Armenian diplomat reflects on protocol failure
Smaller
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Veteran diplomat David Hovhannesian, a former Armenian ambassador to Syria, is critical about the Serge Sarkisian government’s attitude toward the protocols. DAILY NEWS photo
Although 2008 was considered a turning point for the normalization of diplomatic relations between Turkey and Armenia, the starting point of the process dates back to 2001, according to a former Armenian diplomat.
In that year, the “road map,” which was signed with the initials of both foreign ministers from the two countries, was prepared as a draft by Turkish and Armenian experts under the auspices of the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission, or TARC.
Speaking to the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review last week, veteran diplomat David Hovhannesian, a former Armenian ambassador to Syria and one of those involved, said the draft contained information on how to revitalize relations. “It constituted the backbone of the Road Map that was signed last year.”
TARC included politicians, diplomats, historians and psychologists from both countries, Hovhannessian said. The commission’s activities came to a halt following a disagreement between parties in 2004 concerning the 1915 events.
“Although the commission decided to apply to an international impartial organization, the Turkish side later withdrew, which brought our activities to a halt,” he said.
Warm relations with Turkish diplomat
Hovhannesian said he had been in diplomatic contact during his post in Syria between 1992 and 1998 and that these diplomatic contacts included oil transfers to Armenia via Turkey. “The Turkish ambassador [to Syria] was a close friend and we were in regular contact. It was going all perfect and then the war broke out in [Nagorno-Karabakh],” he said.
Evaluating the recent developments on the normalizations protocols, which have been frozen by Armenia, he said: "It had to happen because it was not really possible to move ahead given the current conditions. Turkey was incessantly proposing preconditions.”
However, Hovhannesian was also critical of the attitude of Serge Sarkisian government’s toward the protocols. “[If the government took such an initiative] in the first place, it should not have backed off but have passed the protocol quickly in the parliament. If they had done so, the ball would have been in Turkey’s court,” he said.
He also said bilateral affairs are not entirely under bilateral control. “We have been witnessing the power show of the U.S and Russia,” he said. “They all have different interests. A reorganization of Turkey-Armenia relations would mean a fresh start in the entire Caucasus region.”
26 Mayıs 2010 Çarşamba
19 Mayıs 2010 Çarşamba
Turks, Armenians making slow progress in dialogue
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
ISTANBUL - Hürriyet Daily News
Turks and Armenians are making “slow progress” in discussing the traumatic 1915 events, according to authors Ahmet İnsel and Michel Marian.
The two authors, who initiated the Armenian apology campaign in January last year, were speaking at a conference at Istanbul Bilgi University last week to promote their new book, “Dialogues on the Armenian Taboo.”
Speaking to Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review, Marian referred to the 1915 events as “genocide,” while İnsel said they constituted “a crime against humanity.”
“Nomenclature does not matter,” said İnsel, a professor at Galatasaray University. “Perhaps I will be using the term genocide five years from now. What matters right now is being able to discuss the issue.”
“Ahmet has concerns, which I understand,” said Marian, a French academic with Armenian origins and professor at the Paris Institute for Political Sciences. “In order to prepare Turkish public opinion, we must handle the issue in more universal terms.”
In the book, Marian focuses on how to break the taboos between the two nations and initiate a dialogue. After the book’s publication, Marian said he received negative responses because he used the term dialogue.
“But what you call the [Armenian] diaspora is not a homogenous unit, and it is changing slowly. There are those who are warmer toward Turkey. Hrant Dink had a significant role in that,” he said.
The conference was organized in collaboration by the Hrant Dink Foundation and İletişim Books.
Taboos for both sides
"Michel and I talked about dialogue, which is a taboo for Armenians. The title of the book does not only refer to a taboo on the part of the Armenians, but also of Turks. Turks have this taboo that prevents them from talking about what the Armenians have been through, while Armenians have a taboo that prevents them from getting into dialogue with Turks who do not accept the genocide,” İnsel said.
