ANZAC Cove Destroyed !

[Eceabat]

Ozzie,

it is too late, Howard and the pack went over to the Yanks years ago.

Nice to seek more of the Australian and New Zeland media picking up on the ANZAC Cove destruction issue. A lot of people, especially those who have been here before, are in for a nasty shock when they next visit.

Bill

[Ozzie]

It's a shame that the extent of what was happening wasn't in the media earlier, when a more vigorous protest could have been mounted. I only found out about it through this and another forum.

So much for the next generation seeing how it truly was.

[Ozzie]

Here is a view of a Turk if you will! I have lived seeing history slip from our hands either for the sake of dams, housing or hotels. The history I am talking is ancient in most cases. Now the same attitude has got to recent history, that of the Gallipoli Campaign, for the sake of visitors’ comfort and convenience.

Well, that is why we should all speak since we are this time cited as the reason for these works. Please do NOT do this on my behalf. Why? I do not think that either those who fell in the campaign nor those who fought had much comfort then. When we visit the site do we want to see what they went through, what a hell warfare can be like? I want to.

I think preserving this site, which was unspoiled yet accessible (do not worry visitors) is the only way of comprehending it. Especially as we Turks have not done our homework, do not have many books or written accounts and are desperately in need of preserving the battlefields if we want to learn about the campaign.

Well, in my view, when it comes to history, it is not only in Turkey’s hands and from experience let it not please be so since history is for all of us and all people. This history, and these battlefields, do not just belong to us, we owe it to future generations to pass this legacy on.

Serpil Karacan Sellars

Eceabat

Turkey

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Having reread this thread I think this quote sums it all up.

Lest We Forget

[Ozzie]

“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 to us between the ‘Johnnies’ and the ‘Mehmets,’ where they lie side by side here in this country of ours. . . You, the mothers, who sent your sons from faraway 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.”

-- M. Kemal Ataturk

What the hell ahs happened?

[Ozzie]

The original (I hope it attaches this time)

[mcderms]

I find myself in agreement with Ozgur... There are a lot of people preaching on this post and it's about time that we realised that Turkey has the right to self determination, we lost, it's their country and that's that.

The last row like this was when the Turks tried to charge an entrance fee... this is a poor country, guys. Maybe they cannot keep the area serviceable in the most sensitive way we'd all like but at the same time how many are putting hands in pockets?

[Guest CGI]

Dear mcderms,

Could you please shed some light on the following not-so-very-clear elements in your posting? I'm afraid they are hard to understand :

- "Turkey has the right to self determination, we lost, it's their country and that's that." : Do you mean the Treaty of Lausanne does not exist?

- "The last row like this was when the Turks tried to charge an entrance fee." : Am I right in thinking you wholeheartedly supported that plan?

- "this is a poor country, guys." : could you please tell me how big is their BNP?

- "Maybe they cannot keep the area serviceable in the most sensitive way." : Have you got any idea how big is the Milli Park budget, or does 'maybe' just mean you do not know at all?

- "at the same time how many are putting hands in pockets?" : Do you mean doing that instead of raising their voice against the destruction of historical heritage? Yes, that would be a shame indeed

CGI

[Eceabat]

As one who has been accused of preaching, both in this forum and in the media, I’d like to take issue with a few points raised by mcderm.

No one is questioning Turkey’s right to self determination, especially not me, hey, I live here. However, this is not an issue that pits Australians, New Zealanders, Brits or any of the other countries who had men fight and die on the Gallipoli Peninsula against the Turks. What is being done on the battlefields, and just as importantly how it is being done, is a matter of concern for all those who have a shared history in that land and for future generations who will inherit this legacy.

Yes, the Australian government asked for the road above ANZAC Cove to be "upgraded" to use their own word. And indeed the road all along the coastal strip needed to be repaired as it had not been maintained in 17 years. However, the Australians did not ask for the wholesale destruction of the historical site, excavations cutting into the hills above the Cove of up to 20 metres resulting in cliff faces in places 30 metres high. And yes, I know this as I had part of the letter asking for the upgrade read out to me over the phone, even though it has not been made public.

A lot of untruths have been told over what has happened to the battlefields, and sadly most of them have come from the mouths of our elected leaders. Yes, human remains were disturbed. Yes, trenches and other historically significant sites were destroyed. And no, there were other options to the massive excavations, such as retaining walls beneath the existing roads to stop the threat of erosion.

