 Armenian-Americans are offended that Pres. Obama is going to launch his reelection campaign in Los Angeles this week, on the eve of April 24, having failed to honor his solemn promise to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.
A special Task Force has been set up to organize a communitywide protest to remind the President of his many unkept promises. All major Armenian-American organizations have been activated. Press releases have been written, the airwaves flooded with interviews and ads regarding the demonstration, thousands of flyers printed and distributed, protest signs and banners prepared, and buses chartered to transport the public to the site of the President’s fundraiser on April 21.
The news of the planned Armenian protest must not have been well received by the White House. Neither the President nor his staff would want to come to a major city to launch his reelection campaign, in the face of disenchanted voters who question his credibility in front of TV cameras.
Until this week, White House officials had paid little attention to a March 28 letter from ANCA chairman Ken Hachikian, inviting the President or a Cabinet member to participate in the annual commemoration by laying a wreath at the Armenian Genocide Monument in Montebello, California, on April 24. Given the prospect of a major protest rally on the occasion of the President’s visit on April 21, Democratic officials asked ANCA Western Region to send a follow-up letter, inviting the President to stop by the Genocide Monument in Montebello, situated minutes away from his appearance in Culver City.
It is highly unlikely that the President would make such a gesture to respect the memory of genocide victims on April 21, particularly since three days later he will be issuing a statement on the 96th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, in which once again he will shy away from using the word genocide.
The dangled carrot of a presidential visit to Montebello should not deter the Armenian community’s resolve from showing up in large numbers outside the President’s fundraiser in Culver City. In fact, whatever interest the White House may be showing regarding the Armenian community at this time might well be due to the planned protest.
It is not realistic to expect that the President will acknowledge the Armenian Genocide in the next two years, nor do so if reelected for a second term. Under these circumstances, rather than begging him to use those two “forbidden” words, at every campaign stop Armenian-Americans should raise serious questions about Pres. Obama’s credibility and suitability to lead the nation for another four years. Should Armenian-Americans continue to remain silent, they would be encouraging all other elected officials to deceive the community with empty promises.
The Armenian Genocide Community Task Force, the organizing body of the April 21 rally, has issued an urgent call to action, asking Los Angeles Armenians to participate in large numbers in order to let Pres. Obama hear the community’s “profound disappointment at his failure to honor his campaign promise” and “deliver justice to the Armenian people.” In its announcement, the Task Force pointed out that a large turnout would not only send a loud and clear message to the White House, but also publicize Armenian political demands among millions of people around the world who would be watching the presidential visit on national and international television.
It is salutary that prominent Armenian-American musician Serj Tankian will be participating in the April 21 protest. Moreover, Tankian posted a message to his 570,000 facebook fans, urging them to support the protest: “On Thursday, April 21 at 3 p.m., everyone in Southern California is urged to join in a public protest urging President Obama to uphold his promise and recognize the Armenian Genocide. This issue has always been of extreme importance to Serj and his family.”
Special arrangements have been made to provide transportation to the public by buses starting at 1:30 p.m. from St. Mary’s Church in Glendale, Rose & Alex Pilibos School in Hollywood, and Ferrahian High School in Encino. Those planning to drive to the rally should arrive around 3 p.m., at Sony Studios, 10202 W. Washington Boulevard in Culver City, California.
The larger the number of participants, the more visible their presence and the more audible their voices will be at the rally.
|
Author: Harut Sassounian
-
Serj Tankian to Join L.A. Armenians To Protest Against Obama on April 21
-
Armenians Should Confront Pres. Obama During his California Visit Next Week
It is a shame that the largest Armenian community in the Diaspora has failed to take advantage of Pres. Obama’s visits to California to protest his refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Last October, when he traveled to Los Angeles and Glendale, not a single Armenian confronted him at his public appearances.To make up for their negligence, Armenians in California have a golden opportunity to show that they are deeply troubled when the highest official of the land does not keep his pledge on the Armenian Genocide.Pres. Obama will be in San Francisco on April 20 and in Los Angeles on April 21 – three days before the 96th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide – to launch his reelection campaign with major fundraisers publicized as “Obama Victory Fund 2012.”During the next 18 months, Armenian-Americans should hold demonstrations at every one of the President’s campaign stops throughout the country until the November 2012 presidential election. This is an opportune moment to highlight the President’s lack of credibility, at a time when he is most vulnerable due to his low ratings, as he launches his reelection campaign.Armenians do not need to beg the President to utter the words Armenian Genocide. A more popular head of state – Pres. Ronald Reagan – used those words on April 22, 1981, almost 30 years to the day of Pres. Obama’s visit to Los Angeles! The only reason to protest Obama’s visit would be to let him know that Armenians will no longer be duped when politicians make false campaign promises to gain their support, and ignore them after the election! The Armenian slogan for the 2012 presidential election should be: “Not one vote and not one penny for Obama!”Here is the list of Pres. Obama’s multiple sins on Armenian issues:1. He repeatedly pledged to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide during the 2008 presidential campaign and did not keep his word after the election.
