Category: Armenian Question

“The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary

Barack Obama Is No Jimmy Carter. He’s Richard Nixon.

THE NEW REALISM

By Michael Freedman | NEWSWEEK

Published Apr 25, 2009
From the magazine issue dated May 4, 2009

Republicans have been trying to link Barack Obama to Jimmy Carter ever since he started his presidential campaign, and they’re still at it. After Obama recently shook hands with Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chávez, GOP ideologue Newt Gingrich said the president looked just like Carter—showing the kind of “weakness” that keeps the “aggressors, the anti-Americans, the dictators” licking their chops.

But Obama is no Carter. Carter made human rights the cornerstone of his foreign policy, while the Obama team has put that issue on the back burner. In fact, Obama sounds more like another 1970s president: Richard Nixon. Both men inherited the White House from swaggering Texans, whose overriding sense of mission fueled disastrous wars that tarnished America’s image. Obama is a staunch realist, like Nixon, eschewing fuzzy democracy-building and focusing on advancing national interests. “Obama is cutting back on the idea that we’re going to have Jeffersonian democracy in Pakistan or anywhere else,” says Robert Dallek, author of the 2007 book, “Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power.”

Nixon met the enemy (Mao) to advance U.S. interests, and now Obama is reaching out to rivals like Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the same reason. “The willingness to engage in dialogue with Iran is very compatible with the approach Nixon would have conducted,” says Henry Kissinger, the architect of Nixon’s foreign policy. “But we’ll have to see how it plays out.” Hillary Clinton has assured Beijing that human rights won’t derail talks on pressing issues like the economic crisis, another sign of Nixonian hard-headedness. And echoing Nixon’s pursuit of détente, Obama has engaged Russia, using a mutual interest in containing nuclear proliferation as a stepping stone to discuss other matters, rather than pressing Moscow on democracy at home, or needlessly provoking it on issues like missile defense and NATO expansion, which have little near-term chance of coming to fruition and do little to promote U.S. security. Thomas Graham, a Kissinger associate who oversaw Russia policy at the National Security Council during much of the younger Bush’s second term, says this approach by Obama, a Democrat, resembles a Republican foreign-policy tradition that dates back to the elder George Bush and Brent Scowcroft, and then even further to Nixon and Kissinger.

It’s hard to know if such tactics will work, of course. But Obama has made clear he understands America’s limitations and its strengths, revealing a penchant for Nixonian pragmatism—not Carter-inspired weakness.

© 2009

Source: Newsweek, Apr 25, 2009

April 26, 2009
Obama’s April 24 statement no comfort for Turks

by Ferruh Demirmen

It is becoming almost an annual ritual for American presidents to issue commemorative declarations every year on April 24 to remember the Armenian “victims” of a tragic historic episode that took place almost 100 years ago. How many other foreign historic episodes nearly a century old do the American presidents commemorate every year? The answer: “zero.”

And wherein lies the secret for such homage to Armenian people? Money, my friends, and lots of it in the form of campaign contributions.

And the hapless Turks, ever watchful if the dreaded word “genocide” will be spelled out on such occasions, take a deep breath if that does not happen. They sit mostly on the sidelines, waiting for the events to unfold. Never mind that, the “g” word or no “g” word, they may be blamed for atrocities in history they did not commit.

The Turk’s attitude is the poor man’s consolation for being spared a bigger affront.

The litany

Last year, referring to “human dignity” and “epic human tragedy,” President Bush issued a statement to “honor the memory of the victims of one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century, the mass killings and forced exile of as many as 1.5 million Armenians at the end of the Ottoman Empire.”

Not a single word about the context, and the Moslem victims.

It is a melodramatic soap opera that takes place every year, and this year it was no different.

A few days ago President Obama, referring to “man’s inhumanity to man,” called the 1915 events “one of the great atrocities of the 20th century.” He remembered the “1.5 million Armenians who were subsequently massacred or marched to their death in the final days of the Ottoman Empire.”

So, Obama didn’t use the “g” word. Big deal! But he used the equivalent term in Armenian: “Medz Yeghern,” meaning Big Calamity. To the Turks, it is nearly as offensive as the “g” word. And Obama, a smart and perceptive man, should have known.

Never believe the ANCA-type hypocrites who feigned disappointment in Obama’s choice of words because he didn’t use the “g” word. The Dashnakians must have relished Obama’s use of the term “Medz Yeghern.”

It is the first time an American president pandered to the Freudian psyche of the Armenian lobby.

The term “genocide” is a legal term, anyway, and notwithstanding the untoward motives of ANCA-swayed politicians, the UN and the International Court of Justice are the only legal entities empowered to give credibility to that word.

