Category: Armenian Question

Pro Armenian Cong. Berman pushes Armenian propaganda at the House Foreign Relations Committee

Cong. Berman is speaking to get the Armenian votes in November.

He is militanly pro Armenian.

He recently has  met with the convicted Armenian terrorist  Mourat Topalian.

California Turks/ Azeris must find a way to unseat this biased and unfair representative in Nov. 2008.

House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Congressman Howard L. Berman (D-CA), chairman

Verbatim, as delivered

June 18, 2008

Opening Statement by Chairman Howard L. Berman at hearing, “The Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed Borders”

Between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea lie the countries of the Caucasus – Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia.  Due to disputes that have festered over the course of many years, there are enough compelling questions involving these three countries and their neighbors to occupy us all day long.  During the course of this hearing I’d like to focus on the frozen conflicts affecting economic and political integration in the region, and how U.S. foreign policy is responding to them.  

I’d like to start with one of the most puzzling and problematic matters: the Turkish land blockade of Armenia, in place since 1993. It’s a punishing policy that holds the Armenian economy back and enormously increases the cost of much of Armenia’s trade with other nations. 

The land blockade is also, quite possibly, illegal, as it seems to breach Turkey’s undertaking in the 1922 Treaty of Kars to keep its border-crossings with Armenia open.  And it violates the spirit of the World Trade Organization, of which both Turkey and Armenia are members.

It’s baffling why Ankara would want to pursue this land blockade, which also harms the economy of eastern Turkey, and is therefore clearly contrary to its own interests.  It’s no secret that many Turkish businessmen, especially in the east, have been lobbying for lifting the land blockade.

It also seems manifestly contrary to the strategic interests of Turkey, which purports to be a solid member of the Western alliance.  Without an outlet to Turkey or Azerbaijan, Armenia is forced to rely on its connections to two of Turkey’s historical rivals, Russia and Iran – and given how antithetical the Iranian regime is to the secular, modern Turkish government, it seems odd that Ankara would want to undertake any actions that will enhance Tehran’s influence in Yerevan.

Furthermore, the land blockade has done absolutely nothing to persuade Armenia to alter its policies on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue – the ostensible cause of the land blockade in the first place.  Nor is there any prospect that it will do so.  Armenia has demonstrated its resolve to support the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh.  Turkey is more likely to win influence with the Armenian government if it pursues a policy of good-neighborliness than if it slams the border closed.

Why hasn’t the State Department – which opposes the land blockade – spoken out more forcefully on this matter?  Certainly it’s in our interest to diminish Iran’s influence among its neighbors, not to enhance it.  Ambassador Fried, I’m hoping you’ll lay out for us the steps our government has taken and is taking to convince our ally Turkey to end, once and for all, this counter-productive practice of closed borders.

And by no means is Turkey Armenia’s only problem in the region.  I’m deeply concerned by the series of increasingly bellicose statements made over the past year about Nagorno-Karabakh by senior Azerbaijani officials, as well as the steady increase in Azerbaijan’s defense budget as that nation acquires more oil wealth.  The serious breakdown earlier this year in the 14-year-old cease-fire has been widely blamed on Azerbaijani provocations.  Mr. Ambassador, how do you see this situation, and what is the status of negotiations over Nagorno-Karabakh? 

Turning to Georgia, in recent weeks, we’ve seen increasingly aggressive Russian behavior toward the region of Abkhazia: Moscow has established official ties with the separatist government there, issued passports and citizenship to its residents, dispatched a Russian jet to down a Georgian reconnaissance craft, and deployed railway troops to the region under dubious pretenses.

It was dispiriting to hear the new Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, dismiss offers of foreign mediation of this conflict during his first official meeting in early June with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvilli.  Although the United States and the European Union expressed support for the Georgian President’s peace initiatives during their recent summit in Slovenia, follow-up efforts by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and your deputy Matt Bryza to encourage peace talks have garnered little traction.   Mr. Ambassador, what steps will this Administration take in the coming months to help prevent further escalation of this conflict?  And do you support calls for the Russian-dominated CIS peacekeeping force to be replaced by a neutral EU contingent as one means of mitigating the conflict?

