Dave Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 (edited) Turkey edges towards Armenia ties Turkey has said it is ready to build "political" relations with Armenia while experts investigate Yerevan's claims of a World War I "genocide". Turkey does not have diplomatic ties with neighbouring Armenia, amid a row over the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915-1917. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said "political relations could be established" during joint studies. Armenia has cautiously welcomed the offer of a joint investigation. On Tuesday, Armenian President Robert Kocharyan said he was ready to accept Mr Erdogan's proposal for a joint commission to probe the killings - but demanded a normalisation of relations first. Mr Erdogan told Turkey's Milliyet newspaper that the establishment of formal diplomatic relations would depend on Armenia showing "sincerity" towards undertaking a joint investigation. Turkey shut its border with Armenia in 1993, angry at the Armenian separatist forces fighting for independence from Azerbaijan in the disputed territory of Nagorno-Artsax. Armenia alleges that the Young Turks, the dominant party in the Ottoman Empire in 1915, systematically arranged the deportation and killing of 1.5 million Armenians. Turkey says up to 300,000 Armenians and at least as many Turks died during civil strife in eastern Turkey during World War I, but angrily rejects the allegation of a planned "genocide" of Armenians. Some EU politicians want Turkey to recognise the killings as "genocide" before Ankara is allowed to open talks on EU accession. from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4497519.stm Edited April 29, 2005 by Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantom22 Posted April 30, 2005 Report Share Posted April 30, 2005 (edited) Any commission that is established MUST be under broader auspices than just Turkey and Armenia. It must be under a UN department or perhaps a World Court. Otherwise it will serve NO purpose, and will end up as a "He said, she said." It will solely act as a delaying mechanism until Turkey is admitted into the EU. The facts MUST be weighed by an IMPARTIAL body. Edited April 30, 2005 by phantom22 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakharar Posted April 30, 2005 Report Share Posted April 30, 2005 They'd really hate that, bringing it to the World Court or the European Court of Human Rights. I guess what they are most terrified of are class action suits. One verdict in our favor and the flooodgates will be opened. I think it's a delaying tactic on their behalf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantom22 Posted April 30, 2005 Report Share Posted April 30, 2005 With EU membership, Turkey will get much financial aid and economic education guidance. How can the EU admit a nation that tries a person (Hrant Dink) for stating that although he is a Turkish citizen, he is not Turkish. I can not think of one other nation on this earth that would try a person for such an offense, not even the other nations with bad human rights records. Turkey is in a class by itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esayan Posted April 30, 2005 Report Share Posted April 30, 2005 Do not believe that Turkey is ready for anything. Even if there is a joint study, they do not expect any other result than their official position. They wont recognize anything other than that. Phantom22: There is really no other nation like Turks.. Dink was one of the Armenians who had guts to come out like that well before diaspora knew him. He is the only journalist to defend Armenian rights in Turkey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantom22 Posted May 1, 2005 Report Share Posted May 1, 2005 These Armenians that were sent to the "Syrian Region," does that mean the Deir Zor desert? Are these guys serious? We know what happened to those who were "sent" to this region. http://www.zaman.com/?bl=hotnews&alt=&trh=20050501&hn=19021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumkap Posted May 2, 2005 Report Share Posted May 2, 2005 From Dadrian's The History of the Armenian Genocide, p. xix: In April 1984, a group of public figures (including three Nobel Prize laureates, among whom was the late international jurist Sean McBride) conducted, at the Sorbonne in Paris, "People's Tribunal" hearings on the Armenian genocide and adjudged it to be a crime of genocide without statutory limitations. In August 1985, the UN Subcommission on Human Rights, which had been deadlocked for over 14 years, took note, by a 14-1 vote (with four abstentions), of the hitorical fact of the Armenian genocide. Question: Why should Armenia be asked to sit down with Turkey and create a joint committee to study the "genocide allegations", when this has obviously already been done? The 1985 UN commission was headed by Benjamin Whitaker, one of the most respected experts of international law. Why isn't the Armenian government pointing this out? Do they not know about it? Shouldn't it be up to Turkey to prove why the 1984 finding is invalid? Why does the media ignore the above facts and still treat AG as an allegation? see http://www.teachgenocide.org/files/DocsMap...0(excerpts).pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted May 2, 2005 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2005 Raphael Lemkin himself, the one who officially created the word ''Genocide'', concluded that the Armenian ''case'' was clearly a genocide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verginne Posted May 3, 2005 Report Share Posted May 3, 2005 (edited) Sounds very TARCish to me. No thanks, just a tactic to get what they want and give NOTHING in return. An international court of justice or NOTHING. Edited May 3, 2005 by Verginne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.