A matter of balance

In all honesty, no one can blame Obama, or any other American president for that matter, to commemorate the tragic sufferings and deaths of Armenians during World War I. We must all condemn tragic events that befell humanity.

But humanity also calls for a sense of balance, or justice. Where is the context, the faithfulness to historical truth, and remembrance of Turkish and Kurdish sufferings and casualties in such condemnations?

Why is the number of Armenian casualties in these statements, which historical records show could not have exceeded half a million, boosted to 1.5 million?

Why is there no mention of the betrayal of the Ottomans by the Armenian populace, who, by forming armed gangs, attacked the Ottoman civilians and Ottoman armies from behind during wartime when the country was under Russian, French and British occupation?

More Moslems perished in the hands of terrorist Armenian gangs than the Armenians under Moslem backlash.

Do the American presidents, or politicians of all stripes for that matter, have the right to be selective in condemning “man’s inhumanity to man?”

Did the sufferings and deaths of Turks, Kurds, and even Jews in some cases, matter at all?

As Obama-the-candidate was being indoctrinated by Dashnakians as to the events during World War I and learn diligently the words “Medz Yeghern,” he should have asked his hosts to teach him how to say “betrayal”or “treason” in Armenian. And cite that word in his April 24 statement.

Those irresistible greenbacks

President Obama is a clever man with a huge popularity at home and abroad. Unlike President Bush, who had a habit of bumbling through his unscripted speeches, Obama chooses his words carefully. His language in his April 24 statement is a testimony to the irresistible effectiveness of ANCA’s lobbying efforts. His perception of history was clouded by Armenian propaganda.

The enthusiastic sponsorship that Obama received on ANCA’s website, through videos and webcasts, in apparent violation of ANCA’s tax-exempt status, is all too fresh in minds.

Obama didn’t stop with one-sided depiction of history. Adding insult to injury, he paid homage to Americans of Armenian descent for their contributions to the American society while ignoring Turkish Americans.

Fair is fair. Does Obama think Turks are zombies of no redeemable value?

Surely, the greenbacks, lots of them, must have done wonders for the Armenian propagandists in shaping Obama’s mind.

Dubious diplomacy

Will the Turks take notice of such indignity? We don’t know. But the higher-ups in the Turkish government in Ankara probably will not. They engaged in secret negotiations in Switzerland toward normalization of relations between Ankara and Yerevan, reporting the “progress” to the Obama administration but leaving the Turkish people – as well as the Azeri people – in the dark.

Which begs the question: Did those high-flying Turkish diplomats in Switzerland think they were representing the Obama administration instead of the Turkish people?

The Azeri have a very legitimate stake in the Turkish-Armenian talks because of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.

In the meanwhile the Azeri, being briefed about the Switzerland talks by the Russians, who in turn were briefed by the Armenians, became incensed at Turks’ audacity at conducting diplomacy behind their back. The Azeri showed their displeasure by starting energy-related talks with the Russian energy giant Gazprom. Turkey’s east-west Nabucco energy transit project, already suffering from a cold bout, has become shakier still. The Azeri gas is supposed to be the initial feed gas for the project. Ankara now has its hands full trying to placate a jittery Baku.

The imponderables

Setting all this aside, President Obama perhaps deserves credit for tempering his April 24 statement with some moderation. Even Vice President Joe Biden, the inveterate genocide hawk, softened his stance. Obama could have been harsher in his statement. The moderation, of course, stems from anticipation of a growing dialog between Turkey and Armenia that started in Switzerland. Whether that will materialize, is something else. Obama didn’t want to throw cold water on the process.

But with his unmistakable pro-Armenian bias, most Turks will remain unimpressed with Obama’s stance.

The outcome of the Turkish-Armenian talks so far is a “road map” of which details are kept under wraps. Apparently there are no pre-conditions to advance talks to the next level. But the road map has many roadblocks for both sides – as well, for the Azeri.

In the meantime, the Turkish-American relations will become hostage to the outcome of diplomatic traffic between Ankara, Yerevan and Baku. With “Medz Yeghern” language in the background, it is not a reassuring thought. Turks are not comforted by Obama’s language.

Separately, there is no guarantee that a Democratically controlled U.S. House of Representatives under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi will not pass a pro-genocide resolution soon.

[email protected]

April 26, 2009
South Caucasus Presents Tangled Web Of Shifting Allegiances
Turkish soldiers guard a road at Dogu Kapi, on the Turkish-Armenian border, on April 15.

April 24, 2009 By Brian Whitmore Anticipation is in the air in the Armenian village of Margara.

