Turkey digging in at Gallipoli... again

[barbarosun hafidi]

So would Bill kindly inform us if erection of Nuri Yamut memorial causes upset to him?

[Clio]

Its not going to be the base of another ghastly colossus is it ?

[barbarosun hafidi]

What if it is base of another ghastly colossus. Should Turkey get permission from you or the likes of Bill before erecting a memorial?

[williamsomme]

barbarosun hafidi,go and read more

[barbarosun hafidi]

williamsomme, read what?

[Krithia]

What if it is base of another ghastly colossus. Should Turkey get permission from you or the likes of Bill before erecting a memorial?

If only, and then it may be sympathically done, so we, as the world, can help preserve the battlefields and those who died on this hallowed ground. A car park over a battlefield cemetery is not the memorial that our ancestors, Ottoman and British, would have wanted. Hopefully others will wake up before the Peninsula is turned into one great big car park!

[barbarosun hafidi]

If only, and then it may be sympathically done, so we, as the world, can help preserve the battlefields and those who died on this hallowed ground. A car park over a battlefield cemetery is not the memorial that our ancestors, Ottoman and British, would have wanted. Hopefully others will wake up before the Peninsula is turned into one great big car park!

For a start, Turkey is a sovereign country and it does not need planning permission from the likes of Bill & Co when erecting a memorial to honour their ancestors in Gallipoli.

And who is laying the rules of doing it "sympathically"? Perhaps you can start measuring the dimensions of British Commonwealth and French wargraves on the peninsula, and then we can decide which ones are colossus. Then, if they are deemed to be colossus, then they can be trimmed in size, again, "sympathically" whatever that means!!

[stevem49]

Me thinks the latest developments are more to do with Turkish Tourism than anything else. Let us hope they do not drive the tourists away.

sm

[Guest]

Memorials to the dead are not to be confused with political propaganda.

One who follows Gallipoli knows that the Johnnys and the Mehmets respected each other. What a shame that some in this age do not continue this respect.

Condemn if you wish, but ask, how did they die, and and what would they want now?

I would suggest that they would ask that we all respect the place of their deaths, their remains, and to not make political issue of dead men.

To me the Gallipoli battlefield is a burial ground of many nationalties, and should be now left in peace. No more disturbances, no more angst.

For those who have come lately to respecting what occured there, then they should see it as it was, not what politics decree it to be today.

If one is seroius about Gallipoli, then one won't mind walking it, would one?

Or for the infirm, donkeys and mules are beasts of burden and agile enough for the cliffs.

After all they did manage to bring in the wounded, and carry the ammo.

Kim

[Auimfo]

barbarosun hafidi,

I think you are missing the point entirely. No one is complaining about the construction of Turkish memorials and fully understand the wishes of the Turkish people to build them. What is of concern is the the siting of these memorials and the damage they may be doing in key areas of historical importance to ALL the nations that took part in the conflict. This is what Krithia meant by being sympathetic.

I don't think anyone could possibly claim that the roadworks a couple of years ago actually 'aided' in the conservation of the area. Let's face it, they were unnecessarily damaging, and built with little care or thought to heritage in mind. And just to boot, they were shoddily made and collapsed within months - just adding to the irreperable damage already done. Then of course, there are the carparks built over various places of historical importance.

After such a fiasco, is it any wonder that concerned people are paying particular attention to any 'work' that takes place on the peninsula? Or would you prefer that no one took an interest and let the place be destroyed by unscrupulous government bureaucrats who'd like to see the whole place become a money-making tourism park?

Cheers,

Tim L.

[barbarosun hafidi]

"....Or would you prefer that no one took an interest and let the place be destroyed by unscrupulous government bureaucrats who'd like to see the whole place become a money-making tourism park"

How is it a money-making tourism park? Is it oil rich Ozzies/Kiwis or the locals flooding the area with money?

