The blog contains articles and thoughts in English, Armenian and Arabic about Armenian issues, Artsakh-Karabakh issue, Armenian Genocide as well as the life of Armenians and Christians in Iraq and the Middle East.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Senate Resolution Reshuffles Political Cards in Ankara, Yerevan and Beyond
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
On October 21, while introducing the Armenia-Turkey Protocols to the Turkish Parliament for ratification, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu exposed his government’s true intentions.
Davutoglu stated that Armenia’s acceptance of the agreement, calling for the study of historical archives, indicated that Armenians no longer insisted on their unilateral interpretation of history. He further stated that the Protocols safeguarded Turkey’s territorial integrity from any future Armenian claims by reconfirming the present borders based on past treaties, and that the agreement would contribute to the “liberation ofAzerbaijan’s territories,” meaning Karabagh (Artsakh).
While it is understandable that Davutoglu would try to put the best possible spin on the Protocols in order to secure their ratification by the Turkish Parliament, the three advantages he cited are exactly the reasons why most Armenians have so vehemently objected to this agreement.
As expected, Davutoglu was severely criticized by the opposition parties inParliament that reject the Protocols. The most unexpected attack, however, came from Selahattin Demirtas, head of the Kurdish faction (DTP) in Parliament, who took the government to task for distorting and denying the facts of “the Armenian massacres.” Such a criticism has never been voiced before in the Turkish Parliament. Demirtas brazenly continued: “We believe that we now need to address an issue that has caused so much suffering to the Armenian people -- one of the key problems facing the Republic of Turkey. A hundred years ago, the Ittihad Party, with a policy of Islamizing and Turkifying the entire Anatolia, sought to eliminate the non-Muslims, particularly the Armenian people, from these lands through exile, expulsion, deportation and massacres.”
Ignoring the insults hurled by members of the ruling party (AKP) and others, Demirtas condemned the government’s policy of denial that had the aim of escaping the consequences of this “tragedy,” prompting the creation of “a fake history.” He noted that the persecutions and massacres of Armenians were presented as if they never happened. “We need to speak about all of these things and correct the record,” Demirtas concluded.
Immediately after addressing the Turkish Parliament, Davutoglu flew to Baku in order to quell the Azerbaijani uproar over the signing of the Protocols. Realizing the depth of their anger, Davutoglu was forced to make several outlandish declarations: “Azerbaijan’s lands are sacred for us and their liberation is Turkey’s utmost priority. We will not change our position even if the sky falls down to earth!” He also assured them that “if need be, 72 million Turks are ready to die in Azerbaijan!” Azerbaijan’s leaders, however, were not too impressed with Davutoglu’s highly inflated pronouncements. They continued to shut down mosques financed by Turkey, removed Turkey’s flags from a monument for Turkish martyrs in Baku, and threatened to raise the price of gas sold to Turkey.
While Davutoglu had his hands full in Baku, a news flash from Washingtoncame to reshuffle Ankara’s political cards. A Resolution was introduced in the U.S. Senate that called for the reaffirmation of the Armenian Genocide. This unexpected development sent a powerful message not only to Turkey, but also to the leaders of Armenia, Russia, the European Union and the United States.
To their dismay, Turkish leaders discovered that the Protocols would not put an end to the pursuit of recognition and justice for the crime of genocide committed by their ancestors.
Turkey’s Ambassador to Washington Nabi Sensoy was alarmed by this unexpected development and wasted no time in condemning the Senate Resolution during a Voice of America interview. He called the timing of the Resolution “regrettable” and “unfortunate,” coming just one day after the introduction of the Protocols in the Turkish Parliament. The esteemed Ambassador failed to indicate, however, when would be a better time to introduce such a Resolution!
Turkey’s leaders are now caught in the horns of a dilemma. If they rush to ratify the Protocols in order to prevent the House and Senate Resolutions from gaining political support, they would alienate their oil-rich Azerbaijani “brothers” for not having delivered on their promises on Karabagh. On the other hand, if Turkish leaders delay ratification until after April 24 -- waiting for Armenia to make concessions on Artsakh -- they would run the risk of having either the House or the Senate or both pass the Genocide Resolutions. Since 2010 is an election year for all House Members and a third of the Senate, members of Congress are usually more responsive to their constituents, raising the likelihood of the passage of the Genocide Resolutions. Furthermore, even if Pres. Obama has no intention of keeping his campaign promise on the Armenian Genocide, he would feel compelled to pressure the Turks to ratify the Protocols before April 24, with or without concessions from Armenia on Artsakh, in order to provide a face-saving cover for his next “Meds Yeghern” statement!