2. To make matters worse, his administration actively opposed the adoption of the 2010 congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide.
3. He significantly cut the amount of foreign aid given to Armenia and Artsakh (Karabagh), contrary to his campaign promise. Moreover, his administration did not spend the full amount of aid Congress allocated to Artsakh.
4. He pressured Armenia in 2009 to sign the infamous “Protocols” with Turkey.
5. He made no attempts to press Turkey into lifting its blockade of Armenia.
6. He remained silent in the face of repeated saber-rattling by Azerbaijan’s President against Armenia and Artsakh, ignoring his campaign pledge to support Artsakh’s self-determination.
7. He and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not respond to repeated requests to meet with Armenian-American community leaders to hear their concerns.
8. Last Christmas, while the Senate was in recess, he circumvented the “hold” placed by U.S. Senators, and appointed Matt Bryza as Ambassador to Azerbaijan.
It is crucial that a large number of Armenian-Americans show up on April 20 and 21, not only to protest against the President, but also to publicize their demands through the media covering Pres. Obama’s visit. Should Armenians remain silent, they would be sending the wrong message to politicians that making empty promises to Armenians to get their money and votes, and ignoring them after the election would have no negative consequences to their political careers!Armenians need to wake up from their lethargy. If they want elected officials to take them seriously, they must reward those who support their issues by helping to reelect them, and punish those who make false promises by working to defeat them.A few days after his visit to California, Pres. Obama will issue his annual April 24 statement which will probably exclude once again the term Armenian Genocide. Armenian protesters must make it clear to the President that playing word games with genocide is offensive and that he will pay a political price for his unwillingness to tell the truth!Pres. Obama will be in San Francisco on April 20, at 5 p.m., at the Nob Hill Masonic Center, 1111 California Street, and in Culver City on April 21, at 4:30 p.m., at the Sony Studios, 10202 W. Washington Blvd. Thousands of Armenians should show up at these two locations to protest Pres. Obama’s record of broken promises!As a former Obama supporter, I will be standing outside the Sony Studios on April 21 to express my profound disappointment in his handling of Armenian issues and to let him know that Armenian-Americans will not support his reelection. -
Cemal Pasha’s Grandson Says Genocide,
Morgenthau’s Great Granddaughter doesn’t
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Hundreds of Armenians turned out at UCLA last Thursday night to hear with great apprehension Hasan Cemal, the grandson of Cemal Pasha — one of the top three Turkish butchers of the Armenian nation. This unique and controversial event, titled “From Der Zor to Dzidzernagapert: A Conversation with Hasan Cemal,” was organized by AGBU Asbeds.
Understandably, there was great tension in the air. The large hall was filled to capacity and many were turned away due to lack of room. The presence of armed policemen and security guards inside the hall was both reassuring and disturbing. Cemal confirmed that he was cautioned against coming to Los Angeles, but fortunately everything proceeded calmly. The most shocking thing that evening was not what Cemal said, but what another speaker, Dr. Pamela Steiner, the great granddaughter of Amb. Henry Morgenthau, did not say!
Kurken Berksanlar, Chairman of ABGU Asbeds, welcomed everyone to “an open-minded conversation.” While admitting that some Armenians view with great suspicion Turks who acknowledge the Genocide, he believed that “progressive” Turks, who are speaking openly about the evens of 1915…, appear to be above and beyond the reach and control of today’s Turkish government.” Berksanlar then introduced the keynote speaker Hasan Cemal and the two discussants, Dr. Pamela Steiner, and Prof. Richard Hovannisian.
