Difficult week in April: 94 years later
Will the Armenian side be able to have her own way and to convince the Turkish and all the other interested parties in the fact that a dialogue is possible only without preconditions?
The week started with just another visit of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-chairs to the region. In fact, there was nothing new, except the regular dim statements about the speedy regulation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, peace and stability in the region and prosperity. The MG statements are sometimes quite like the reports of the secretaries of city committees, issued to higher authorities: everything is good; sure there are discrepancies, deficiencies, but everything can be improved. The cochairmen's route is also traditional: Yerevan-Baku-Yerevan-Stepanakert-Yerevan- Baku, with some variations.
But the interesting point is that Official Baku has not ever protested against this route and has not sent notes to the Departments of Foreign Policy of France, USA or Russia, complaining of the "illegal crossing of the boundary". Almost as Orwell says: all are equal, but some are more equal than others. But this just in passing. The diplomats arrived simply in order to once more make sure the Presidents did not change their minds about the encounter in Prague due on May 7, although it is incomprehensible, how they could have done so
But the basic news of the week came on the night of April 22-23, when the agreement between Foreign Ministries of Armenia and Turkey was promulgated, with the mediation of the Swiss Foreign Ministry about a certain road map on the normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations. The most interesting point is that the very text of the agreement cannot even be called a text in view of its unusual brevity. However, this gave rise to different kinds of commentaries and interpretations, especially in the Azeri press. The latter began to speak of various kinds of "leakages", having nothing in common with the reality. By the way, the lie was so transparent that refutations appeared in the same Azerbaijani press already the next day And the matter concerned some assumed five clauses, which Armenia allegedly had to carry out, so that Turkey would graciously open the boundary. By the way, it was exactly the complete lack of information of the population of Armenia about the content of the agreement that became the reason for various kinds of commentaries, quite far from the reality too. It is completely understandable that each of the parties in this game is trying to outwit the other, but the question is to what extent the Armenian side will be able to have her own way and to convince the Turkish and all the other interested parties in the fact that a dialogue is possible only without preconditions. Especially when the question stands quite clear for Armenia: to be or not to be.
And finally - the annual April 24 address of the US President Barack Obama, an address that everybody had been waiting for with some morbid feeling: will he utter the Word or not?
That small percentage of Armenians, who knew for sure that the US President would avoid the word "genocide" in his address, can sigh with relief. But Barack Obama did even worse; he actually legalized the Armenian word for the Genocide "Mets Yeghern", which caught the entire world, including Turkey. It would be naïve of us to think that he used this word-combination by pure accident. He, or to be more accurate, his speechwriters saved face: the word is not uttered, but a curtsey is made to Armenians. And in this connection again the question arises: how long the recognition of the Armenian Genocide is going to be the basic, if not the unique priority of foreign policy of the Armenian state?
It is appropriate to recall that before the promulgation of the joint statement of the Armenian and Turkish MFAs, for some reason majority of Armenians thought Obama would certainly repeat what he said being a Senator and a Presidential candidate. If we do not seize on words and definitions, the US President kept his promise. The extent of truthfulness of this assertion can confirm the fact that Turkey considers the words "Mets Yeghern" and "Genocide" to be synonyms. Well, something like "the catastrophe of the European Jews" and the "Holocaust". By the way, in their statement of petition for the events of 1915 the Turkish intelligentsia used almost the same expressions. Besides, Turkish diplomat, Ambassador Yalim Eralp said, "Mets Yeghern" indicates "genocide". Moreover, the Foreign Ministry of Turkey severely criticized Obama's address, finding his statements unacceptable. As for Abdullah Gul, there are some moments in Obama's speech with which he cannot agree. "In 1915 hundred thousands of Turks and Moslems lost their lives. With this regard it is necessary to share the pain of all those who died", stated President Gul.
However, the matter is not in concepts, but in the legal aspect. Recognition of the Armenian Genocide leads to the claims of moral and material compensation for the Armenian nation to be awarded by Turkey as the assignee of the Ottoman Empire. So many times has all this been said that it is no more taken seriously. The worst that could happen, has happened: recognition of the Armenian Genocide has become an exchange card, a political tool, a method of pressure and anything else, but a requirement of justice.
