52 replies to this topic

[MJ]

Instead of saying, "However, I think it is different from calling someone disingenuous," above, I meant to say, "it is different from calling someone dishonest."

[aurguplu]

martin,

i am pressed for time, so this is going to be a partial reply:

since i have joined this forum, we have come to agree on a number of very important points, the most important of them being the genocide being a genocide and the necessity of recognising it as such, apologising for, and paying reparations (i also honestly, seriously and pesistently propose that diaspora armenians eventually resettle in anatolia as first class citizens of a civilised tr, which as far as i understand you don't consider).

we have been disagreeing on two main points: whether turkey has one or two entities to deal with, and whether the diaspora should be regarded as a body as serious as the roa in any discusions. you say that the roa is the sole such body, and that turkey should only deal with it and ignore the diaspora (please correct me if i read you incorrectly) or at least not hide behind the pretext of the differing diaspora stance to avoid communication with the roa. i say that we cannot afford to ignore the diaspora on the grounds of its numbers, financial and political power, and the very clear set of aims, one of which (the land) we - rightly - see as a threat to our existence as we know it.

we are both right and wrong. you are right in saying that states deal with states. true. that's at least how it should be. but the fact is that it isn't. we have very extensive ties with israel, and we know full well how deeply the diaspora is involved in israeli affairs, including the palestinian question. we see a very comparable case with the armenian question, and the example is extremely relevant to us: zionism started as an intellectual movement in the 19th century, and with the presence of the ottoman empire in the region and the appalling conditions of the jews in most of europe, maybe no-one took it seriously save some jews. a century later israel was a reality and had kicked the butt of all the arab states that were more than twenty times its size, and the palestinians today are homeless.

it is extremely important that you realise that we are not playing games here about this issue but are genuine: we want no change of borders. and i want this land issue dropped because i) as long as it exists there will be no solution to the ag problem, and i want one, and soon, and ii) i know how resilient my people are when it comes to defending their land. you may call it barbaric, and after all being drenched in blood is not civilised, but it keeps our land ours, at least that's the way our folks think.

i want to see the land claims dropped because there will simply never be an atmosphere in turkey that will allow for such discussion to flourish. when i discuss certain issues with you, i do not only do it as an intellectual exercise, but as a part of something that i am trying to pursue here, however small my contribution may be. when i discuss the ag issue, it gives me certain ideas, makes me read more about it, reformulate my stance, and discuss it with my fellow turks in a more informed manner (by being more informed i mean that i am one of those few turks who care to listen to what the OTHER side has to say: most of us over here are engaged in "turk's propaganda to the turk": i cannot imagine a greater waste of time). now i have seen that with intelligent arguments, clear language, well-presented facts, and a balanced approach COMING FROM A TURK, and some guts (risk-taking), may i add, a number of turks can be made to at least consider the possibility that what transpired was indeed a genocide.

now engaging in such a pursuit in turkey is not as dangerous anymore as many would rightly think, as i have found by trial and error (you do realise, don't you, mj, that my posting here which i am sure some turkish security official checks every now and then is a pretty risky business, and i am aware of it), and the fact that i have occasionally aired my views re ag in public (small discussions, no press invited), and i am still here, and am no government official. i am conducting this pursuit because i genuinely hope that at some very distant future turkey will recognise the genocide, but that wil not just "happen", especially without the efforts of turks like us. this is what i am doing, i am taking a risk, maybe, but i think it is worth taking and my nation will eventually gain more from it that it fears it will lose. i also think that ag recognition is a realisable aim whereas land claims are not. i do not "say "amen" to prayers that won't be realised" as we say in turkish, and land claims are such a prayer as far as i am concerned. plus, any discussion of turkish teritorial integrity by a turk can be taken to be tantamount to treason by the the population, and i am no traitor, nor do i want to be seen as one by my own people.

a similar reason why we don't even consider discussing land claims is that the very acceptance of such a discussion is recognising - or rather, condoning - the possibility that it is something that might happen one day. this land claims issue is an ongoing war as far as we can see, and a war is not fought by guns alone. words, propaganda, bribery, threat, diplomacy are all part of it. most of warfare, especially today, is mental rather than physical.

what we are fighting about is clear: eastern anatolia. the desire of the armenian side to bring the land claims to the discussion table is their first line of attack, and our refusal to accept to discuss it is our first line of defence. you might ask, well what happens, after all, if you just "have a dent" in what you see as your first line of defence? the answer is clear: the second line of defence is exposed to attack.

you might ask of course whether we are fully at ease morally with the fact that the original inhabitants of the lands are gone: no we are not (i am not at least, and i know of many turks, not necessarily intellectuals, who aren't either). but here i must reiterate my oft-quoted native american/australian comparison, but this time to highlight a difference between the two situations rather than a parallel: the white americans and and australians are almost totally descended from the white settlers, and native ancestry amongst these populations is an exception rather than a rule, in fact it is a great rarity, and at least in australia, it s something still to be hidden rather than cherished (i understand that the few white americans who have native blood are very proud of it today, as opposed to thirty years ago), whereas in turkey the situation is the reverse: there is practically no turk without "native" blood, even the central asian refugees who came as late as the afghan war in the 1980s have started to mix with the locals, and in a great many cases, entire chunks of turks of today are just converted armenians, greeks, slavs etc. this is a fact that has always been known to us and only - unsuccessfully - repressed under the republic, which was trying to impose western concepts, one of which was nation-state, and a racial concept could not be divorced from that. neither our religion nor our concept of ethnicity or nationality ever excluded others who wanted to join us (this is how we became an empire), and it was a matter of course for us that some, if not most, of our ancestors were the local anatolians. and this is also a main reason why we do not even discuss the land claims: we are just as anatolian as you are. the language and ethnic consciousness that we have, along with certain cultural items, came from central asia. but most of our genes haven't: they are local. an enormous portion of our culture is local, not because we were mere savages incapable of anything cultural, so we took everything from you guys, but we ARE part you. we are the greeks, the armenians, the slavs, the georgians, the italians, the laz, the circassians, the kurds, the arabs, the persians, the this and the that PLUS the central asian turks and - in a few places - the mongols. looking from the perspective of a native anatolian and not the central asian conqueror, we chose - or were made to choose - to take over the conqueror's language and religion, and in return joined his ranks. we did not take his culture in bulk, we took some items, and we were made to shed only the language, the cross, and eating pork (not even wine). practically the whole rest of our culture survived, because we survived: the turkish carpets of anatolia are full of designs that go back 8000 years, in many cases the weaving tecchnique and the colour scheme are the main two things that survive from central asia. the same can be said of our architecture, arts and crafts, family life, everyday interactions, food and drink, even popular religion (why is anatolia full of saints and teir shrines when islam has no saints and shrines, ever thought of it?). we are the locals+the invaders. to tell us that we should get out to make room for you is to tell us to get out of places that we have been in for millenia. we have a right to it by blood, not the blood on our sword but the one in our veins.

it is not our genes, culture etc. that are different from yours: it is our ethnic identity. turkish ethnic identity is not and has never been blood-based. one of the top aristocratic families of this country is the mihaloğulları family, and as you can judge by the name, they were originally greek. there is hardly a seljuk sultan without a greek mother, which practice continued under the ottomans. all this mingling for the past thousand years has produced "us" and has removed from you the right to sole property to the land, including on moral grounds, i am afraid. what do you say?

in fact, it only now occurs to me that this was the underlying argument deep in my brains all along. why didn't it surface and i was forced to resort to others, i don't know. maybe it's my barbaric genes that made me shout at the top of my voice "we shall fight here, fight there, we shall never surrender (freely adapted from churchill).

so in brief, the armenians are perfectly entitled to resettle in eastern anatolia as first-class citizen as far as i am concerned, and to recall a point that was raised by other members earlier on, it might have satisfied ethnic desires better if the country was called anatolia rather than turkey. maybe if it were called that way we would not be at eachothers' throats to draw the border here or there. but then again, it was called "turchia" by the italians by the middle ages (it is significant that the ottomans never called it "turkey") and only after the collapse of the empire and the establishment of the republic with a predominantly turkish population was the place finally called "turkey" by the local inhabitants. this name business is something that the turks will face in the not so distant future, with the kurds if not with you. i myself am pretty uneasy about the whole place being called "turkey", because we have not been able to divorce the name "turk" from its ethnic context (whether we have actually tried or not is a different matter), and still "turk" is considered as a primarily ethnic term. i must hasten to add, though, that i am fully in favour of keeping anatolia in one place since it is an entity in every sense of the word: geographical, geopolitical, demographic and cultural. the people of anatolia would be far better off in one big civilised anatolia than in several smaller parts of it: the sum is more than its parts.

this may have been incomplete, but gotta dash now, will complete later on, cheers.

[MJ]

Ali,

I cannot go into the subject to any extent in the coming days. Just have one comment:

Nothing is possible to accomplish if the whole host of issues is not put on the table.

[aurguplu]

mj,

ok. go on, put forth all the issues on the table. as far as i see them they are:

1. ag and its ramifications: i say we open up all our relevant archives, recognise it, apologise for it, pay reparations german style, and allow you to resettle; and you open up all your relevant archives, make the russians, the french, the british, the germans, the usa and anyone else relevant do the same, and then face the picture that will come out. i also say that all guilty parties be pronounced as such. everybody knows turks are guilty. it's no news. news will be the part played by these guys and even some armenian factions in the ag.

2. land claims: o.k., you bring the issue on the table, we recognise your right to ask that question, at the same time retaining our right to answer in the negative: no. our reasons to say no are:

i) we look at our own nation and do not see one that could be persuaded to give land, especially one it is living on, other than by military means.

ii) we are just as native as you by dint of our anatolian heritage. the picture of anatolian turks as central asian mongols is totalyy inaccurate as can be observed by anyone who visits the place. we are anatolian in every sense of the word. turkish-speaking anatolians. this gives ud the very same moral title to the land as it does to you, the anatolian greeks, the kurds and everyone else.

iii) looking around, we do not see other conquerors give land to the conquered and pack their stuff and go. why should we, then? because it is going to be more civilised? if this is the case, then perhaps those who preach civilisation and righteousness to the rest of the world (the americans, for instance), should pack, get back into nina/pinta/santa maria (and mayflower) and sail back to wherever they came from in europe. you get them to do that, then you will have a serious hand in asking us to do the same.

iv) we are not prepared to discuss the land issue because as i have stated your claims are your first line of attack and our refusal to discuss them is our first line of defence. and if the first line of defence is pierced through, the second line of defence is exposed to attack. and if that goes on, we or our offspring may eventually find themselves either imprisoned in anatolian ghettoes palestinian style, or herding sheep in kazakhstan. neither of these is the future we envisage.

this is our position. let's hear yours.

cheers,

[Boghos]

Dear Ali,

You have repeated several times in this forum that the Turkish government is preparing the population for AG recognition. Nevertheless all we, poor mortals, have been able to see points to the opposite. Turkey´s line is: let´s repeat the lie over and over again. And even give it a varnish of respectability by funding "academics" in Turkey and abroad.

Turks in their vast majority not only deny that the AG took place but also have ill fellings towards Armenians. It is hard to believe that it would be in any Turkish politician interest to put forward this kind of proposition. Much less the military, for obvious reasons.

This sounds exceedingly like some sort of conspiracy theory. It simply does not exist.
Now, if you could present some concrete evidence of what you have been defending things would change dramatically. Who knows, we, the very organized, rich, powerful, influential, omniscient and omnipresent diaspora, could give you a hand.

This whole discussion is not moving forward because you fail to understand what Armenian wants and that the diaspora is mostly irrelevant when it comes to important decisions. Turkey´s line that the Armenian diaspora is all powerful and magnificent, that you swallow so easily, is simply borrowing from the same arguments that is made about the jews almost everywhere. It is just a more comical and farcical version of it.

Issues in Armeno-Turkish relations are not that complex. Actually they are quite simple. The solution, however is rather difficult because Turkey is very far from feeling secure about itself in almost all matters.

[MJ]

I have had more than my share of distractions in the last couple of weeks or so, and had decided not to get destructed any further, for now, but got tempted again…

Boghos,

You have pointed things absolutely transparently. I was thinking about absolutely the same response to Ali.

I guess, it is part of the growing up of each and every boy to face his fears so that to be liberated from them. This is what Ali also needs to do along with his entire nation… He needs to jump over the wedge which separates them from manhood. Then the truth will reveal itself… And if he needs a friendly hand to jump over – we are here...

Uhhh…I need a litle break from the Hye Forum ... But ask for me, and I'll be back.

[aurguplu]

dear boghos,

1. i have lately been talking to some People Who Would Know re turkey's evolving stance over the ag issue, and they said the observed the same thing. let me tell you the concrete pieces of evidence that i can think of: i) i have been to this forum for the past two years, which i do not doubt for a second that the turkish security checks in on and off, and have survived so far, and neither me nor anyone i know have been molested/made life difficult for or anything like that. ii) there are an increasing number of turks who are having similar experiences, iii) for the past few years, genocide-related material giving the armenian version of events has been freely entering turkey and even translated into turkish and has not been removed from circulation iv) some turkish armenians have referred in public to "a tragedy" that their nation had experienced that the turkish state has not yet addressed properly (e.g. hrant dink of agos): these same individuals are still alive and well and functioning as they did before v) a turkish minister from a very senior family wrote a book called "the beads of salkım hanım" narrating the story of the infamous property tax of the wwii period, where a main character, a jewish person, was changed to an armenian one (leon to levon) by the (armenian) director of the movie (etyen mahçupyan) and references were made to 1915, although it created great hype, no-one had a brush with the law, vi) roald grigor-souny gave a few lectures at turkish universities giving the armenian version of events. he wasn't shouted out, but after the lecture some from the turkish audience gave their accouns they had heard from their grandparents about how the armenians in their district were killed. nobody got to meet the police after that, vii) halil berktay gave an interview to a high circulation newspaper in which he described the CUP guys as the ancestors of our modern susurluk guys (you know what i mean if you follow turkish affairs). the article appeared as a centrefold double-page spread (or was it single page?) and halil berktay, the interviewer and the newspaper are still alive and kicking. viii) zülfü livaneli, a popular ex-communist singer, political activist and columnist, published an article where he asked the question of "for how long more are we to pay for the crimes of the ittihadists" ix) atlas, the turkish version of the national geographic, produced an issue mainly devoted to 1915 (with that title) where a glimpse of a highly unofficial version of the story can be read between, and sometimes directly on, the lines, and finally x) a senior politician, one of Those Who Know (forgot his name) had characterised the change from leon to levon in the salkım hanım movie (see v) as "a part of a greater plan to psychologically prepare the nation to the fact that what had happened to the armenians was a genocide".

i think these are enough to show that some very serious changes are taking place in this country. the fact that almost all of the above took place in the last two years is a point that strenghtens my argument.

as far as the still lingering turkish official position is concerned, i derscibe it as controlled retreat: it would be a very foolhardy state to acknowledge such a thing before having properly prepared the nation's psyche for it.