Roads are being repaired. Visitors are inquiring about real estate prices. Talk abounds of new hotels, shops, and restaurants.

A sleepy border hamlet of just 1,500 people, Magara is the site of the only bridge linking Armenia with Turkey — a bridge that has not been used since Ankara closed the border and cut off diplomatic relations with Yerevan in 1993 over the war in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Now, with talk of an impending Armenian-Turkish rapprochement reaching a fever pitch, locals like 70-year-old Demaxia Manukian are hopeful that their isolation is at an end.

“The more consumers there will be, the better it will be for us. Infrastructure will improve — the streets and the water system,” Manukian tells RFE/RL’s Armenian Service, stressing that the town will need to be spruced up in order to impress all the new visitors if the border opens.

“After all, it’s a matter of prestige. That’s why it has to get better.”

The thaw in relations between Ankara and Yerevan, which began shortly after Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian took office a year ago, has picked up steam in recent months with high-level backing from both the United States and Russia.

The issue takes on added relevance this week, as Armenians on April 24 commemorate the 94th anniversary of the onset of mass killings of ethnic Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the end of World War I — a longstanding source of tension between Turkey and Armenia.

Turkey’s Foreign Ministry announced this week that the two sides had agreed to a road map to normalize ties. In testimony before the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised Ankara and Yerevan for taking “bold steps” toward reconciliation, adding that “normalizing relations and opening their borders will foster a better environment for confronting that shared, tragic history.”

But the complex Turkish-Armenian relationship does not exist in a vacuum. It is but one thread in a tangled web of grievances and mistrust that have long plagued the South Caucasus — and sparked a sometimes fractious race for influence among the international powers drawn by the lure of energy and strategic location.

Historical Animosities

When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, Turkey was the first country to recognize Armenia’s independence, but the warm neighborly relations were short-lived.

Turkey and Azerbaijan, both predominantly Muslim countries, are close allies. When Armenia occupied Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh region, Ankara broke off relations with Yerevan and closed the border in solidarity with its ally.

Azerbaijan remains deeply suspicious of a Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and has hinted that it would scuttle the regional balance if its interests are not safeguarded.

Moreover, Yerevan’s longstanding claim that the mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I constituted genocide infuriates Ankara and has long been a roadblock to normalizing ties.

The Turkey-Armenia road map, brokered by Switzerland, comes as Armenia and Azerbaijan appear to be edging closer to a resolution of the Karabakh standoff, with apparent help from Moscow.

Both the Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders traveled to Russia this week for talks with officials, and both offered carefully worded, but optimistic, assessments of the talks.

Meanwhile, Azerbaijan, which fears it will be the odd man out in a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement, has turned a cold shoulder to its traditional allies in Ankara in recent weeks, with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev refusing a recent invitation to travel to Turkey.

At the same time, Baku has been cozying up to Moscow.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev (right) with Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev in Barbikha on April 17Baku may be seeking to remind Ankara that as the sole energy supplier in the South Caucasus, it is free to choose its friends, and its issues. Analysts say Turkey is trying desperately to persuade Azerbaijan that an opening to Armenia is in everybody’s interests.

“The Turkish strategic perspective and the message that they constantly articulate to Baku is that over the longer term, a normalization with Armenia will actually enhance Turkish leverage and influence in the region — which, from the Turkish point of view is good for Ankara and good for Baku,” says Richard Giragosian, director of the Yerevan-based Center for National and International Studies.

“This is a Turkish strategic agenda based on Turkish national interests. It is not to curry favor with Brussels, nor is it to please Washington. But in the long run from a Turkish perspective, it’s good for the region, it’s good for Azerbaijan, and it’s good for Turkey.”

Baku, however, appears unconvinced.

During his visit to Moscow on April 17, Aliyev said he saw no obstacles to cutting a deal to sell natural gas to Russia’s Gazprom. Aliyev added that Baku hoped to diversify its natural gas exports, most of which are currently sent west to Europe via Turkey.

Such a move would be a severe blow to the proposed U.S.- and EU-backed Nabucco pipeline, which would transport gas from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to Europe via the South Caucasus, bypassing Russia.

Baku has also warned that an open Turkish-Armenian border “could lead to tensions in the region and would be contradictory to the interests of Azerbaijan.”

Shifting Alliances

Analysts say Aliyev is attempting play the gas card to get the best possible deal in a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Specifically, Baku is seeking Russian support for the withdrawal of Armenian troops from regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh.

A Karabakh resolution would be a feather in Moscow’s cap as it seeks to reassert itself in its former Soviet territories. But a far greater draw — for Moscow and all the international powers keeping toeholds in the South Caucasus — is energy.

