Category: Asia and Pacific

  • Hope for opening borders

    Hope for opening borders

     
     

    [ 25 Mar 2009 14:25 ]
    Yerevan-APA. Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian took positive position in the settlement of the relations with Turkey, APA reports quoting Novosti Armenia.

    The Minister stated that they had conducted many negotiations to open the borders between the two countries and normalize the relations.
    “I hope that we will regulate the relations, establish diplomatic cooperation and open the borders soon,” he said.
    There is not any diplomatic relation between the two countries at present and the borders have closed since 1993.
    Progress in the relations between the sides started after the visit of Abdullah Gul to Yerevan for watching the match between Armenian and Turkish football teams on September 6, 2008.

  • Karabakh should be returned to Azerbaijan

    Karabakh should be returned to Azerbaijan

     

     
      

     
     

    [ 25 Mar 2009 16:29 ]
    Vienna –APA. On 24th March, in Vienna, the Third Armenian Azerbaijani Public Peace Forum was opened with an international Round Table on Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict – Challenges and Opportunities for Building Confidence Between Societies.

    Almost 40 Armenian and Azerbaijani civil society leaders, experts, intellectuals gave a start to the events that are going to continue in Vienna until 27th March. The three Co-Chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group Ambassador Bernard Fassier, Ambassador Yury Merzlyakov and Matthew Bryza, as well as the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office for Nagorno-Karabakh conflict Ambassador Andrzej Kasprzyk and Mr. Alexandros Katsanis, representative of the current OSCE Chairman-in-Office, took part in the Forum.
    During almost 5-hours of open and frank discussion, the international mediators and civil society shared their views on the challenges and possibilities to build confidence between the Armenians and the Azerbaijanis today. This is a very rare opportunity when all international mediators in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process are discussing the different aspects of the conflict together with such a large civil society delegation from all sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict divide. In such sense, this is an event that marks a milestone in the Nagorno-Karabakh peacebuilding process.
    After the round table, the mediator of the dialogue, International Alert’s representative for Eurasia region Dessislava Roussanova, said: “The three Co-Chairmen had a united message to the Forum – war is not an option. But the Co-Chairmen were there not just to deliver their messages. They were there to listen, to engage in dialogue, and to discuss very frankly with civil society issues and aspects of the Nagorno-Karabakh peacebuiding process and the possible role that civil society could play in it. The discussion was very constructive, the tone was extremely positive. There was a desire among many that this collaboration between civil society and the mediators should become a regular cooperation.”
    Regnum agency reports that Co-Chairs made interesting speeches in the event. French Co-Chair Bernard Fassier noted that the mediators did not solve the problem, but assist the sides in the process and try to achieve international guarantee.
    To him, the compromise is a solution of the problem without defeat, not missing the opportunity. Fassier added that attempts on recognition of Nagorno Karabakh as independent state and returning it to Azerbaijan without any terms can cause new war .
    The diplomat stated that Madrid proposals were not ideal and stressed that unideal compromise was better than the war.
    “The real version is returning of territories, which are under the control of Armenian servicemen, to Azerbaijan and security of the temporary status of Nagorno Karabakh for Baku and Yerevan. Self-determination of peoples problem can be solved after 5-10 or 15 years, when Azerbaijani community will return back to their lands ,” he said.
    The US Co-Chair Matthew Bryza underlined that Armenian and Azerbaijani Presidents should achieve the peace.
    “They should know that the process will not occur basing on Azerbaijan, but international guarantee,” he said. Bryza added that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton supported to assist for the solution to the conflict .
    Russian Co-Chair Merzlyakov noted that the difficult problem is divergence of opinion between the sides on status quo. The diplomat added that the monitorings are held to strengthen confidence building between the sides at present.
    “One of the last monitorings did not take place because of violation of cease fire . Moreover, the sides did not implement demands of MG on withdrawal of snipers from the front. The mediators support negotiations conducted between Azerbaijani and Armenian civil societies. Such kind of meetings will not be held in Yerevan, Baku , but other cities,” he said.

  • U.S. Envoy Again Visits Armenia

    U.S. Envoy Again Visits Armenia

     

    By Ruben Meloyan

    A senior U.S. official paid on Wednesday a brief and apparently unexpected visit to Yerevan which the Armenian Foreign Ministry said focused on international efforts to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

    Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza, who is also Washington’s chief Karabakh negotiator, met with President Serzh Sarkisian and Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian and made no public statements afterwards. Sarkisian’s office also did not immediately report any details of the talks.

    According to the Armenian Foreign Ministry, Bryza passed on to Nalbandian a message from U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton relating to U.S.-Armenian relations, regional security and the ongoing dialogue between Armenia and Turkey. A ministry statement said Clinton “warmly recalled” her March 17 phone conversation with Sarkisian that also touched on these subjects.

    “In the message, Secretary of State Clinton expressed her readiness to provide utmost support to the process of a peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict,” said the statement. “During the meeting Eduard Nalbandian and Matthew Bryza discussed issues pertaining to the Artsakh (Karabakh) negotiating process,” it added without elaborating.

    Bryza already visited Yerevan as well as Baku and Stepanakert early this month together with the two other co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, Yuri Merzlyakov of Russia and Bernard Fassier of France. The three mediators expressed hope that the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan will meet again soon and make further progress towards the signing of a framework Karabakh peace accord. The meeting could take place on the sidelines of a European Union summit in Prague scheduled for May 7.

    https://www.azatutyun.am/a/1600561.html

  • Novruz celebration in New York

    Novruz celebration in New York

     
      

     
     

    [ 24 Mar 2009 11:17 ]
    New York. Zaur Hasanov –APA. Novruz Holiday was celebrated in Orion Palace, Brooklyn, New York.

