More on Obama Speech Aftermath‏

Hurriyet, Turkey
April 25 2009
He Did Not Say Genocide, But Made it Worse
by Zeynep Gurcanli

US President Barack Obama did not say "genocide" [Turkish soykirim] in
his expected statement. He did not use the word "genocide", which is
the English word for this. But he did do something that surprised
everyone, and included in his statement the Armenian words that the
Armenians use for the events of 1915; he employed, in his English
text, the Armenian term, that is, "Meds Yeghern," for the events of
1915.

The Armenian dictionary equivalent for this word is "Great
Disaster"...

Indeed, the Turkish Foreign Ministry as well has chosen to take this
term that Obama used in its "dictionary meaning." The Foreign Ministry
read the Armenian term in the text as "great disaster."

But some in the Armenian diaspora, however, use this as the equivalent
of "genocide."

In short, Obama, in making his statement, left a question mark.

Now the debate is this:

Did he say "genocide" or not?

Perhaps he did not say "genocide," but the message was very harsh

Even if Obama, in his message, did not use the English word
"genocide," the message he issued was extremely harsh.

He spoke of the 1915 incidents as "the 1.5 million Armenians who were
subsequently massacred or marched to their death." He characterized
the things that took place in the final period of the Ottomans as
"terrible events" and went even further:

He said: "The terrible events of 1915 remind us of the dark prospect
of man's inhumanity to man."

Stressing that he has consistently expressed his views on the events
of 1915 and that these views have "not changed," Obama said: "My
interest remains the achievement of a full, frank and just
acknowledgment of the facts."

In other words, the US president does not say "genocide," but he does
point out that, during his election campaign, he had characterized the
events of 1915 as "genocide," says "I am of the same opinion on this
issue," and moreover conveys to Turkey and the Turks a message that
"you as well should accept the events in this way."

Supporting in his message the new process beginning between Turkey and
Armenia, Obama uses "Meds Yeghern" a second time in the final portion,
and again conveys a very harsh message:

"Nothing can bring back those who were lost in the Meds Yeghern. But
the contributions that Armenians have made over the last ninety-four
years stand as a testament to the talent, dynamism and resilience of
the Armenian people, and as the ultimate rebuke to those who tried to
destroy them..."

Bush had said "tragedy"

US presidents traditionally issue a message on the 1915 events every
year on 24 April.

But the message that Obama issued this year was, in comparison to
those of the previous two presidents, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton,
quite harsh.

Bush had spoken in his messages of the 1915 events as "the great
tragedy of the 20th century." The 24 April message that Bush issued
last year as US President began as follows:

"On this day of remembrance, we honour the memory of the victims of
one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century, the mass killings
and forced exile of as many as 1.5 million Armenians at the end of the
Ottoman Empire..."

In the continuation of his message, Bush praised the contributions to
American society of people of Armenian origin, and related the
importance he ascribed to US-Armenian relations.

Bush, who had issued a similar message in 2007, had used the
expression "horrible tragedy" in 2006 for the events of 1915.

Clinton had spoken of "great tragedy" and "massacre"

As for Bill Clinton, he had preferred in the message he had issued as
US president in 2000, to speak of the events of 1915 as a "great
tragedy."

Clinton, who had used more cautious language in 1999, had then spoken
of the 1915 incidents as "one of the saddest chapters of history." In
his other messages, Clinton had described the incidents as "the
deportations and killing of the Armenians."

American Conservative Magazine
April 25 2009
A Decent Compromise
Posted on April 25th, 2009 by Daniel Larison

I failed to mention the commemoration of the Armenian genocide
yesterday. After seeing Obama's remarks, I thought I would make a
couple of observations. Obviously, Obama refrained from referring to
it directly as genocide in English, and the Armenian phrase he used to
describe it, Mets Yeghern (or, in the Western dialect transliteration
being used in the official remarks, Meds Yeghern), primarily means
slaughter or crime, but it can be and has been used to refer to
genocide.

The official name for the genocide in Armenian is a calque,
tseghaspanut'yun, which refers specifically to the killing of a race
or people, so it is not quite full recognition, but it is also as
close to full recognition as possible under present circumstances.

This provides a face-saving way to acknowledge the reality of what
happened without unduly irritating Turkey, and I think it shows enough
respect to Armenian history without jeopardizing the improving
relations between Turkey and Armenia.

Anadolu Agency, Turkey
April 25 2009
Turkish Foreign Ministry says some parts of Obama's Armenia speech
unacceptable

Ankara, 25 April: The Turkish foreign minister defined on Saturday [25
April] US president's comments on the incidents of 1915 as
unacceptable.

Turkey's Foreign Ministry released a statement and considered some
statements in US President Barack Obama's speech on the "Armenian
remembrance day" as unacceptable.

"We consider some expressions in that statement and the perception of
history it contains concerning the events of 1915, as unacceptable,"
the ministry said.

The ministry said that nobody should forget that several hundreds of
thousands of Turks also lost their lives in those days.