Therefore, if Armenia’s leaders stand firm on their repeated public commitments not to make concessions on Artsakh linked to the Protocols, they would be in the driver’s seat in terms of controlling Ankara’s next steps.
Pres. Sargsyan must also keep his solemn promise not to allow the Protocols to undermine Armenia’s efforts for genocide recognition. A good start to demonstrate the Armenian President’s resolve on this issue is to send a letter to the leadership of the House and the Senate, encouraging them to pass the pending Resolutions. It should be noted that the Turkish government has never hesitated to use its considerable political muscle to lobby against past Congressional Resolutions on the Armenian Genocide. Sending a simple letter of support to the U.S. Congress is the least Pres. Sargsyan could do!
The Armenian government’s backing for the newly-introduced Senate Resolution would also send a message to Washington, Moscow and beyond that Armenia is not giving up on its historic rights, even though it is being pressured to make major concessions in other areas.
It is high time for Armenian leaders to reassess the nation’s difficult predicament and take all necessary measures to avoid further missteps.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Turkey Exposed: Cannot Pretend to be Both Pro-Israeli and Pro-Palestinian
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Playing the skillful political games of their Ottoman predecessors, Turkey’s current masters present their country under various guises -- as European and Middle Eastern, Islamic and secular, pro-Arab and pro-Israeli.
It now appears that the end is near for at least one of these Turkish charades. Israeli officials have finally awakened from their prolonged coma to discover that their erstwhile “strategic partner” is far more hostile than their Arab enemies.
For a long time, Turkish leaders have been calling the Israelis all sorts of unsavory names and accusing Israel of committing barbaric acts, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Strangely, Israel has shown little indignation, even in the face of persistent racist and anti-Semitic outbursts by large segments of the Turkish public.
The latest display of Turkish hostility was the exclusion of Israel from a multinational military exercise which was to start in Turkey on October 12. In protest, the United States, Italy and Holland pulled out of these maneuvers, causing their cancellation. In a move designed to further irritate the Israelis, Turkey announced that it would instead hold joint military exercises with Syria, Israel’s main adversary.
Turkey’s Prime Minster Rejeb Erdogan told the Anatolia Press Agency last week that he had banned Israel from the military drill in response to the wishes of the Turkish public. “Turkey does not take orders from anyone in regards to its internal affairs,” Erdogan boasted. Some Turkish officials indicated that the ban was instituted because the Israeli jets assigned to the exercise had participated in the Gaza bombings earlier this year.
This episode marks a major escalation of the long-standing Turkish bitterness towards Israel. For the first time, the Turkish military joined the civilian government in adopting an anti-Israeli position. Furthermore, Turkey went beyond mere verbal condemnation to taking concrete action. For years, the Israeli government was willing to swallow insults from Turkish officials, as long as its Air Force was permitted to make practice runs in the vast Turkish airspace, shared intelligence, and sold military hardware to Turkey.
Making matters worse, Israelis were deeply offended by the broadcast of a Turkish show on state TV last week, depicting graphic scenes of Israeli soldiers killing Palestinian children and committing other atrocities.
Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman reacted by summoning the Turkish ambassador and accused Turkey of inciting hatred against Israelis. Lieberman stated that not even Israel’s enemies would air such a hostile TV series. Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom urged Turkey “to come to its senses.” Another Israeli official stated: “We need to stop accepting the Turkish dictates and humiliations. It is inconceivable that they should insult us at every opportunity, and we should continue to hold our tongues.”
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu categorically rejected any future mediating role for Turkey in talks with Syria. An unnamed “senior Israeli official” was quoted by Haaretz as stating that the strategic ties with Turkey may “have simply ended.” Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post quoted some Israeli defense officials as stating that “advanced weapons sales to Turkey would now be reviewed.”
There were also widespread calls last week for the Israeli public to boycott Turkish resorts. National Public Radio (NPR) reported that Israel’s largest labor union would no longer plan for thousands of its workers organized tours of Turkey, and would direct them to go instead to Greece and Bulgaria. Since January, there has been a 47% drop in the number of Israelis spending their vacations in Turkey, according to Time magazine. An Israeli coffee shop chain expressed its displeasure by announcing that it would no longer serve Turkish coffee to its customers. In an unprecedented move, several Israeli cabinet ministers declared that they would turn down the Turkish Embassy’s invitation to attend Turkey’s Independence Day celebrations later this month.
Many outraged Israelis advocated that, in retaliation, Israel acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Dan Margalit of “Israel Hayom” newspaper accused the Turks of not only committing Genocide, but also the “ongoing crime, which is expressed in energetic Turkish activity to deny the atrocity and to incite against any country and government and artist who wish to express their horror.”
Ephraim Inbar, head of the BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, reminded the Turks that they are still in need of “Israeli influence in Washington to prevent the passage in Congress of a resolution declaring the killing of Armenians during World War I a genocide.”
In an unprecedented action, the “Im Tirtzu” Israeli student movement held a protest last week in front of the Turkish Embassy in Tel Aviv. The students displayed bloody pictures of victims of the Armenian Genocide, handed out books on the Genocide to passersby, and carried signs calling on Turkey to formally recognize the Genocide.
To atone for its past sin of siding with Turkish denialists, Israel must officially affirm the Armenian Genocide as well as actively lobby for its recognition by other states. Israel should also permit the erection of a monument at a prominent location to commemorate the victims of the Armenian Genocide and reverse its long-standing ban on TV broadcast of documentaries on this subject. It is certainly in Israel’s own interest to side with the victims of genocide rather than with its perpetrators!
Instead of maintaining at all cost its unholy alliance with Turkey, Israel should earnestly pursue a peace settlement with the Palestinians and live in peace with its Arab neighbors, thus obviating the need to curry favors with the Turkish denialist regime.
Publisher, The California Courier
Playing the skillful political games of their Ottoman predecessors, Turkey’s current masters present their country under various guises -- as European and Middle Eastern, Islamic and secular, pro-Arab and pro-Israeli.
It now appears that the end is near for at least one of these Turkish charades. Israeli officials have finally awakened from their prolonged coma to discover that their erstwhile “strategic partner” is far more hostile than their Arab enemies.
For a long time, Turkish leaders have been calling the Israelis all sorts of unsavory names and accusing Israel of committing barbaric acts, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Strangely, Israel has shown little indignation, even in the face of persistent racist and anti-Semitic outbursts by large segments of the Turkish public.
The latest display of Turkish hostility was the exclusion of Israel from a multinational military exercise which was to start in Turkey on October 12. In protest, the United States, Italy and Holland pulled out of these maneuvers, causing their cancellation. In a move designed to further irritate the Israelis, Turkey announced that it would instead hold joint military exercises with Syria, Israel’s main adversary.
Turkey’s Prime Minster Rejeb Erdogan told the Anatolia Press Agency last week that he had banned Israel from the military drill in response to the wishes of the Turkish public. “Turkey does not take orders from anyone in regards to its internal affairs,” Erdogan boasted. Some Turkish officials indicated that the ban was instituted because the Israeli jets assigned to the exercise had participated in the Gaza bombings earlier this year.
This episode marks a major escalation of the long-standing Turkish bitterness towards Israel. For the first time, the Turkish military joined the civilian government in adopting an anti-Israeli position. Furthermore, Turkey went beyond mere verbal condemnation to taking concrete action. For years, the Israeli government was willing to swallow insults from Turkish officials, as long as its Air Force was permitted to make practice runs in the vast Turkish airspace, shared intelligence, and sold military hardware to Turkey.
Making matters worse, Israelis were deeply offended by the broadcast of a Turkish show on state TV last week, depicting graphic scenes of Israeli soldiers killing Palestinian children and committing other atrocities.
Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman reacted by summoning the Turkish ambassador and accused Turkey of inciting hatred against Israelis. Lieberman stated that not even Israel’s enemies would air such a hostile TV series. Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom urged Turkey “to come to its senses.” Another Israeli official stated: “We need to stop accepting the Turkish dictates and humiliations. It is inconceivable that they should insult us at every opportunity, and we should continue to hold our tongues.”
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu categorically rejected any future mediating role for Turkey in talks with Syria. An unnamed “senior Israeli official” was quoted by Haaretz as stating that the strategic ties with Turkey may “have simply ended.” Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post quoted some Israeli defense officials as stating that “advanced weapons sales to Turkey would now be reviewed.”
There were also widespread calls last week for the Israeli public to boycott Turkish resorts. National Public Radio (NPR) reported that Israel’s largest labor union would no longer plan for thousands of its workers organized tours of Turkey, and would direct them to go instead to Greece and Bulgaria. Since January, there has been a 47% drop in the number of Israelis spending their vacations in Turkey, according to Time magazine. An Israeli coffee shop chain expressed its displeasure by announcing that it would no longer serve Turkish coffee to its customers. In an unprecedented move, several Israeli cabinet ministers declared that they would turn down the Turkish Embassy’s invitation to attend Turkey’s Independence Day celebrations later this month.