“Armenians look at Turks with hatred on the one hand, and see them close to themselves on the other,” he said. “Ours is an Oriental sort of closeness.”
Marian said his origins were in the eastern province of Erzurum and the Doğubeyazıt district of the eastern province of Ağrı. Although he lost part of his family in 1915, he said others were rescued by a Turkish official.
“The governor warned my grandfather right before the massacres in Ağrı. That is how they managed to survive. My grandfather was grateful to him all his life,” he said.
İnsel’s introduction to the events of 1915 was through a book he read at the age of 15. His research on the issue deepened over the course of many years.
The Turkish academic recalled the 1919 trials, initiated by the Damat Ferit Paşa government, noting that those responsible for the 1915 events were prosecuted then.
"In court records there is a perfect definition by the prosecutor, who said the events were ‘murder against humanity.’ The [Turkish] national liberation movement disregarded these trials. The Boğazlıyan governor, who was sentenced to death as a result of the lawsuit, was announced as a national hero by Parliament a year later.”
İnsel said the debate over nomenclature clouds both sides’ coming to terms with the pain that was experienced.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
ISTANBUL - Hürriyet Daily News
Turks and Armenians are making “slow progress” in discussing the traumatic 1915 events, according to authors Ahmet İnsel and Michel Marian.
The two authors, who initiated the Armenian apology campaign in January last year, were speaking at a conference at Istanbul Bilgi University last week to promote their new book, “Dialogues on the Armenian Taboo.”
Speaking to Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review, Marian referred to the 1915 events as “genocide,” while İnsel said they constituted “a crime against humanity.”
“Nomenclature does not matter,” said İnsel, a professor at Galatasaray University. “Perhaps I will be using the term genocide five years from now. What matters right now is being able to discuss the issue.”
“Ahmet has concerns, which I understand,” said Marian, a French academic with Armenian origins and professor at the Paris Institute for Political Sciences. “In order to prepare Turkish public opinion, we must handle the issue in more universal terms.”
In the book, Marian focuses on how to break the taboos between the two nations and initiate a dialogue. After the book’s publication, Marian said he received negative responses because he used the term dialogue.
“But what you call the [Armenian] diaspora is not a homogenous unit, and it is changing slowly. There are those who are warmer toward Turkey. Hrant Dink had a significant role in that,” he said.
The conference was organized in collaboration by the Hrant Dink Foundation and İletişim Books.
Taboos for both sides
"Michel and I talked about dialogue, which is a taboo for Armenians. The title of the book does not only refer to a taboo on the part of the Armenians, but also of Turks. Turks have this taboo that prevents them from talking about what the Armenians have been through, while Armenians have a taboo that prevents them from getting into dialogue with Turks who do not accept the genocide,” İnsel said.
“Armenians look at Turks with hatred on the one hand, and see them close to themselves on the other,” he said. “Ours is an Oriental sort of closeness.”
Marian said his origins were in the eastern province of Erzurum and the Doğubeyazıt district of the eastern province of Ağrı. Although he lost part of his family in 1915, he said others were rescued by a Turkish official.
“The governor warned my grandfather right before the massacres in Ağrı. That is how they managed to survive. My grandfather was grateful to him all his life,” he said.
İnsel’s introduction to the events of 1915 was through a book he read at the age of 15. His research on the issue deepened over the course of many years.
The Turkish academic recalled the 1919 trials, initiated by the Damat Ferit Paşa government, noting that those responsible for the 1915 events were prosecuted then.
"In court records there is a perfect definition by the prosecutor, who said the events were ‘murder against humanity.’ The [Turkish] national liberation movement disregarded these trials. The Boğazlıyan governor, who was sentenced to death as a result of the lawsuit, was announced as a national hero by Parliament a year later.”
İnsel said the debate over nomenclature clouds both sides’ coming to terms with the pain that was experienced.
12 Mayıs 2010 Çarşamba
Patriarchate election
Turkey's Armenian community still divided on patriarchate
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Turkish Armenians are still not able to elect a new patriarch, partly due to the government’s delay and
partly due to a conflict of ideas within the congregation.