A columnist at Milliyet newspaper, Cemal immediately won over his skeptical audience by greeting them in Armenian — “parev harkeli paregamner” — and telling them: “I came here to open my heart and open my mind to you…. I know your pain, your grief of Genocide, your grief of Meds Yeghern.” Ignoring Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code which bans the use of the term Armenian Genocide, he courageously repeated those words several more times during his talk. He also condemned the Turkish government’s denial of the Armenian Genocide, calling it “colluding in the crime!”
Cemal described his deeply moving 2008 visit to the Armenian Genocide Monument in Yerevan, where he laid three carnations in memory of his close friend, Hrant Dink, the Armenian journalist who was assassinated in Istanbul by Turkish extremists. While visiting Yerevan, he had a startling encounter with Armen Gevorkyan, grandson of the man who in 1922 assassinated his grandfather, Cemal Pasha.
Cemal described the progress made in Turkey during the past three decades on the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, going from total denialism to an apology campaign, restoration of Armenian churches, and holding academic conferences on this topic. He asked Armenians to come to Turkey to participate in the “recovery of memory.” He urged them never to forget the past, without becoming its captives.
While Cemal’s candid remarks left a good impression on the audience, Dr. Steiner turned off the attendees with her adamant and intentional refusal to use the word genocide. Instead, she used such typical Turkish denialist terminology as “tragedy,” “suffering,” and “events of 1915.” As director of the Inter-Communal Trust-Building Project, she spoke about “possible steps towards building trust between Armenians and Turks.” She stunned the audience by asking Armenians to acknowledge that “the Turkish people [who] suffered horrendously during World War I … need and deserve acknowledgment for that!” As if that request was not outrageous enough, she went on to urge Armenians to “consider acknowledging Turkish suffering before they receive an acknowledgment for theirs!”
During the question and answer period, when I pointed out the irony of Cemal Pasha’s grandson freely using the term Armenian Genocide, while the great granddaughter of Amb. Morgenthau would not, Dr. Steiner’s response was inadequate. Her justification was that she was playing the role of a “facilitator,” seeking “conciliation” between Armenians and Turks.
The final discussant, Prof. Hovannisian, in a stern voice, gave a polite, yet powerful response to the previous speakers. He told Hasan Cemal that the large Armenian audience had come not to listen to him as a Turkish journalist, but as the grandson of Cemal Pasha. He explained that understanding the Turkish perpetrators’ mindset cannot in any way justify their actions. He cautioned everyone not to equate Armenian suffering resulting from intentional destruction with the suffering of Turks as a result of war. He emphasized that Armenians were seeking not only recognition, but, more importantly, restitution of their confiscated properties. He urged the Turkish government to return the hundreds of Armenian churches in Turkey to the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul. Finally, in a direct allusion to Dr. Steiner, Prof. Hovannisian emphasized that “conciliation” required “acts of contrition.” His remarks were greeted with a standing ovation.
I found Cemal to be both candid and brave. He could have easily avoided the use of the term Armenian Genocide, maintaining that doing so could land him in jail. However, he made no excuses and used the genocide term several times. Considering his grandfather responsible for “the Great Catastrophe,” he described today’s Turkey as “a manic-depressive country!”
Although it is not easy to forget that Hasan Cemal is the grandson of one of the three masterminds of the Armenian Genocide, it would be wrong to hold children responsible for the sins of their parents. His position has dramatically evolved since his Boston appearance two years ago, when he avoided the term Armenian Genocide. I asked him privately at the end of his UCLA talk if he was not concerned that he could be taken to court for using the word genocide. Even though he said he did not think so, he found it important enough to mention my concern in a column he wrote in Milliyet upon his return to Istanbul.
The only sour note in Cemal’s words that evening was his rejection of demands for the return of Armenian territories from Turkey. Nevertheless, it is not surprising to hear a Turk, no matter how tolerant, defend his country’s territorial integrity. He did state, however, that the Turkish government should apologize to Armenians and pay compensation to them.
On the other hand, Dr. Steiner, as a Jewish-American and direct descendant of Amb. Morgenthau, cannot be excused for her persistent refusal to use the term genocide, despite her self-avowed good intentions. Anyone who does not acknowledge the truth of the Armenian Genocide loses the moral authority to play a constructive role in Armenian-Turkish relations. One cannot remain neutral between a victim and victimizer. She should heed the wise words of Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel who stated: “Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim!”