The South Caucasus’ role as a transit hub for oil and gas from the Caspian Sea and Central Asia to Europe is casting a long shadow over the ongoing process as Russia and the West seek to control these crucial energy routes. Ilgar Mammadov, a Baku-based political analyst, says “everybody is playing a sophisticated game.”

After the Armenian-Turkish road map was announced on April 22, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry released a statement saying that “the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations must proceed in parallel with the withdrawal of Armenian troops from the occupied lands of Azerbaijan.”

But Mammadov says Baku’s strategy has risks, as it could push Azerbaijan even “farther into the hands of Russia” and away from the West.

“Baku is trying to use the advantage of its geopolitical location to influence the position of its European and American partners. But if the Russians respond to this policy in a very material way, like pulling Armenian forces back from some of the occupied territories, I think the foreign policy orientation of this regime in Baku may become irreversible,” Mammadov says.

If the Russians respond to this policy in a very material way, like pulling Armenian forces back from some of the occupied territories, I think the foreign policy orientation of this regime in Baku may become irreversible.The moves toward Moscow by Baku, which until now has enjoyed a degree of independence due to its energy wealth, are being watched nervously in Georgia, whose ties with Russia have sunk in recent years, bottoming out during the five-day war over South Ossetia in August.

With no energy resources of its own, and an international partner — the United States — that has grown more accommodating of Moscow in recent months, Georgia may be in the position to suffer most in the event of a resurgence of Russian influence in the region.

Armenia, which has the strongest traditional ties with Moscow despite its relative lack of resources, may prove a more equal partner if the border with Turkey is opened and its commercial isolation ends. In this way, Russia has a vested interest in seeing the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement move forward, and may be using the Karabakh process to help nudge it along.

In a recent interview with RFE/RL, Deputy U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza — who is one of three co-chairmen of OSCE-sponsored mediation on Karabakh — stressed that Washington sees the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation and a Nagorno-Karabakh settlement as “separate tracks.” He added, however, that negotiations on Karabakh are gaining momentum.

“I honestly can say that I feel more than ever a constructive spirit and that we are actually entering a new phase, I hope, of the negotiations,” Bryza said. “The presidents spent a year getting to know each other a bit and knowing each other’s positions. And now I feel we are moving to a new phase with a deeper more detailed discussion of the remaining elements of the basic principles that need to be resolved.”

Football Diplomacy 2.0

Analysts say, however, that Turkish-Armenian reconciliation will likely precede any settlement on Nagorno-Karabakh.

Sabina Freizer, director of the Brussels-based The International Crisis Group’s Europe program says many Caucasus-watchers are pointing to October, when Sarkisian is due to visit Turkey to watch a World Cup qualifying soccer match between Armenia and Turkey, as a possible date to close the deal.

“I am quite optimistic and I believe that if the border is opened and diplomatic relations are established this will change things fundamentally in the South Caucasus. I personally believe that at this point the two sides seem to be close enough that the border should open quite quickly,” Freizer said. “But of course the timing is very political. One date that people are talking about is during President Sarkisian’s visit to Turkey, if it occurs in October. That might be a good time to open the border.”

If an agreement is reached in time for Sarkisian’s visit, it would provide a tidy conclusion to the “football diplomacy” that the Armenian president began in September, when he hosted Turkish President Abdullah Gul to Yerevan to watch the last match between the two national teams.

While the United States has strongly backed Turkey and Armenia normalizing relations, the momentum is also causing some political discomfort for U.S. President Barack Obama.

During a visit to Turkey earlier this month, Obama encouraged the talks between Ankara and Yerevan, saying they “could bear fruit very quickly.”

The recent progress, however, will make it difficult for Obama to make good on a campaign promise to Armenian-Americans to recognize the 90-year-old mass killings as genocide. Such a move now would infuriate Turkey and potentially scuttle any deal to open the Armenian border.

But back in the border village of Margara, residents say they are ready to move beyond painful historical grievances.

Three of Demaxia Manukian’s uncles perished in the mass killings, but he nevertheless says he is ready to move on.

“There are Turks and there are Armenians. The Turks are human beings, too. They rock their children in their cradles just like we do,” Manukian said. “But when politics get injected into this, that is the danger.”