Some people obviously still can not stand to see a Turkish memorial being built on the peninsula, when Turkey is honouring their ancestors with a memorial. Just like in the olden days when some people could not stand to see a Turkish memorial on the peninsula then blew it up with dynamite.

http://cas.awm.gov.au/heraldry/REL27817

[Auimfo]

How is it a money-making tourism park? Is it oil rich Ozzies/Kiwis or the locals flooding the area with money?

Read my post a little more carefully barbarosun hafidi. I didn't say it 'is' a money-making tourism park but that without careful monitoring might become one. And you will notice that I did not specify the nationality of the 'unscrupulous government bureaucrats' quite simply because they exist on every side of the fence.

Oil rich Ozzies/Kiwis??????? I wish!!!!!!!!!! Those who visit don't go there to enjoy fun rides or expect to find Disneyland - they go there to pay their respects. Yes they have to spend money on travel and necessary accomodation but it's those who would try to cash in on these visitors by wanting to create a cheap theme park who we must be careful of. (By the way - it's spelt 'Aussies' )

Some people obviously still can not stand to see a Turkish memorial being built on the peninsula, when Turkey is honouring their ancestors with a memorial. Just like in the olden days when some people could not stand to see a Turkish memorial on the peninsula then blew it up with dynamite.

http://cas.awm.gov.au/heraldry/REL27817

Without trying to be rude, that's just a load of rubbish. Where's your evidence for such a claim other than the destruction of a Turkish memorial in 1919 - which it will be noted, was built over the top of Australian graves after having their crosses removed by Turkish troops.

It seems that you are angered at what you perceive to be an attack on the Turkish people. Unfortunately, your perception is misguided and you have missed the point completely. We are upset with ANYONE who would unnecessarily cause damage and destruction to key areas of historical and international importance, no matter where they are from.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[The Plummed Goose]

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.

William G. McAdoo

[Auimfo]

Very true Eric.

But when someone's misguided understanding of imagined prejudices colour their public comments about people like Bill and his friends who are doing their honest best in terms of heritage conservation, the record needs to be set straight.

There is no 'anti-Turk' sentiment expressed here and nationality has absolutely nothing to do with this. It's a ludicrous suggestion on the part of barbarosun hafidi. If he cares to read the thread regarding the roadworks at Anzac Cove from a couple of years ago, he might see that we were equally disgusted by the actions of both the Australian and Turkish authorities who permitted the work to commence and then continue even after the potential damage was recognised.

Uncaring idiots in positions of authority exist in all walks of life whether they be Australians, Turks, British or New Zealander. (and probably every other country as well)

Cheers,

Tim L.

[barbarosun hafidi]

"Without trying to be rude, that's just a load of rubbish. Where's your evidence for such a claim other than the destruction of a Turkish memorial in 1919 - which it will be noted, was built over the top of Australian graves after having their crosses removed by Turkish troops."

This must be the tallest lie! Take that picture with you, go to peninsula and have a look around. If that memorial were left alone it were just going to be next to Australian graves. It was not built over the top of any grave. Wooden crosses were used as firewood, a necessity of the harsh winter (obviously no gas pipes then). Pope Benedict XV's envoy was happy with the care provided. But some with no respect to the fallen chose to destroy it.

http://www.awm.gov.au/exhibitions/gmaps/cemeteries/

"..... After the evacuation many of the wooden crosses were used as firewood and the grass and shrubs grew back, covering the graves. Other cemeteries had been remodelled by the Turks in 1916 after Pope Benedict XV enquired after the state of the cemeteries. When the Turkish War Office discovered the cemeteries had vanished from view, they made mounds, representing graves, and bordered them with stones. These mounds often faced a different direction to the graves underneath. It did make the cemeteries look tidy, and the Pope's envoy, who inspected the remodelled cemeteries, reported that the Turks were caring for the cemeteries."

It is possible to defeat an ignorant man in argument, you show them the truth first, but if that man is bigoted, then no chance..

(And by the way auimfo, I don't need a lecture in English, Ozzies and Aussies sound same)

[Krithia]

barbarosun hafidi, I am not sure what agenda you have as you keep missing the point. But this I'll argue no longer.

The past cannot be changed so it is in-material if Turk had destroyed graves and the Allied forces memorials just after the war. That was THEN, this is NOW.