If the Interior Ministry does not announce a date for the new election within 60 days of notice, the Armenian community is planning to take legal action, sources told Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.
An “Initiating Committee” formed by the community foundation’s executives and members of the Civilian Initiative applied to the Istanbul Governor’s Office for the second time last week. According to the schedule planned months ago, May 9 was to be the date for the delegation election, and May 12 was to be the date for the election of a new patriarch.
Speaking to the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review, Setrak Davuthan, a member of the Initiating
Committee and the community’s attorney, expressed amazement at the latest developments. "In every election until this one, the ministry used to send us a document stating every detail on how the election should be conducted. Not this time,” Davuthan said.
The committee had to go a second time to the Governor’s Office after receiving no reply to their first application, Davuthan said. “Legally, we must receive an answer within 60 days. If we do not, we will go to court.”
The impediment for the election does not only come from the ministry. The congregation itself has not yet reached a consensus on whether to choose a patriarch or a co-patriarch. Therefore, in the last few months there have been two separate applications submitted to the Governor’s Office from the Initiating Committee and from the Turkish Armenian Patriarchate Spiritual Assembly Committee.
The latter insists that a co-patriarch should be elected, whereas the Initiating Committee says a new patriarch is a must. Mesrop II, the current patriarch, suffers from dementia and cannot fulfill his duties. According to the rules of the Armenian Apostolic Church, a new patriarch cannot be assigned before the previous one passes away. The Initiating Committee, on the other hand, is concerned that legal conflicts might arise if a co-patriarch is elected.
Ateşyan’s position
Speaking to the Daily News, Archbishop Aram Ateşyan, chief of the Turkish Armenian Spiritual Assembly and the 85th Turkish Armenians’ Co-Patriarch candidate, said the May 12 date was decided solely by the Initiating Committee “without consulting the Spiritual Assembly.” “
We are waiting for a reply from the Governor’s Office for an election date,” he said.
Noting that the Initiating Committee was founded by the Patriarchate and granted civic authority, Hampo Tanışman, a committee member, said the Patriarchate granted them certain rights. “We did not take action on our own,” Tanışman said.
Tatyos Bebek, a prominent figure in the congregation, said the Spiritual Assembly is responsible for the ongoing debate on the election. “This debate obstructed the course. Those in power within the community adopted a self-centered approach and the Spiritual Assembly could not direct the course well,” Bebek said. “Therefore, the problem could not be contained and started to involve state authorities, as well.”
Noting that the Armenian community has many issues to resolve, Bebek said: “Although we should take care of issues concerning our foundations immediately, we are just wasting time. Unfortunately, as the Patriarchate does not function effectively, the rights of the congregation members cannot be watched over to a sufficient degree. This impedes possible gains on the foundations issue.”
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Turkish Armenians are still not able to elect a new patriarch, partly due to the government’s delay and
partly due to a conflict of ideas within the congregation.
If the Interior Ministry does not announce a date for the new election within 60 days of notice, the Armenian community is planning to take legal action, sources told Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.
An “Initiating Committee” formed by the community foundation’s executives and members of the Civilian Initiative applied to the Istanbul Governor’s Office for the second time last week. According to the schedule planned months ago, May 9 was to be the date for the delegation election, and May 12 was to be the date for the election of a new patriarch.
Speaking to the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review, Setrak Davuthan, a member of the Initiating
Committee and the community’s attorney, expressed amazement at the latest developments. "In every election until this one, the ministry used to send us a document stating every detail on how the election should be conducted. Not this time,” Davuthan said.
The committee had to go a second time to the Governor’s Office after receiving no reply to their first application, Davuthan said. “Legally, we must receive an answer within 60 days. If we do not, we will go to court.”