And finally, I’d like to address an issue with long-term implications for U.S. foreign policy throughout the region: the prospect of democratization and political development in the South Caucasus.  Lately in the wake of elections in the region, there has been a worrying trend of large-scale protests and forceful police reaction. This explosive combination has the effect of silencing the opposition and strengthening ruling political regimes in a region that is still struggling to establish its democratic credentials.

Last fall, the Georgian government imposed a sweeping state of emergency following demonstrations by thousands of protesters over a government that appeared out of touch with the people.  Armenia experienced violent clashes that left eight people dead following March presidential elections.  And Azerbaijan could suffer a similar fate during its presidential elections in October, as the government is already cracking down on the media and opposition. 

Mr. Ambassador, we would welcome your assessment of the democratic prospects of these countries, which are of such great strategic importance to the United States.  Given unstable regimes and considerable political acrimony, what is the potential for fostering sustainable dialogue on a multi-party, parliamentary level? I would also be grateful if you could address the question of how the U.S. administration is holding these governments accountable for human rights abuses, while at the same time working to achieve lasting peace between them.

It’s a tall order; we don’t have all the time in the world to address all the matters we’d like to today, so I’m going to stop at this point and turn to my colleague and friend Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the ranking member of the committee, for any comments she may wish to make.

English Version Below

From vural c. [[email protected]]

Wexler ve ilgili konu hakkinda bir Turk anasindan mesaj

      Kongrede bugun yapilan toplanti
      Posted by: “Bennur Yegenoglu” 
      Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:21 am (PDT)
      Sevgili Arkadaslar,
      
      Aldigim bilgilere gore, bugun Kongre¢de cok rahatsiz edici bir toplanti yapilmis. Kongre¢nin Dis Iliskiler Komitesi¢nde bugun halka acik yapilan toplantida (hearing) ABD Disisleri Bakanligi Mustesarlarindan Dan Fried konusma yapmis ve Komite uyeleri kendisine sorular yoneltmis.
      
      Komitenin web sayfasinda sizlerin de gorebilecegi gibi, konu, Kafkaslardaki Donmus Krizler (Frozen Conflicts of the Caucasus) idi. Ancak, sanki konu bu degilmis gibi, toplanti adeta Turkiye aleyhine yapilan bir karalama kampanyasi toplantisina donusmus. Malum, Dis Iliskiler Komitesinin uyelerinin bircogu Ermeni diasporasinun yogun oldugu Kaliforniya eyaletinden. Ancak, Komite Baskani acilis konusmasinin daha ilk paragrafinda Gurcistan ve Ermenistan-Azerbeyc an arasi yasanan krizlere deginmektense, Turkiye¢nin Ermenistan ile olan sinirinin kapali olmasindan bahsetmis ve konunun detaylarina girmis.
      
      Burada bir parantez de acmamiz gerekiyor. Komite Baskani Berman cok yakin bir zamanda Turk hukumetinin cok ust duzey yetkilileriyle gorustugunu kendisi bugun toplantida dile getirmis (en son Sn. Babacan ile gorustu), ve Komite danismanlarinin Buyukelciligimizle cok yakin temasta olduklarini da biliyoruz. Hukumetimiz ve devletimiz tarafindan harcanilan bu kadar efora ragmen kendisinin konusmasinin daha ilk paragrafindan Turkiye¢ye karsi bir tavir almasi uzucu oldu.
      
      Toplantida Turkiye dostu olan uyeler de varmis, Kongre uyeleri Wexler (Florida) ve bizim eyaletimizi temsil eden Scott (Georgia) gibi. Ancak Turkiye karsiti uyelerin sesleri cok daha yuksek ve sert cikmis.
      
      Ermeni lobisinin ne kadar guclu oldugunu ve bizim daha ne kadar cok yol kat etmemiz gerektigini bu tip toplantilar yapildikca daha iyi anliyoruz.
      
      Toplantida dagitilan Mustesar Dan Fried¢in konusmasinin metnini, ve Komite Baskani Berman¢in acilis konusmalarini bu linklerde gorebilirsiniz.
      
     
     
      
      Ve bugun de her zamanki gibi ayni sonuca variyoruz. Onemli olan “constituent” dedigimiz bizlerin gibip Kongre uyelerimizi bu tip toplantilarda bizim lehimize konusmalarini tesvik etmek. Cunki sonucta Turkiye Cumhuriyeti yabanci bir devlet. Kongre uyelerini asil ilgilendiren kendi “district” lerinde yasayan vatandaslari. Bizim daha cok para toplamamiz, daha aktif olmamiz, daha cok mektup yazip gondermemiz, ve Kongre uyelerimizin yerel ofisleriyle daha yakin temasta olmamiz gerekiyor.
      
