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, December 31, 2011
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Monday, December 26, 2011
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Monday, December 19, 2011
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Friday, December 16, 2011
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Pres. Sargsyan Makes Major Strategic Shift in Armenia's Demands from Turkey
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Pres. Serzh Sargsyan delivered a major speech in Marseille, France, last week, during which he introduced a new strategy for the resolution of Armenia's demands from Turkey. Until now, the Armenian government had merely pursued the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
For the first time, the President spoke about Armenia's demand for “justice.” To ensure that his message was received loud and clear, he repeated the word "justice" three times in three separate sentences:
-- “Every Armenian demands justice, whether he or she lives in Armenia, Artsakh or the Diaspora.”
-- “We were strong enough to survive the Meds Yeghern [Great Calamity], and we are just as strong now to demand justice.” The President used the term “Armenian Genocide” six times in other parts of his speech.
-- “That was the joyful news for justice, not revenge,” Pres. Sargsyan stated, describing the joy ofMarseille Armenians in 1921, when they heard the acquittal of Soghomon Tehlirian, Talat's assassin, by a German court.
Surprisingly, not a single political commentator in Armenia, Turkey or elsewhere took note of the significant shift in the approach articulated by Pres. Sargsyan. Seeking “justice” for the victims of genocide is a completely different objective than simply attaining recognition. In this context, the word “justice” encompasses the undoing of as much of the damage as possible, by demanding the restitution and return of all looted assets, confiscated properties, and occupied territories.
While advancing a more comprehensive set of demands from Turkey, Pres. Sargsyan expressed his conviction that the day would come when Turkey's leaders would acknowledge the mass crimes committed by their predecessors: “We are confident that Turkey will repent. That is neither a precondition nor a desire to exact revenge. Turkey must face its own history. Someday, Turkey's leadership would find the strength to reassess its approach to the Armenian Genocide. Our position has not changed -- it is clear cut. We are prepared to establish normal relations with Turkey, befitting neighboring countries. For example, neighboring countries Poland and Germany led by Chancellor Willy Brandt, acknowledging his country's terrible crimes, dropped to his knees at the Warsaw Ghetto. Sooner or later, Turkey, a self-described European country, will have a leadership worthy of being called European, which will bow its head at the Tsitsernagapert [Genocide] Memorial. The sooner the better, but, that's the prerogative of the Turkish people. We cannot impose anything on them. They should do that for the sake of the Turkish people, just as Willy Brandt did for the sake of the German people.”
Egemen Bagis, Turkey's Minister for European Union Affairs, perhaps not comprehending the farreaching consequences of Pres. Sargsyan's demand for “justice,” reacted angrily to other parts of the Armenian President’s remarks. Bagis arrogantly stated: “There is no power in the world that could bring the Turkish people to its knees. On the contrary, the Turkish people know full well how to bring to their knees those who make such ill-informed statements.”
I fully endorse Pres. Sargsyan's new approach to the pursuit of Armenian demands from Turkey. Through my columns, speeches, interviews, and private meetings, I have repeatedly urged Armenia’s leaders to demand “justice” from Turkey, rather than simply seeking genocide recognition. One of my articles on this topic, “Genocide Recognition and Quest for Justice,” was published last year inThe International & Comparative Law Review of the Loyola Law School of Los Angeles.
Armenia is better off presenting its claims from Turkey in terms of seeking “justice,” to avoid the danger of making official territorial demands from a powerful and menacing neighbor. Nevertheless, the demand for “justice” is a code word or shorthand for a comprehensive set of claims from Turkey. Not even Turkey's denialist leaders would dare challenge the universally-accepted notion of “justice” based on the rule of law, specifically, international law.
While Pres. Sargsyan's remarks in Marseille are highly commendable, it remains to be seen how this newly articulated concept of seeking justice for the Armenian Genocide will be translated into action. What practical steps will the Armenian government, particularly the Foreign Ministry, take to demand justice from Turkey? Will Armenia back the lawsuits filed by Diaspora Armenian communities in American and European courts against Turkey, demanding restitution for Armenian losses during the Genocide or will Armenia bring its own lawsuit against the Republic of Turkey in the World Court?