The impediment for the election does not only come from the ministry. The congregation itself has not yet reached a consensus on whether to choose a patriarch or a co-patriarch. Therefore, in the last few months there have been two separate applications submitted to the Governor’s Office from the Initiating Committee and from the Turkish Armenian Patriarchate Spiritual Assembly Committee.
The latter insists that a co-patriarch should be elected, whereas the Initiating Committee says a new patriarch is a must. Mesrop II, the current patriarch, suffers from dementia and cannot fulfill his duties. According to the rules of the Armenian Apostolic Church, a new patriarch cannot be assigned before the previous one passes away. The Initiating Committee, on the other hand, is concerned that legal conflicts might arise if a co-patriarch is elected.
Ateşyan’s position
Speaking to the Daily News, Archbishop Aram Ateşyan, chief of the Turkish Armenian Spiritual Assembly and the 85th Turkish Armenians’ Co-Patriarch candidate, said the May 12 date was decided solely by the Initiating Committee “without consulting the Spiritual Assembly.” “
We are waiting for a reply from the Governor’s Office for an election date,” he said.
Noting that the Initiating Committee was founded by the Patriarchate and granted civic authority, Hampo Tanışman, a committee member, said the Patriarchate granted them certain rights. “We did not take action on our own,” Tanışman said.
Tatyos Bebek, a prominent figure in the congregation, said the Spiritual Assembly is responsible for the ongoing debate on the election. “This debate obstructed the course. Those in power within the community adopted a self-centered approach and the Spiritual Assembly could not direct the course well,” Bebek said. “Therefore, the problem could not be contained and started to involve state authorities, as well.”
Noting that the Armenian community has many issues to resolve, Bebek said: “Although we should take care of issues concerning our foundations immediately, we are just wasting time. Unfortunately, as the Patriarchate does not function effectively, the rights of the congregation members cannot be watched over to a sufficient degree. This impedes possible gains on the foundations issue.”
10 Mayıs 2010 Pazartesi
Armenia hopes to avoid politics at 2010 Eurovision
Monday, May 10, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Eva Rivas, Armenia’s candidate at this year’s Eurovision Song Contest, will sing a song called ‘Apricot Stone,’ which tells of reuniting with one’s roots. Her publicist says there are no references to Turkey in the lyrics and that politics should not be a part of the contest. Rivas, meanwhile, has wished good luck to her Turkish counterparts, MaNga
Armenia’s candidate at the 55th Eurovision contest has no interest in making a political statement against Turkey, according to the singer’s publicist.
“We are not going there to make politics. We are not interested in politics at all. We trust in our candidate. All we want to do is to do the best for our country,” said Hayk Markosyan, who is representing Valeriya Reshetnikova Tsaturian, who uses Eva Rivas as her stage name.
A world citizen, the 22-year-old Rivas was born in Rostov, Russia to an Armenian mother and a half-Russian, half-Greek father. Known as the "Golden Voice of Rostov," Rivas has won a number of awards for the country’s music industry.
Overcoming tension from last year
During the contest at the end of May in Oslo, Rivas will sing “Apricot Stone,” which recounts the story of a mother telling stories of her imaginary homeland.
The song’s subject matter, however, has upset some in Turkey, who perceived the story of longing as a thinly-disguised reference to the traumatic events of 1915.
“Eva has never visited Armenia, neither has Karen Kavaleryan, the song-writer. ‘Apricot stone’ is a song about reuniting with the roots, with Armenia,” Markosyan recently told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review in discounting the view.
“We are not after making politics in the competition; we are after fair play. We do not have the slightest hint at Turkey in our song,” said Markosyan, who is speaking on behalf of Rivas due to the singer’s tight schedule ahead of the song contest.
Markosyan said he hopes there will be no repeat of the tension that broke out between Azerbaijan and Armenia after last year’s competition in which Azerbaijan closed down the SMS number for Armenia during the voting while prosecutors opened an investigation into those who had voted for Armenia.
Armenia, meanwhile, displayed an image of Nagorno-Karabakh on the screen during the voting.