As facilitator between the two communities, Dr. Steiner probably believes that she should not take sides. But telling the truth is not taking sides between Armenians and Turks, anymore than acknowledging the Holocaust is siding with Jews. Furthermore, it is not clear what exactly her role is as facilitator. Genocide is not a dispute that requires the services of a mediator. How can she reconcile two nations without the victimizer first making amends for what her own great grandfather called “The Murder of a Nation!”
Two days after her talk at UCLA, Dr. Steiner sent me a lengthy e-mail explaining further her role as facilitator and insisting that Amb. Morgenthau would have supported her work. I cannot pretend to know her great grandfather better than her, but being familiar with the Ambassador’s humanitarian efforts during and after the Genocide, I have no doubt that he would have done everything possible to bring justice to Armenians, rather than remaining neutral between the perpetrators and their victims.
-
Armenian Attorneys Respond To Court Appeal of German Companies
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Attorneys for Armenian heirs of life insurance policyholders filed a powerful response last month to the petition of German companies seeking a rehearing by a federal appeals court. The majority of a three-member panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled in favor of the Armenians’ right to pursue their demand for unpaid claims, reversing an earlier ruling by the majority of the same panel of judges.
The response of the Armenian lawyers dealt a devastating blow not only to the German insurance companies, but also to the Republic of Turkey which had shamelessly filed a “friend of the court” petition in support of the German defendants. It is ironic that instead of Germany, the Turkish government is the one objecting to the lawsuit against the German firms!
The Armenian claimants asked the Court of Appeals to deny the German petition for a rehearing. The German defendants had based their appeal on the contention that the California State statute extending the deadline for filing claims against insurance companies was unconstitutional because the law’s endorsement of the Armenian Genocide contradicts the federal government’s foreign policy.
The Armenian attorneys contested the German defendants’ claim by asserting that “there have been no negative foreign policy repercussions from statutes and/or enactments promulgated” by more than 40 U.S. states on the Armenian Genocide. The attorneys further stated that while several U.S. Presidents have objected to congressional resolutions on the Armenian Genocide, there have been many other statements by the federal executive and legislative branches in favor of such recognition. The attorneys specifically mentioned the two congressional resolutions on the Armenian Genocide adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives in 1975 and 1984, as well as Pres. Reagan’s reference to the Armenian Genocide in his Presidential Proclamation of 1981.
The attorneys asserted that previous U.S. Administrations maintained a “deafening silence” while more than 40 U.S. states recognized the Armenian Genocide, without constituting any threat to U.S. foreign policy. Furthermore, even if past Administrations were opposed to congressional resolutions on the Genocide issue, there would be no reason to object to local and state resolutions, as they would have no impact on U.S. foreign policy.
The Armenian attorneys cited previous court decisions asserting that State statutes could be challenged on the basis of the foreign affairs doctrine only if they conflicted with “an expressed unmistakable executive treaty, Congressional enactment or executive policy.” The attorneys reasoned that the courts had ruled a similar California statute on the Holocaust to be invalid because the federal government had created a Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets in the United States, obviating the need for separate Holocaust-related lawsuits. No federal commission has been established to regulate lawsuits related to the Armenian Genocide. Another key difference in the two cases is that the Armenian plaintiffs are not seeking restitution, but only the recovery of insurance benefits owed to them.
The Armenian attorneys also made the convincing argument that even if previous Administrations have had contradictory stands on the Armenian Genocide, “there is no evidence of an express federal policy banning the term ‘Armenian Genocide’ in legislative enactments by the States.”
The Armenian lawyers proceeded to slam the “friend of the court” petition filed by the Republic of Turkey, which claimed that the California statute conflicted with federal foreign policy on the Armenian Genocide. The Armenian attorneys asserted that “Turkey does not create or dictate United States foreign policy; only the United States government can do that.” Turkey’s allegation that “the current Administration opposes recognition of the Armenian Genocide are flatly contradicted by President Barack Obama’s own statements. As Senator and presidential candidate, he spoke forcefully on the Armenian Genocide. As President, he reasserted: “I have consistently stated my own view of what occurred in 1915, and my view of that history has not changed.”
Finally, the Armenian legal team pointed out that this case also safeguards the right of the State of California to regulate insurance companies operating within its borders. Thus, overturning the California statute on Armenian insurance policyholders would “impair California’s interest in providing individuals with access to its courts to resolve disputes concerning insurance policies held by them and issued by companies doing business in the State.”