RFE/RL’s Armenian and Azerbaijani services contributed to this report
- Print
- Email
- Comment (4)
Would you like to post to this forum? Name * Enter your name Enter your name Location City City E-mail Enter your email Your email address is invalid Comment *
Your comment is empty or longer than 4000 characters. Your comment is empty or longer than 4000 characters. Disclaimer
Reader comments in no way reflect the views or opinions of RFE/RL correspondents, contributors, or staff.
Before you post a comment, please read the forum rules Are you human? Please enter the numbers below: Comments 1-4 (of 4) by: J from: US April 24, 2009 20:38 To Dasiey “from Canada”- your poor English betrays your IQ

by: Dasiey from: Canada April 24, 2009 17:18 Mr. Whitmore,

Based on the western media reports such as New York Times,Armenian have sculpted women and children in Azerbaijan just 17 years ago!!
As a humanitarian advocate ,I believe we can Not be blind to the facts that Armenian committed genocide in Azerbaijan just 17 years ago in the city of Kojli.
Armenia so far have not respected The latest U.N Resolution( March 14/2008) which asks Armenia to withdraw from %20 of Azerbaijan’s occupied lands.

Further more,Armenian terrorist group(ASALA)was removed from the list of terrorist in North America is still active! This is their media’s website:

The question is Which nation is the victim?

by: Armenian from: US April 24, 2009 13:16 Armenians will never move on until Turkey accepts genocide. There is no nation on the Earth that could forget genocide, and definitely, not Armenians. It is not politics, it is a matter of historical justice. So please stop publishing rubbish.

by: J from: US April 24, 2009 11:44 Why is Azerbaijan constantly mentioned- it is irrelevant to the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation issue. They should know that by now.
April 26, 2009
Bipartisan Congressional Support for Armenian Genocide Recognition on Display at Capitol Hill Observance

ANCA CAPITOL HILL ARMENIAN GENOCIDE REMEMBRANCE
DRAWS 40 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

“It is long past the time for the United States to formally recognize the Armenian Genocide.”
-Speaker Nancy Pelosi WASHINGTON-On April 23, dozens of Democratic and Republican Members of Congress joined with over 500 Armenian Americans from across the United States in Capitol Hill’s historic Cannon Caucus Room in a solemn remembrance devoted to U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide, reported the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA). Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), in their remarks to the standing-room only audience, both spoke forcefully of their personal commitment to proper U.S. condemnation and commemoration of the Armenian Genocide. “It is long past the time for the United States to formally recognize the Armenian Genocide,” noted Speaker Pelosi in her remarks. She went on to spotlight the importance of grassroots efforts against Turkey’s multi-million dollar campaign of genocide denial. “How far we can go with the resolution [H.Res.252] this year depends on the outreach that each and everyone of us in this room can do to win on the floor of the House. We can do any amount of inside maneuvering in the Congress and Washington, but what is important is the outside mobilization to bring to bear the voices of people across America.” The Congressional Armenian Genocide observance was organized by the Congressional Armenian Caucus, with Caucus co-chairs Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) serving as masters of ceremony. Opening prayers were offered by his Eminence Oshagan Choloyan, Prelate of the Armenian Apostolic Church of the Eastern United States as well as Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, Legate of the Diocese of the Armenian Apostolic Church of Eastern United States. Joining Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer in offering remarks at the commemoration were Armenian Genocide Resolution lead sponsors Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Rep. George Radanovich (R-Calif.), House Members of Armenian descent Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) and Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), as well as Reps. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), and Tim Walz (D-Minn.). Members in attendance at the Observance also included Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), and Reps. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), David Dreier (R-Calif.), Bob Filner (D-Calif.), Rush Holt (D-N.J.), Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), James Langevin (D-R.I.), Richard Neal (D-Mass.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Ed Royce (R-Calif.), and Diane Watson (D-Calif.). The evening included powerful remarks about the consequences of genocide by guest speaker Dr. Henry Theriault of Worcester State University. Also offering remarks were Armenian Ambasador Tatul Markarian and Permanent Representative of the Nagorno-Karabagh Republic to the U.S. Robert Avetisyan. Video coverage of key remarks at the Armenian Genocide observance will be posted to the ANCA Website at www.anca.org. The Armenian Genocide Resolution, introduced earlier this year by Reps. Schiff and Radanovich and Congressional Armenian Caucus co-chairs Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), calls on the U.S. president to properly recognize the Armenian Genocide. It currently has over 100 co-sponsors and has been referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee, chaired by Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.). President Obama, as a Senator and a candidate for the presidency, spoke forcefully, clearly, and repeatedly in support of U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide, frequently criticizing then-President Bush for failing to properly characterize and commemorate this crime while in the White House. He is expected to offer his first April 24th statement, a White House tradition, this Friday. Among President Obama’s past statements have been the following:
– “The Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable.”
– “America deserves a leader who speaks truthfully about the Armenian Genocide and responds forcefully to all genocides. I intend to be that president.”
– “As a senator, I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution (H.Res.106 and S.Res.106), and as president I will recognize the Armenian Genocide.”