    Representatives of the communities and diplomats attended the event, APA US bureau reports. Addressing the opening ceremony, chairwoman of the Azerbaijani Society of America Tomris Azeri spoke about the history of Novruz Holiday and its importance for the Turkic peoples. Azerbaijani ambassador to UN Agshin Mehdiyev noted that Novruz is the incoming of spring and symbol of unity and reconciliation. He wished peace and welfare to the Turkic world.
    The annual special prizes of the Azerbaijani Society of America were presented to Narmin Sultanova (City University of New York) and Jamila Hashimova (Georgetown University) at the event. Announcing the contest among the Azerbaijani students studying in USA, the Society aims to learn their ideas about the future directions of the Diaspora’s activity.
    Turkey’s Consul General in New York Mehmet Samsar, representative of the Turkish community of America Ali Chinar, leaders of the Jewish community Erza Friedlander and others attended the event.

    Lala Yusubova’s dance group “The Caucasus” and Amir Vahab’s ensemble performed the concert program.

  • USE YOUR VOTE: Schiff introduces Armenian genocide resolution

    USE YOUR VOTE: Schiff introduces Armenian genocide resolution

    March 21, 2009

    @ 9:54 pm by Bridget Johnson

    And an Armenian betting site wagers on whether President Obama will use the word when he marks the commemorative date for the 1915 deaths a little over a month from now. , READ THE STORY AND THAN  sound off below:

    Leading The News


    Wagering on the question of genocide
    Posted: 03/21/09 09:55 PM [ET]
    Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has introduced a controversial measure to recognize mass killings nearly a century ago in Armenia as genocide, while an Armenian betting website wagered on whether President Obama will dare to use the word.

    The resolution, which comes as Obama prepares to travel to Turkey for an April 6-7 visit that will include a forum on fostering dialogue between the West and the Muslim world, calls the deaths of as many as 1.5 million Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman Empire starting in 1915 “genocide.” Turkey blames the deaths on civil upheaval toward the end and directly after World War I, saying that 300,000 Armenians were killed and at least as many Turks.

    Schiff’s resolution, which was introduced with 76 bipartisan cosponsors ranging from Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. It calls on the president to “accurately characterize the systematic and deliberate annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as genocide.”

    Schiff authored the resolution with Reps. George Radanovich (R-Calif.), Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.).

    “The facts of history are clear, well documented, and non-negotiable,” Schiff said in a statement. “…It has never served our national interest to become complicit in the denial of genocide, and it never will. While there are still some survivors left, we have a compelling moral obligation to speak plainly about the past.”

    Schiff’s district includes Glendale, Calif., the city with the largest population of Armenians in the United States, which regularly marks Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day each April 24 with commemorations and calls for the U.S to recognize the killings as genocide.

    And one Armenian betting site has been taking wagers on just what words Obama will use a little over a month from now, after his trip to Turkey is long over and Schiff’s resolution proceeds at an yet-unknown pace.

    The website PanARMENIAN.net reported Saturday that Vivaro bookmakers had been taking bets on whether Obama will actually use the word “genocide” when commemorating April 24. Odds were just 1 to 30 for Obama saying “genocide,” while odds were 3 to 2 for Obama choosing cautious terminology to mark the day of remembrance.

    The Armenian news site reported that the wager had been taken down from Vivaro’s site as of their story.

    Obama does face a political gamble, though, in choosing where to fall on the Schiff resolution.

    Schiff and other co-authors of the resolution, which had a predecessor that didn’t make it to a vote two years ago under pressure from the Bush administration, wrote to Obama last week, reminding him of his past stances in recognizing the killings as genocide.

    In a Jan. 19, 2008, campaign statement, Obama vowed to do just that should he become president. “As a U.S. Senator, I have stood with the Armenian American community in calling for Turkey’s acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide,” he wrote. “Two years ago, I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term ‘genocide’ to describe Turkey’s slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915. I shared with Secretary Rice my firmly held conviction that 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.

    “An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy. 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.”

    But his efforts to build a stronger relationship with Turkey — and likely use the secular Muslim nation as a conduit to reach out to Iran — may result in a changed agenda.

    Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan responded to the bill’s introduction in a TV interview Wednesday, reported Hurriyet Daily News. “The complete normalization of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkey ties will create a brand-new geopolitical situation in the southern Caucasus,” Babacan said. “A decision or a statement to be made by a third country [on the 1915 killings] will cause harm. While we are looking into the future from a broader perspective, we believe that any interference by a third country is very wrong.

    “We hope that an irrational step will not be taken,” Babacan said. “We are openly speaking with our American friends. We hope no wrong steps will be taken.”

    ========================

    19 Comments »

    The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.

    1. It’s almost morning in Turkey. Is everyone ready for the Turks to start posting up their made up version of history? They’ll be here any moment.

      Comment by Ken — March 21, 2009 @ 10:48 pm

    2. HEY ALL,

      PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE, PUBLISHED IN “THE JERUSALEM POST,” AND TELL ME THAT THERE WAS NOT AN ARMENIAN GENOCIDE.

      THIS IS ONE OF ISRAEL’S MOST POPULAR NEWSPAPERS.

      YES, ALL OF YOU TURKS SHOULD READ THIS.