Today we must work together to preserve History for future generations and by this I mean remove politics, religion, propaganda and corruption from driving change so we can keep the true memory alive of those who sacrificed so much in those dark days of the Great War. New memorials are welcome as long as the intent is untarnished, and the beauty and heritage of the battlefield preserved.

I'll end now and repeat the words written for Ataturks address:

Those heroes that shed their blood And lost their lives...

You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country.

Therefore, rest in peace.

There is no difference between the Johnnies

And the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side,

Here in this country of ours.

You, the mothers, who sent their sons from far away countries...

Wipe away your tears.

Your sons are now lying in our bosom

And are in peace.

After having lost their lives on this land, they have

Become our sons as well.

[Auimfo]

barbarosun hafidi,

My comment was made relative to what the soldiers believed at the time - you obviously missed my innuendo. (which is probably my fault for being a bit obscure)

Nevertheless, you have still failed to provide any evidence that there still exists any undercurrent of animosity towards Turkish memorials being built. How many now exist on the peninsula and how many of these have you seen complained about or removed simply because they were Turkish? Please give us some proof of your allegations other than a single 1919 example which is irrelevant when discussing today's values.

It always amazes me when someone in the minority (as you are in this debate) can't make their case, they revert to calling everyone else 'bigoted'. It's a cheap cop-out that exposes the weakness of your argument. And frankly, your inference that everyone here are racists is full of spite and completely without foundation.

How many times do you need it explained - we don't care if a memorial is Turkish, Australian, British. Kiwi, French etc.....if it's sited directly on a place of historical importance and going to cause the heritage of that particular spot to be damaged then don't build it. (the same goes for roads, carparks and the rest) Surely with a little bit of common sense a nearby site can be found that achieves the same aim without unduly disturbing the conservation of the area.

Perhaps next time I visit, we can discuss it in person. Should I meet you on the Anzac water slide or is it easier for you to get to the Helles ghost train?

Cheers,

Tim L.

P.S. Sounds/spelling are two completely different things. I was only trying to help you with the correct spelling of 'Aussies' and intended it in a light hearted manner - hence the smiley. You really need to take those blinkers off and stop imagining things where they don't exist.

[Eceabat]

Hi Pals,

For various reasons I have not been posting much of late but thought I should add something to this discussion, if only to clarify a few points.

Williamsomme has suggested that Barbaroson Hafidi should do some more reading. Not a bad idea if one wants to understand the issues in play here. There is a wealth of material on offer, especially if you know where to find it or have some good contacts.

A handy place to start is the project plan for the development of the Gallipoli Peninsula Historic National Park (or to give it its Turkish acronym GYTMP), which sets out all of the proposed developments that the state intends to carry out on the peninsula.

This document clearly sets out certain criteria that a project must meet before it can be undertaken. Key to this criteria is the requirement that no work can be allowed if it will destroy historically significant sites on the battlefield. It then goes on to say that this includes trenches and other works dating from 1915, along with other relics or remains from the campaign. It also specifies that no construction work can be carried out at any of the landing beaches used by the Allies and so ably defended by the Turkish forces and that a full historical survey of any site subject to proposed construction be conducted before work can commence.

In the case of both the work on Second Ridge, where trenches were damaged or partly filled with excavated soil or rubble from the original roadbed, or close to the Nuri Yamut memorial, where the landscaping filled in existing mine craters dating from late in the campaign, this regulation was ignored.

This same regulation was ignored in 2004 when the national park authority built a car park directly over the front line trenches at Bomba Siirti, known to the Allies as Turkish Quinn’s. The same regulation was flouted when a café and sales outlet centre was constructed above the beach at Morto Bay. This project also infringed other Turkish laws that prohibit construction on waterfront sites.

