Tentative deal between Armenia, Turkey brings opposition from both sides

armenian kids turkish flag
Spread the love


Armenian Americans and Turkish Americans both say the governments in their homelands are giving too many concessions. A commission that would study the Armenian genocide is a sore point for some.

By Ann M. Simmons

October 4, 2009

Upset over an agreement that would establish diplomatic ties between Armenia and Turkey and reopen their common borders, members of the Los Angeles Armenian community plan to rally in Beverly Hills today.

Organizers of the demonstration say they will call on Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan to refrain from signing protocols with Turkey that they believe would threaten Armenia’s interests and security.

Sargsyan is scheduled to visit Los Angeles today.

A deal that would essentially normalize relations between the long-estranged nations is expected to be signed this month. But the agreement faces opposition from both Armenian Americans and Turkish Americans, who argue that the governments in their homelands are making unreasonable concessions.

“We’re not against normalization and peace with Turkey,” said Arek Santikian, a UCLA student and chairman of the Armenian Youth Federation of the Western United States. “We really would want peace. But we can’t have peace with preconditions.”

Among the agreement’s provisions is the creation of a historical commission that would evaluate the bloody history between the two countries. The Armenian genocide of 1915 to 1918 claimed the lives of about 1.2 million Armenians under the Ottoman Empire, which became the modern republic of Turkey. The Turkish government disputes that a genocide took place.

A historical commission would allow Turkey “to question the veracity of the genocide,” Santikian said. “We know that it happened. We can’t put a question mark on that.”

Turkey disputes the number of those killed and argues that Armenians were equally brutal in slaying Turks when they revolted against their Ottoman rulers and aligned themselves with invading Russian troops.

Armenian American critics of the agreement also argue that the protocols would allow Turkey to keep eastern territories they say are historically part of Armenia.

They are also concerned about the future of Nagorno-Karabakh, a disputed enclave populated mainly by ethnic Armenians but within the borders of Azerbaijan, which has close ethnic and political ties with Turkey.

“The protocols are not proportional,” said Caspar Jivalagian, a student at Southwestern Law School and an Armenian Youth Federation member. “It is a very pro-Turkish document.”

But many Turkish Americans disagree.

“Turkey is giving too much and getting too little in return,” said Ergun Kirlikovali, West Coast director of the Assembly of Turkish American Assns.

Some believe the Turkish government is selling out Azerbaijan by reconciling with Armenia before the dispute over Nagorno-Karabakh has been settled. Others fear Turkey might be forced to give back land.

Kirlikovali said Turks are also tired of being defamed by Armenians who were “constantly pushing a bogus genocide claim . . . and distorting and misrepresenting history.”

He argued that a historical commission would allow experts to come to a “nonpolitical” verdict on the issue, and said that’s why Armenians were opposed to the creation of such a panel. It could debunk their main indictment against Turks, Kirlikovali said.

Gunay Evinch, the assembly’s Washington, D.C.-based president and a Fulbright scholar, said that despite the concerns over the consequences of the accord between Turkey and Armenia, the agreement presented “a unique opportunity to move forward for these countries and their people, but not without risks.”

ann.simmons@latimes.com

Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times


Spread the love

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts