PROTOCOLS

[MosJan]

Armenian-Turkish border may open in six months 13.10.2009 19:35 GMT+04:00 http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_print.gif http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_mail.gif /PanARMENIAN.Net/

 

 

The project dedicated to the dialogue between youth of Armenia and Turkey "Two sides of the mountain" was carried out from October 8 to 14 in the Turkey's village Vakyfly. The project is supported by the U.S. Embassy in Turkey. As a PanARMENIAN.Net correspondent reports, in the framework of the project, Armenian students visited the village Vakyfly, which is officially the only village mostly populated by Armenians.

 

Participants met with the U.S. Embassy in Turkey the attache on culture and education Craig Dicker.

Welcoming the signing of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols, the official expressed hope that parties will continue to develop relationships that already exist.

 

"The United States will continue to support the parties in the process of reconciliation, “ Mr. Dicker said, noting that the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border will occur within six months after the Protocols are ratified by the parliaments of the two countries. "Turkey has a great potential for tourism development in the country and when borders open a vast number of Armenians from Diaspora will go to Turkey to see the historical Armenian monuments, and it will bring great economic benefits to Turkey”. Mr. Dicker expressed opinion, that the Turkish authorities are in favor of opening the borders for economic reasons.

 

 

[MosJan]

The issue of RA-stationed Russian military bases can be resolved without damaging Yerevan’s, Moscow’s or Ankara’s interests 13.10.2009 19:31 GMT+04:00 http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_print.gif http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_mail.gif /PanARMENIAN.Net/ RA-Turkey rapprochement process is, undoubtedly, a positive one and what’s important, is a result of both countries’ voluntary choice, head of CSTO International Information Support Center Ramil Latypov said at Yerevan-Ankara-Moscow TV bridge on “New Geopolitical situation in the East: Armenian-Turkish rapprochement, problems and realities”.

 

 

“Armenia is a CSTO member and we are, surely, concerned over the issue of Armenia-stationed Russian military bases. Still we believe that friendly relations between Armenia and Russia will allow to resolve the issue without damaging Yerevan’s, Moscow’s or Ankara’s interests,” CSTO representative noted.

 

He also added that Russia is opposed to armed conflicts in the Caucasus. “Moscow supports RA-Turkish rapprochement and where’re ready to assist both Armenia and Turkey to normalize ties,” Ramil Latypov emphasized.

 

 

[MosJan]

Russia interested in RA-Turkey dialogue establishment 13.10.2009 18:30 GMT+04:00 http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_print.gif http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_mail.gif /PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenia and Turkey are currently assessing advantages and disadvantages of bilateral ties' normalization process, Natalia Ulchenko , Professor of economics, Head of Turkish research department at Oriental Studies Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences said at Yerevan-Ankara-Moscow TV bridge on “New Geopolitical situation in the East: Armenian-Turkish rapprochement, problems and realities”. “It's obvious that Ankara, too, will benefit from rapprochement and border opening, which will promote development of Eastern Anatolia Region,” she noted.

 

According to Natalia Ulchenko, Turkey's eastern region is the least developed, so the rapprochement will open new perspectives at the expense of the Armenian market.

 

“Turkey has repeatedly demonstrated its sound approach in disputable situations. Normalization process can lead to positive developments should Turkey support Yerevan with its positive attitude,’ the Turkologist noted.

 

According to her, Russia is interested in RA-Turkey dialogue establishment, as one leading both to economic development and stabilization of situation in South Caucasus.

 

 

[MosJan]

Zhirayr Sefilyan: ANC was unable to fulfill its mission 13.10.2009 18:09 GMT+04:00 http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_print.gif http://www.panarmenian.net/news/images/ico_mail.gif /PanARMENIAN.Net/ ARFD does not pursue honest goals, leader of Miatsum national initiative Zhirayr Sefilyan told a news conference in Yerevan. The movement, he said, is conducting a signature campaign in Yerevan. “Every day, we collect 800-1000 signatures. Had ARFD wanted to prevent RA-Turkish Protocols from being signed, it would have collected 1 million signatures and submitted them to President,” he noted.

 

Touching on cooperation with Armenian National Congress (ANC), activist said that they had supported Levon Ter-Petrosyan, but congress was unable to fulfill its mission. “We can’t fold our hands,” he said, “We struggled with ANC on a united front and are not going to quit it.”

 

 

[MosJan]

 

Who Determines Armenia-Turkey Preconditions?: True nature of “historic” signing seen in Hillary’s persistence

Published: 09 November, 2009

• Article tools
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gifprintable version
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/emailthistoafriend_icon.gifemail to friend
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/comment_icon.gifcomments (8)
• share the article

While the western media is reacting to the signing of protocols Saturday as if 100 years of Turkish-Armenian animosity has been whitewashed by however much ink is required to sign foreign ministers' names, statements by Turkey’s Prime Minister reveal a different and perhaps more accurate picture that demands prudent examination before Armenia’s parliament signs off on the documents.

 

Just a day after Armenia’s Foreign Minister did as he was told (by Hillary Clinton and others) to put pen to paper, Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan says Armenia must withdraw from the occupied territories bordering Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

According to news reports Erdogan says Turkey cannot take a "positive step" toward opening the joint border with Armenia until Armenian troops give up ground they overtook in the battle to secure a perimeter for Karabakh.

 

 

So there it is.

 

Let President Serzh Sargsyan say now that there are no “pre-conditions”. Let Diaspora organizations who swallowed hard but willingly to support the protocols now back the president and say that he has battled “courageously” to ensure the integrity of Armenia’s interests. Where is the justification for their support, in light of these remarkably frank and informative revelations by the Turks?

 

By signing the protocols Armenia has welcomed Turkey – and more significantly, its backing of the US, Russia, France – to have its way with interpreting history and with shaping a future that Armenia must accept but cannot determine.

 

If you believe reports coming from American media on Saturday’s signing of the Armenia-Turkey protocols, Hillary Clinton deserves more credit (or blame) than Minister of Foreign Affairs Edward Nalbandyan or his counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu in getting the deal to the table.

 

From the seat of a BMW with papers flying and cell phones in both ears and, surely, an appreciation of the absurdity that a woman from Arkansas who grew up in the “Better Dead Than Red” era, should be the matchmaker between these countries must have struck the Secretary of State. Aides aiding and negotiators negotiating, Secretary Clinton brokered ways for Nalbandyan and Davutoglu to make nice so as not to spoil the glory of a moment that belonged to she and to her co-fixers, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner.

 

Like good little boys brought to the principal’s office after a dust up on the playground, Nalbandyan and Davutoglu put their marks where they were told then kissed their proxy’s cheeks and schlunked off into the Zurich night deprived of the dignity of even making speeches on this day regaled as “historic”.

 

Look at a map.

 

The United States needs every avenue possible to secure overland passage to its growing points of conflict. An open border between Armenia and Turkey could only enhance its position that now includes over-flight rights with Russia.

 

Led by the latest Nobel Peace Prize winner, the US is now engaged in two wars on this continent and threatens a third (Iran). Armenia has nothing to offer but its geographic location. More vitally, though, the deal would allow the US military to expand its ties and aid to Azerbaijan – an aggrieved third party – and no longer bound by a sense of parity in security aid to Armenia/Azerbaijan..

 

This “rapprochement”, need we be told, is likely less about Armenia and Turkey relations than America-Afghanistan-Iran-Iraq convenience. (It is even more likely about US and Russian designs and a new-found cooperation in the region, post-Georgian war.)

 

Previously part of the Silk Road, Armenia is now valued as something far more ominous as it is positioned to become a link for the Russians that bypasses Georgia for commerce and a more direct line for the US that provides access to Iran that so far is obstructed by America’s own war in Iraq.

 

According to big-time US media reporting on Saturday’s signing in Zurich, Secretary Clinton was adamant and unrelenting in making sure signatures were secured for the Armenian-Turkish protocols.

 

Reportedly, she told Nalbandyan and Davutoglu: “This is too important, you’ve come too far. It has to be seen through.”

 

It has to be.

 

And so it will be. Like it or not.

[MosJan]

 

Historic Step: Armenia-Turkey protocols signed; await ratification

By John Hughes

ArmeniaNow editor

Published: 10 October, 2009

• Article tools
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gifprintable version
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/emailthistoafriend_icon.gifemail to friend
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/comment_icon.gifcomments (46)
• share the article

As anticipated by all and dreaded by many in Armenia and abroad, protocols were signed Saturday night in Zurich Switzerland that are expected to establish normalized relations between Turkey and Armenia, while also widely feared as rewriting Armenian history.