Many outraged Israelis advocated that, in retaliation, Israel acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Dan Margalit of “Israel Hayom” newspaper accused the Turks of not only committing Genocide, but also the “ongoing crime, which is expressed in energetic Turkish activity to deny the atrocity and to incite against any country and government and artist who wish to express their horror.”
Ephraim Inbar, head of the BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, reminded the Turks that they are still in need of “Israeli influence in Washington to prevent the passage in Congress of a resolution declaring the killing of Armenians during World War I a genocide.”
In an unprecedented action, the “Im Tirtzu” Israeli student movement held a protest last week in front of the Turkish Embassy in Tel Aviv. The students displayed bloody pictures of victims of the Armenian Genocide, handed out books on the Genocide to passersby, and carried signs calling on Turkey to formally recognize the Genocide.
To atone for its past sin of siding with Turkish denialists, Israel must officially affirm the Armenian Genocide as well as actively lobby for its recognition by other states. Israel should also permit the erection of a monument at a prominent location to commemorate the victims of the Armenian Genocide and reverse its long-standing ban on TV broadcast of documentaries on this subject. It is certainly in Israel’s own interest to side with the victims of genocide rather than with its perpetrators!
Instead of maintaining at all cost its unholy alliance with Turkey, Israel should earnestly pursue a peace settlement with the Palestinians and live in peace with its Arab neighbors, thus obviating the need to curry favors with the Turkish denialist regime.
Monday, October 19, 2009
لقاء
أجرت إذاعة الـ(بي بي سي) بالعربية لقاء معي غداة التوقيع على البروتوكولين بين أرمينيا وتركيا للحديث عن رأي الشارع الأرميني حولهما.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Is it possible to execute the protocols? My Comment
http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2009/10/14/88052.html#000
I wrote the following comment on this article under the title "Misleading Article":
The Armenian Genocide of 1915 is a historical fact recognized by 22 countries, 40
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Nine Actions Armenia Must Take Before Ratifying the Protocols
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
The very first step in attempting to "normalize" relations between Armenia and Turkey -- signing the Protocols in Zurich on October 10 -- was nearly aborted when the Foreign Ministers of both countries objected to the statements that each had prepared for delivery following the signing ceremony.
Since both parties had the right to review in advance each other’s closing statements, the Armenian Foreign Minister complained that the Turkish side planned to raise unacceptable issues on Karabagh (Artsakh) and the historical commission. For his part, the Turkish Foreign Minister objected to his Armenian counterpart’s attempt to assert that the establishment of relations between the two countries was not based on "any preconditions."
After more than 3-hours of intense back and forth, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and other high-ranking officials, succeeded in pressuring the Armenian and Turkish Foreign Ministers into signing the Protocols, without making closing statements.
Despite the massive outpouring of Armenian sentiment, accusing Armenia’s leadership of making unacceptable concessions, Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian went ahead and signed the Protocols in Zurich.
The signed Protocols are now to be submitted to the Armenian and Turkish Parliaments for ratification. Before this final step, however, the Armenian side should consider taking the following nine actions in order to minimize the damage the Protocols would cause to Armenian interests:
1) A non-governmental organization or an opposition political party should file a lawsuit with Armenia’s Constitutional Court, challenging the constitutionality of the Protocols. This initiative would be separate from the legal requirement that the Constitutional Court pronounce judgment on whether a particular international agreement is in line with Armenia’s Constitution.
2) Before taking up these Protocols, the Armenian Parliament should wait and see if its Turkish counterpart will ratify them first.
3) If the Turkish Parliament fails to ratify the Protocols "in a reasonable timeframe," the Armenian government should declare them to be null and void.
4) The Armenian Parliament should not ratify the Protocols, if the Turkish Parliament attaches any reservations or provisions at the time of ratification.
5) The Armenian government should withdraw the Protocols from parliamentary consideration, if the Turkish Parliament links its ratification to unrelated issues, such as the Artsakh negotiations or the Armenian Genocide.
6) The Armenian Parliament should add a provision to the Protocols, stating that they would be considered null and void, if after ratification Turkey does not open the border with Armenia within the stipulated 60-day timeframe or if it closes the border after opening it. In fact, Pres. Sargsyan committed himself to adding such a provision, in response to a suggestion I made during his meeting with Armenian-American leaders in Los Angeles on October 4.