Members of Congress Honor Victims of the Armenian Genocide; Call for Proper U.S. Recognition of this Crime Against Humanity

Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-MD): “I come every year because I think that the issue you place on the national and international agenda is of great importance. . . If there should be any question raised about the occurrence of this genocide, it is beyond my understanding. . . If other nations can speak the truth then our nation must speak the truth on this issue. . . The Senate [Armenian Genocide] resolution has my strongest support.”

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ): “There are those who argue that Turkey is an ally, and maybe it is. But, at the end of the day, even an ally should permit us to have our own policy to recognize what history says happened—that 1.5 million Armenians perished. That should be the reality we take as a position for the country. When Hitler asked “who remembers the Armenians?” I answer that we remember the Armenians, the next generation of the Armenians, and all of us who believe in human rights. And this country remembers the Armenians, and that is why we are here today.”

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ): “We have to remember that genocide was originally discovered in those years [1915-1923]. . . and make sure to support legislation to recognize the Genocide, making sure that it is known as an Armenian event and do everything we can to get it passed.”

Rep. David Dreier (R-CA): “We are strongly committed to doing everything we can to making sure there is clear recognition of the Armenian Genocide – and that is exactly what I’ve said to two Turkish Prime Ministers.”

Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ): “It is so important for you to be here and to show up. The only way a message is going to be sent is if more and more people come out and show up. . . The effort to deny the Genocide continues and that’s why it’s so important to be out there in large numbers to counter their actions.”

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): “I long for the day when we not only come to commemorate the Genocide, but to celebrate the passage of Genocide resolutions. . . Let’s not let any of our Armenian parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles down. . . let’s recognize the Armenian Genocide now!”

Rep. George Radanovich (R-CA): “It’s particularly exasperating this year – we have a bill out of committee ready to go to the floor, yet we are finding it difficult to move it further and I think after 12 years I wonder and I tire but I know you have been waiting 91 years and it gives me hope we will soon be recognizing the Genocide. Keep working and have faith and America will recognize it.”

Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY): “Without a full acceptance, we have denial, and with denial we perpetuate terrible episodes in history, threatening humanity and mankind, and impede on the march of freedom and liberty. I don’t intend on allowing that to happen! I pledge and vow to you as one of your own to keep the fight up and keep on working hard.”

Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ): “The truth has curative power and reconciliation powers and we thank you for that effort of getting the truth out.”

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL): “When we learn the lesson of the Armenian Genocide, we say ‘never again,’ which is very easy to say in a speech in Washington. But I’ve been there [as a U.S. soldier serving in Bosnia] when we’ve meant ‘never again,’ where we took action as the only superpower on the planet to stop a crime. So now when we look at what’s happening today, we have a powerful moral lesson that we have learned from the people of Armenia — the one that we have to carry into the classrooms and television sets.”

Rep. James Langevin (D-RI): “If we do not recognize the Armenian Genocide it will happen again and again and again.”

Rep. Joe Schwarz (R-MI): “I am a student of history and have been interested in Armenian history for many years. One of the goals for Congress and for American foreign policy should be a strong and independent Armenia within the community of the Transcaucasus. We should not let the Azeris, the Georgians, the Russians, the Turks impinge on the bright and prosperous future of Armenia. . . The United States must recognize the Armenian genocide so that we can get on with the healing.”

Rep. John Larson (D-CT): “I’m often amazed at the ceremonies and annual pilgrimages people make on behalf of their beliefs and their cause. And for those that seek to remember or understand Armenia all you have to do is look around this room it’s written on your faces, it’s carried in your hearts.”

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY): “It is time for the American government to officially recognize what happened 91 years ago and join the other countries of the world with official recognition . . . We must always stand up and speak the truth to counter any denial.”

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): “It is extraordinary given what the Armenian people were subjected to, given the fight that still goes on, given the unfair obstacles still put in the way of Armenia, given the importance of reminding the world of this genocide, that you have compassion, wisdom, and commitment to universal values that lead you to your efforts for stopping the atrocities taking place in Darfur.”

Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL): “If you look at all the members who have spoken here and those who are still waiting to speak this is a very unique situation. On any other day these Members may have nothing in common, but this is what happens when you come together for truth. . . You have done a great job in bringing this to everyone’s attention in this country and I commend you and urge you to keep it up.”

Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA): “It’s time for President Bush to adhere to his campaign promise and tear down that wall of denial and recognize and honor the Armenian Genocide.”

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI): “We must pierce the myth of this indispensable relationship [between the U.S. and Turkey]. . . No relations can be built upon a lie. . . If we are going to have friends and allies in the world that the United states can depend on, there must be honesty both within our relationship and in the United States itself.”

Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ): “What is going on now – because your movement is getting stronger, your voices are getting louder, your issues are being heard – there is a disinformation, it’s always been there but now it’s more organized. . . So now we have to keep the pressure on keep the fight on. Genocide anywhere is wrong.”

Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ): “What is the harm in denying the truth? Is there any harm in denying the truth? As human beings we know that this does cause a physical destruction to the body when one denies the truth. Just as I believe that applies to individuals, I believe that it applies to countries and humanity. And so when the world denied the Armenian Genocide and continues to deny it, not only did that lead to the Holocaust but it has contributed to the atmosphere in which the world has witnessed the deaths of 400,000 in Darfur. You notice that there are some similarities in the way the Ottoman Empire persecuted the Armenian population and what is going on in Darfur — the forced exile, the systematic deprivation of food and water, and murder through starvation. . . Denying the truth about genocide is really a second killing, a double genocide. We as Americans cannot stand by when the truth continues to be denied.”

Rep. Sue Kelly (R-NY): “It makes no sense that we cannot officially recognize the genocide, acknowledge it, ask for an apology and go beyond the issue, allowing the whole region to move together. This cannot happen unless there is an apology!”

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA): “When will Turkey be part of the modern world if it does not recognize the past? Where would Germany be if it denied the Holocaust? Where would America be if we said slavery didn’t exist and the native America tribes just drifted away peacefully. Every country needs to recognizes its past in order to move forward to the future. And that is why I have co-sponsored every resolution in the last ten years in the House of Representatives to recognize the first genocide of the last century. But we have seen it again and again. Our International Relations committee passes the resolution – we reformulate the resolution and get it through the Judiciary committee instead. We move that bill through that Committee and then the House leadership won’t let it come up to a vote. It’s time to raise our voices to even higher levels and say its time for this to come up for a vote. Why is the Congress hiding from its responsibilities?”

Rep. John Tierney (D-MA): “ All of you do us a great service in reminding us the issues that are important to the Armenian community and for us to attend to those issues. Truth about what happened 91-years ago and the fairness of the issues for which you fight are things we need to continually remember. The truth is that it was ‘Genocide.’ We have to end man’s inhumanity to man, and we can only do that by acknowledging what has happened in the past, and swearing that we should never remain silent as it happens now in Darfur.”

Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN): “I commend you for your efforts to keep this alive and I hope you get a hard vote.”

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD): “The lesson of the Armenian Genocide is that evil things are not just done by the bad people who perpetuate the crimes, but in a way are allowed to happen by the good people who are not taking the necessary action. The failure of the United States Congress to pass an Armenian Genocide Resolution sends exactly the wrong signal to people around the world about accountability. We have to send the signal that we are going to hold people accountable and the failure to do that has been a stain on the conscious of Congress and the United States.”

Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA): “I understand it is a responsibility of mine in Congress to stand for your people and for the plight of your nation. . . . I told the President of Azerbaijan that we wanted to be friends with Azerbaijan but that we will not do it at the expense of Armenia and the Armenian community. We want the dignity of Armenia to shine strong in the Caspian region. You have our support and bipartisan support by members of Congress to make sure we never forget the terrible atrocities that occurred 91 years ago and that we never forget the plight of the Armenian people.”

Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA): “A country is only as great as its ability to recognize its past, recognize its mistakes, apologize and move on. The Diaspora isn’t looking for blood and vengeance, I believe you are looking for reconciliation and recognition so that we can all move forward in this world to insure that future acts of genocide shall cease.”

Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA): “I come to support you and join with my colleagues in saying that California already has a resolution supporting the Genocide of the Armenians, so we are already ahead of the game. And we want it to spread across this nation, all 50 states, that they then will correct the people out there that would like to deny. Let them know that history speaks for itself, and that the genocide is real. . . .We are going to try to convince our colleagues, regardless of the Turkish influence that appears in these halls, and win out in the end.”

April 26, 2009
Thaw between Turkey and Armenia shifts alliances in South Caucasus

Financial Times

By Isabel Gorst in Moscow
Published: April 25 2009 03:00 | Last updated: April 25 2009 03:00

A rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia this week provided further evidence of a shift in the balance of power in the South Caucasus that is propelling gas-rich Azerbaijan closer to Russia, analysts said.

The process that began when Georgia went to war with Russia last summer over its breakaway territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, could jeopardise European plans to reduce dependence on Russian gas by importing extra Caspian supplies. Azerbaijan views the announcement on Wednesday by its ally Turkey and historic foe Armenia of plans to normalise ties as a betrayal that would leave it relatively isolated in the South Caucasus, where Armenia already enjoys strong ties with Russia and Iran.