Touching on these tensions, he said: “Starting with Turkey’s candidate MaNga, I wish good luck to everyone on behalf of my team. Let’s leave politics to politicians and gather in Oslo to do uniformly all the best for our countries. And let the best one win.”
Road to Oslo passes through Greece
Unlike the Inga and Anuş Arşagyan sisters, who represented Armenia in last year’s competition while dressing in traditional clothes for their song “Jan Jan,” Rivas plans to give a dynamic performance in a more modern outfit.
“This song will speak to everyone, regardless of their nationality, that lives far away from the lands they belong to. As it is a modern song, it is also very sentimental,” he also said.
As in past years, Armenia’s entry will be in English because it is the most advantageous for international competition, Markosyan said.
Rivas is now touring Greece and Greek Cyprus, Markosyan said, adding that the two have shown a keen interest in her works, although she is also widely appreciated in Russia and Armenia because of her origins.
"Rivas will not only be supported by Armenia. There is also great support from Russia, Greece, and Greek Cyprus,” he said.
Monday, May 10, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Eva Rivas, Armenia’s candidate at this year’s Eurovision Song Contest, will sing a song called ‘Apricot Stone,’ which tells of reuniting with one’s roots. Her publicist says there are no references to Turkey in the lyrics and that politics should not be a part of the contest. Rivas, meanwhile, has wished good luck to her Turkish counterparts, MaNga
Armenia’s candidate at the 55th Eurovision contest has no interest in making a political statement against Turkey, according to the singer’s publicist.
“We are not going there to make politics. We are not interested in politics at all. We trust in our candidate. All we want to do is to do the best for our country,” said Hayk Markosyan, who is representing Valeriya Reshetnikova Tsaturian, who uses Eva Rivas as her stage name.
A world citizen, the 22-year-old Rivas was born in Rostov, Russia to an Armenian mother and a half-Russian, half-Greek father. Known as the "Golden Voice of Rostov," Rivas has won a number of awards for the country’s music industry.
Overcoming tension from last year
During the contest at the end of May in Oslo, Rivas will sing “Apricot Stone,” which recounts the story of a mother telling stories of her imaginary homeland.
The song’s subject matter, however, has upset some in Turkey, who perceived the story of longing as a thinly-disguised reference to the traumatic events of 1915.
“Eva has never visited Armenia, neither has Karen Kavaleryan, the song-writer. ‘Apricot stone’ is a song about reuniting with the roots, with Armenia,” Markosyan recently told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review in discounting the view.
“We are not after making politics in the competition; we are after fair play. We do not have the slightest hint at Turkey in our song,” said Markosyan, who is speaking on behalf of Rivas due to the singer’s tight schedule ahead of the song contest.
Markosyan said he hopes there will be no repeat of the tension that broke out between Azerbaijan and Armenia after last year’s competition in which Azerbaijan closed down the SMS number for Armenia during the voting while prosecutors opened an investigation into those who had voted for Armenia.
Armenia, meanwhile, displayed an image of Nagorno-Karabakh on the screen during the voting.
Touching on these tensions, he said: “Starting with Turkey’s candidate MaNga, I wish good luck to everyone on behalf of my team. Let’s leave politics to politicians and gather in Oslo to do uniformly all the best for our countries. And let the best one win.”
Road to Oslo passes through Greece
Unlike the Inga and Anuş Arşagyan sisters, who represented Armenia in last year’s competition while dressing in traditional clothes for their song “Jan Jan,” Rivas plans to give a dynamic performance in a more modern outfit.
“This song will speak to everyone, regardless of their nationality, that lives far away from the lands they belong to. As it is a modern song, it is also very sentimental,” he also said.
As in past years, Armenia’s entry will be in English because it is the most advantageous for international competition, Markosyan said.
Rivas is now touring Greece and Greek Cyprus, Markosyan said, adding that the two have shown a keen interest in her works, although she is also widely appreciated in Russia and Armenia because of her origins.