      NOW ADD 22 COUNTRIES, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, 42 OF 50 US STATES, AND IF YOU STILL BELIEVE THAT THERE WASN’T AN ARMENIAN GENOCIDE, THEN YOU SHOULD PROBABLY GO TO A DOCTOR AND GET SOME MEDICATION, BECAUSE THAT’S CALLED SERIOUS DELUSION.

      SINCERELY YOURS

      J. ROGERS

      Comment by John R — March 21, 2009 @ 10:49 pm

    3. It’s almost morning in Istanbul. The Turks will be here any moment now to enlighten us about their fabricated version of history.

      Comment by Ken — March 21, 2009 @ 10:51 pm

    4. Ms. Johnson, in your story the Turkish Foreign Minister is quoted extensively, alluding that the resolution would harm Turkish-Armenian normalization. Wouldn’t it make sense to include statements from the Armenian Foreign Minister as well? Have there been attempts to contact the Armenian side? What are their views?

      Comment by Dany Beylerian — March 22, 2009 @ 12:17 am

    5. Obama has been extremely foolish to back the lies he has been fed by the Armenians and paid historians and should not even be talking about the Armenian deportations as “genocide”.
      One of our foreign ministers was right when in a speech in Brussels he said ‘Turkey would not have been the great country it is today had the Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians been allowed to stay” .
      It is right that the US should take note of Turkey, the US needs Turkey much more than Turkey needs America – Turkey is now the leading voice in the middle east.

      Comment by Van der Galien — March 22, 2009 @ 8:26 am

    6. Take a moment to read a letter about the Armenian Genocide from the International Association of Genocide Scholars to President Obama-

      Comment by Dee — March 22, 2009 @ 11:43 am

    7. In response to Dany Beylerian – Have there been attempts to contact the Armenian side? What are their views?

      The only reported contact between the Armenian administration and the US was a telephone conversation when 18th March Secretary of State Hilary Clinton called President Sargsyan, after her trip to Ankara. Armenian state television proudly reported the event, but the genocide issue gave way to Armenian requests for more US financial assistance.

      In order for the Armenian / Turkish border to be opened, one of Turkey’s continued and repeated demands is that Armenia retracts its claim of genocide and agrees to a longstanding Turkish proposal for a commission of historians to study the matter. The Armenian regime increasingly expresses its confidence that the Armenian / Turkish border will soon be opened, but Armenia’s MFA Eduard Nalbandian has never explained how the genocide issue has been resolved. Moreover, he interestingly states that genocide has never been discussed with Turkey. )

      Genocide recognition is the single most important issue for all self-respecting Armenians. But the Armenian public has no voice in this matter. The Armenian position is negotiated by the Sargsyan regime, and according to the Turkish press he has agreed to sign the document to establish the commission of historians just prior to the 24th April.

      )

      For more details and a chronology of genocide related news events:

      Comment by Bruce Tasker — March 23, 2009 @ 3:46 am

    8. Statement of Professor Bernard Lewis
      Princeton University
      Distinguishing Armenian Case from Holocaust

      April 14, 2002

      C-SPAN2

      Question: “The British press reported in 1997 that your views on the killing of one million Armenians by the Turks in 1915 did not amount to genocide and in this report in the Independent of London, says that a French court fined you one frank in damages after you said there was no genocide. This obviously triggered a debate in Israel where this quoted article (Moderator cuts in and asks him to ask his question as their running out of time). My question is, sir, have your views changed on this whether the killing of one million Armenians amounts to genocide and your views on this judgment?”

      Bernard Lewis responds: “This is a question of definition and nowadays the word “genocide” is used very loosely even in cases where no bloodshed is involved at all and I can understand the annoyance of those who feel refused. But in this particular case, the point that was being made was that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany and that is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale.

      Great numbers of Armenians, including members of the armed forces, deserted, crossed the frontier and joined the Russian forces invading Turkey. Armenian rebels actually seized the city of Van and held it for a while intending to hand it over to the invaders. There was guerilla warfare all over Anatolia. And it is what we nowadays call the National Movement of Armenians Against Turkey. The Turks certainly resorted to very ferocious methods in repelling it.

      There is clear evidence of a decision by the Turkish Government, to deport the Armenian population from the sensitive areas. Which meant naturally the whole of Anatolia. Not including the Arab provinces which were then still part of the Ottoman Empire. There is no evidence of a decision to massacre. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence of attempt to prevent it, which were not very successful. Yes there were tremendous massacres, the numbers are very uncertain but a million nay may well be likely.

      The massacres were carried out by irregulars, by local villagers responding to what had been done to them and in number of other ways. But to make this, a parallel with the holocaust in Germany, you would have to assume the Jews of Germany had been engaged in an armed rebellion against the German state, collaborating with the allies against Germany. That in the deportation order the cities of Hamburg and Berlin were exempted, persons in the employment of state were exempted, and the deportation only applied to the Jews of Germany proper, so that when they got to Poland they were welcomed and sheltered by the Polish Jews. This seems to me a rather absurd parallel.”

      Comment by Jill — March 23, 2009 @ 10:59 am

    9. Boghos Nubar Pasha to The Times of London (January 30, 1919)

      Boghos Nubar Pasha was the leader of the Armenian delegation in attendance at the Paris Peace Conference after World War I. In his letter to The Times of London, dated 30 January 1919, he openly acknowledges that it was the Armenian contributions to the allied war effort which led to their mistreatment by the Ottoman authorities.