as far as the diaspora is concerned, we are first and foremost busy with the american and french diasporas. i had never heard of the brazilian or dutch diaspora, for instance. it may be because these two countries, especially the usa, are of paramount importance to turkish interests, and the diaspora there is the largest, most vocal, richest, most powerful, and most dedicated. we are especially uneasy with the fact that some diaspora members have big stakes in the american media and entertainment industry (kirk kirkorian for instance). we see this as a weapon that can be used in propaganda warfare. you may of course point out here that until ararat, not a single movie (or am i wrong) was actually made on the subject, and i may agree that we are perhaps exaggerating this threat. but still, it is there.

as far as the comparison with the jewish diaspora is concerned, i stick to my argument. do you honestly believe that israel could survive for one day in the middle east without american support, and that there would be that much american support for it in view of the most blatant excesses they have comitted against the palestinians, especially recently, if there were not a very rich and powerful jewish lobby in america dedicated to the cause of aliyah?

cheers,

[Boghos]

The fact that people are not being murdered by stating the historical truth is probably an improvement. But not exactly proof that the state is preparing the population for AG recognition. Or is it not Turkey the country that recently created an "institute" of Armenian studies, and whose embassies protest all over the world against the AG ? Morevoer books such as "Jenosit" by Dadrian were not published in the last two years, but before. Similarly, Kurdish revolutionary groups such as Kizilirmak and Yorum have had their CDs sold openly for years, but that does not mean that the Kurdish question was about to be resolved.

You see there is a big difference between given access to a few irrelevant intellectuals to material on AG and "preparing the population for AG recognition". That is just tokenism.

On the diaspora: first of all I never said that the Brazilian or Dutch or Singaporean diasporas were relevant or irrelevant. If by saying that you were trying to disqualify me as a source, by saying that the American and French diasporas are what really matters, implying that I shouldn't know, well, welcome to your "scholar" world.

In any case, I am just saying that the role of the diaspora is overplayed by Turkey for obvious reasons and you swallow the bait. I think you have acknowledged that yourself to a certain extent. I do agree that the diaspora has been important for Israel. It has also been important for Armenia. But that does not mean that it dictates foreign policy. I can cite several instances where Israel acted without the knowledge of the US and sometimes even against it. Yes, the diaspora has helped lobbying in Washington and Paris. But it is much weaker than you seem to think. It is helped in Europe by the uneasy feelings animosity that most European countries have for Turkey. I can however understand where you are coming from: a product of Kemalist brainwashing and the longstanding paranoia of a still dying empire surrounded by unfriendly neighbours. I don't mean in a bad or insulting way, it is simply how things are.

Just a few words on the Susurluk vs CUP analogy: I admit I don't know the context this was said but more often than not these comments have the underlying theme of "how great, tolerant and peaceful the OE was" and was spoiled by those mafiosi. The myth of the OE is another sickness that doesn't seem to go away.

Dear Ali, I realize you are a good person, but believeing on what you want to believe, through some fallacy of composition, and being privy to information from "people in the know" are signs that a rest is merited and perhaps a bit more.

[ August 23, 2002, 02:26 AM: Message edited by: Boghos ]

[MJ]

Dear Boghos,

Give Ali due justice..

For a nation which has left its landmarks all over the continent throughout history by promoting the norms of Jeffersonian Democracy, such things cannot take place without observing the letter and spirit of plebiscite – the Turkish nation has to vote on it –was it Genocide or Armenian Rebellion, where both nations perished equally. Bad-bad things happened in the past…. It may require an intensive educational campaign to be conducted by the Turkish Generals…

Brrr… I am out of here...