Barbaroson Hafidi has said that Turkey is a sovereign country and does not need the permission of others to erect a memorial to its fallen. Indeed, as I have said other postings, Turkey is a sovereign country. And as a sovereign country, Turkey signed the Lausanne Treaty of 1923 (also on the recommended reading list). As such, Turkey agreed to certain conditions regarding some areas of the Gallipoli Peninsula. Among them was the granting in perpetuity the designated areas set aside as Allied war cemeteries or memorials to the Allied powers. While not affecting Turkish sovereignty, this does confer certain rights on the Allied powers, rights exercised in the main by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) and to a lesser degree by the equivalent French organisation.

Having been granted in perpetuity, this does rather rule out the possibility raised by Barbaroson Hafidi of “sympathically” trimming the size of any Allied cemetery or memorial site on the peninsula.

As has been discussed elsewhere on the forum, the treaty also sets out that “The land to be granted by the Turkish Government will include in particular, as regards the British Empire, the area in the region known as Anzac (Ari Burnu)”. This is not just Anzac Cove or the cemeteries within the sector, this land grant covers a large area that goes beyond the front lines held during the campaign. As such, in theory at least, Turkey would have to ask permission to erect a new memorial in the designated region.

Some more relevant reading matter would be the media coverage of the agreement reached by the prime ministers of Turkey and Australia in April 2005 that no construction or excavation work would be carried out in the Anzac sector till such time as a full historical and archaeological survey of the area was conducted. As I have written before, that study has yet to begin, let alone be completed.

Australian authorities were notified of the plan to resurface the road on Second Ridge, though were given assurances that no excavation work would be carried out. When informed that digging was going on, a senior Australian official immediately visited the site and ordered work to stop, which it did. Maybe that was just good manners, especially on the part of the official in charge of the excavation work, who according to other senior Turkish officials I have spoken to, has had a prosecutor’s investigation opened against him for damaging a historic site.

For interest’s sake, Barbaroson Hafidi might want to do a Turkish language Google search of the following names: Haluk Oral, Sahin Aldogan, Gursel Goncu, Tuncay Yilmazer, Selim Meric, Cemalettin Yildiz, Yetkin Iscen or Gursel Akinguc, historians all, Turks to a man and each one of whom has spoken out or written about the damage to the battlefields and criticised the recent developments. There is no foreign campaign targeting Turkey, just the voices being raised of those concerned for the shared history on this land.

However, there are some documents that Barbaroson Hafidi will not be able to read. One of these documents is the one written by the Canakkale Culture and Heritage Commission, the regional body with the responsibility to assess all proposed projects at historically or culturally sensitive sites, giving approval for the excavation work on either side of the road on Second Ridge. Barbaroson Hafidi will not be able to read this document as it does not exist. No permission was granted by the commission to carry out this work, though such approval from the body was required under law.

It would also be interesting to read the commission document approving the 10,000 square metre development some 400 metres to the south of the Nuri Yamut memorial. However, it does not exist, as the only approval given for this site was for a 1000 to 2000 square metre project.

Similarly, it would have been useful to read about the details of this 10,000 development in the GYTMP master plan. Can’t be done though as the plan only called for a 1000 to 2000 square metre memorial to be constructed.

This is not my speculation or subjective commentary on my part. The head of the commission, Professor Dr. Ülkü Altınoluk of Yildiz Technical University in Istanbul, made it clear in public statements that in both cases approval was not given for the work as undertaken.

One a more personal note, Barbaroson Hafidi asked me directly to “…kindly inform us if erection of Nuri Yamut memorial causes upset to him?”.

Not in the least, I have always considered the Nuri Yamut memorial, constructed in 1943 by the then commander of the Turkish 2nd Corps, General Nuri Yamut, to be one of the most moving memorials to the fallen on the peninsula.

What I had a problem with was the extensive landscaping carried out around the memorial late last year. Not only did I find the work out of character with the original memorial but it was distressing to see quantities of human remains uncovered by the excavation work and significant historical sites such as mine craters damaged. That causes upset to me.