7) The Armenian Parliament, before ratifying the Protocols, should pass a law making it illegal for any governmental entity or agency to participate in any effort that questions the truth of the Armenian Genocide. This law would counter declarations made by Turkish leaders and others that the historical sub-commission mentioned in the Protocols would re-examine the facts of the Armenian Genocide.
8) The Armenian Parliament should make it illegal for any Armenian official to negotiate, sign or approve any territorial concessions regarding Artsakh. This would shut the door firmly on repeated Turkish demands for Armenian concessions on Artsakh, prior to the ratification of the Protocols.
9) The Armenian Parliament should declare the Treaty of Kars, signed under duress by the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, to be null and void. Once the Treaty of Kars is annulled, the reference in the Protocols to relevant international treaties defining the existing Armenian-Turkish border would no longer be valid and therefore, would not preclude future Armenian territorial demands from Turkey.
It is imperative that the Armenian authorities implement the foregoing steps, because merely providing verbal explanations in defense of the Protocols would not eliminate their detrimental effects.
Since Armenia’s leaders are unwilling or unable to renegotiate and amend these Protocols, due to the international pressure brought to bear on them -- as seen during the Zurich spectacle -- the least they should do is to take actions that would limit the damage to Armenia’s national interests.
Publisher, The California Courier
The very first step in attempting to "normalize" relations between Armenia and Turkey -- signing the Protocols in Zurich on October 10 -- was nearly aborted when the Foreign Ministers of both countries objected to the statements that each had prepared for delivery following the signing ceremony.
Since both parties had the right to review in advance each other’s closing statements, the Armenian Foreign Minister complained that the Turkish side planned to raise unacceptable issues on Karabagh (Artsakh) and the historical commission. For his part, the Turkish Foreign Minister objected to his Armenian counterpart’s attempt to assert that the establishment of relations between the two countries was not based on "any preconditions."
After more than 3-hours of intense back and forth, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, and other high-ranking officials, succeeded in pressuring the Armenian and Turkish Foreign Ministers into signing the Protocols, without making closing statements.
Despite the massive outpouring of Armenian sentiment, accusing Armenia’s leadership of making unacceptable concessions, Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian went ahead and signed the Protocols in Zurich.
The signed Protocols are now to be submitted to the Armenian and Turkish Parliaments for ratification. Before this final step, however, the Armenian side should consider taking the following nine actions in order to minimize the damage the Protocols would cause to Armenian interests:
1) A non-governmental organization or an opposition political party should file a lawsuit with Armenia’s Constitutional Court, challenging the constitutionality of the Protocols. This initiative would be separate from the legal requirement that the Constitutional Court pronounce judgment on whether a particular international agreement is in line with Armenia’s Constitution.
2) Before taking up these Protocols, the Armenian Parliament should wait and see if its Turkish counterpart will ratify them first.
3) If the Turkish Parliament fails to ratify the Protocols "in a reasonable timeframe," the Armenian government should declare them to be null and void.
4) The Armenian Parliament should not ratify the Protocols, if the Turkish Parliament attaches any reservations or provisions at the time of ratification.
5) The Armenian government should withdraw the Protocols from parliamentary consideration, if the Turkish Parliament links its ratification to unrelated issues, such as the Artsakh negotiations or the Armenian Genocide.
6) The Armenian Parliament should add a provision to the Protocols, stating that they would be considered null and void, if after ratification Turkey does not open the border with Armenia within the stipulated 60-day timeframe or if it closes the border after opening it. In fact, Pres. Sargsyan committed himself to adding such a provision, in response to a suggestion I made during his meeting with Armenian-American leaders in Los Angeles on October 4.
7) The Armenian Parliament, before ratifying the Protocols, should pass a law making it illegal for any governmental entity or agency to participate in any effort that questions the truth of the Armenian Genocide. This law would counter declarations made by Turkish leaders and others that the historical sub-commission mentioned in the Protocols would re-examine the facts of the Armenian Genocide.
8) The Armenian Parliament should make it illegal for any Armenian official to negotiate, sign or approve any territorial concessions regarding Artsakh. This would shut the door firmly on repeated Turkish demands for Armenian concessions on Artsakh, prior to the ratification of the Protocols.
9) The Armenian Parliament should declare the Treaty of Kars, signed under duress by the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, to be null and void. Once the Treaty of Kars is annulled, the reference in the Protocols to relevant international treaties defining the existing Armenian-Turkish border would no longer be valid and therefore, would not preclude future Armenian territorial demands from Turkey.