"Rivas will not only be supported by Armenia. There is also great support from Russia, Greece, and Greek Cyprus,” he said.
7 Mayıs 2010 Cuma
Old Turkish-Armenian bridge to become peace
Thursday, May 6, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Projects for a historical bridge that is expected to connect the two sides of the Ani ruins between Turkey and Armenia are being accelerated. International Council of Monuments and Sites Chairman Gagik Gyurjian says the bridge should become a peace passage between the two countries. Others, however, say the project’s goals should be more international
Both Turkish and Armenian experts have been focusing on restoring the ruins of the ancient city of Ani, situated on the Armenian border in the eastern province of Kars.
Despite almost negligible progress in the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia, cultural representatives from both countries have been quietly restoring shared heritage important to both.
“We can collaborate with non-governmental organizations away from the shadow of politics. We do not need to wait for the opening of borders for a peace passage,” chairman of the International Council of Monuments and Sites Gagik Gyurjian recently told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.
Both Turkish and Armenian experts have been focusing on restoration to the ruins of the ancient city of Ani, situated on the Armenian border in the eastern province of Kars, and work on the Surp Haç (Holy Cross) Armenian Church on Akdamar Island in the eastern province of Van.
The two countries should now focus on converting the ruined historic bridge at Ani into a peace passage joining Turkey and Armenia, the former Armenian Culture Minister said, adding that he was ready to start working with Turkish officials and nongovernmental organizations as soon as possible to realize the project.
Politics and debate on the holy cross
In spite of political tensions, Turkey has announced plans to open the historical Surp Haç (Holy Cross) Armenian Church on Akdamar Island in eastern Turkey for prayer once a year.
Scheduled to open for a service on Sept. 12, the church, whose restoration work was finished in 2007, is still the subject of controversy because no cross has yet been affixed to the top of the chapel.
Gyurjian, who represented Armenia during the church’s restoration process, said he believes the cross will be put in its place before the church service.
“There was no debate about the cross before or during the restoration process. Now, a short time before the opening, news wondering whether the cross would be put on or not has begun to appear. The event has gained a political dimension, otherwise the cross would have been in its place in the opening.”
As for the decision that the church will open for prayer once a year, Gyurjian said: “Prayers should not have been limited. This approach is not sincere.”
The leader of the Armenian committee in Turkey, Aram Ateşyan, told the Turkish press last week that having the church open for services only once a year was insufficient. “I leave the matter of the holy cross to the consideration of our prime minister.”
Turks and Armenians working in tandem
When asked about the common view that Turkey had made a leap in recent years toward the restoration of Armenian churches within Anatolia, Gyurjian said: “Our cultural artifacts have been destroyed up until this point and our traces have been denied. They are Armenian cultural artifacts, but they now form part of the richness of Turkey.”
Discussing the collaboration of Turkish and Armenian experts on restoring the Ani ruins and the Surp Haç Church, Gyurjian said: “Some of the ruins are in Turkey and the other part is in Armenia. It should be protected as a whole. Both Turkey and Armenia are members of UNESCO, so our responsibilities are the same.”
Ani was an international city
Although Gyrujian is determined to create a peace bridge between the two countries, Armenian Monuments Awareness Project President Richard Ney said the bridge should become an international world peace passage rather than just a link between Turkey and Armenia.
“The protection of the region around Ani is important because of the role the area played historically. As a fulcrum of the Silk Road, Ani was more than a capital for Armenia,” he said.
“It was also a center of international trade and a city of peace. In its heyday, Arabs and Europeans, Christians and Muslims lived in peace and prosperity. Ani was truly an international city,” he said.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Projects for a historical bridge that is expected to connect the two sides of the Ani ruins between Turkey and Armenia are being accelerated. International Council of Monuments and Sites Chairman Gagik Gyurjian says the bridge should become a peace passage between the two countries. Others, however, say the project’s goals should be more international
Both Turkish and Armenian experts have been focusing on restoring the ruins of the ancient city of Ani, situated on the Armenian border in the eastern province of Kars.