Based on these powerful arguments — and the “friend of the court” briefs filed by several major law firms and organizations to be discussed in a future column — it is hoped that the federal Court of Appeals will rule against the German insurance companies’ petition for a rehearing. Should the German firms lose the appeal, they have the final recourse of petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court.
It is critical for Armenians to win these appeals in order to protect not only the interests of the heirs of insurance policyholders, but also to prevent Turkish denialists from exploiting this lawsuit to invalidate decades of efforts in support of Genocide recognition in the United States.
-
Sassounian’s column of March 17, 2011
Lawsuit Against U.S. Federal Reserve
Seeks Armenian Gold Looted by Turkey
Publisher, The California Courier
The Glendale-based nonprofit Center for Armenian Remembrance (CAR) sued the U.S. Federal Reserve on March 4, seeking information on its acquisition of a large amount of Armenian gold looted by the Ottoman government in 1915.
CAR filed the lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act. The gold, originally valued at five million Turkish Gold Liras ($22 million dollars), is now estimated to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York recently claimed that they have no records of any Armenian gold in their possession.
It was not easy to trace the circumstances under which the Armenian-owned gold was transferred from Istanbul to the United States almost a century ago. The results of our research on the convoluted series of transactions are summarized below:
The Ottoman government had seized the gold and other valuables belonging to Armenians deported and killed in the 1915 genocide, expropriating their bank accounts and safe deposit boxes. The Ottoman Liquidation Commission used a complex set of bank transfers to hide the trail of this “blood money.” The Turkish Treasury placed the looted Armenian gold initially in the German Deutschebank in Istanbul. In 1916, the gold was transferred to the Bleichroeder Bank in Vienna, and from there moved to the Reichsbank (German Central Bank) in Berlin, and deposited in the account of Ottoman Public Debt.
At the end of World War I, when the Allied Powers demanded reparations from Germany and its Ottoman Turkish ally, German officials had no choice but to comply with that request, agreeing to turn over to the Allies the Armenian gold held by the Reichsbank. Accordingly, the expropriated Armenian gold was transferred to France and Great Britain in 1921.
A subsequent British document confirms the true ownership of this gold. On September 26 1924, leaders of the two main opposition parties in Great Britain, Liberal Party leader and former Prime Minister H.H. Asquith and Conservative Party leader and future Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin sent a memorandum to Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald pleading for British assistance to Armenians in view of their support for the Allied cause and the great suffering they endured during World War I. The two British leaders argued that “the sum of 5 million pounds (Turkish gold) deposited by the Turkish Government in Berlin in 1916, and taken over by the Allies after the Armistice, was in large part (perhaps wholly) Armenian money. After the enforced deportation of the Armenians in 1915, their bank accounts, both current and deposit, were transferred by order to the State Treasury at Constantinople. This fact enabled the Turks to send five million sterling to the Reichsbank, Berlin, in exchange for a new issue of notes.”
Subsequently, instead of returning the Armenian gold to its original owners, Britain and France sold it to the United States Government through J.P. Morgan Bank in Paris, by exchanging it for U.S. Treasury Certificates.
On January 29, 1925, Senator William H. King submitted resolution 319 to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee demanding that the looted gold be “set aside in trust” for Armenians. The resolution stated: “The Turkish Government had arbitrarily seized and transferred to the Turkish treasury all bank accounts, both current and deposit, belonging to Armenians, by which Armenian gold in the sum of 5 million Turkish pounds, amounting to $22,450,000, was transferred to the Turkish treasury, which gold was afterwards deposited by the Turkish Government in the Reichsbank at Berlin…. Said deposit of Armenian gold in the Reichsbank at Berlin was by article 259 of the Treaty of Versailles transferred and surrendered to the principal allied and associated powers, including the United States…. Said deposit in equity and right belongs to the Armenians from whom the same was seized, or to their legal representatives…. Said deposit should be set aside in trust to be hereafter paid over to the persons from whom said gold was seized, or to their lawful representatives….”
This gold is just a small portion of the billions of dollars of Armenian assets stolen by Turkey and various other countries during and after the Armenian Genocide. The restitution of all looted Armenian assets, wherever they may be, should be one of the highest priorities for those pursuing justice for the horrendous crimes committed against the Armenian nation.
-
Sassounian’s column of March 10, 2011
Who Rules Turkey: Erdogan or Aliyev? Publisher, The California Courier
Turkish leaders often brag about their success in transforming Turkey from a country with a failing economy and serious domestic problems, to a robust regional power that projects its influence far and wide.