 

The ceremony, scheduled for around 8 p.m. Yerevan time was delayed when the Armenian delegation objected to a statement that the Turkish side wanted to add to the proceedings. It is believed that the statement was intended to link the Nagorno Karabakh settlement to the rapprochement process – a condition the Armenians have objected to from the start of negotiations.

 

http://www.armenianow.com/images/uploadedimages/ai414101.jpg

The signing ceremony resumed around 11:15 p.m. Yerevan time (8:15 p.m. in Zurich) at the University of Zurich, and Armenia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Edward Nalbandyan and his Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu put their names on documents that have drawn wide support from the international diplomatic community. Making special trips to demonstrate their countries’ support of the signings, on hand were US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner.

 

Neither side issued a statement following the signing as had initially been planned, an idea apparently scrapped as a consequence of the dispute that led to the signing delay.

 

Respected Armenian institutions such as the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Armenian General Benevolent Union, the Armenian Assembly of America, have urged support of the protocols and have called for objective dialogue on the issues.

 

On Friday, a group of prominent Diaspora leaders from singer/actor (and current Armenian Ambassador to Switzerland) Charles Aznavour to billionaire businessman Ruben Vardanian of Moscow signed a letter of support saying that by signing the protocols: “The Armenian leaders with the sense of high responsibility for the future of the motherland and coming generations, act today with wisdom and courage for the establishment of the relations between the two countries and the opening of borders without any preconditions.”

 

But against the support came a lashing from the powerful Armenian National Committee of America saying: "The Obama Administration's attempts to force Armenia into one-sided concessions . . . is short-sighted and will, in the long term, create more problems that it serves."

 

Also on Friday, multiple thousands in Yerevan streets voiced the disdain of political parties at home and other Diaspora organizations – most sympathetic to Armenia’s oldest party, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaksutsyun.

 

As they have since the protocols were announced August 31, the Dashnaks led the largest anti-government rally seen since February 2008, when oppositionists crowds swelled daily, prior to further events that led to Armenia’s worst violence on March 1, 2008 when 10 were killed and more than 200 injured in street warfare.

 

Opposition to the protocols has centered on two main concerns believed to be implied in the documents.

 

First: The establishment of a historical commission to debate events of 1915-18 in Ottoman Turkey is widely feared at home as legitimizing Turkey’s claims that the deaths of up to 1.5 million Armenians has been mischaracterized as “genocide” by the Armenians (and 22 governments that have passed legislation recognizing it), when in fact according to the Turks they, too, suffered at the hands of the Armenians in collateral impact of World War I.

 

Second: The protocols call for “recognition of territorial integrity” of borders, a condition that has a two-prong impact. One: It could imply that Armenia must concede its “occupation” of land internationally-recognized as belonging to Azerbaijan around the Armenian enclave of Nagorno Karabakh. Two: It could mean that, by recognizing Turkey’s current border it would negate legal claims currently in debate by Genocide survivors who have called for reparation and indeed for compensation for land they say was stolen from their ancestors in the 1915-18 displacement of Armenians from what is now Turkey.

 

Consistently, and with apparent growing impatience, President Serzh Sargsyan has dismissed the outrage over “pre-conditions” as a misunderstanding at best, and, at worst, a deliberate provocation by his critics to undermine his authority.

 

In any case, ink on the pages put these protocols into the machine of diplomatic process that is next to see them ratified or rejected by parliaments of both countries. With ratification expected, the result would mean that within two months borders between Armenia-Turkey would be opened for the first time since Turkey closed them in 1993.

 

Saturday’s signing comes a day before a city-wide celebration is planned in capital Yerevan, marking the 2,791st birthday of the city. In extraordinary fashion, especially considering the impact of the world financial crisis, Yerevan has been cleaned and decorated and prepped for celebration of a day that usually passes with only perfunctory recognition.

 

The appearance of elaborate neon holiday lights and the creation of a historic fantasy land in Republic Square has led to criticism that the planned celebration is less about honoring Yerevan and more about creating a diversion from the protests that are likely to share the capital’s streets in wake of today’s expected but nonetheless inflammatory development.

[MosJan]

Baku: Deal casts shadow over brotherly ties with Turkey

The Azerbaijani capital slammed its ally Ankara on Sunday for agreeing to normalize ties with Yerevan, suggesting that the protocols signed by Armenia and Turkey have cast a shadow over the relationship between Ankara and Baku.

"The normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia before the withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied Azerbaijani territory is in direct contradiction with the interests of Azerbaijan and casts a shadow over the spirit of brotherly relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey, built on deep historical roots," the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry said in a written statement.

 

Only hours before the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers were due to sign the protocols at a ceremony held in Zurich late on Saturday to establish diplomatic relations and open their sealed border, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan told reporters his country was showing "goodwill" to restore ties with Armenia. But he said Turkey was keen on seeing Armenian troops withdrawn from Nagorno-Karabakh, an Armenian-occupied enclave in Azerbaijan that has been a center of regional tension. "We are trying to boost our relations with Armenia in a way that will cause no hard feelings for Azerbaijan," Erdoğan told reporters.

 

Turkey closed the frontier with Armenia in 1993 in solidarity with fellow Muslim country Azerbaijan, then at war with Armenian-backed ethnic Armenians in the breakaway mountain region of Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

"As we have repeatedly noted, the definition of relations of one state with others is the sovereign right of the state. However, normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia before the withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied Azerbaijani territory is in direct contradiction with the interests of Azerbaijan. ... Taking into account the importance of opening all borders and communications in the region, Azerbaijan believes that the opening of the Turkish-Armenian border unilaterally calls into question the structure of peace and stability in the region," the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry said.

 

The statement also recalled remarks by Erdoğan delivered in the Azerbaijani parliament in May.

 

"Turkey closed its border with Armenia after its occupation of Azerbaijani lands. The boundaries can be opened after the removal of the occupation. As long as the requirements of our Azerbaijani brothers are not satisfied, we will not retreat from this position one step. It is interconnected and cannot be considered separately," the statement quoted Erdoğan saying at the time.

 

 

[MosJan]

Protocols signed, what's next? Dashnaks start fight against ratification

By Karine Ionesyan

ArmeniaNow reporter

Published: 12 October, 2009

 

* Article tools

* printable version

* email to friend

* comments (5)

* share the article

 

After the long-discussed protocols between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey were signed Saturday in Zurich, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) Dashnaktsutyun starts a new campaign against the protocols, but now against their ratification at the parliaments of the two countries.

 

Giro Manoyan, Director of the International Secretariat of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Bureau in Yerevan says even though the party has not demanded resignation by President Serzh Sargsayn, it is possible that it will do so during its upcoming rally October 16.

 

Manoyan appeals to his compatriots in Diaspora to not give up on Armenia despite the signed protocols

Manoyan says that even though it was not allowed to be voiced by Turkey in the signing ceremony, there remains evidence that settlement of Karabakh is still a Turkish pre-condition of the protocols.

 

“No matter how much our president insists that the announcements made by Turkey refer to domestic consumption and Azerbaijan, Turkey will continue its policy, because the day after signing the protocols, the prime minister and foreign minister of Turkey continue insisting their conditions,” Manoyan says.

 

In his meeting with journalists today, Manoyan appealed to Diaspora to not take extreme steps, and not to stop the flow of funds to Armenia.

 

Manoyan also states that Yerevan’s birthday anniversary (yesterday) was never celebrated as magnificently as it was this year. He believes that doing so the authorities tried to distract people’s attention from the signing of the protocols.

[MosJan]

 

New provocations, old techniques: Expert notes Armenia’s vulnerability in information standoff with Azerbaijan

By Georg Khachaturyan

 

Published: 13 October, 2009

• Article tools
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gifprintable version
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/emailthistoafriend_icon.gifemail to friend
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/comment_icon.gifcomments (0)
• share the article

A senior expert from a Yerevan think-tank is seeing an increased Azerbaijani effort to use all-out information warfare against Armenia.

 

Gagik Harutyunyan, the director of the Noravank Scientific-Educational Foundation, believes the winner in the information war will come out as the winner in the whole battle.

