A TV Debate On Armenian-Turkish Relations

On Jan. 12, 2008, a friend of me in Yerevan invited me to attend a TV debate on Armenian-Turkish relations managed by Armenia TV channel. The debate was between Armenia’s ex-prime minister and political leader Khosrov Harutunyan and political scientist Dr. Armen Ayvazyan. As I knew Dr. Ayvazyan’s views on this issue I accepted to sit with the group of attendees in the program who would support Dr. Ayvazyan in this issue.

The debate was especially concentrated on one matter of the Armenian-Turkish relations; the closed borders between Armenia and Turkey. Harutunyan defended “normalizing” Armenian-Turkish relations, and that Armenia should make initiatives to “change” Turkey’s policy, at the same time considering the EU as a “natural ally” to Armenia in this issue.

Dr. Ayvazyan finds that opening the borders between Armenia and Turkey, which currently is not possible as Turkey put several unachievable preconditions to do that, will threaten Armenia’s interests. This is because opening borders between the two countries would offer the opportunity to Turk professionals and companies to enter Armenia’s economy widely and allows Turkey’s intelligence to infiltrate Armenia. Dr. Ayvazyan sees that Armenia does not have defensive mechanisms in economic and national security to face such a case. He also finds that Armenia must follow efficient policy to face the hostile policy followed by Turkey and its strategic partner Azerbaijan towards Armenia. Dr. Ayvazyan stated events from which it can be decided the EU might not be considered as Armenia’s “natural or strategic ally”. He also stated Armenia can’t survive on the current area of 29.8 thousand kilometer square, besides territories of former "Autonomous Region of Mountainous Gharabagh". Thus, it must raise the issue of the Armenian lands of Western Armenia occupied by Turkey, which is essential in solving the Armenian issue instead of seeking alone the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

Harutunyan stated countries in Europe which have small areas, like Armenia, that had normalized its relations with neighboring countries with greater areas. The comparison here was improper as these countries, unlike Turkey, used to solve their problems in civilized ways. Besides, the people of these countries did not suffer from genocide, and even Germany, unlike Turkey, admitted the dark page of its history and recognized the Holocaust. It also seemed Harutunyan doesn’t realize that normalizing relations between parties in conflict can’t be achieved till solving existing problems and restoring justice. The successive Turkish regimes seem not to be ready to do this by following hostile policy towards Armenia and denying the Armenian Genocide.

The three “jury” members in the program out of four voted for Harutunyan’s opinions. They were either young or not specialized people (a young female student in religions, a young man who is the director of an FM radio station, the head of the Photographer’s Union and the director of an NGO!!). The attendees should have given the right to voice their opinions on this important issue.

The program will be broadcast on Tuesday (Jan. 15 at 9:15 p.m. Armenia local time) and will receive votes on both views to decide which view is more accepted by the voters.

Dear reader, which view is more practical and closer to you?

http://www.karabakh-open.com