However, Obama's address was best commented by a person, far from politics, namely Armen Jigarkhanyan: "What we expect is not a matter of political angle. The importance of the persona of Obama is a temporary concept, while the problem of recognition of the Armenian Genocide has existed for 94 years. Will Obama pronounce the word "genocide" or not is not so important. Our relation to today's state of affairs is the most important. This is a matter to be approached with an open soul and a sober mind; there is no place for emotions here." According to Armen Jigarkhanyan, each person that speaks about recognition of the Genocide must think about how competent he is in this issue. "Each Armenian has the right to require recognition of the Genocide, at the same time caring for the possibility of establishing diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey", he said.
Karine Ter-Sahakyan
But the basic news of the week came on the night of April 22-23, when the agreement between Foreign Ministries of Armenia and Turkey was promulgated, with the mediation of the Swiss Foreign Ministry about a certain road map on the normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations. The most interesting point is that the very text of the agreement cannot even be called a text in view of its unusual brevity. However, this gave rise to different kinds of commentaries and interpretations, especially in the Azeri press. The latter began to speak of various kinds of "leakages", having nothing in common with the reality. By the way, the lie was so transparent that refutations appeared in the same Azerbaijani press already the next day And the matter concerned some assumed five clauses, which Armenia allegedly had to carry out, so that Turkey would graciously open the boundary. By the way, it was exactly the complete lack of information of the population of Armenia about the content of the agreement that became the reason for various kinds of commentaries, quite far from the reality too. It is completely understandable that each of the parties in this game is trying to outwit the other, but the question is to what extent the Armenian side will be able to have her own way and to convince the Turkish and all the other interested parties in the fact that a dialogue is possible only without preconditions. Especially when the question stands quite clear for Armenia: to be or not to be.
And finally - the annual April 24 address of the US President Barack Obama, an address that everybody had been waiting for with some morbid feeling: will he utter the Word or not?
That small percentage of Armenians, who knew for sure that the US President would avoid the word "genocide" in his address, can sigh with relief. But Barack Obama did even worse; he actually legalized the Armenian word for the Genocide "Mets Yeghern", which caught the entire world, including Turkey. It would be naïve of us to think that he used this word-combination by pure accident. He, or to be more accurate, his speechwriters saved face: the word is not uttered, but a curtsey is made to Armenians. And in this connection again the question arises: how long the recognition of the Armenian Genocide is going to be the basic, if not the unique priority of foreign policy of the Armenian state?
It is appropriate to recall that before the promulgation of the joint statement of the Armenian and Turkish MFAs, for some reason majority of Armenians thought Obama would certainly repeat what he said being a Senator and a Presidential candidate. If we do not seize on words and definitions, the US President kept his promise. The extent of truthfulness of this assertion can confirm the fact that Turkey considers the words "Mets Yeghern" and "Genocide" to be synonyms. Well, something like "the catastrophe of the European Jews" and the "Holocaust". By the way, in their statement of petition for the events of 1915 the Turkish intelligentsia used almost the same expressions. Besides, Turkish diplomat, Ambassador Yalim Eralp said, "Mets Yeghern" indicates "genocide". Moreover, the Foreign Ministry of Turkey severely criticized Obama's address, finding his statements unacceptable. As for Abdullah Gul, there are some moments in Obama's speech with which he cannot agree. "In 1915 hundred thousands of Turks and Moslems lost their lives. With this regard it is necessary to share the pain of all those who died", stated President Gul.
However, the matter is not in concepts, but in the legal aspect. Recognition of the Armenian Genocide leads to the claims of moral and material compensation for the Armenian nation to be awarded by Turkey as the assignee of the Ottoman Empire. So many times has all this been said that it is no more taken seriously. The worst that could happen, has happened: recognition of the Armenian Genocide has become an exchange card, a political tool, a method of pressure and anything else, but a requirement of justice.
However, Obama's address was best commented by a person, far from politics, namely Armen Jigarkhanyan: "What we expect is not a matter of political angle. The importance of the persona of Obama is a temporary concept, while the problem of recognition of the Armenian Genocide has existed for 94 years. Will Obama pronounce the word "genocide" or not is not so important. Our relation to today's state of affairs is the most important. This is a matter to be approached with an open soul and a sober mind; there is no place for emotions here." According to Armen Jigarkhanyan, each person that speaks about recognition of the Genocide must think about how competent he is in this issue. "Each Armenian has the right to require recognition of the Genocide, at the same time caring for the possibility of establishing diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey", he said.
Karine Ter-Sahakyan