[aurguplu]

dear boghos,

1. the fact that non-official versions of the ag story are freely available in turkey today means far more than you think. i am saying this because i experienced pretty much the same thing re the kurdish question. when i was a teenager (1980s) kurds simply didn't exist. they were mountain kurds who spoke a bastardised mixture of turkish, arabic and persian, and were called kurds because their boots made the sound "kart, kurt" when they were walking on snow (this is not a joke but serious government "theory" re the origin of the name "kurd"). i saw in the intervening years how the issue was gradually thawed (mainly thanks to the very courageous efforts of our late özal), and the military was forced to take a bit of a back seat thanks to the growing civilian opposition to their policies by the turkish (not kurdish) population. true, there have been a very large number of people - if not the numerical majority - who were opposed to that etc., and there are still publications around that portray the kurds as mountain turks etc., but so much of the opposite view has hit the bookstores, the newspapers, the media, the songs, the movies etc. that by the mid-nineties the fact that there were kurds (there weren't ten years ago), that they were not turks (they were mountain turks ten years ago), that they fought to get their cultural rights recognised etc. (they had all fought with us in the dardanelles according to the story ten years ago), was an open secret. and then, in the last five-ten years, the ban on kurdish got gradually lifted, culminating in the official removal of all the legal obstacles recently, and today there are no restrictions (officially at least) to express your kurdish identity. it all took less than fifteen years. there still are some odd academics here and there that publish stuff like "kurds are turks", they are met with respect, but the same kind of respect that you show to your neighbour who says that his wife is pretty and his kids smart. that is what i mean by preparing the public for the regognition of the ag. and all these things like the institute for armenian studies etc will not be able to survive in an environment when the government finally pulls off its support.

2. i may have overexaggerated the importance of the jewish diaspora a bit, not because i am brainwashed or anything but because i am physically over here and get most of my news second hand. but it is clear that israel could not do what it is doing without serious diaspora backing. mind you, the usa is still the only country that is offering serious support to israel. europe doesn't and hasn't been for a while, even if germans are still having their pangs of conscience over the holocaust.

3. i hadn't realised i had to give you a corrective to notions about me being a product of kemalist brainwashing. i came from two families who were active in turkey long before mustafa kemal, and i have a sense of perspective reading history. i am fully aware that much of kemalist-written history is pure fiction, this is indeed one of the reasons why i had stopped my academic carrer in turkey. the bulk of my references when referring to "sensitive" topics are european, as the turkish sources can simply not be trusted on their own: you need a corrective. so please, no more calling me a "kemalist" turk. if you are going to call me anything, call me something that i am: a turk.

4. i am aware of the dangers of "believing what i want to believe", and strive - and hope - not to fall into that trap. plus, i think the charge is unjustified: no turk would want to believe that ag is a fact, but it unfortunately is, and we are the ones to blame. now this is just so bad that if you can stomach that, you can stomach pretty much anything else. so if i were a person who would believe what he wanted to believe, i wouldn't be here in the first place.

but i agree with your suggestion that we perhaps have to take a little break. i am busy and tired, and so seem you and mj. i might be away for some time, will check in again when i am in the right mood. till then, take care you all,

cheers,

[THOTH]

Ali, (& MJ, Boghos, & all)

I have been away a while but have recently read through much of the preceeding discussion. I find a great deal of hope for the commonality of what has been expressed here - regardless of our (sometimes/often)differing interpretations and observations. IMO - where we disagree is less important (though still obviously significant) then where we do agree. I think we have the basis for a solid foundation for (complete) reproachment. I really do.

Unfourtunatly - though I aknowledge Ali's points regarding lessening of offical suppression of individual expression (regarding the Genocide and other controversial issues within Turkey of late) I too agree with MJ & Boghos that in no way can I really yet see this (as an official attempt for) paving the way for Genocide recognition. Nor would I even characterize what is occuring (officially) as even a strategic retreat of some kind (at least not directly). Again though - my opinions are based on my (limited) exposure. I acknowledge that Ali is much closer to these things and by definition (through exposure) has a more intimate understanding of the situation over there. (does not mean he is correct however - and his contentions are still unproven IMO).