Despite almost negligible progress in the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia, cultural representatives from both countries have been quietly restoring shared heritage important to both.
“We can collaborate with non-governmental organizations away from the shadow of politics. We do not need to wait for the opening of borders for a peace passage,” chairman of the International Council of Monuments and Sites Gagik Gyurjian recently told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.
Both Turkish and Armenian experts have been focusing on restoration to the ruins of the ancient city of Ani, situated on the Armenian border in the eastern province of Kars, and work on the Surp Haç (Holy Cross) Armenian Church on Akdamar Island in the eastern province of Van.
The two countries should now focus on converting the ruined historic bridge at Ani into a peace passage joining Turkey and Armenia, the former Armenian Culture Minister said, adding that he was ready to start working with Turkish officials and nongovernmental organizations as soon as possible to realize the project.
Politics and debate on the holy cross
In spite of political tensions, Turkey has announced plans to open the historical Surp Haç (Holy Cross) Armenian Church on Akdamar Island in eastern Turkey for prayer once a year.
Scheduled to open for a service on Sept. 12, the church, whose restoration work was finished in 2007, is still the subject of controversy because no cross has yet been affixed to the top of the chapel.
Gyurjian, who represented Armenia during the church’s restoration process, said he believes the cross will be put in its place before the church service.
“There was no debate about the cross before or during the restoration process. Now, a short time before the opening, news wondering whether the cross would be put on or not has begun to appear. The event has gained a political dimension, otherwise the cross would have been in its place in the opening.”
As for the decision that the church will open for prayer once a year, Gyurjian said: “Prayers should not have been limited. This approach is not sincere.”
The leader of the Armenian committee in Turkey, Aram Ateşyan, told the Turkish press last week that having the church open for services only once a year was insufficient. “I leave the matter of the holy cross to the consideration of our prime minister.”
Turks and Armenians working in tandem
When asked about the common view that Turkey had made a leap in recent years toward the restoration of Armenian churches within Anatolia, Gyurjian said: “Our cultural artifacts have been destroyed up until this point and our traces have been denied. They are Armenian cultural artifacts, but they now form part of the richness of Turkey.”
Discussing the collaboration of Turkish and Armenian experts on restoring the Ani ruins and the Surp Haç Church, Gyurjian said: “Some of the ruins are in Turkey and the other part is in Armenia. It should be protected as a whole. Both Turkey and Armenia are members of UNESCO, so our responsibilities are the same.”
Ani was an international city
Although Gyrujian is determined to create a peace bridge between the two countries, Armenian Monuments Awareness Project President Richard Ney said the bridge should become an international world peace passage rather than just a link between Turkey and Armenia.
“The protection of the region around Ani is important because of the role the area played historically. As a fulcrum of the Silk Road, Ani was more than a capital for Armenia,” he said.
“It was also a center of international trade and a city of peace. In its heyday, Arabs and Europeans, Christians and Muslims lived in peace and prosperity. Ani was truly an international city,” he said.
2 Mayıs 2010 Pazar
Armenian nationalist politician closes doors on dialogue
Sunday, May 2, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Claims of sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh are threatening to draw Armenia and Azerbaijan into a new conflict at the slightest provocation.
Although international peacemakers are actively working to settle the disputes, political experts are worried that the slightest wrong step could fuel antagonism between the two parties.
Manvel Sargsian, who organized the Karabakh movement against Azerbaijan in Yerevan in 1987, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review that Russia was fueling the problem by “supporting the Azeris” in the policy to “remove the Armenians from the region.”
Sargsian was Armenia’s Nagorno-Karabakh representative after the armed clashes came to an end in 1994.
The Armenian politician also said it is not possible for Armenia to make “the smallest concession” in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, comments that show how mired the region’s problems are in nationalism.
Blaming Turkey due to preconditions
Noting that Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 because of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Sargsian said Turkey is “imposing preconditions” on the reopening of the border. “Karabakh cannot be a precondition in the [Turkey-Armenia] border issue,” he said. “Not the smallest piece of land can be sacrificed.”