 

http://www.armenianow.com/images/uploadedimages/ai415101.jpgHarutyunyan says the winner in the current media war “will win the battle”At a press briefing shortly before leaving for Moscow on Monday, President Serzh Sargsyan regretted that the Armenian public gets the information of what Turkish officials say about the process with Armenia mainly from Azerbaijani websites.

 

“The authors of these websites, naturally, try to distort and toughen the statements of Turkish officials. Nevertheless, such statements first of all target the Azerbaijani audience. Otherwise, it is odd to me – if the Turks will in fact not ratify these protocols, why did they agree to sign them?” said Sargsyan responding to the weekend statements by Turkish premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan and foreign minister Ahmet Davutoghlu that the Saturday signing of protocols envisaging the establishment of diplomatic ties and normalization of bilateral relations between Yerevan and Ankara would not jeopardize the interests of Turkey’s regional ethnic ally Azerbaijan and that the parliament of Turkey would not ratify the protocols “until Armenian forces withdraw from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, including Nagorno-Karabakh.”

 

The political analyst also believes that the Armenian side had acted quite passively up to 2008, very occasionally responding to the ‘black PR’ published by Azerbaijan, and only recently Armenia started adequately reacting to the information attacks from Azerbaijan. The expert is sure that issues concerning the information standoff must be included in the state policy. Yet now, he says, the capital of the entire Armenian nation is being used inefficiently.

 

Harutyuntyan also notes that the Armenian side must act in a more coordinated manner, and it must try to use even the slightest differences that exist in relations between Turkey and Azerbaijan, the tandem of which has so far acted in a well-concerted manner against

Armenian interests in the information domain.

 

According to Harutyunyan, Armenia had better arm itself with the so-called ‘asymmetric method’ implemented by an opponent, that is to say, to speak more and often and on any occasion.

 

“We should not only adequately react to information provocations, but also have more initiative. It is necessary not to forget that in an information standoff, presenting a fact more often looks more convincing than the fact itself,” says Noravank’s head.

[MosJan]

 

Raffi Hovannisian Comments: Protocol process “sourced in bloody soil”

Raffi K. Hovannisian

 

Published: 13 October, 2009

• Article tools
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gifprintable version
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/emailthistoafriend_icon.gifemail to friend
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/comment_icon.gifcomments (0)
• share the article

The history of the Armenian people has been an ordeal of suffering, tragedy, and genocide. In this millennial series of misfortunes, however, never has the nation invited destruction upon itself.

 

But today it stands at the brink, with a small group of improperly elected leaders apparently racing toward a forsaking of both identity and interest.

 

http://www.armenianow.com/images/uploadedimages/ai414901.jpgHovhannisyan says the fate of the generations to come is at stake now. With the stroke of a pen, the Armenian president and his foreign minister have crossed the line of danger and dignity; in Zurich, Switzerland on October 10, 2009, they resigned from a long-standing national quest to preserve the fundamental rights, security, and integrity of an ancient land and its native heirs.

 

The signing of the two diplomatic “protocols” between Armenia and Turkey might indeed constitute the latest entry in the ledger of crimes committed, and covered up, against the Armenian nation.

 

 

Core Values are Not Commodities

 

As a servant of the Armenian nation, reflecting both prior office and present opposition, I am appalled by this latest offense. As an Armenian citizen, for many years denied that honor by successive authorities, I ache as the soul of our nation is traded away for illusory promises of “good will” and “open borders” with Turkey.

 

Our vital values, from our collective responsibility as heirs of the Genocide to our individual expression of liberty and belonging, are not commodities. That unrequited murderous conception of 1915—the original plan to drive to extinction the Armenian people, the Armenian homeland, and so the Armenian species—is one of the principal sources of our modern identity, just as its equitable resolution is the anchor of our future national security.

 

 

This is Duplicity, Not Diplomacy

 

What will “open borders,” a courtesy commonly extended at no cost to all civilized nations, cost the Armenians?

 

Of course every Armenian seeks peace, prosperity, and good-neighborly relations. But what we have in these protocols is only an expensive illusion of them.

 

The ends, generally stated, are sound: Open borders and normal diplomatic relations among neighbors are pure and prudent goals. But the means we use must be as pure and prudent as the ends we seek. Unfortunately, the secretive diplomatic process launched by the Armenian and Turkish administrations is defective at the fundaments, sourced as they are in bloody soil, where a pronounced asymmetry of power survives to this day.

 

First, the protocols stipulate that Armenia relinquish its lawful historic rights and extend an unlimited de jure recognition of Turkey’s de facto borders, which were drawn and defined on the very basis of the eradication and violent dispossession of the Armenian people from its ancestral heartland. In so doing they demand, and have received, the Armenian presidency’s endorsement of that fantastic crime against humanity which has deprived generations of Armenians of its civilization, heritage, and patrimony.

 

Second, the protocols entail a joint condemnation of terrorism, yet fail to include any corresponding renunciation of the broader criminal outrage of genocide.

 

Third, the protocols impose a requirement for a “dialogue on the historical dimension” of relations. This measure, representing a unilateral attempt at imprisoning the Armenian genocide in a bilateral echo chamber, not only challenges the untouchable veracity of the Genocide, but secures the complicity of the Armenian state in absolving Turkey of any responsibility for its genocidal actions.

 

Once these terms are brought to life, absolutely little will remain of the legitimate expectation to secure Turkey’s and the world’s reaffirmation of and redemption for the Genocide. Turkey will forever deflect and delay liabilities for its genocidal acts by leveraging the infinite and inconclusive nature of the bilateral “dialogue.”

 

Normalization or not, these protocols move us not one inch toward reconciliation, that pure and total communion based on the truth—a brave recognition of all aspects of shared Turkish-Armenian history, including the great genocide and national dispossession of the Armenian people.

 

 

The Protocols in the Proper Perspective

 

In all the pomp and circumstance of diplomatic “breakthroughs,” we cannot forget that the burden of “normalization” rests, as it always has rested, with the Turkish republic. The decisions to close the border with Armenia and to withhold normal diplomatic relations—violations, both, of all viable international norms—were decisions that Turkey made and realized on its own. Hence, each of the Turkish “concessions” reflected in the protocols represents only the most basic minimum commitment of a decent and civilized country.

 

Turkey’s bare and stated readiness to open borders and normalize relations—the extent of its responsibilities in the framework of the protocols—is, therefore, a non-event. No international initiative should have been necessary for those moves. And that Turkey has made that determination now—only after accepting the sacrifice of an entire nation—deserves not praise but continued skepticism in the substance behind its diplomatic flourishes, whether they relate to the European Union or broader geopolitical objectives.

 

 

From Protocols to Parliaments

 

Now that the Armenian and Turkish sides have signed these protocols, the second stage, of ratification, is set for the parliaments at Yerevan and Ankara.

 

Regrettably, dispensing with a parliament’s traditional role of advice and consent in the foreign policy of state, the executives have imposed a prohibition on amending or altering these protocols in any way. While this stands in clear contradiction with democratic standards and practices, it also denies the public and its members in each country the right to exercise or engage their opinions in this process. This extraordinary methodology flies in the face of customary diplomatic practice, which calls for the establishment of official relations through a simple exchange of notes.

 

The scheme here is plain, perfectly tailored, and aimed at tying down for good history’s loose ends. Soon the Armenian National Assembly, too, will be called upon to bear complicit responsibility in giving legislative validation nearly 90 years after the fact to the illegal Bolshevik-Kemalist pacts which crowned the genocidal process and sought to seal the fate of the Armenian nation.

 

What is more, not content with pursuing this official acceptance of Turkey's long-standing occupation of the Armenian homeland, its leaders will continue audaciously to abuse every turn of the ratification process in order to deflect their own culpability by linking implementation of the protocols and lifting of the Turkish blockade with what they pitch as the “occupied territories of Azerbaijan.” Clearly, that would be a disingenuous and inapposite reference to the freedom-loving people of Mountainous Karabagh, its odds-defying liberation and constitutional decolonization from the Turco-Stalinist legacy, and its resultant territorial integrity.

 

In the final analysis, Armenian and Turkish citizens have been refused both voice and choice in determining the outcome of an immensely significant process that will forge the future course of both countries. This is especially distressing, because on the judgments to be made in the coming weeks and months shall turn the fate of generations to come—and their imperative to face history, remember collectively, and bridge in earnest the great Turkish-Armenian divide.