I know of no one, Turk or foreigner, who has tried to prevent the Turkish government from commemorating the fallen of the Gallipoli Campaign. Certainly not me. There have over the years been more than two dozen projects undertaken within the boundaries of the national park by Turkish authorities. Some of these I have openly supported while others I have personally disliked for various reasons but not had grounds to object to. And yes, there have been four major projects – the roadwork at Anzac Cove, the car park built over the top of Turkish Quinn’s, the excavation work along Second Ridge and the excavation and construction work at Fusilier Bluff and in Gully Ravine – that I, like some many others in Turkey, have opposed as strongly as possible

All four have a number of things in common. All four damaged significant historical sites, all four uncovered the remains of fallen soldiers, all four were carried out in contravention of Turkish laws and regulations.

I am in favour of more people, foreigners and Turks, visiting this region to pay homage to those soldiers of all nations who served here and to learn more about their own history. However, care should be taken to ensure that the history they come to learn about is not destroyed due to poorly planned and often illegal developments and that the graves of the fallen are not ploughed over by bulldozers, their remains unearthed and their final rest disturbed in the name of tourism.

Commemorate by all means, but don’t desecrate.

Some people may not consider it is important that Turkey to be a state of law, where laws and regulations are made to be observed not ignored or broken. Some may not feel it is important that Turkey abide by the terms of international agreements, such as the Lausanne treaty, signed on behalf of Turkey by Ismet Inonu and ratified by the parliament founded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Some may not feel it is improper to destroy historically significant sites. Some may not see anything wrong digging up the bones of soldiers who fell in the campaign and scattering their remains.

Some may not. However, I do.

Bill Sellars

[Auimfo]

Here endeth the lesson.

Good to see you still hanging in there Bill.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[ShirlD]

Thank you Bill for this, much appreciated

Cheers

Shirley

[Guest]

Thanks for the concise report.

Cheers

Kim

[barbarosun hafidi]

Interesting posts lately..

Auimfo,

I never called anyone "bigoted", however I don't have any objection if you are feeling that way. Your argument is baseless as there is no possibility of building any new Allied memorials on the peninsula now.

Bill,

Talking about doing some reading, have you read The Senate's report titled Matters relating to the Gallipoli Peninsula? Rather lengthly 200+ pages report, ends with "..In short, we believe this information is of no probative value. Given Mr Sellars' propensity in the past in making sensational and unsubstantiated allegations, we believe that such fresh allegations ought to similarly be discounted." Senator John Watson (Deputy Chair)"Senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells.

If you have read but not understood I suggest you re-read it. Also, Lausanne Treaty is discussed there, and it covers your "novice interpretation".

Now I shall leave you with your own dreams, you can continue to dream on.

[Auimfo]

Barbarosun Hafidi,

Well what did your following comment imply then??

"It is possible to defeat an ignorant man in argument, you show them the truth first, but if that man is bigoted, then no chance."

Baseless?? Then why were we just as angry with the Australian Gov't over the roads fiasco? I've asked you twice but so far you still haven't offered one shred of evidence suggesting that people don't want Turkish memorials simply because they are Turkish. I'm still waiting (and probably will for a long time because there isn't any)

I'd also suggest that you check your sources and provide details of all relevant Senate Hearings into the roads disaster rather than hand picking an outvoted one simply because it suits your purpose. The one you refer to was a 'minority' report compiled after the hearings by two (yes, just 2) of those participating senators who stood to lose face from the debarcle (and did!). They were simply trying to shift the blame away from themselves and hide the facts....it didn't work. The 'majority' report which was agreed upon by the vast majority of the senators (yes, over 40 of them) agreed with Bill Sellars and found his evidence compelling and truthful.

If you're trying to sling mud at Bill, then you'll have to find something a lot more substantial than a couple of outvoted and embarrased senators trying to hide their own inefficiency.

So who is the real novice here? I suggest you go and re-read the Treaty of Lausanne. I think you'll find that what Bill says is quite correct and written in black and white.

Sweet dreams.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Krithia]

Now I shall leave you with your own dreams, you can continue to dream on.[/font][/font]

Winston Churchill sums this up nicely for me A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject

Beware of the man of one book!

[Guest]

I don't know about you guys, but I get the feeling that Barbarosun Hafidi has a mission other than Turkish memorials???

Kim