      To the Editor of the Times,
      Sir, the name of Armenia is not on the list of the nations admitted to the Peace Conference. Our sorrow and our disappointment are deep beyond expression. Armenians naturally expected their demand for admission to the Conference to be conceded, after all they had done for the common cause.
      The unspeakable suffering and the dreadful losses that have befallen the Armenians by reason of their faithfulness to the Allies are now fully known. But I must emphasize the fact unhappily known to few, that ever since the beginning of the war the Armenians fought by the side of the Allies on all fronts. Adding our losses in the field to the greater losses through massacres and deportations, we find that over a million out of a total Armenian population of four million and a half have lost their lives in and through the war. Armenia’s tribute to death is thus undoubtedly heavier in proportion than that of any other belligerent nation. For the Armenians have been belligerents de facto, since they indignantly refused to side with Turkey.
      Our volunteers fought in the French “Legion Entrangere” and covered themselves with glory. In the Legion d’Orient they numbered over 5,000, and made up more than half the French contingent in Syria and Palestine, which took part in the decisive victory of General Allenby.
      In the Caucasus, without mentioning the 150,000 Armenians in the Russian armies, about 50,000 Armenian volunteers under Andranik, Nazarbekoff, and others not only fought for four years for the cause of the Entente, but after the breakdown of Russia they were the only forces in the Caucasus to resist the advance of the Turks, whom they held in check until the armistice was signed. Thus they helped the British forces in Mesopotamia by hindering the Germano-Turks from sending their troops elsewhere.
      These services have been acknowledged by the Allied Governments, as Lord Robert Cecil recognized in the House of Commons.
      In virtue of all these considerations the Armenian National Delegation asked that the Armenian nation should be recognized as a belligerent. Had the recognition been granted, we should now have been admitted, ipso facto, to the Conference, to which even transatlantic States have found access, though having merely broken off diplomatic relations with Germany, without the least sacrifice on their part.
      At the moment when the fate of Armenia is being decided at the Peace Conference, it is my duty, as the head of the National Delegation which has no tribute from which its voice can resound, to state once again, in the columns of The Times, the important part played by the Armenians in this frightful war. I wish strongly to urge that the Armenians, having of their own free will cast their lot with the champions of right and justice, the victory of the Allies over their common enemies has secured to them a right to independence.

      Believe me, sir, yours very truthfully,
      Boghos Nubar

      Comment by Jill — March 23, 2009 @ 11:01 am

    10. Enough with this genocide bs. Armenians should stop being cry babies, admit to the crimes they have comitted as well and get a life.

      Comment by Kenny — March 23, 2009 @ 11:30 am

    11. UK ‘s position – a very recent statement

      Dear friends,

      This is a very recent statement from the UK government.

      …..NEITHER THIS GOVERNMENT NOR PREVIOUS BRITISH GOVERNMENTS HAVE JUDGED THAT THE EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENTLY UNEQUIVOCAL TO PERSUADE US THAT THESE EVENTS SHOULD BE CHARACTERISED AS GENOCIDE UNDER THE 1948 UN CONVENTION ON GENOCIDE”

      Events of 1915 – Britain’s position

      Minister Lord Malloch-Brown, responsible for Africa, Asia and United Nations in the Foreign Affairs, issued the following statement, on March 4th, 2008, in response to a question directed to the House of Lords of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, with respect to the events of 1915:

      “Armenia: Genocide

      Baroness Finlay of Llandaff asked Her Majesty’s Government:Whether they recognise the existence of genocide in Armenia in 1915.

      The Minister of State Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Malloch-Brown) : The position of the Government on this issue is long-standing. The Government acknowledge the strength of feeling about this terrible episode of history and recognise the massacres of 1915-16 as a tragedy. However neither this Government nor previous Governments have judged that the evidence is sufficiently unequivocal to persuade us that these events should be categorised as genocide as defined by the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide.

      As my right honourable friend the then Minister for Europe (Geoffrey Hoon) said in a debate in Westminster Hall on 7 June 2006 (Official Report col. 137WH) the work of establishing the truth must be conducted as a joint exercise by the parties directly involved if it is to help towards reconciliation. There needs to be a truth and reconciliation process owned by the people of Armenia and Turkey. Outsiders can commend the idea to the parties but they should not try to do the work for them-undertaking this is an important part of the confidence-building and reconciliation process for the parties themselves. The Government will continue to encourage the parties to embark on such a process. In the mean time we should resist the temptation to pre-empt its conclusions.”

      ~~~

      Lord Triesman, Parliamentary Under Secretary in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, in response to a question, made the following statement on January the 22nd, 2007:

      OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT ON ARMENIAN ALLEGATIONS

      (JANUARY 22, 2007)

      ON BEHALF OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT, DEPUTY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS FOR PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, LORD TRIESMAN MADE THE FOLLOWING DECLARATION IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS:

      “….FOR THIS GOVERNMENT, RECOGNITION OF THE SO-CALLED ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IS NOT A CONDITION OF TURKEY’S MEMBERSHIP OF THE EU. I WISH TO BE STRAIGHTFORWARD AND CLEAR ABOUT THAT. NEITHER THIS GOVERNMENT NOR PREVIOUS BRITISH GOVERNMENTS HAVE JUDGED THAT THE EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENTLY UNEQUIVOCAL TO PERSUADE US THAT THESE EVENTS SHOULD BE CHARACTERISED AS GENOCIDE UNDER THE 1948 UN CONVENTION ON GENOCIDE”

      Comment by Cem Tuncoglu — March 23, 2009 @ 11:37 am

    12. Armenian story has another side

      By Norman Stone, a historian and the author of “World War I: A Short History”

      October 16, 2007
      All the world knows what the end of an empire looks like: hundreds of thousands of people fleeing down dusty paths, taking what was left of their possessions; crammed refugee trains puffing their way across arid plains; and many, many people dying. For the Ottoman Empire that process began in the Balkans, the Crimea and the Caucasus as Russia and her satellites expanded. Seven million people — we would now call them Turks — had to settle in Anatolia, the territory of modern Turkey.