 

 

October 12, 2009

Yerevan

 

[MosJan]

 

Protocols “extorted through treachery”: Heritage Party demands Sargsyan’s resignation

Published: 13 October, 2009

• Article tools
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gifprintable version
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/emailthistoafriend_icon.gifemail to friend
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/comment_icon.gifcomments (0)
• share the article

The Heritage Party has today called for the resignation of President Serzh Sargsyan, over the signing of protocols with Turkey on Saturday that the opposition party says:

 

http://www.armenianow.com/images/uploadedimages/ai415201.jpg

“Were extorted through treachery and insistence, were signed by the authorities that were imposed on the people of Armenia as a result of falsified elections and who carry the burden of the bloodshed on March 1. This kind of government doesn't have the right to take a decision on behalf of the people of Armenia and all Armenians around the world.”

 

The brief statement calls on:

 

“All political parties against the signing of the protocols to unite and reach change of power and structural reforms through combined effort.”

 

And it:

 

“Warns all citizens to realize the gravity of the moment and severe consequences in order to face destructive consequences of the subsequent conspiring contract, which was extorted by self-will.”

 

Heritage, founded by former Minister of Foreign Affairs Raffi Hovannisian, is the second party in as many days calling on Sargsyan to step down. Yesterday the Armenian National Congress, led by former President of Armenia Levon Ter-Petrosyan, also called for the president’s resignation.

[MosJan]

 

The Protocol Process: What happens next?

http://www.armenianow.com/images/uploadedimages/ai414801.jpg

The signing part is over; the next step is for the National Assembly to take By Gayane Abrahamyan

ArmeniaNow reporter

Published: 13 October, 2009

• Article tools
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gifprintable version
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/emailthistoafriend_icon.gifemail to friend
• http://www.armenianow.com/images/comment_icon.gifcomments (3)
• share the article

The protocols envisaging the establishment of diplomatic ties and normalization of bilateral relations signed by Armenia and Turkey in Zurich, Switzerland, last weekend still have a long and, apparently, difficult way for the clauses they contain, primarily the opening of the border, to be implemented.

 

First, the president is to send them to the Constitutional Court for an expert review. If found to be consistent with the set of fundamental laws, the documents will then be presented to parliament (in Armenia as well as in Turkey) for ratification. Turkey is to open the border within 60 days after the protocols are signed by both countries’ parliaments. However, experts think the whole process before the opening of the border might take as long as a year.

 

The dramatic signing of the protocols followed six weeks of discussions during which serious criticism and concerns have been voiced in particular over the clauses of the documents that commit Armenia to recognizing its existing border with Turkey, the controversial provision on establishing an intergovernmental sub-commission to study historical documents and archives, as well as a possible linkage of Armenia-Turkey normalization to a separate settlement process with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

Despite hunger-strikes, sit-ins and numerous marches organized by the nationalist Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) party in Armenia and the protests accompanying President Serzh Sargsyan’s weeklong five-stop Diaspora tour, the foreign ministers of the two countries inked the historic documents at the Aula hall of the Department of History at the University of Zurich on October 10.

 

The signatures, meanwhile, have no legal force until the ratification of the documents by the parliaments of the two countries.

 

The protocols indicate no specific timeframe (or deadline) for the ratification process. It is written: “to ratify within a reasonable timeframe”, which, according to law expert Hrair Tovmasyan, can be “maximum two or three months.”

 

“This is the only stage where a timeframe is not set. In the past, we did have cases when a process on acceding to international conventions would last for one or two years. This time Turkey will maximum drag the process until April 24 of next year,” Tomvasyan told ArmeniaNow.

 

Within days, the president of Armenia is expected to send the protocols to the Constitutional Court where the obligations assumed by Armenia under the protocols will be reviewed on their constitutionality.

 

Even if one clause in the protocols is found unconstitutional, the protocols in full will be invalidated, which, however, Tovmasyan considers highly unlikely, given that legally the documents are “clean”.

 

However, hardly had the ink on the documents dried than on October 11, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated in his speech at the ruling Justice and Development party’s meeting that they will not ratify the Zurich protocols “until Armenian troops withdraw from the occupied territories in Azerbaijan” and that “the Turkish-Armenian border will be opened only after the restoration of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity.”

 

Still, according to reports out of Ankara Monday, the protocols are expected to be delivered to the Turkish Parliament next week for review and vote.

 

Responding to these “verbal preconditions” set by the Turkish side, the leader of the parliamentary majority in Armenia said that the protocols will be put on the parliament’s agenda and discussed only following a corresponding decision by the Turkish parliament.

 

“In the event of any deviation or provisos from the Turkish side, we will not even put the issue on the agenda,” said Galust Sahakyan, the head of the parliamentary faction of the governing Republican Party of Armenia, on Monday. He added that by failing to ratify the protocols, Turkey will only put itself in a difficult situation.

 

“We, of course, do not benefit in that case, but do not lose anything either. After all, it will be Turkey that will have to give answers before the three states,” emphasized Sahakyan.

 

The Armenian president still appears to give the Turks the benefit of the doubt. Before leaving on a brief visit for Moscow on Monday, Sargsyan said that he saw “no serious grounds not to accept [Turkish President Abdullah] Gul’s invitation” to pay a visit to Turkey to attend a World Cup qualifier between the two countries’ national soccer teams slated for October 14.

 

“If no extraordinary events happen in the next two days, I will go and will support my favorite team, the national soccer team,” Sargsyan told reporters.

[MosJan]

Little fun for soccer fans, giant leap for rapprochement

http://medya.todayszaman.com/todayszaman/2009/10/13/armenia-russia.jpg Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan met with his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, during a visit to Moscow on Monday, two days after Armenia signed two protocols to normalize relations with Turkey in Zurich. Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan announced on Monday that he plans to accept an invitation from his Turkish counterpart, Abdullah Gül, to watch a low-excitement 2010 World Cup qualifying second-leg match between the Turkish and Armenian national teams to be held at Bursa's Atatürk Stadium on Oct. 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

President Sarksyan's announcement followed the signing of two protocols between Armenia and Turkey to establish diplomatic ties and to open their border. Gül had gone to Yerevan to watch the first leg of the soccer match between Turkey and Armenia upon the invitation of President Sarksyan on Sept. 6, 2008, in what has become known as soccer diplomacy. “The president of Turkey came to Armenia at my invitation, and I don't see a serious reason not to accept his invitation,” Sarksyan told reporters. “If in the coming two days nothing extraordinary happens, I'll accept his invitation. I'll go to Bursa and support our team.”

 

The Armenian national soccer team arrived in Bursa yesterday. The game is no more than a formality for fans of the two teams as both have already lost the chance to qualify for the 2010 World Cup, but it has long been a source of diplomatic controversy due to uncertainty over Sarksyan's participation.

 

Sarksyan had previously said he would not attend Wednesday's return game unless there was progress toward opening the border between the two countries. His remarks on Monday came as he was speaking to reporters at Yerevan's airport before flying to Moscow, where he was to meet with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Turkey was actually one of the first countries to recognize Armenia's independence in 1991.

 

The two countries have been holding closed-door talks for over one-and-a-half years on ways to restore diplomatic relations and open their mutual border, closed by Turkey in 1993 in protest of the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territory during a war over the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

 

Sarksyan will become the first president of an independent Armenia to visit Turkey when he attends the game under tight security in Bursa.

 

The protocols signed in Zurich require ratification by both parliaments, a process that could yet be derailed by the festering conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Armenian-backed breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

Long and winding road ahead

 

Although the deal signed on Saturday calls for a reopening of the border, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan reiterated on Sunday that Armenia must first withdraw from the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

The statement appeared to be an effort by Turkey to appease its close ally Azerbaijan, which said the new agreement will aggravate the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. While praising the agreement to establish diplomatic ties with Armenia and reopen their border, Erdoğan called progress with a former bitter foe an “important step” that would lead to cooperation and dialogue.

 

However, Erdoğan said the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute must be resolved to enable Turkey to take steps to normalize ties and for the deal to be approved by Parliament.

 

“We want all conflicts to be resolved, and we want all borders to be opened at the same time. [but] as long as Armenia does not withdraw from occupied territories in Azerbaijan, Turkey cannot take up a positive position. If problems between Azerbaijan and Armenia are resolved, the public would accept Turkish-Armenian relations more easily. Approval in Parliament would be so much easier,” he said.