Monday, December 12, 2011
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Friday, December 09, 2011
Thursday, December 08, 2011
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
US Court to Rule on Turkish Banks’ Motion to Dismiss Armenian Lawsuits
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Two separate lawsuits were filed last year in US Federal Court in Los Angeles against theRepublic of Turkey and two of its major banks demanding compensation for properties confiscated from Armenians after the 1915 Genocide.
The first is a class action lawsuit seeking what could amount to billions of dollars from the Turkish Republic, T.C. Ziraat Bankasi, and the Central Bank of Turkey for unjust enrichment from liquidation of properties belonging to Armenians deported and exterminated during the Genocide.
The second lawsuit, filed by three Armenian-Americans, seeks $64 million for their confiscated properties in Adana, Turkey, and millions more for accrued rent and interest paid by the U.S. government in the past 60 years for use of the strategic Incirlik Air Base, built on land taken from families of the Armenian plaintiffs.
When these lawsuits were initiated, the Turkish government and its two banks ridiculed the charges, claiming that US courts have no authority to judge the actions of other governments. In order to block the lawsuits, the Turkish entities refused to be served with the legal documents, which is the first step in filing a lawsuit. After lengthy cat and mouse games, Turkish officials finally received the court documents transmitted to them by the US Embassy in Ankara at the request of the State Department.
After grudgingly accepting the court papers, the Republic of Turkey refused to appear in US Federal Court, despite warnings from the State Department that it risked a default judgment. The Turkish banks, however, fearing a similar fate, rushed to the court and filed a motion to dismiss the pending lawsuits.
In their filings, the banks objected to the lawsuits, claiming that American courts lacked jurisdiction due to sovereign immunity. They argued that the lawsuits should not go forward because of the Ankara Agreement of 1934, the "political question doctrine," potential harm to U.S.-Turkish relations, lack of evidence that the plaintiffs are heirs of the owners of the confiscated properties, and the expiry of the statute of limitations.
Surprisingly, the Turkish banks conceded that even if the Republic of Turkey did confiscate Armenian properties, international law precluded the filing of such lawsuits, since Turkey had taken "the property of its own nationals."
The banks’ lawyers made the outrageous suggestion that the wills of Armenian Genocide victims be reviewed to determine the legal heirs of the confiscated properties. In case these victims did not have a will, the lawyers proposed that the relevant laws be examined to see who was really entitled to their properties!
The attorneys for the Armenian plaintiffs countered the Turkish objections and asked the court to deny the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs asserted that the Ziraat bank branch in the United States is a private commercial bank and has no reason to enjoy sovereign immunity. Moreover, "genocide and the associated plunder of property is never deemed a legitimate act of the state. There is no application of a political question, as this case focuses on the return of unjust gains from the sale and/or rental of property held in trust. Finally, the statute of limitations does not apply because the properties were held in trust, and the failure to return them is a continuing injury." The attorneys further asserted that there are no statutes of limitations for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.
Contradicting the Banks’ claims, the lawyers for the class action lawsuit maintained that the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act does not preclude the prosecution of foreign entities engaged in commercial activity in the United States which both the Republic of Turkey and the two banks have done for many years. The lawyers also asserted that the defendants falsely claimed that international law does not apply to foreign countries "for wrongs perpetrated against their own nationals." On the contrary, "international law prohibits states from expropriating property of nationals conducted during genocide and human rights abuses."
A hearing is scheduled in Federal Court on December 19 to determine the validity of the Turkish banks’ motion to dismiss the two lawsuits. Should the court reject the Turkish motion, and the Armenian plaintiffs end up winning their lawsuits during a subsequent trial, the court may order that the US assets of both Turkish banks be seized, up to the value of the claims, and turned over to the heirs of dispossessed Armenian victims as fair compensation.
Monday, December 05, 2011
Sunday, December 04, 2011
Saturday, December 03, 2011
Friday, December 02, 2011
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
p--cmYrAD_e345B