It is imperative that the Armenian authorities implement the foregoing steps, because merely providing verbal explanations in defense of the Protocols would not eliminate their detrimental effects.
Since Armenia’s leaders are unwilling or unable to renegotiate and amend these Protocols, due to the international pressure brought to bear on them -- as seen during the Zurich spectacle -- the least they should do is to take actions that would limit the damage to Armenia’s national interests.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Big demostration in Yerevan against the Protocols, Oct. 9, 2009
On October 9, 2009, I participated in the big demonstration, which took place in Yerevan protesting against Armenia-Turkey Protocols. I took this video with my mobile phone.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Protocols to be Signed and Ratified With Possible Reservations
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
The President of Armenia spent just 24 hours in Los Angeles on October 4, following brief visits to Paris and New York. Angry protesters greeted him in all three cities, accusing him of making unacceptable concessions in a pending agreement with Turkey.
In a large conference hall in the Beverly Hilton hotel, Beverly Hills, around 60 community leaders were invited to exchange views with the President on the Armenia-Turkey Protocols. They had to first pass through metal-detectors to get into the hall.
Meanwhile, thousands of demonstrators had gathered outside the hotel waving placards, demanding Pres. Sargsyan’s resignation, and chanting slogans that could be heard all the way inside the 8th floor conference room. A small plane could be seen hovering overhead, flying a large banner with the inscription -- "No to Protocols."
After the President’s opening remarks, I was called upon to address the issues at hand. In welcoming the President to Los Angeles, I wondered why he had decided to consult with Diaspora Armenians, only after the negotiations with Turkey had been concluded and the Protocols already initialed. What was the purpose of this "consulting tour," when Armenia and Turkey were just days away from signing the Protocols in Switzerland? If the visit was intended to appease the Diaspora, why was it not done earlier, before most Armenians went into a frenzy, causing chaotic scenes in Paris where demonstrators were violently dragged off by the French police to allow the President to lay a wreath at the feet of the Gomidas Statue?
Tense confrontations do not lend themselves to calm and meaningful dialogue.
I also questioned the wisdom of trying to reconcile with Armenia’s long-standing enemies, at a time when Armenians have great difficulty reconciling with each other. Rather than forming an Armenian-Turkish commission, there is a greater need for an intra-Armenian task force to reach a common understanding of their political demands, and agree on a proper division of labor between the Armenian government and Diasporan communities.
I expressed the opinion that these Protocols were not only poorly negotiated, but also concluded under foreign pressure. Furthermore, contrary to the President’s protestations, the Protocols include several Turkish preconditions, such as acceptance of Turkey’s territorial integrity, and re-examination of the Genocide issue.
While the Armenian side has negotiated in good faith, Turkish leaders have kept repeating their rejectionist refrain -- as seen in Pres. Gul’s recent statement in Nakhichevan -- that Turkey would not open its border with Armenia, until the Karabagh conflict is settled. What was the whole point of these negotiations and concessions, if Armenia’s border with Turkey would remain closed?
Even if the Protocols are signed and ratified, and the border is opened, Armenia could still end up holding an empty bag, should Turkey, under some future pretext, close it down again. I asked Pres. Sargsyan if he would be prepared to add a reservation to the Protocols, stating that Armenia would nullify the agreement, should Turkey close the border again!
I also expressed my agreement with the President’s concern -- stated during an interview with the Armenian Reporter -- that some of the provisions of the Protocols were bound to make the pursuit of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide even more challenging. I asked the President if it was wise to make the Armenian activists’ already difficult task of confronting the powerful Turkish state even more difficult!
I concluded my remarks by urging the President not to rush into signing these flawed and detrimental Protocols. Why attempt to resolve through a single document, decades-long problems between Armenia and Turkey? A one-line document simply calling for the establishment of diplomatic relations and opening of the borders would have sufficed.
I pointed out that the President’s acceptance of the Protocols, was forcing Armenians to pin their hopes on the possibility that Turkey itself would inadvertently end up safeguarding Armenia’s interests by refusing to ratify the agreement for its own reasons.
In response to my remarks, Pres. Sargsyan expressed his willingness to accept my suggestion to add a reservation to the Protocols that would call for the repeal of the agreement, should Turkey ever decide to close the border, after opening it.
In the course of the three-hour-long meeting during which very few of the 29 speakers supported the Protocols, Pres. Sargsyan insisted that he would never accept the re-examination of the facts of the Armenian Genocide by the historical sub-commission referred to in the Protocols. He stated that the main task of this sub-commission would be to discuss the steps necessary for the removal of the consequences of the Genocide. The President expected that the agreement would open new avenues to educate the Turkish public about the Armenian Genocide. He also categorically rejected the possibility of being pressured into making concessions on Artsakh!