 

Sarksyan said on Monday the statements by Turkey's leaders were addressed primarily to the people of Azerbaijan. "If Turkey is not going to ratify it, why has it signed it? Today the ball is in Turkey's court. We have already spoken out about our steps and will move in this direction. We have enough patience to wait for developments. We will move forward without wavering,” Sarksyan said.

 

Gül, who will host Sarksyan in Bursa, has admitted that the process ahead for complete normalization of ties is full of obstacles. “Of course, difficult issues don't become easy. An iceberg doesn't melt in a day,” Gül told reporters in Kayseri on Sunday, voicing his hope that Sarksyan would agree to come to Bursa.

 

In an address to the people of Armenia delivered on Saturday ahead of the signing ceremony, Sarksyan had indicated that his country would not give up efforts for international recognition of the alleged Armenian genocide.

 

Asked in a recent interview with French media if Turkey is ready to recognize the World War I killings as genocide, Gül said: “We are very open on the subject, but if there is such an allegation -- which we don't accept, by the way -- who is going to decide?” He said Turkey has said a committee of historians should decide whether the killings were genocide. The Armenian-Turkish agreement calls for a panel to discuss “the historical dimension” of the killings, including “an impartial scientific examination of the historical records and archives to define existing problems and formulate recommendations.” However, Gül said: “I think we have to move past this. There is a new period starting. ... It's a period of peace, stability, confidence, security and cooperation.”

 

13 October 2009, Tuesday

 

TODAY'S ZAMAN WITH WIRES ANKAR

[MosJan]

Soccer drops off agenda in Bursa after Belgium debacle

http://medya.todayszaman.com/todayszaman/2009/10/13/bursa.jpg The Armenian national team was welcomed yesterday by soccer fans in Bursa, where the team will play against Turkey in hopes of qualifying for the 2010 World Cup. With the Turkish national team out of the 2010 World Cup even before its penultimate European Group 5 qualifying match against Belgium in Brussels began on Saturday night, soccer is no longer the main topic in Bursa, where the second-leg match between Turkey and Armenia is to be played on Wednesday.

 

 

 

The atmosphere in Bursa changed in a flash after Turkey lost its chance to qualify for the World Cup tournament before a 2-0 loss to Belgium, and the Turkey-Armenia match has lost its importance in terms of soccer. Although the Turkish Soccer Federation (TFF), which had planned to sell tickets for the match for TL 150, has decided to distribute tickets free of charge, few are likely to come to the match to support Turkey.

 

The game, which also bears political importance because of its probable contribution to bilateral ties between the two countries, seems to have lost its diplomatic importance to some extent as an agreement was signed between Turkey and Armenia on Saturday to establish diplomatic relations.

 

Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan, who previously said he would not attend the Turkey-Armenia 2010 World Cup qualifying match in Turkey if the border between Armenia and Turkey remained closed, announced yesterday that he will come to the match in accordance with the deal signed. Turkish President Abdullah Gül also decided to come to Bursa upon Sarksyan's decision. The two presidents are expected to arrive in Bursa on Wednesday.

 

The Turkish and Armenian national teams have also arrived in the city. The Armenian team held its first training session in the city on Monday at Bursaspor's facilities. While the team previously planned to take a city tour, they were not reportedly allowed to for security concerns. Security teams, who predict that provocateurs would likely go to the match now that tickets are free of charge, have intensified security measures. They are also trying to find ways to identify fans who were previously involved in provocative incidents and not to allow them into the match.

 

Some circles in the city have been questioning since Sunday why the Bursa Governor's Office announced that unfurling anything other than national flags or banners will not be allowed in the stadium. The Turkish Public Workers' Labor Union (Kamu-Sen) distributed 10,000 Azerbaijani flags in the city.

 

Some Bursaspor fans say they will not obey the rule that no banners or flags other than the Turkish flag will be displayed in the stadium.

 

Some soccer commentators claim that Armenia will win the match, as the match has lost its athletic excitement. Those evaluating the match from a diplomatic perspective, however, say the match is likely to be the most friendly match between two countries.

 

Turkey and Armenia have been holding closed-door talks for more than a year on ways to restore diplomatic relations and open their mutual border, closed by Turkey in 1993 in protest over the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territory during a war over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. The dispute is further complicated by Armenian claims of genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Empire during World War I, a charge Turkey denies.

 

13 October 2009, Tuesday

 

ERCAN YAVUZ BURS

[MosJan]

Report: Nalbandian signed deal at Lavrov’s insistence

http://medya.todayszaman.com/todayszaman/2009/10/13/nalbandian-lavrov.jpg Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov shake hands after the signing ceremony of the protocols in Zurich on Saturday. Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian was pressured by his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, to sign two protocols to restore relations with neighboring Turkey after a last-minute dispute emerged, threatening the signing of the historic documents on Saturday in Zurich.

Despite the delay due to last-minute disagreements, Turkey and Armenia signed two landmark protocols outlining the restoration of bilateral ties and the opening of their shared border, in Zurich on Saturday. The disagreement stemmed from both sides' objections to language in statements the other wanted to read after signing the deals, concerns that burst into the open just minutes before the ceremony was to begin at the University of Zurich, in the shadow of Switzerland's snowcapped Alps.

 

Nalbandian did not agree to sign the protocols but was forced to do so upon an order from Lavrov, the Azeri Press Agency (APA) reported on Monday, citing a report by the Russian daily Kommersant.

 

“According to the Russian newspaper, when the situation became tense, Lavrov gave a note to Nalbandian: ‘Sign it easily and go!' Only after that did Nalbandian sign the protocols,” APA said.

 

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's efforts have been widely covered by international news agencies. In a black BMW outside a chalet-style hotel in the foothills of the Swiss Alps, Clinton used high-drama cell phone diplomacy to clinch a historic Armenian-Turkish deal, Agence France-Presse reported.

 

“There were several times when I said to all of the parties involved that ‘this is too important, this has to be seen through, you have come too far',” Clinton later told reporters on the plane from Zurich to London.

 

Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey, the host of the ceremony and whose country mediated the talks between Armenia and Turkey, was, meanwhile, hectically busy during those three hours, reports said. “Calmy-Rey was rushing around like a third secretary,” a Turkish diplomat was quoted as saying by the Turkish Sabah daily.

 

13 October 2009, Tuesday

 

TODAY'S ZAMAN WITH WIRES ANKAR

[MosJan]

Diaspora threatens to stop financing Armenia

Several Armenian diaspora organizations from around the world have slammed the signing of two landmark protocols on Saturday by Armenia and Turkey for restoring ties and opening their shared border, while leading figures in the international community have praised the signing of the protocols.

 

 

The Turkish and Armenian parliaments must now approve the Swiss-mediated deal, signed by Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and his Turkish counterpart, Ahmet Davutoğlu, in the face of opposition from nationalists on both sides and an Armenian diaspora, which insists that Turkey acknowledge the killings of Anatolian Armenians during World War I as genocide. The boldest reaction among the Armenian diaspora came from the Union of Armenian Associations in Sweden, with spokesperson Vahagn Avedian saying the signing brought discord into Armenia-diaspora relations. The first step the diaspora will undertake after the protocols' conclusion will be to stop financing Armenia, Avedian told news portal PanArmenian over the weekend. Money from Armenians living abroad, which according to estimates amounts to $1 billion a year, is a significant source of income for landlocked Armenia.

 

In Jerusalem, Georgette Avagian, historian and representative of Hay Dat, an organization related with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), told PanArmenian that the diaspora would not be silent and would take certain steps in regards to the protocols.

 

“Now April 24 and Oct. 10 become days of mourning for us because today we have lost our historical lands, and the issue of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide has turned to dust,” Avagian said. In the United States, an influential diaspora organization, the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), suggested that “the success of Turkey in pressuring Armenia into accepting these humiliating, one-sided protocols proves, sadly, that genocide pays.”

 

ANCA Chairman Ken Hachikian pledged that “the ANCA and all Armenian Americans will continue our efforts to restore morality to our nation's response to the Armenian Genocide, and, more broadly, to the cause of genocide prevention.”

 

Alongside the diaspora's harsh reactions, the international community has praised the protocols. Bulgaria, Israel, Spain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) were among those to welcome the deal, as well as the US based-Armenian Jewish Committee (AJC).