      In 1914, when World War I began in earnest, Armenians living in what is now Turkey attempted to set up a national state. Armenians revolted against the Ottoman government, began what we would now call “ethnic cleansing” of the local Turks. Their effort failed and caused the government to deport most Armenians from the area of the revolt for security reasons. Their sufferings en route are well-known.

      Today, Armenian interests in America and abroad are well-organized. What keeps them united is the collective memory of their historic grievance. What happened was not in any way their fault, they believe. If the drive to carve out an ethnically pure Armenian state was a failure, they reason, it was only because the Turks exterminated them.

      For years, Armenians have urged the U.S. Congress to recognize their fate as genocide. Many U.S. leaders — including former secretaries of state and defense and current high-ranking Bush administration officials — have urged Congress either not to consider or to vote down the current genocide resolution primarily for strategic purposes: Turkey is a critical ally to the U.S. in both Iraq and Afghanistan and adoption of such a resolution would anger and offend the Turkish population and jeopardize U.S.-Turkish relations.

      Given this strong opposition, why would Congress, upon the advice of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, make itself arbiter of this controversy? What makes the Armenians’ dreadful fate so much worse than the dreadful fates that come with every end of empire? It is here that historians must come in.

      First, allegedly critical evidence of the crime consists of forgeries. The British were in occupation of Istanbul for four years after the war and examined all of the files of the Ottoman government. They found nothing, and therefore could not try the 100-odd supposed Turkish war criminals that they were holding. Then, documents turned up, allegedly telegrams from the interior ministry to the effect that all Armenians should be wiped out. The signatures turned out to be wrong, there were no back-up copies in the archives and the dating system was misunderstood.

      There are many other arguments against a supposed genocide of the Armenians. Their leader was offered a post in the Turkish Cabinet in 1914, and turned it down. When the deportations were under way, the populations of the big cities were exempted — Istanbul, Izmir, Aleppo, where there were huge concentrations of Armenians. There were indeed well-documented and horrible massacres of the deportee columns, and the Turks themselves tried more than 1,300 men for these crimes in 1916, convicted many and executed several. None of this squares with genocide, as we classically understand it. Finally, it is just not true that historians as a whole support the genocide thesis. The people who know the background and the language (Ottoman Turkish is terribly difficult) are divided, and those who do not accept the genocide thesis are weightier. The Armenian lobby contends that these independent and highly esteemed historians are simply “Ottomanists” — a ridiculously arrogant dismissal.

      Unfortunately, the issue has never reached a properly constituted court. If the Armenians were convinced of their own case, they would have taken it to one. Instead, they lobby bewildered or bored parliamentary assemblies to “recognize the genocide.”

      Congress should not take a position, one way or the other, on this affair. Let historians decide. The Turkish government has been saying this for years. It is the Armenians who refuse to take part in a joint historical review, even when organized by impeccably neutral academics. This review is the logical and most sensible path forward. Passage of the resolution by the full House of Representatives would constitute an act of legislative vengeance and would shame well-meaning scholars who want to explore this history from any vantage point other than the one foisted upon the world by ultranationalist Armenians.
      Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

      Comment by Cem Tuncoglu — March 23, 2009 @ 11:42 am

    13. Turkey is saying that the so-called “reproachment” will be hampered by the Armenian Genocide resolution, not-so says the Armenian government representative.

      In a letter sent soon after legistlation recognizing the Armenian Genocide was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, the Chairman of the Standing Committee on Foreign Relations of the Armenian parliament expresses complete support for the measure and writes: ” I am confident that the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United Stated not only would not hamper, but on the contrary will contribute to the prospects of a thorough dialogue between Turkey and Armenia.”

      March 19, 2009

      The Honorable Howard Berman
      Chairman
      Committee on Foreign Affairs
      U.S. House of Representatives
      Washington, DC 20510

      Dear Chairman Berman:

      I have the pleasure to write to you upon the introduction of legislation recognizing the Armenian Genocide, and to share with you and your colleagues our complete support for the adoption of this measure affirming the commitment of the United States to the
      cause of genocide-prevention. Armenia aspires for the universal recognition and condemnation of the Armenian Genocide, and sees it both as a restoration of an historical justice and as a way to improve the overall situation in the region, while also preventing similar crimes in the future.

      The Armenian people in our homeland, in the United States and around the world, remain grateful for the hard work that you and your colleagues, including, of course Congressmen Adam Schiff and George Radanovich, have devoted over the course of many years to secure U.S. recognition and official commemoration of this crime. I am confident that the proponents of this process are also rightly convinced that the lack of official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United States has thus far in fact served to make Turkey’s position in the issue of resolving the Armenian-Turkish relations more uncompromising. We value these efforts and are, this year, particularly encouraged by the clear statements of President Barack Obama and senior members of his Administration in this regard during the elections.

      Please know that I remain available to share with your Congressional colleagues, either in writing or in person, the principled stand of the Republic of Armenia in support of universal recognition of the Armenian Genocide. I am confident that the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United Stated not only would not hamper, but on the contrary will contribute to the prospects of a thorough dialogue between Turkey and Armenia. A clear and principled stance by the U.S. can only assist in developing awareness that the recognition of the Genocide is not at all a demonstration of anti-Turkish sentiments, but a necessity emanating from the need to condemn this crime against humanity. Furthermore, any durable improvement of Armenia-Turkey relations must rest upon a foundation of shared respect for truth and justice.

      Thank you for your friendship with the people and government of the Republic of Armenia and for all your support and assistance over the years.

      Sincerely,
      Armen Rustamyan
      Chairman
      Standing Committee on Foreign Relations
      National Assembly of Armenia

      Comment by Rich — March 23, 2009 @ 11:57 am

    14. Here are some excerpts from First Armenian Prime Minister of Republic of Armenia– Hovannes Kachaznouni…

      He explains regretfully for forming bands against Ottoman Turks and fighting them.. Does this sound to you like a one sided genocide of Armenians??

      What’s below is the complete edition of the 1955 booklet released by the Armenian Information Service, offering a record of Hovhannes Katchaznouni’s parting words to the Dashnagtzoutiun, given in the form of an address to the Party congress in 1923 Bucharest.

      ……………
      If the formation of bands was wrong, the root of that error must be sought much further and more deeply. At the present time it is important to register only the evidence that we did participate In that volunteer movement to the largest extent and we did that contrary to the decision and the will of the General Meeting of the Party.

      The Winter of 1914 and the Spring of 1915 were the periods of greatest enthusiasm and hope for all the Armenians in the Caucasus, including, of course, the Dashnagtzoutiun. We had no doubt the war would end with the complete victory of the Allies; Turkey would be defeated and dismembered, and its Armenian population would at last be liberated.

      We had embraced Russia whole-heartedly without any compunction. Without any positive basis of fact we believed that the Tzarist government would grant us a more-or-less broad self-government in the Caucasus and in the Armenian vilayets liberated from Turkey as a reward for our loyalty, our efforts and assistance.

      We had created a dense atmosphere of illusion in our minds. We had implanted our own desires into the minds of others; we had lost our sense of reality and were carried away with our dreams. From mouth to mouth, from ear to ear passed mysterious words purported to have been spoken in the palace of the Viceroy; attention was called to some kind of a letter by Vorontzov-Dashkov to the Catholicos as an important document in our hands to use in the presentation of our rights and claims — a cleverly composed letter with very indefinite sentences and generalities which might be interpreted in any manner, according to one’s desire.

      We overestimated the ability of the Armenian people, its political and military power, and overestimated the extent and importance of the services our people rendered to the Russians. And by overestimating our very modest worth and merit we were naturally exaggerating our hopes and expectations.

      The deportations and mass exiles and massacres which took place during the Summer and Autumn of 1915 were mortal blows to the Armenian Cause. Half of historical Armenia —the same half where the foundations of our independence would be laid according to traditions inherited from the early eighties and as the result of the course adopted by European diplomacy — that half was denuded of Armenians: the Armenian provinces of Turkey were without Armenians. The Turks knew what they were doing and have no reason to regret today. It was the most decisive method of extirpating the Armenian Question from Turkey.

      Again, it would be useless to ask today to what extent the participation of volunteers in the war was a contributory cause of the Armenian calamity. No one can claim that the savage persecutions would not have taken place if our behavior on this side of the frontier was different, as no one can claim the contrary, that the persecutions would have been the same even if we had not shown hostility to the Turks. This is a matter about which it is possible to have many different opinions.

      The proof is, however — and this is essential — that the struggle begun decades ago against the Turkish government brought about the deportation or extermination of the Armenian people in Turkey and the desolation of Turkish Armenia. This was the terrible fact!

      Civilized humanity might very well be shaken with rage in the face of this unspeakable crime. Statesmen might utter menacing words against criminal Turkey. “Blue”, “yellow”, “orange” books and papers might be published condemning them. Divine, punishment against the criminals might be invoked in churches by clergymen of all denominations. The press of all countries might be filled with horrible descriptions and details and the testimony of eye-witnesses. . . . Let them say this or that .. . but the work was already done and words would not revive the corpses fallen in the Arabian deserts, rebuild the ruined hearths, repopulate the country now become desolate. The Turks knew what they ought to do and did it.

      The second half of 1915 and the entire year of 1916 were periods of hopelessness, desperation and mourning for us. The refugees, all those who had survived the holocaust, were filling Russian provinces by tens and hundreds of thousands. They were famished, naked, sick, horrified and desperate floods of humanity, flooding our villages and cities. They had come to a country which was itself ruined and famished. They piled upon each other, before our own eyes, on our thresholds dying of famine and sickness

      And we were unable to save those precious lives. Angered and terrified, we sought the culprits and quickly found them: the deceitful politics of the Russian government. With the politically immature mind peculiar to inconsequential men, we fell from one extreme to another. Just as unfounded was our faith in the Russian government yesterday, our condemnation of them today was equally blind and groundless.

      http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/1923Manifesto-record.htm

      Comment by Cem Tuncoglu — March 23, 2009 @ 12:02 pm

    15. Cem Tuncoglu,

      You take an article out of the Chicago Tribune? The Tribune is one of the most corrupt one sided genocide denialist publications of the United States.

      I lived in Chicago half my life, read it’s denialist propoganda spoon fed to them by the Turk’s. I wouldn’t be suprised if you were one of them as well.