Given Pres. Sargsyan’s refusal to accept the re-examination of the Genocide and rejection of any concessions on Artsakh -- two key Turkish demands -- one wonders if members of the Turkish Parliament would ever agree to ratify these Protocols and open the border with Armenia!
Pres. Sargsyan concluded the lengthy session by acknowledging that he himself has concerns about some aspects of the Protocols that have not been fully assessed! He stated that the Protocols could close the door on future demands from Turkey and may cause difficulties in resolving the Artsakh conflict. Similar concerns were also expressed by Arkady Ghoukassian, the former President of Artsakh, who was accompanying Pres. Sargsyan.
Despite such misgivings, it was clear from the Pres. Sargsyan’s overall remarks that he did not entertain any revisions of the Protocols, and seemed fully intent on seeing them signed and ratified, possibly after adding some reservations.
Publisher, The California Courier
The President of Armenia spent just 24 hours in Los Angeles on October 4, following brief visits to Paris and New York. Angry protesters greeted him in all three cities, accusing him of making unacceptable concessions in a pending agreement with Turkey.
In a large conference hall in the Beverly Hilton hotel, Beverly Hills, around 60 community leaders were invited to exchange views with the President on the Armenia-Turkey Protocols. They had to first pass through metal-detectors to get into the hall.
Meanwhile, thousands of demonstrators had gathered outside the hotel waving placards, demanding Pres. Sargsyan’s resignation, and chanting slogans that could be heard all the way inside the 8th floor conference room. A small plane could be seen hovering overhead, flying a large banner with the inscription -- "No to Protocols."
After the President’s opening remarks, I was called upon to address the issues at hand. In welcoming the President to Los Angeles, I wondered why he had decided to consult with Diaspora Armenians, only after the negotiations with Turkey had been concluded and the Protocols already initialed. What was the purpose of this "consulting tour," when Armenia and Turkey were just days away from signing the Protocols in Switzerland? If the visit was intended to appease the Diaspora, why was it not done earlier, before most Armenians went into a frenzy, causing chaotic scenes in Paris where demonstrators were violently dragged off by the French police to allow the President to lay a wreath at the feet of the Gomidas Statue?
Tense confrontations do not lend themselves to calm and meaningful dialogue.
I also questioned the wisdom of trying to reconcile with Armenia’s long-standing enemies, at a time when Armenians have great difficulty reconciling with each other. Rather than forming an Armenian-Turkish commission, there is a greater need for an intra-Armenian task force to reach a common understanding of their political demands, and agree on a proper division of labor between the Armenian government and Diasporan communities.
I expressed the opinion that these Protocols were not only poorly negotiated, but also concluded under foreign pressure. Furthermore, contrary to the President’s protestations, the Protocols include several Turkish preconditions, such as acceptance of Turkey’s territorial integrity, and re-examination of the Genocide issue.
While the Armenian side has negotiated in good faith, Turkish leaders have kept repeating their rejectionist refrain -- as seen in Pres. Gul’s recent statement in Nakhichevan -- that Turkey would not open its border with Armenia, until the Karabagh conflict is settled. What was the whole point of these negotiations and concessions, if Armenia’s border with Turkey would remain closed?
Even if the Protocols are signed and ratified, and the border is opened, Armenia could still end up holding an empty bag, should Turkey, under some future pretext, close it down again. I asked Pres. Sargsyan if he would be prepared to add a reservation to the Protocols, stating that Armenia would nullify the agreement, should Turkey close the border again!
I also expressed my agreement with the President’s concern -- stated during an interview with the Armenian Reporter -- that some of the provisions of the Protocols were bound to make the pursuit of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide even more challenging. I asked the President if it was wise to make the Armenian activists’ already difficult task of confronting the powerful Turkish state even more difficult!
I concluded my remarks by urging the President not to rush into signing these flawed and detrimental Protocols. Why attempt to resolve through a single document, decades-long problems between Armenia and Turkey? A one-line document simply calling for the establishment of diplomatic relations and opening of the borders would have sufficed.
I pointed out that the President’s acceptance of the Protocols, was forcing Armenians to pin their hopes on the possibility that Turkey itself would inadvertently end up safeguarding Armenia’s interests by refusing to ratify the agreement for its own reasons.