 

Bulgaria's Foreign Ministry said they were convinced that the signing of the protocols “eliminates all impediments for the future development of bilateral relations and contributes to the peace and stability in the region of the South Caucasus and the Black Sea,” while the UAE Foreign Ministry stated that the protocols would provide an important stabilizing factor in the region, in general, and south of the Caucasus, in particular, and would contribute to enhancing regional cooperation in various areas of development for the interest of the Turkish and Armenian peoples.

 

The Israeli Foreign Ministry said, “The agreement proves yet again that open and fearless negotiation is the only way to overcome differences and past events.”

 

The Spanish Foreign Ministry expressed pleasure over the signing, adding that this move would strengthen stability in the Caucasus.

 

AJC Executive Director David Harris, meanwhile, “saluted the courage of” the two governments “in choosing the path of reconciliation over that of continued conflict.”

 

Expressing hope that the accord would have a positive impact on peace efforts in the wider region, Harris said: “There is a painful history here, but Turkey and Armenia have wisely decided that the dividing issues of both past and present must be addressed through dialogue. In signing this accord, they have reminded us that no conflict, however intractable, need be eternal.”

 

13 October 2009, Tuesday

 

TODAY'S ZAMAN WITH WIRES

[MosJan]

Azerbaijani deputies travel to Turkey to discuss protocols

Members of the Turkish caucus in the Azerbaijani parliament are scheduled to visit Turkey today to discuss protocols signed by Turkey and Armenia over the weekend aimed at normalizing relations and establishing diplomatic ties.

 

“As part of the visit, the delegation will meet with representatives of the Turkish government,” Azerbaijan's Trend News Agency quoted Nizami Jafarov, co-chairman of the Azerbaijani-Turkish Inter-Parliamentary Friendship Group, as saying on Monday.

 

The 11-member delegation will stay in Turkey until the weekend. During their trip, Jafarov said, they will meet with representatives of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and opposition parties as well as with influential leaders of Turkish society. Turkish news reports said the delegation is expected to meet with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on Wednesday.

 

Azerbaijan, a regional ally of Turkey, insists Turkey should not normalize its relations with Armenia before Armenia withdraws from Azerbaijani territory it occupied during a war over Nagorno-Karabakh in the early 1990s. Jafarov denied claims that the visit constitutes a protest against the protocols, but added, “We want the opening of the border [between Turkey and Armenia] to not look like Turkey's favor to Armenia.”

 

Jafarov also expressed Azerbaijan's trust in Turkish authorities not to act against Azerbaijan's national interests.

 

A similar visit took place in April when several Azerbaijani women deputies traveled to Turkey to express their opinions about the process of rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan criticized the visit saying it was “ill-intentioned.”

 

13 October 2009, Tuesday

 

TODAY'S ZAMAN WITH WIRES

[Arpa]

Protocols “extorted through treachery”: Heritage Party demands Sargsyan’s resignstion http://www.armenianow.com/images/printable_icon.gif[/img

As that great philosopher of the 20th century Popeye would say.

"ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, AND ENOUGH IS TOO MUCH"

---

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH US? Is not "ENOUGH TOO MUCH"?

ՀԵՐԻՔ Է, ԲԱՒԱԿԱՆ Է: !!!!

Did the furks ever demand the resignation of kakafurk?

Here we are, for the last 20 years, since 1989 constantly screaming and yelling for the “resignation” of our Presidents.

When will we ever learn that our “presidents” are of Armenian heritage, unlike the likes of Roman, Persian, Russian, ottoman ones.

When will we ever learn to love, revere and obey one of our kind, stop loving, revering and obeying the likes of hamid and kakafurk?

OK, OK!

We know that Levon, Robert and Serge are one of our snotty/khllot/kakot/shitty boys, as opposed to the furkish “saints” hamid and kakafurk. Where is the limit? Where do we stop?

Who are our “saints/idols” since Mesrop and Narekatsi?

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!

Can we show some respect to one of OUR OWN? Admit that they may be more intelligent than many of us, and give them the “benefit of the doubt’ ?

Edited October 13, 2009 by Arpa

[Yervant1]

As usuall as predicted, we put the cart in front of the horses. Nothing is official except of the protocol signing, the border is still closed if it ever opens and we are still at where we are. We see opinions and statements coming form everywhere and anywhere, they are all saying different and opposing things. Are we going to lose a lot, or gain anything, maybe gain a lot and lose very little? Who knows! This is an ongoing process that sometimes we win and sometimes we lose, only time will tell whether it was the right thing to do or the wrong one, and or maybe a little bit of each.

Siting on our asses and demanding justice got us nowhere, let's give this a chance and judge it later if it was the proper thing to do.

[Hellektor]

FREEDOM FROM GEORGIAN DOMINANCE

 

The opening of the Turkish-Armenian border will especially favor the solution of issues facing Armenians of Javakhk, said president of the "Javakhk" Patriotic Union Shirak Torosyan,

Is it me missing something or I don't know something these smartasses know very well? Do they have reassuring info the Turk will actually open the border? If so, will they be kind and share this info with us?

 

..."Today we are trying to do the same thing in a kind of virtual reality by trying to stand up for the lands of Western Armenia;

As long as we are divided and view our own as our enemies, we will have to suck on it forever. ...And Mr. Torosyan: Kars, Ardahan, Surmalu (with Mount Ararat) are in what is referred to as Eastern Armenia.

 

P.S. I have said it, I don't like the terms Eastern/Western Armenia. There is this tiny, less than 10% Armenia of today and the rest is occupied by our neighbors. What is wrongly known as Western Armenia should be referred to as Turk-Occupied Armenia.

 

[Hellektor]

-Today's existing borders..... Armenia is forced to accept the drawing of our national borders by others and apparently we have no say i it.

(no comment necessary)

 

I always knew, and have said so in the past, that this last point, borders, will be a big trump card for major Turkish concessions. Was I wrong!!

In fact, Armenia and Turkey do not have the power to redraw the border, yet the genocidal Turk will use these shameful protocols to howl like wolves to the world that Armenia has confirmed the illegal Kars treaty (can't do that either).

 

 

» ՀԱՅ-ԹՐՔԱԿԱՆ - Հայաստանն ու Թուրքիան իրաւասու չեն «հաստատել» սահմանը

 

 

ԱՐԱ ՊԱՊԵԱՆ

«ՄՈԴՈՒՍ ՎԻՒԵՆԴԻ» ԿԵՆՏՐՈՆԻ ՂԵԿԱՎԱՐ

 

Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան եւ Թուրքիայի Հանրապետութեան միջեւ դիւանագիտական յարաբերութիւններ հաստատելու մասին արձանագրութեան հինգերորդ կէտով կողմերը ստանձնում են գոյութիւն ունեցող սահմանն հաստատելու պարտաւորութիւն:

 

Ըստ այդմ՝ անհրաժեշտ է անդրադառնալ մի խիստ կարեւոր, թէեւ առաջին հայեացքից տարօրինակ, հարցի. Արդեօք Հայաստանի Հանրապետութիւնն ու Թուրքիայի Հանրապետութիւնը, համաշխարհային իրաւունքի տեսանկիւնից, իրաւասո՞ւ են հաստատել գոյութիւն ունեցող սահմանը:

 

Յստակեցնեմ հարցադրման էութիւնը: Համաշխարհային իրաւունքի տեսանկիւնից որեւէ միջազգային բազմակողմ պայմանաւորւածութիւն, անկախ նրա դրսեւորման ձեւից՝ պայմանագիր, համաձայնագիր, արձանագրութիւն եւ այլն, կարող է փոփոխութեան ենթարկւել, դադարեցւել կամ չեղեալ յայտարարւել միմիայն տւեալ փաստաթղթի մաս կազմող բոլոր կողմերի մասնակցութեամբ եւ համաձայնութեամբ: Այս սկզբունքը, պայմանագրերի մասով, ամրագրւած է (codified) պայմանագրերի մասին Վիեննայի կոնւենցիայի (1969) 39 - 41 յօդւածներում:

 

Նախկին ԽՍՀՄ-ի սահմանի հայաստանեան հատւածի «հաստատումը» որպէս Հայաստանի եւ Թուրքիայի սահման, իրաւական տեսանկիւնից, նշանակում է սահմանի փոփոխութիւն1), քանի որ Հայաստան-Թուրքիա «de jure» սահմանը էապէս տարբերւում է խորհրդային-թրքական սահմանից: Նշեալ իրաւական (de jure), այսու միակ օրինական, սահմանը «հաստատւել է» բազմակողմ փաստաթղթով, հետեւաբար՝ գոյութիւն ունեցող սահմանի հաստատումը էութեան մէջ սահմանի փոփոխութիւն է եւ, տւեալ դէպքում, դուրս է երկկողմ յարաբերութիւնների շրջագծից՝ հետեւեալ պատճառով:

 

1918 թւականի հոկտեմբերի 30-ին Օսմանեան կայսրութիւնը, Առաջին աշխարհամարտում ջախջախիչ պարտութիւն կրելուց յետոյ, ստորագրում է Մուդրոսի զինադադարը: Իրաւական տեսանկիւնից այս զինադադարը անվերապահ կապիտուլացիա էր, հետեւաբար՝ Թուրքիայի ողջ ինքնիշխանութիւնը sovereignty, մինչեւ խաղաղութեան պայմանագրի կնքումը, փոխանցւում է յաղթանակած ուժերին: Այսինքն՝ այդուհետեւ յաղթանակած Դաշնակից ուժերին2) էր վերապահւած որոշելու, թէ Օսմանեան կայսրութեան որ մասում եւ ինչ աստիճանի է վերականգնւելու թրքական պետութեան ինքնիշխանութիւնը:

 

1919-1920 թւականներին խաղաղութեան պայմանագրերի պայմանները քննարկելու համար՝ Փարիզում գումարւում է խաղաղութեան վեհաժողովը: 1920 թւականի ապրիլին Փարիզի խաղաղութեան վեհաժողովի Սան Ռեմոյի նիստն անդրադառնում է Օսմանեան կայսրութեան ճակատագրին: Բնականաբար, կարեւորագոյն հարցերից մէկը Հայաստանի ապագայի հարցն էր: Ուստի՝ Դաշնակից ուժերի Գերագոյն խորհուրդը (Supreme council of the allied powers) ապրիլի 26-ին պաշտօնապես դիմում է ԱՄՆ-ի նախագահ Վուդրօ Վիլսոնին՝ Իրաւարար վճռով որոշելու Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան սահմանը (to arbitrate the frontiers of Armenia)3):

 

Վերջին պարբերութեան մէջ առկայ են երկու հանգամանքներ, որոնք արժանի են լրացուցիչ պարզաբանման:

 

ա- Փարիզի վեհաժողովի Գերագոյն խորհուրդը լիազօրւած էր եւ գործում էր Դաշնակից բոլոր ուժերի անունից: Այսինքն՝ իրաւարարութեամբ Հայաստանի սահմանը որոշելու հայցադիմումը (compromis), հետեւաբար՝ դրա հիման վրայ կայացւելիք վճռի անվերապահ ընդունման պարտաւորութիւնն արւած էր բոլոր Դաշնակից ուժերի անունից: Առաջին աշխարհամարտի տարիներում Դաշնակից ուժերի (Allied powers) մէջ ուղղակիօրէն ընդգրկւած էին աւելի քան երեք տասնեակ երկիր, իսկ Բրիտանական կայսրութեան, Ֆրանսիայի երրորդ հանրապետութեան, Ճապոնիայի եւ Իտալիայի թագաւորութիւնների կախեալ տարածքներով (dependent territories) հանդերձ գրեթէ հարիւր երկիր:

 

բ- Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան սահմանը, ի տարբերութիւն Թուրքիայի միւս սահմանների, որոշւելու էր ոչ թէ խաղաղութեան պայմանագրով, այլ՝ իրաւարարութեամբ (arbitration): Իրաւական տեսանկիւնից սա խիստ կարեւոր առանձնայատկութիւն է, քանի որ պայմանագրերը միշտ էլ կարող են կողմերի համաձայնութեամբ փոփոխւել, կասեցւել, չեղեալ յայտարարւել, իսկ Իրաւարար վճիռներն վերջնական եւ անբեկանելի են (final and without appeal), ինչպէս նաեւ կայացման պահից կատարման համար պարտադիր են (binding):4) Այսինքն՝ իրաւարարութիւնը, ի տարբերութիւն պայմանագրի, ենթակայ չէ վերանայման: Բացի այդ՝ իրաւարարութիւնը եւ պայմանագիրն ունեն հակառակ ընթացակարգեր: Եթէ պայմանագրի դէպքում նախ համաձայնութիւնն է ձեռք բերւում, յետոյ միայն այն ստանում է համապատասխան իրաւական ձեւակերպում, ապա իրաւարարութեան դէպքում՝ նախ ստորագրւում է ապագայ համաձայնութիւնն անվերապահ ընդունելու հայցադիմումը (compromis), յետոյ նոր միայն կայացւում է վճիռը (award):

 

Այսու, ի հետեւանս վերոյիշեալ ապրիլի 26-ի հայցադիմումի, 1920 թւականի մայիսի 17-ին ԱՄՆ-ի նախագահ Վուդրօ Վիլսոնը պաշտօնական գրութեամբ ստանձնում է հայ-թրքական սահմանի իրաւարարութիւնը եւ ձեռնամուխ է լինում համապատասխան աշխատանքներին: Այստեղ անհրաժեշտ է ընդգծել, որ սա Սեւրի պայմանագրի ստորագրումից (10 օգոստոսի 1920 թ.) գրեթէ երեք ամիս առաջ էր, ըստ այդմ, իրաւարարութեան գործընթացը սկսւել է խաղաղութեան պայմանագրի ստորագրումից եւ նրա մէջ որպէս 89-րդ յօդւած ներառւած հայցադիմումից՝ անկախաբար:

 

Ամփոփելով՝ կարելի է կատարել հետեւեալ յստակ եզրակացութիւնները. Թուրքիայի հետ Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան սահմանը որոշւել է երկու իրարից անկախ հայցադիմումի (Սան Ռեմոյի 26 ապրիլի 1920 թ. եւ Սեւրի 10 օգոստոսի 1920 թ.) հիման վրայ կայացւած Իրաւարար վճռով: Վճիռն օրինապէս կայացւել է 1920 թւականի նոյեմբերի 22-ին եւ իր ուժի մէջ է մտել նոյն օրը: Երկու օր յետոյ‘ նոյեմբերի 24-ին, վճիռը պաշտօնական հեռագրով փոխանցւել է Փարիզ: Վճիռը երբեք չի բողոքարկւել, այն ուժի մէջ է առ այսօր: Վճիռն իրաւական է եւ օրինական (legal and lawful): Այն գործում է Սեւրի պայմանագրից անկախաբար: Սեւրի պայմանագրի մէջ ներառւած հայցադիմումը (compromis)՝ յօդւած 89, եղել եւ մնում է յաւելեալ, բայց ոչ հիմնական հայցադիմումը:

 

Այսու, Հայաստանի եւ Թուքիայի միջեւ սահմանը հաստատւել է համաշխարհային իրաւունքի բազմակողմ փաստաթղթով (multilateral instrument of international law)՝ Իրաւարար վճռով (Arbitral Award), որին այսօր կողմ են հանդիսանում գրեթէ հարիւր երկիր:

Այս ամբողջին անդրադառնալուց յետոյ՝ վերադառնանք բուն հարցին.

 

- Միջազգային իրաւունքի ո՞ր հիմնաւորմամբ են Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան եւ Թուրքիայի Հանրապետութեան իշխանութիւններն ուզում անտեսել իրենց իսկ միջազգային պարտաւորութիւնները եւ երկկողմ արձանագրութեամբ բեկանել բազմակողմ միջազգային անբեկանելի որոշումը՝ Իրաւարար վճիռը:

 

Ընդսմին պէտք է նկատի ունենալ, որ միջազգային իրաւունքում սկզբունքնօրէն բացակայում է օրինապէս ուժի մէջ մտած Իրաւարար վճռի փոփոխման, կասեցման կամ բեկանման ընթացակարգ կամ նախադէպ:

 

20 սեպտեմբերի 2009 թ.