      Comment by Rich — March 23, 2009 @ 12:03 pm

    16. Hello my Armenian friends!!

      I do not know much about Armenian Genocide because I was born in 1965, but I was around when Armenians were KILLING Turkish Embassy staff all around the world in 70’s.. The newspapers were reporting the killings almost on daily basis. At the time I was living a small town called “Samatya” in Istanbul, Turkey where 20% population were Armenians. We (Turks) never had any problems with them. We lived and worked together for decades. Some of my good friends were armenians. We never bother them when their countryman were killing Turks. They were not responsible for someone else whether they were Armanian or not. We were all equally treated at the school, hospital, shops.. There was no such Genocide claims by Armenians by then, even if so I never heard of it.

      35 years on, they started this talk about so called “Armenian Genocide”. Nobody knew exactly what has happened in 1915. The history says 4 Turks died for each Armenian dead. We know they were in a war, we know they killed each other. I am asking how can you blame today Turks today what may or may not happened 100 years ago in a war. What about all the Turks who were killed by Armenians at the time. Should we go and kill their grandchildren today? Come on guys, its time to behave responsibly. You have no rights to create “hate” between the two neighbouring nations. They should improve the trade between countries. Time for Peace, not War!! Nobody gains if Turkish and Armenian people had bad relationship. There are still many many armenians living and working in Turkey. If you create bad air, they will feel unsecure and unwanted by Turks. This B.S. needs to end foe everyones sake!!! Go and listen some John Lennon songs..

      Comment by Altan Demiray — March 23, 2009 @ 12:27 pm

    17. A March 23, 1920, letter of Col. Charles Furlong, an Army
      intelligence officer and U.S. Delegate to the Paris Peace Conference,
      to President Woodrow Wilson elaborated: “We hear much, both truth and
      gross exaggeration of Turkish massacres of Armenians, but little or
      nothing of the Armenian massacres of Turks. … The recent so-called
      Marash massacres [of Armenians] have not been substantiated. In fact,
      in the minds of many who are familiar with the situation, there is a
      grave question whether it was not the Turk who suffered at the hands
      of the Armenian and French armed contingents which were known to be
      occupying that city and vicinity. … Our opportunity to gain the
      esteem and respect of the Muslim world … will depend much on
      whether America hears Turkey’s untrammeled voice and evidence which
      she has never succeeded in placing before the Court of Nations.”

      Capt. Emory Niles and Arthur Sutherland, on an official 1919 U.S.
      mission to eastern Anatolia, reported: “In the entire region from
      Bitlis through Van to Bayezit, we were informed that the damage and
      destruction had been done by the Armenians, who, after the Russians
      retired, remained in occupation of the country and who, when the
      Turkish army advanced, destroyed everything belonging to the
      Musulmans. Moreover, the Armenians are accused of having committed
      murder, rape, arson and horrible atrocities of every description upon
      the Musulman population. At first, we were most incredulous of these
      stories, but we finally came to believe them, since the testimony was
      absolutely unanimous and was corroborated by material evidence. For
      instance, the only quarters left at all intact in the cities of
      Bitlis and Van are Armenian quarters … while the Musulman quarters
      were completely destroyed.”

      Niles and Sutherland were fortified by American and German
      missionaries on the spot in Van. American Clarence Ussher reported
      that Armenians put the Turkish men “to death,” and, for days, “They
      burned and murdered.” A German missionary recalled that, “The memory
      of these entirely helpless Turkish women, defeated and at the mercy
      of the [Armenians] belongs to the saddest recollections from that
      time.”

      Comment by Ismail — March 23, 2009 @ 2:03 pm

    18. There was an Armenian Genocide, more than one and one-half millions were slaughtered, tortured, raped, children taken, and more. The bestiality of the treatments brought out mans’ inhumanity to man. Only imagine, horseshoes being hammered into men’s feet and then being asked…. ‘where is your Jesus now’?
      Today, there are Armenians in nearly all the countries on our planet – obviously… the survivors fled to wherever they were able…. The nearest country, Syria, accepted all those who fled the Turks.
      My family’s survivors reached Aleppo,,,, My family is grateful to the Syrian nation for my father and my three uncles…. the only adults I would have in my family. All others, grandparents, relatives, my cousins who were the children, lost, slaughtered, separated and never to find
      each other. And, imagine, all the survivors lived their lives with the memories of Genocide….
      Sadly, today we are told that it is a Genocide occurring in Darfur. And,
      we just sit by while a despot kills, tortures, rapes AGAIN? Oh yes, our
      former president has sent ‘humanitarian aid’ to the people of Darfur.
      Oh yes, all the Genocides of 20th century, and now into the 21st century, thehumanitarian aid is sent. I see this as a means for our leaders to ease their own consciences for their inaction….. sending aid to those who survive the horrors – yet are living a life of hell….. loss of
      families, homes, lands, and left with endless, unforgettable memories.
      I believe that one day, hopefully in the near future, one bright young
      person will ask: WHY WERE GENOCIDES TOLERATED BY THE DEMOCRACIES OF THE WORLD? DID HUMAN LIFE HAVE NOT VALUE?
      WHY WAS KILLINGS OF INNOCENTS BY DESPOTS WITH CHOSEN GOALS
      NOT DIVERTED, NOT HALTED, and THE DESPOT/S CHARGED WITH
      ‘COMMITTING GENOCIDES’ and THEY AND THEIR COHORTS PUBLICLY
      HANGED…… to deter Genocides…..