The Gallipoli Historical National Park has a charter and is governed by legislation. Within this legislation it clearly states, as does the original master plan for the development of the park, that no trenches or sites of historical significance are to be damaged or even developed. Whoops, that one slipped past the guys who built a car park over the top of the Turkish trenches at Bombasirti or ran the bulldozers through the hills above ANZAC Cove and then dumped the spoil onto the beach (It’s still there by the way, despite official promises made five weeks ago that it would be removed).

Addressing another matter raised, the Turkish government has allocated $100 million, of which about $20 million has already been spent, on the 66 or so projects that are being developed across the Peninsula. Not to shabby for a so called poor country (estimated GNP $350 billion).

As to putting hands in pockets, the New Zealanders offered $NZ 750,000 (more than $US500,000) for the development of a walking trail from the coast up to Chunuk Bair. This was rejected by Turkey as unneeded.

A minor point, and one that no official wants to go near is that there is the Luasanne Treaty of 1923, referred to a number of times in this thread. Mcderm is quite right when he said the Allies lost at Gallipoli. However, take a longer view of history, we won the war and yes, the Luasanne Treaty was the signing off point for that conflict for the Allies and Turkey.

In that treaty it sets out that the ANZAC area, as delineated to this day by datum markers, and the lands on which stand the other Allied cemeteries, is granted in perpetuity to the Allied powers referred to in the document. In particular, articles 128 and 129 of the treaty are relevant. Concerning the ANZAC sector, the opening paragraph of article 129 is significant.

"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), which is shown on Map No. 3."

Concerning the row over the proposal last year to charge admission fees to the battlefields, the howls overseas were nothing to the screams heard here in Turkey. Again, it would have been an illegal act, as that handy document the Luasanne Treaty also states that visitors must have free access at all time to the cemeteries.

All of this isn’t a question of undermining Turkey’s sovereignty, that is also assured by the treaty. However, despite the spineless bureaucrats in Canberra, London and elsewhere not wanting to push the issue, the Allied powers did and do have some rights over the area.

What needs to be understood, both here and elsewhere, is that history is not about concrete and asphalt. At the risk of preaching (again) it is about people and places. Well, the people who fought here and gave up so much are still here and the places they fought over and lived in are too. If we care about history and those who served and fell, what better monument to them than preserving the battlefield.

[Bryn]

mcderms,

If your major justification for all this is "we lost", then better get your facts right.

Turkey lost World War One. "We" won.

[Max]

- "Turkey has the right to self determination, we lost, it's their country and that's that." : Do you mean the Treaty of Lausanne does not exist?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

CGI

Are you suggesting that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne actually restrict Turkeys right to self determination or its sovereignty over the Gallipoli peninsula. ?

Andy

[Ozzie]

So, it's been one big balls up by all around. What I want to know is, can it be fixed? What can we do to stop anymore earthworks? Will my grandchildren see something of the original Gallipoli or will it be all carparks and roads to the cemetries and memorials only?

[Eceabat]

Andy,

The Treaty of Lausanne clearly states that Turkey retains full sovereignty over the lands granted in perpetuity to the Allied forces. However, yes it also clearly sets out certain limitations on what can be done in those areas, and lays out rights and obligations to all parties. The requirement set by the Allies that the Peninsula remain demilitarised was rescinded prior to World War Two as a concession to Turkey and to try and gain favour with Ankara. However, the rest of the treaty, as regards the cemeteries, memorials and the ANZAC or Ariburnu sector as set out in articles 128, 129 and elsewhere still apply.

One of the obligations that Turkey has it to maintain the roads providing access to the cemeteries and memorials. The road along the coast in the ANZAC sector had, apart from a few potholes being filled, had not been maintained for 17 years.

As to a question of sovereignty, you only have to look at the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus Straits, over which Turkey only has limited control, a result of international agreements put in place after the war. While it can regulate the traffic of shipping through these waterways, she is not allowed to charge transit fees and cannot force ships to take a pilot on board. In fact, if a ship runs aground the Turks can’t touch it or assist unless the captain or owner requests assistance.

Cheers

Bill

[Max]

Hello Bill

The point I was trying to make by my somewhat rhetorical question was that Turkey holds and maintains sovereignty over the area of land in question. Like most agreements the Treaty of Lausanne gives with one hand with the threat of taking away with the other.