      Eminim bir cogunuz diyeceksiniz ki, “ama biz bunlari artik yapiyoruz.” Evet dogru, yapiyoruz, ama yeterli olmuyor — olmadigini bu tip “hearing” lerde daha iyi goruyoruz. Arkadaslar lutfen el ele verelim, ve daha aktif olalim.
      
      Bennur
    

——- English Version ——-

Washington, DC – On June 18, the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) held a hearing, “The Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed Borders”.  The HFAC Hearing was an opportunity for members to make comments and ask questions to Ambassador Dan Fried, Department of State Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, regarding the situation in the Caucasus.

The HFAC accepted the Statement of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA) by President Nurten Ural concerning:

  a.. Armenia’s aggression against and violent occupation of Azerbaijan, massacres of thousands of Azeris, and displacement of over one million Azeri refugees from western to eastern Azerbaijan;
  b.. Armenia’s illegal blockade of the Nakchivan territory of Azerbaijan, as recently reported by Congressional Research Services;
  c.. Congressional Research Services’ report that Turkey’s closed borders with Armenia does not constitute to a blockade or embargo against Armenia;
  d.. Turkey’s efforts to normalize relations with Armenia, including facilitating trade transit, engaging in over $200 million in trade, accepting immigrant workers, providing of visitation visas at the Turkish-Armenian border entry ports, allowing two air corridors and over 100 flights per month roundtrip from Turkey to Armenia, proposing to establish a joint historic commission to study and rule on the events defining the Armenian Revolt and Insurgency (1880-1919) and 1915 Ottoman relocation of Armenians from the war zones.
Many of the HFAC Committee members who participated were from California and spoke to represent their Armenian constituents.  HFAC Chairman Berman, whose office had met with former ANCA Chairman Mourad Topalian, who was convicted of weapons and explosive charges that federal authorities connected to at least three incidents of Armenian terrorism, led the general attack on Turkey and the Turkish people.

Berman expressed that because since 1992 Armenia has demonstrated “resolve” on the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, Turkey should give up its strategy of trying to change Armenia’s mind through a border blockade of Armenia.  He further expressed that because it costs $2000 extra per truck to transit from Turkey to Armenia through Georgia due to the closed land border, under such financial hardships, Armenia was forced to develop relations with Iran.

According to President-Elect Evinch, who attended the hearing, “Chairman Berman’s underlying position seems to endorse Armenia’s violent invasion and occupation of Azerbaijan under an absurd interpretation of the right of self-determination regarding Nagorno-Karabakh, an area one-third the size of Hawaii island and in the heart of Azerbaijan.  Berman forgives Armenia for developing an economic and military alliance with Iran, and blames Turkey’s border closing for Armenia’s irresponsible actions.”  Evinch continued, “This view caters to the interests of the Armenian American lobby, not the United States.”

Evinch added, “$2000 spent extra on transit per truck, is $2000 less Armenia can use for its military aggression against Azerbaijan.  If Armenia seeks to reduce the cost of its aggression by forging an alliance with Iran, it will have admitted that its “resolve” will be at the cost of Armenia’s integration with the West.  This policy caters to Armenian ultra-nationalists, not to Armenia’s best interest.

Some HFAC members accused Azerbaijan of preparing for a war with Armenia, based on statements made by the Azerbaijan President.  Evinch expressed, “What’s lost upon the California members of the HFAC is that Azerbaijan’s territory is occupied by Armenia, and Azerbaijan has one million internal refugees because of that.  It is the duty of the government of Azerbaijan to protect its citizens.  I would expect no less from the United States government if Florida were invaded and occupied by Cuba and one million refugees had fled to Washington, DC for protection.”

Some HFAC members, particularly California representatives Watson, Schiff, and Sherman, pressed Ambassador Fried on whether and why the United States does not define the Armenian case as genocide.  Watson stated that she represents many Armenians in her district, Hollywood, and demanded a “yes-or-no” response.  Ambassador Fried responded repeatedly that the United States “does not use the word”, as that would prejudice rapprochement efforts between Turkey and Armenia.