such now would amount to "moving the goalposts".  What mattered was "freedom of speech" and a process of "internal awareness raising and conciliation".



To remind, the other day the European Armenian Federation informed that Turkey threatens some EP members. Specifically, the Socialist and Liberal groups, which were the promoters of the Paragraph during the debates in the Committee on Foreign Relations, spoke out against the Armenian Genocide recognition as a precondition for Turkey's accession in the EU.