      All across out planet, in so many countries, there are Armenian communites…..why, because they fled the Armenian Genocide…. why else would they leave their own Christian lands of 3,000 years.
      Today, leaders send humanitarian aid to peoples who have suffered the
      Genocides of the 20th century, and now, Darfur in the 21st century, (this aid eases their consciences for their inaction). The survivors live with the unforgettable memories, loss of families, lands….
      Unless the despots are made to own up, pay for their guilty actions.
      the next despot will step forward – who is to stop them??
      Ottoman Turkey began the Armenian Genocide in 1915-1923, however,
      all the subsequent Turkish governments have been in denials of the
      Genocide of the Armenians from their own lands….. for Turkey shall be only for Turks…… and the Turks believe their own deceptions! Sad, sad.

      Comment by Mary-Aljian Hamparian — March 23, 2009 @ 2:16 pm

    19. An Armenian allegation of genocide is monetary scam which has been planed by the New World Occupiers. The fact is London Bankers decided Armenian uprising way before 1915. Yes indeed Turkish genocide has been planned by the imperial war lords. Yes indeed Armenian rebels have been used as private arm forces. Result is 2.7 million Turkish Graves…

      Comment by Gusan Yedic — March 23, 2009 @ 3:44 pm

  • AZERBAIJAN: ARMS SCANDAL STIRS SUSPICIONS OF MOSCOW

    AZERBAIJAN: ARMS SCANDAL STIRS SUSPICIONS OF MOSCOW

    Shahin Abbasov 27/01/09

    Azerbaijani allegations about the reported transfer of a multi-million-dollar stash of Russian weapons to Armenia should prompt Baku to rethink its relationship with Moscow both in terms of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and energy policy, local analysts say.

    On January 8, the independent “Mediaforum.az” portal first published the copy of a document allegedly signed by Lieutenant General Vyacheslav Golovchenko, deputy commander of armaments for Russia’s North Caucasus military district, that listed weapons and army vehicles transferred in 2008 to Armenia’s defense ministry from Russia’s military base in the northern Armenian town of Gyumri.

    The 69-item list included 27 T-72 tanks, several armored personnel carriers, various types of missiles and guns, grenade launchers, machineguns, submachine guns, mines, and shells. Anonymous experts cited by Mediaforum.az put the approximate value of the transfer at roughly $800 million.

    The document’s source was not indicated.

    While both Moscow and Yerevan have denied the transfer, Azerbaijani officials tell EurasiaNet that they have no doubts that the handover took place.

    One Azerbaijani government source, who asked not to be named, told EurasiaNet that the signed document was “first . . .obtained by the Azerbaijani security services via their channels in Moscow, and then leaked to Mediaforum.az.”

    “We have enough information on the issue,” the source said. He did not, however, specify what further steps Baku plans to take.

    In a January 15 statement, Azerbaijan’s foreign ministry noted that the “Russian actions cause special concern . . . in the context of strategic partnership relations between Baku and Moscow and Russia’s mediating role in the Karabakh conflict’s resolution.”

    Parliamentarians have taken up the cry. Aydin Mirzazade, deputy chairman of the parliamentary commission on defense and security, argues that Azerbaijan should demand that Armenia return the weapons and vehicles to Moscow – or that Moscow withdraw from a role in the negotiations over Nagorno Karabakh, APA news agency reported.

    Whether or not the transfer actually took place is not a subject for public debate. The story has reawakened memories of the late Russian Lieutenant General Lev Rokhlin’s 1997 accusation that the Russian defense ministry was transferring weapons to Armenia without the Kremlin’s assent.

    Instead, analysts and parliamentarians alike are focusing on how Baku should respond, and reasons for the alleged transfer.

    Analyst Ilham Ismayil believes that Azerbaijan should now express clear support for the Nabucco gas pipeline – a project designed to offer an alternative to Russian supply routes to Europe – during the January 26-27 Nabucco summit in Budapest.

    “It is abnormal when a country [Russia] which you call a strategic partner transfers arms to your enemy,” Ismayil commented. Azerbaijani observers had earlier expressed concerns that arms withdrawn from Russia’s former bases in Georgia would end up in Armenia – the current scandal is cited as justification for those fears.

    Rauf Mirkadirov, political columnist for the Baku-based Zerkalo (Mirror) daily, goes still further. The Kremlin, he believes, hoped to use the arms transfer to trigger a fresh war between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno Karabakh in 2009, and thereby block the Nabucco project. The transfer acted as a de facto response to Azerbaijan’s own military buildup, he said; Azerbaijani military spending now stands at well over $2 billion per year.

    “[T]aking into account all of Russia’s recent actions, the possibility of the conflict resuming soon is unfortunately increasing again,” Mirkadirov said.

    The South Caucasus’ territorial conflicts are the only lever left for Russia to keep its influence in the region, to oppose Georgia and Azerbaijan’s integration with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and to block energy projects like Nabucco, Mirkadirov added

    But while Azerbaijani tempers simmer, Moscow shows little sign of changing its story.

    On January 21, the Russian foreign ministry gave the Azerbaijani embassy in Moscow an official note that affirms that the Russian defense ministry did not transfer or sell to Armenia any of the arms described in the Mediaforum.az report. The note described the report as “disinformation, which has a clearly anti-Russian character,” news agencies reported.

    In a January 16 statement, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that a joint investigation with the Russian General Staff had shown that ” [t]he person whose name is mentioned in the Azerbaijani media did not sign any documents and Russia did not supply arms to Armenia last year. We came to the conclusion that this document is false.”

    Lavrov emphasized that, as co-members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, Russia has programs of “military-technical cooperation” with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. “Our Azerbaijani friends know it and there were no concerns in the past,” he said.

     

    Editor’s Note: Shahin Abbasov is a freelance correspondent based in Baku. He is also a board member of the Open Society Institute-Azerbaijan.

    Eurasianet