Indeed, Turkey has the second largest army in NATO after the United States, and the 15th largest economy in the world in terms of GDP. As a self-appointed mediator and powerbroker, Turkey often meddles in regional and international hot spots. Such hegemonic behavior has earned Prime Minister Recep Erdogan the nickname of “Sultan” who is hell-bent on restoring the long-defunct Ottoman Empire.
The founding principle of Turkey’s expansionist foreign policy is the often repeated mantra — “zero problems with neighboring states” — which has not been always successfully implemented. While Turkey has managed to improve its relations with Syria and Iran, its disingenuous reconciliation efforts with Armenia have been a total failure. Its bungled attempt to create the false impression of better relations with Armenia has not fooled anyone, least of all Diaspora Armenians who are painfully familiar with such deceptive Turkish tactics.
Apparently, the one leader who was tricked by Turkey’s fake gestures of reconciliation with Armenia was Pres. Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan. Ironically, Turkey’s policy of “zero problems with neighbors” had the unexpected and counter effect of creating problems with Azerbaijan where none existed before.
Azerbaijan’s President became furious upon learning that Ankara was about to sign the Armenia-Turkey Protocols which called for opening the border between the two countries and establishing diplomatic relations. Turkish assurances that the Protocols were simply an attempt to extort concessions from Armenia did not mollify Azerbaijan. Pres. Aliyev demanded the immediate termination of the negotiated agreement, because he did not want Armenia’s blockade lifted until Artsakh (Karabagh) was returned to Azerbaijan.
Even though the Protocols were clearly in the national interest of Turkey, Prime Minister Erdogan buckled under Azeri pressure and abandoned their ratification. Why would he obey Baku’s orders and not conclude an agreement that is clearly in his country’s best interest? Here are some likely explanations: First, Turkey receives some of its energy supplies from Azerbaijan. Second, Azeris living in Turkey strongly oppose the Protocols. Third, Erdogan is sensitive to accusations that he is flirting with his Armenian adversaries, at the expense of “brotherly” Azerbaijan!
Of course, a truly strong leader would be able to defend his country’s national interests and withstand both external and internal pressures. Despite all of his boisterous talk during his global travels, the fact remains that Erdogan’s rule is neither secure nor stable. While he presents himself to his foreign counterparts as the leader of an all-powerful country, he has plenty of enemies at home who are constantly plotting his demise!
Last week, fresh evidence surfaced about Prime Minister Erdogan’s tenuous hold on power and Pres. Aliyev’s ability to exploit his weakness. The former Mayor of Kars revealed that Azerbaijan’s President had urged Erdogan to have the partially completed Armenia-Turkey Friendship Monument demolished. The Turkish leader dutifully obliged after a short visit to Kars. Using the pretext that the statue was grotesque and ugly, he demanded its demolition. The former Mayor told students at Marmara University that the statue was torn down at the explicit request of Aliyev. The Kars city council subsequently voted to destroy the massive monument. By promptly following Aliyev’s orders, Erdogan tarnished his own reputation around the world. Some likened his unsavory action to the Taliban who had destroyed the sacred Buddha statues in Afghanistan!
It is a bizarre situation when the leader of a small state is able to impose his will repeatedly on his more powerful neighbor. When Aliyev demanded that Ankara not ratify the Armenia-Turkey Protocols, “Big Brother” obliged and carried out the request of Aliyev Junior. The spoiled “Junior Brother” then demanded that a Turkish statue be demolished. That order was also carried out with no questions asked.
If Erdogan thinks that by appeasing Aliyev he will be able to secure Turkey’s energy supplies, he is sadly mistaken. Appeasement is a slippery slope that paves the way for more concessions. Having learned that his wishes are unquestionably carried out by Turkey’s leaders, Aliyev will now escalate his demands. What would he ask Erdogan to do next? How far is the all-powerful “Sultan” willing to go to accommodate the demands of the junior bully next door? Who calls the shots in Ankara: Erdogan or Aliyev?
Armenians, however, have no reason to be dissatisfied that Aliyev is bullying Erdogan. By demanding that Turkey not ratify the Protocols, Aliyev inadvertently saved Armenia from an ill-advised agreement; and by urging Erdogan to have the statue in Kars torn down, he made the Turkish leader the laughing stock of the civilized world!