Ilham Aliev, the president of Azerbaijan, has intensified pressure on Turkey, suggesting during a visit to Moscow this month for talks about gas and the disputed region of Nagorno Karabakh, that a Turkish betrayal could hit bilateral gas trade.

Disagreements between Turkey and Azerbaijan over gas prices and transit terms have undermined European plans to build the Nabucco pipeline to carry extra Caspian gas across the South Caucasus to Europe.

Mr Aliev said Azerbaijan could export some gas through the planned Nabucco pipeline to Europe, but warned it was “difficult to say when this project will move from a dead end and who will do it”.
Azerbaijan opened gas talks with Russia last year after the war in Georgia exposed the vulnerability of pipelines crossing the South Caucasus that have allowed Turkey to emerge as a crucial energy hub in the area.

Mr Medvedev said the “chances were very high” that Russia would soon clinch a gas import deal with Azerbaijan.

Edward Chow, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said: “It makes sense [for Azerbaijan] to appease Russia by sending some gas that way,”. It was unlikely that Azerbaijan would compromise its independence by exporting all its gas to Russia, he added.
Mr Aliev said the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict could end Armenia’s exclusion from oil and gas export projects in the South Caucasus.

European diplomats said Russian efforts to broker a settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict could help restore its international image in the aftermath of the war in Georgia. But analysts said Russia was exploiting separatist tensions to strengthen its grip on the South Caucasus.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

April 25, 2009
Azerbaijani politicians and political analysts comment on Barack Obama’s 24 April statement

Baku. Elnur Mammadli – APA.

“I think that U.S. President Barack Obama’s opinion on the “Armenian genocide” is unscientific approach to history. Such political approaches to history do not serve peace,” chairman of Musavat Party Isa Gambar told APA. He said the happenings, which caused the tragedy of people of various nations during the World War I, are introduced in the West as the tragedy or even genocide of Armenians.
“President Obama says in his statement “The contributions that Armenians have made over the last ninety-four years stand as a testament to the talent, dynamism and resilience of the Armenian people”. Does this “testament” also cover the fate of tens of thousands of Azerbaijanis killed by them in 1918? Does the “testament” covers ethnic cleansing policy carried by Armenians in Armenia, occupation of Azerbaijani territories, ethnic cleansing policy in Karabakh, Khojaly genocide? I think President Obama and other politicians would rather think over these questions?” he said.

Member of Political Board of New Azerbaijan Party (YAP) Aydin Mirzazadeh noted that Barack Obama had been expected to make sensational statement on April 24. He said Obama’s words during the election campaign were natural.
“But when in power attention is paid to the state’s national interests. It is important for the US to preserve the relations with Turkey. American society knows that genocide claims are Armenians’ lies. I did not see unusual and sever views in Obama’s speech. There is nothing unusual in his calling the events of 1915 great tragedy. It should not be regarded only as an opinion favoring Armenians. Several expressions used by Obama to the advantage of Armenians are of diplomatic character. I think Armenians will not achieve their goal,” he said.

Chairman of Azerbaijan Democratic Party Serdar Jalaloglu said when speaking about “Armenian genocide”, one should speak about the massacres committed by America against Hindus, and by France against Algeria.
“Raising of “Armenian genocide” in the world is Christian fanaticism and aims to exert pressure on Turkey and revenge for 400-year policy of Ottoman Empire in Europe. The present position of the US is vague. Such claims do not serve security and peace in the world, on the contrary pave the way for mutual claims among states and peoples. It can become a precedent and other peoples may raise other claims. US and other countries’ supporting Armenians is not in line with their position and status in the world,” he said.

According to political scientist Mubariz Ahmadoghlu, US President Bakak Obama does not understand the importance of Turkey and Turkey’s important role in Middle East policy. “Obama approaches Turkey as a tool and compares Turkey with 70 million population with 8 million Armenians in the world. However, if Turkey takes resolute steps, it will take even less than a year that Obama will understand what mistakes he made in his speech. Only fifty percent of archives have been opened in Armenia and sixty percent of them were studied. In general only 30 percent of documents on genocide claims have been studied so far. If Obama supports such opinion basing on 30 percent of archive materials, it shows that he is a man of straw”.

To political scientist Ilgar Mammadov, Obama’s calling 1915 events as “great tragedy” is not a word expressed against Turkey: “Of course, Turks, Armenians and others lost their lives on that time, because of World War I. It’s a positive case that Obama did not use the term “genocide”.

Apa

April 25, 2009