All that being said I must again commend you Ali for your honest attention (and risk taking) regarding this issue. You and those (Turks) like you (and Armenians like us!) are the hope (and one thing you can communicate to other Turks is the existance of Diasporan Armenians that are not anti-Turk Ogers). This latter fact is most important IMO - because I believe that among most Turks it is assumed that we are such. (and we need to cast off our prejudices regarding Turks as well). I really liked your presentation of the mixed/inclusive ethnicity of Turks - and the relevance of this (just wanted to let you know). That the national psyche among Turks is so counter (for admiting to) this realization is a major probelm/stumbling block - IMO. (And unofficially apathy is of course the main problem. Its funny though - in monitoring the Turk press (in English) and government prounoucements and such - there is anything but (offical) apathy towards this issue. In fact there is a great deal of open hostility towards Armenians - IMO.

So I wonder now what we can do to further (broaden & deepen) the spirit of openess and cooperation between our peoples (that to some degree we have established here on the forum in a very limited way). Could there be (English speaking?) Turkish web forums or such that this forum could perhaps do some sort of (controlled/moderated/whatever?) exchange with that could help with mutual understanding. (Just a thought) - I don't know.

Anyway - regardless of our differences - you should know that you and your efforts are appreciated.

[aurguplu]

dear thoth,

thanks for your refreshing posting. we three (actually, initially mj and i) were involved in an online war about the land claims and frankly speaking, it wasn't getting anywhere.

i think we have to realise that we are not going to be able on every single issue: i realise that i just cannot make some armenians drop the land claims, and those same armenians have to realise that they just cannot make us take any steps that has the slightest risk of resulting in a smaller turkey and us herding sheep in kazakhstan.

what we have so far agreed upon, though, is the fact of genocide and its implications (i think we have reached broad consensus here, even though differences may remain). this is something we can buil upon and more significantly, something that we on this part of the world can eventually carry on to a larger audience here. i don't like wasting time, and my efforts here are at least partly fuelled by the desire to see this genocide business sorted out so that it doesn't dog my - and your - children anymore.

as far as the land claims, though, the most i can agree to - and i think this is already quite a lot - is that the anatolian armenians be eventually allowed to resettle in their original homeland. some of the members in this forum - especially mj - totally reject this option as far as i can see, but quite a few armenians (not necessarily those in this forum) differ: some armenians have moved in to buy land in eastern anatolia, which, although creating some hype, was allowed legally as far as i know, and there is a hotel in van (van?) which was closed down on the grounds that the californian armenian who had bought it three years ago had named it "vartan" after his son (which i understand means "victory" in armenian, is this correct?). the hotel got reopened after a court ruling and got its name back.

there is a town in central anatolia near kayseri, originally called germir, whose name was changed to something turkish in the republican period, the name of the town was given back after the inhabitants protested for several decades! incidentally, it is the hometown of ilya kazancıoğlu (elia kazan), by the way.

so things are happening. may be i am too much of an optimist, but the kurdish example is there.

i am thinking about your proposal re other forums, let me think about it a bit more. i take risks, but not stupid ones.

cheers,

[edward demian]

If our geography had been different and the Mediteranian would have been the border instead of Turkey, what then?
The real key to the success of the Armenian nation is in its economy. With an open economy like that of the US, and with equal property rights for cityzens and nationals, the country would surely have a labor shortage.
I wonder if opening the borders with Turkey would not be the end of Armenia. An influx of milions of Turks for jobs would overwhealm and out populate Armenia. In some respects Armenia is stronger now than before the independance. It is self sufficient in Energy production. Not many countries can boast of that. If only free banking laws, of the Swiss Variety and other Tax Haven countries, could be enacted, There would be an influx of money which would drive the cost of borrowing down which would stimulate all industry.
Once again we revert back to the "Cityzenship" issue. Universal Armenian Rebulic Cityzenship to all for the asking, much like the Israeli's law of Return. That is a must. Smart money wants to be safe money. A business man want to know that he has the same rights as the locals.
To join the EU a country has to adopt property rights laws. As such, Turkey will have to return all the Armenian properties on individual basis. Perhaps that would accomplish what the polititians can't.