The nationalist politician also had a different view on the Khojaly massacres, in which hundreds of ethnic Azerbaijani civilians were killed Feb. 25 and Feb. 26, 1992, during the Nagorno-Karabakh war. The Armenian politician claimed Aziz Muttalibov, the former president of Azerbaijan, had himself said the massacre was committed by the “Azerbaijani opposition.”
“The bodies of innocent Azeris murdered by the soldiers in the city of Ağdam city 15 kilometers away were carried away to Khojaly by those soldiers themselves,” Sargsian said.
Azerbaijan, along with the Memorial Human Rights Center, Human Rights Watch and other international observers, say the massacre was committed by ethnic Armenian armed forces.
These international sources also say the killings were carried out with the help of Russian soldiers in the region. The official death toll provided by Azerbaijan stood at 613 civilians, of whom 106 were women and 83 were children.
“Everyone in Turkey says Russians aided the Armenians, but this is a lie,” said Sargsian. “On the contrary, they helped the Azerbaijanis. We supplied our weapons from the Tashnaks.”
Sargsian insisted on Russia’s role in the present stalemate in Nagorno-Karabakh, claiming that the Soviet Union had strived hard to remove Armenians from the region, thus fuelling the conflict.
Saying that during the conflict, Russian forces handed over Armenian civilians to Azerbaijan, Sargsian claimed the number of such civilians had reached 700 by the end of the clashes.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
VERCİHAN ZİFLİOĞLU
YEREVAN - Hürriyet Daily News
Claims of sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh are threatening to draw Armenia and Azerbaijan into a new conflict at the slightest provocation.
Although international peacemakers are actively working to settle the disputes, political experts are worried that the slightest wrong step could fuel antagonism between the two parties.
Manvel Sargsian, who organized the Karabakh movement against Azerbaijan in Yerevan in 1987, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review that Russia was fueling the problem by “supporting the Azeris” in the policy to “remove the Armenians from the region.”
Sargsian was Armenia’s Nagorno-Karabakh representative after the armed clashes came to an end in 1994.
The Armenian politician also said it is not possible for Armenia to make “the smallest concession” in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, comments that show how mired the region’s problems are in nationalism.
Blaming Turkey due to preconditions
Noting that Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 because of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Sargsian said Turkey is “imposing preconditions” on the reopening of the border. “Karabakh cannot be a precondition in the [Turkey-Armenia] border issue,” he said. “Not the smallest piece of land can be sacrificed.”
The nationalist politician also had a different view on the Khojaly massacres, in which hundreds of ethnic Azerbaijani civilians were killed Feb. 25 and Feb. 26, 1992, during the Nagorno-Karabakh war. The Armenian politician claimed Aziz Muttalibov, the former president of Azerbaijan, had himself said the massacre was committed by the “Azerbaijani opposition.”
“The bodies of innocent Azeris murdered by the soldiers in the city of Ağdam city 15 kilometers away were carried away to Khojaly by those soldiers themselves,” Sargsian said.
Azerbaijan, along with the Memorial Human Rights Center, Human Rights Watch and other international observers, say the massacre was committed by ethnic Armenian armed forces.
These international sources also say the killings were carried out with the help of Russian soldiers in the region. The official death toll provided by Azerbaijan stood at 613 civilians, of whom 106 were women and 83 were children.
“Everyone in Turkey says Russians aided the Armenians, but this is a lie,” said Sargsian. “On the contrary, they helped the Azerbaijanis. We supplied our weapons from the Tashnaks.”
Sargsian insisted on Russia’s role in the present stalemate in Nagorno-Karabakh, claiming that the Soviet Union had strived hard to remove Armenians from the region, thus fuelling the conflict.
Saying that during the conflict, Russian forces handed over Armenian civilians to Azerbaijan, Sargsian claimed the number of such civilians had reached 700 by the end of the clashes.
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)