 

———————————————————————————————————————

Յ. Գ. Մենք ականջակախ՝ այնքան չխօսեցինք Թուրքիայի Հանրապետութեան կողմից Հայաստանի Հանրապետութեան, շեշտում եմ՝ հանրապետութեան, տարածքների բռնազաւթման մասին, որ այսօր Դաւութօղլուն իրեն իրաւունք է վերապահում՝ ասելու, որ Հայաստանը շարունակում է բռնագրաւել Ադրբեջանի տարածքները, դա հակասում է միջազգային բոլոր նորմերին:

 

—————————————

1) Ի դէպ, թրքական կողմի պնդումը որպէսզի արձանագրութիւնները ենթարկւեն խորհրդարանական վաւերացման՝ պայմանաւորւած չէ միայն գործընթացը ձգձգելու ցանկութեամբ: Դրա համար շատ աւելի պարզ հնարներ կան: Վաւերացման անհրաժեշտութիւնն առաջացել է, քանի որ սահմանների փոփոխութիւնները, ըստ երկու երկրների Սահմանադրութիւնների, ենթակայ են խորհրդարանական վաւերացման:

 

—————————————

2) Հայալեզու պատմագիտութեան եւ քաղաքագիտութեան մէջ Դաշնակից ուժերն առաւելապես յայտնի են Անտանտի երկրներ անւանումով:

 

3) Full report of the committee upon the arbitration of the boundary between Turkey and Armenia, appendix I, number 10 (The national archives, Washington, 760J.6715-760J.90C/7)

 

4) Hans-Jurgen Schlochauer, Arbitration, Encyclopedia of public international law, v. I, 1992, Amsterdam, p. 226.

 

Source, Alik online edition.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Hellektor

[Boghos]

As usuall as predicted, we put the cart in front of the horses. Nothing is official except of the protocol signing, the border is still closed if it ever opens and we are still at where we are. We see opinions and statements coming form everywhere and anywhere, they are all saying different and opposing things. Are we going to lose a lot, or gain anything, maybe gain a lot and lose very little? Who knows! This is an ongoing process that sometimes we win and sometimes we lose, only time will tell whether it was the right thing to do or the wrong one, and or maybe a little bit of each.

Siting on our asses and demanding justice got us nowhere, let's give this a chance and judge it later if it was the proper thing to do.

 

Yes. Now that the protocols are signed we can hear more noise coming from Turkey whereas the Armenians and Armenia seem to have understood very quickly that they were signed and that there is nothing to be done about it. Turkey is acting as it is because it needs to do it, not because it really has a choice. They'll make all kinds of apparently contradictory statements but in the end parliament should ractify them. The reason is simple: this whole protocols business is just a politically convoluted way of getting done what has been agreed upon: establishing diplomatic relations with Armenia and opening the border. Armenia did not and does not have a choice: it will establish relations with Turkey and since it never closed the border, it will just wait until the Turks open their door. I cannot find any argument whatsoever to say that if things happens as I expect that Armenia will be harmed.

 

Now as to Karabagh (Arpa jan: that's how they call themselves, let's not mirror the whole Turkey-turkey-Turkiye nonsense): I think it is highly unlikely that a solution to Karabagh was not discussed and agreed upon. Time will tell if that is true and what it is. Turkey gains considerable legitimacy having direct relations with Armenia and may even be an important part of the whole process.

[Nané]

As usuall as predicted, we put the cart in front of the horses. Nothing is official except of the protocol signing, the border is still closed if it ever opens and we are still at where we are. We see opinions and statements coming form everywhere and anywhere, they are all saying different and opposing things. Are we going to lose a lot, or gain anything, maybe gain a lot and lose very little? Who knows! This is an ongoing process that sometimes we win and sometimes we lose, only time will tell whether it was the right thing to do or the wrong one, and or maybe a little bit of each.

Siting on our asses and demanding justice got us nowhere, let's give this a chance and judge it later if it was the proper thing to do.

 

I have severely conflicting thoughts and feelings about all this. When I give in to emotions I feel betrayed and belittled as an Armenian. But when I put emotions aside I come to the same conclusion as you Yervand. What have we achieved so far in terms of G recognition? OK couple of dozens of countries have recognized it, movies have been made, songs have been composed, books have been written ... We march and demand justice every 04/24, we erect monuments, blah blah blah. Then what? We can keep at it for another 100 years and still be at the same dead end (or just completely lose importance and the interest of those who now care). The sad truth is that in all likeliness NOTHING would ever happen. Because we don't have that much weight in this big crazy world. We will never have justice and have no other choice but to become part of an un-just game with the maximum amount of discretion, pragmatism and (why not) a little slyness.

[MosJan]

i guess that can be one way ...

consolidate & cut your losses and move on, spasenq mi aveli lav pahi, yerb menq aveli patrast k@linenq yerb mer dzerqin aveli hzor xaghaqarer k@linen yve menq mer aseliq@ kasenq ?

 

 

kareli e nayes iyspev..

 

yerek tarets @enkerojs het eyi xosum, inqn el mi etpisy ban asets, amenahetaqrqir iyn er vro na asum e.. " unenq Artsaxi Haykakan HAnrapetutyun - mern e, HAykakan e, inchu chen gnum bnakven shenatsnen ?? inchi en spasum ?? inch tarberutyun HAyastan e norits mek hogh n e menq enq azatagrel,,, inch chen gnum ?? te partadir arevmtyan hayastan pit lini or gnan.. chen gna et jamanak el chen gna...

"

[Hellektor]

I have severely conflicting thoughts and feelings about all this. When I give in to emotions I feel betrayed and belittled as an Armenian. But when I put emotions aside I come to the same conclusion as you Yervand. What have we achieved so far in terms of G recognition?

Nothing, that’s why I have repeated a zillion times that now that we have an independent state, we should use the Wilson arbitration card which has nothing to do with the recognition of the AG. The primitive, nomadic, cattle-herder savages Turks are, they cannot stand the loss of territory. Our problem with the Turks is territorial. See how they do everything they can to take that tiny bit of land Armenians liberated that has never, ever belonged to fake “Azerbaijan” historically, morally or legally. The whole Turk-Armenian relations farce is nothing but a vicious game to force victorious Armenia to cede territory to the sore, genocidal, warmongering “Azeri” losers. They have never faltered from this vile and self-righteous demanding of territory from Armenia on any occasion, yet we never respond in the like manner when they howl like wolves that “Armenians should withdraw from “occupied” “Azeri” territory”.

 

Turks have never tolerated and will never tolerate the existence of an Armenian state of any shape, size or form and all they do is directed towards destroying the Armenian state to remove the Armenian “wedge” to realize their sick, delusional pan-Turkist delirium, yet none of us can see all this, despite every announcement by Turk leaders in this direction.

 

Because we don't have that much weight in this big crazy world.

This is where we are always wrong! Read any article on Turkey (and indeed fake “Azerbaijan”), see what they do by meddling in all conflicts (Israel-Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, etc.). This fake country founded on genocide has nothing: no civilization, no culture, no science, it's no industrial country; it doesn't even have oil or gas. As I have always said, Turkey, the most worthless garbage ever to have leaked the trashcan of the universe does everything to show how IMPORTANT they are. This word, “important”, comes up everywhere there’s talk of Turkey.

 

I have many a time compared Turkey to an old and horrendously ugly prostitute that with an ultraheavy makeup manages to sell her putrid, decomposing self at an exorbitant price to the West and indeed all the world. Everything they say is in the line of presenting themselves as IMPORTANT yet everything we say is how small, poor, landlocked and unimportant Armenia is.

 

Well, explain to me how the greatest beasts of prey of our day wasted their precious time they could use for much, much more IMPORTANT issues: like shedding crocodile tears for some refugees in a distant corner of Africa for example, which is faaaaaaaaaar more STRATEGICALLY and GEOPOLITICALLY (to use a couple of our favorite words when we trash Armenia) IMPORTANT to their NATIONAL SECURITY (yet a couple of other words from the same meaningless jargon) and gathered in Zurich to force poor, small, unimportant Armenia to sign the protocols and how the Turk's muzzle and that of the others shone when this was done?

 

We voluntarily threw away our winning cards where there was not even the necessity, yet the Turk HAD to open the border to invade the EU. We helped the genocidal parasites big time to get rid of one of the most thorny and rocky (unimportant though) hurdles on their way and this self-deprecating attitude of ours is the main culprit...

 

 

http://www.armenews.com/IMG/suisse13-399x266.jpg

A gathering of the most greedy and ferocious beasts of prey of our days: the bear, the cow-bitch with the facelift induced fake smile, the Eurofags, the wolves, the hyenas, the heyvanoghlu …and the Jew Jackal in the middle all impatient to tear the small, landlocked, poor and unimportant sheep apart for the nth time. The old and gay lion is absent but its spirit roams above the sacrificial room.