As you quite rightly point out the Turkish government of 1922/23 did make provision to give free access to cemeteries etc and to maintain infrastructure as required. The last part of Article 128 is, in my view, the most important however "The above provisions shall not affect Turkish or Greek sovereignty over the land thus granted.". This in effect means that any time the Turkish government want to use the land granted for anything else they are quite within their legal rights to do so, as I said, give with one hand and threaten to take away with the other.

As far as I am concerned the Turkish government has fulfilled its obligations set out in the Treaty of Lausanne, how could any signatory of the treaty envisage the level of visitor numbers seen today. In fact in part 8 of Article 129 the Turkish government asks for prior notification of parties exceeding 150, I wonder what they would make of the thousands of visitors expected on Anzac Day.

I am not going to make public my views on what many here see as the desecration of sacred ground because I don't want to fan the situation but I will say that I am in agreement with those who think that the civil engineering recently carried out could and probably should have been of a much higher standard.

Andy

[Eceabat]

Hi Andy,

You are quite right about the last part of article 128 of the Luasanne Treaty reinforcing Turkey’s sovereignty over the parts of the Gallipoli Peninsula. However, I still feel that the bit about granted in perpetuity also conveys some value and rights and responsibilities.

A similar situation exists in the Haidarpasa Cemetery in Istanbul, which contains quite a number of Florence Nightingale’s less successful cases. The two plots of land used for burials during the Crimean War were granted to the British government in perpetuity by the then Ottoman Sultan, extra land being granted to link to the two. The cemetery, which is beautifully maintained by the CWGC, is still in use and members of Istanbul’s British community can still be planted there.

While Turkey has generally kept to the letter of the treaty (could have done a bit more on the road upkeep in years gone by), and has bent over backwards to assist in the holding of the ANZAC Day commemorative services in the past, there has been a more recent push tighten its interpretation and ignore the question of the ANZAC or Ariburnu sector’s status under the treaty.

Every Allied grave, cemetery and memorial on the Peninsula is on Turkish soil, I just contend it is Turkish soil with a slight difference.

All the best

Bill

[Eceabat]

I was going to post another rant about more recent damage to the ANZAC Cove area, having been out there today (Friday). Usual stuff about soil being dumped onto the beach at the Cove, cement trucks being washed out and dumping excess concrete directly onto the beach, that sort of thing.

Then I came across an article by Alan Ramsey, a respected Australian political columnist, and decided my ravings could wait. This article, which is on the Sydney Morning Herald's on line edition for Saturday, names names, points fingers (and indeed sticks them where they should be stuck.

For anyone who wants to know the political side of what has happened, at least from the Australian angle, this is where to go.

Cheers

Bill

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Alan-Ramsey/Sha...3509924777.html

[Auimfo]

Thanks for the link Bill. Such a frustrating article to read though. Something like this needs to be front page of every major newspaper in Australia. The gov't needs to be given a big wake up call. It seems at the moment they are still able to deflect the attention by stonewalling and using the line "we'll look into it and get back to you" - hoping it will all go away and be forgotten.

I read with extreme anger Howard's comment:

"We made certain requests in relation to a road in one part of the area which was, as I understand, a little away from Anzac Cove."

With the 90th anniversary of Anzac Day on our doorstep, let's hope the media and Australians who visit Anzac Cove recognize the true extent of damage and take the Gov't to task by demanding answers for their complicy in this disaster and the subsequent deceit of the Australian public*.

Tim L.

I hope this hasn't breached any forum rules and apologize if it does.

[Andrew P]

Thanks for that article Bill. Very interesting reading. It would be good to think that Howard won't slip out of this mess his government has created.

There has hardly been a word of this mess from the press in WA, so hearing what's going on from the likes of you & CGI is very much appreciated.

It seems Senator Mark Bishop is trying to get to the truth of this and also the mass grave at Fromelles in France, so at least there is one political person in Canberra who seems genuinely interested in our history.

Regards

Andrew

[Eceabat]

Here is the rant I mentioned in my last posting, along with a couple of pics of the new look ANZAC Cove. (I hope they attach)

All drive-by historians will be pleased to know that the asphalt for the road across the top of ANZAC Cove was laid on Friday. The contractors are moving at a rate of about one kilometre a day.

While Turkish officials justified the excavations into the hills above the Cove as required to prevent damage from erosion, parts of the newly laid road are only one metre further in from the edge of the Cove than the old one. In other places along the coastal strip, the road follows exactly the route of the old. Despite this, all along the coastal road excavations have cut back into the hills.