In response to my remarks, Pres. Sargsyan expressed his willingness to accept my suggestion to add a reservation to the Protocols that would call for the repeal of the agreement, should Turkey ever decide to close the border, after opening it.
In the course of the three-hour-long meeting during which very few of the 29 speakers supported the Protocols, Pres. Sargsyan insisted that he would never accept the re-examination of the facts of the Armenian Genocide by the historical sub-commission referred to in the Protocols. He stated that the main task of this sub-commission would be to discuss the steps necessary for the removal of the consequences of the Genocide. The President expected that the agreement would open new avenues to educate the Turkish public about the Armenian Genocide. He also categorically rejected the possibility of being pressured into making concessions on Artsakh!
Given Pres. Sargsyan’s refusal to accept the re-examination of the Genocide and rejection of any concessions on Artsakh -- two key Turkish demands -- one wonders if members of the Turkish Parliament would ever agree to ratify these Protocols and open the border with Armenia!
Pres. Sargsyan concluded the lengthy session by acknowledging that he himself has concerns about some aspects of the Protocols that have not been fully assessed! He stated that the Protocols could close the door on future demands from Turkey and may cause difficulties in resolving the Artsakh conflict. Similar concerns were also expressed by Arkady Ghoukassian, the former President of Artsakh, who was accompanying Pres. Sargsyan.
Despite such misgivings, it was clear from the Pres. Sargsyan’s overall remarks that he did not entertain any revisions of the Protocols, and seemed fully intent on seeing them signed and ratified, possibly after adding some reservations.
Top Turkish Newspaper Openly Writes of Armenian Genocide
In the beginning it was total silence and denial. Then in the recent two years we started seeing phrases like "so called Armenian Genocide," "Armenian claims of genocide," and so on. In any case the word genocide was always written in quotation marks. Yet today, one of Turkey's premier newspapers Today's Zamanpublished a rare story about how the Armenian Genocide was organized and orchestrated by the ruling elite of the Turkish government in 1915.
Orhan Kemal Cengiz, a human rights advocate writes that the "Massacres of Armenians were orchestrated and organized by the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) -- which came to power through a military coup -- while the Ottoman Empire was falling apart. After these massacres and as a result of the lack of confrontation with our past, the CUP and its gangs changed their format and turned into the “deep state” in Turkey. These deep state elements continued their massacres and manipulations and drenched Turkey with blood during the Republican era. We have these deep state elements, but we also have many people fighting against them with or without knowing the history."
True the word genocide is not used in that paragraph. Instead Cengiz is using the phrase Massacres of Armenians. However, in the 5th paragraph he openly talks about the Armenan genocide in the following way. "I was in Toronto last year attending an extremely interesting course on genocide. For two weeks we went into all the details of different genocides that took place in various parts of the world. All lecturers gave exemplary presentations, and I felt I had really learned something. However, I also realized that there was a fundamental difference in the way in which the Armenian genocide is being handled. When we spoke about the Holocaust, we spoke of the Nazi regime; when we discussed the genocide in Cambodia, we talked about the Khmer regime; when it came to the Armenian genocide, though, we only heard the word "Turks."
While his sincerity is most appreciated he does have a point that when the world refers of the Jewish or Cambodia national tragedies we do refer to regimes. However, we speak of the Armenian Genocide Turks are indeed pointed. But why is this?
It is the 90 years of the denial of the truth and the fear to face its own history that has made things come to this place, where a Turk is pointed when speaking of the Armenian Genocide. Why is it taking Germany only 20 years to face the Jewish Holocaust, say thank you and compensate, but when it comes to the Armenian Genocide even the past 90 years are not enough?
It is believe that if Turkey had earlier recognized the genocide and condemned it the following generations would have blamed it to the ruling regime of the time not the nation. In fact, I have heard many stories that many Turkish families have risked their lives hiding the Armenian families, their neighbors from massacres and killings in and around 1915.
A historic moment is upon us. Today the president of Armenian, meeting with the leaders of various Armenian parties and discussing the pre-signing of the Turkey Armenia normalization protocols, despite much criticism, said that "we want to show that even the nation that has fallen a victim to a genocide can be the first to offer a hand of normalization of relationship." Arming themselves with sincerity, honesty and the sense of fairness and justice the Armenian, Turkish and Azerbaijani nations should look to a new South Caucasus, building a better future for their children and themselves.
Written by Armen Hareyan
Founder of HULIQ.com
The article of Todays Zaman:
Bloody Turk!
by
ORHAN KEMAL CENGİZ
Monday, October 05, 2009
Friday, October 02, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
p--cmYrAD_e345B