Ok so now to the frothing at the mouth bit. At two separate points along the Cove itself, cement trucks have dumped excess concrete directly onto the beach. In their haste to get the road ready for 25 April, more soil and the broken up asphalt of the old have been bulldozed onto the beach.

Local Turks who have seen the work are as horrified as I am, and are as critical of the destruction, and the indecent haste as anyone else.

This is a case of political expediency and bureaucracy run wild.

There is a proposal to "upgrade" the road running atop Second Ridge, along which are sited the front line trenches, also backed by the Australian government. If this is carried out in the same slap dash manner as the coastal road, there is little hope for the area.

OK, I’ve taken my medication now and have calmed down.

Bill

[Eceabat]

Opps,

over did it on my attachments allocation the first time round.

For your info, the first shot posted was an installation art piece in concrete 60 metres south of Ariburnu cemetery.

The following two are of of bulldozer-assisted natural erosion into the cove and the new tarmac for the ANZAC Cove International Airport (arrivals and departures terminals to be constructed later).

Bill

PS. I think the medication is wearing off

[Geoff S]

Thanks for the additional photographs Bill.

The road looks tiny in comparison to all the excavation work that has been done. Perhaps, it will be widened before the official parties arrive on the big day.

I think that the Australian PM could be in for an interesting day,, if any members of the Australian public who have visited the site in the past, get a chance to see his improvements’ & get close enough to stonker him.

He might want to keep his head well below the parapet, or risk being sniped.

Cheers

Geoff S

[Eceabat]

Followers of this thread may want to look at a story in the Australian newspaper the Age for 17 April. It seems as if the Howard government is to withdraw support for further road projects in the ANZAC area until a proper assessment is carried out. Too late for the Cove but it might help save Second Ridge.

Sadly, I doubt Howard will get near the masses to get the serve he deserves and I wouldn't like to see any protests during the ceremonies themselves. Of course, if the opportunity presents itself....

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/How...3509968200.html

[michaeldr]

In my sheltered, northern hemisphere, what-passes-for life, I have not come across this expression before

Presumably Geoff, you are using it in the ..... form?

“According to the Macquarie Dictionary, stonkered in Australia can mean drunk, which is presumably the sense you know, though it also has associated ideas of being defeated, exhausted, done in, or lethargic, as after a large meal. This comes from the verb stonker, which at one time could mean to kill, but is now the action of outwitting or defeating somebody. It is generally said that this in turn comes from an old Scots term stonk, originally and oddly the stake in a game of marbles. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first recorded use of it was in John Jamieson’s Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language in 1841, in which he said that stunk was “the stake put in by boys in a game, especially in that of marbles”. According to the Concise Scots Dictionary, this is now only local Scots dialect, and it suggests the Scots got it from local English dialect (do try to keep up), which might have originated in stock, a store, presumably the bag or other container the marbles or money were kept in. The Australian use seems to have come out of soldiering—at least, the first examples in the Australian National Dictionary (hang on a minute while I move some of these books out of the way) are from military publications at the end of the First World War, in 1918.”

For more see http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sto3.htm

And thanks Bill, for the link to Alan Ramsey’s article, which I have passed on

Regards

Michael D. R.

Edited 16 April , 2005 by michaeldr

[Max]

Can all posters please remember the forum rule concerning no discussion of contemporary politics. Some of the latest postings are sailing very close to the wind and I would be disappointed if I, or any other moderator, had to edit posts.

Andy

[Bryn]

Yes, apparently contemporary politics don't impinge on what's going on at Anzac Cove.

I had a post deleted on this thread earlier. Thanks for telling me why, guys, appreciate it.

[michaeldr]

Andy,

I have now edited my earlier post

However, I do not see how one can discuss this very urgent and important problem with out mentioning its Australian political angle; see Bill’s last link

“Opposition spokesman on the environment and heritage, Anthony Albanese, said it was evident from Dr Cameron's letter that the Howard Government had known for two years that the roadworks would cause extensive damage.

"The Government asked for the roadworks to be done but seeks to avoid any responsibility for the consequences," he said.”

I appreciate that the Moderators have a difficult job here,

but this is a very important Great War subject which also happens to have a political aspect in Australia

Perhaps if the Australian politicians had stayed out of it in the first place, then ……………………

Regards

Michael D.R.