"History can be construed and evaluated only on the basis of
undisputed evidence and documentation," the ministry statement said.

The ministry said that common history of the Turkish and Armenian
nations had to be assessed solely through impartial and scientific
data, and historians must base their evaluations only on such
material.

"It is with such an understanding that we support the historical
dimension of the Turkish-Armenian dialogue," it said.

The ministry also said that it considered positively the stance of
President Obama on the Turkish-Armenian normalization process.

Agence France Presse -- English
April 24, 2009 Friday 12:51 PM GMT
Gul says Obama 'better informed' on Armenian massacres
ANKARA, April 24 2009

Turkish President Abdullah Gul hinted Friday that he did not expect
his US counterpart Barack Obama to brand the mass killings of
Armenians under the Ottoman Empire a genocide.

He told reporters that they had discussed the question "very broadly"
during Obama's visit to Turkey earlier this month, adding that the US
president "is now better informed."

During his 2008 White House run, Obama pledged to recognise the World
War I massacres as genocide, and had an opportunity to do so in the
annual April 24 statement from the White House commemorating the
events.

But analysts said it was unlikely after Wednesday's announcement by
Armenia and Turkey that they had agreed "a comprehensive framework"
for normalising bilateral ties.

Gul predicted that Obama's message "will encourage ... all our
well-intentioned work," referring to the negotiations between Ankara
and Yerevan.

He said that Washington had "intensified very productive efforts to
produce a climate favouring a resolution of regional problems."

Armenians say 1.5 million of their people were victims of genocide in
eastern Turkey from 1915 and many countries, including France and
Canada, have officially recognised the killings as such.

Turkey rejects the genocide label and says 300,000-500,000 Armenians
and at least as many Turks died in civil strife when Armenians took up
arms in eastern Anatolia and sided with invading Russian troops.

Gul also said that Wednesday's accord would help Azerbaijan, a close
ally with Turkey at odds with Armenia over Nagorny Karabakh, an ethnic
Armenian enclave of Azerbaijan that fought to break free of Baku's
control.

"I have spoken often with (Azerbaijan's President) Ilham Aliyev in
recent days," he said. "We are in agreement that everything that is
being done is of advantage to both our countries, Azerbaijan and
Turkey."

Azerbaijan on Thursday urged Turkey to link reconciliation efforts
with Armenia to the withdrawal of Armenian forces from Nagorny
Karabakh.

Earlier this month, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan ruled
out a deal with Armenia unless Yerevan resolved its conflict with
Baku.

Baku has long insisted that any agreement should depend on Armenian
concessions in the dispute over Nagorny Karabakh.

Azerbaijan Defence Minister Safar Abiev was in Ankara Friday for talks
with Turkish armed forces chief General Yasar Buyukanit which were
expected to cover the accord with Armenia.

WPS Agency, Russia
April 24, 2009 Friday
TURKISH GAMBIT;
Serj Sargsjan brought with him a sensation
by Arkady Dubnov, Gajane Movsesjan

ARMENIA AND TURKEY DECIDED TO NORMALIZE BILATERAL RELATIONS;
Normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey will alter the
regional situation in more ways than one.

Deplaning in Moscow for a working visit on April 22, President of
Armenia Serj Sargsjan already knew what the rest of the world was only
bound to discover the following morning: Armenia and Turkey had agreed
to normalize bilateral relations. Foreign ministers of these countries
signed the appropriate declaration at the talks brokered by
Switzerland on the night on April 23. The document stated that Turkey
and Armenia decided "to launch a complex process of normalization of
the relations" that would "promote mutual interests". The so called
Road Map plan of the future negotiations between Ankara and Yerevan
was adopted. Among other things, it stands for the opening of the
Armenian-Turkish border which Ankara closed in 1993 protesting against
occupation of Azerbaijani territories by Armenia in the wake of a
conflict between these two countries. Currently on a visit to Poland,
Ovik Abramjan of the Armenian National Assembly (parliament) said that
the Armenian-Turkish border might be opened and diplomatic relations
established in 2009.

"It was probably no coincidence at all that the Armenian-Turkish
declaration was signed on the eve of April 24 when victims of Armenian
genocide in the Ottoman Empire are solemnized," to quote Arman
Melikjan, formerly foreign minister of the self-proclaimed and
unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and former candidate for
president of Armenia. "US President Barack Obama is scheduled to speak
in Washington later today. Armenians all over the world would dearly
like him to keep his promise and use the term "genocide" in his speech
today."

Judging by activeness of US diplomacy in general and that of Matthew
Bryza, American Chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group, official Washington
in its turn would dearly like to do without the use of so strong a
term in the president's speech. It will complicate atmosphere of the
Armenian-Turkish relations and impair the Road Map which is nothing
Yerevan or Ankara will want, of course. Well-informed and trustworthy
sources report that Washington put the Armenian leadership under
certain pressure to compel it to sign the joint declaration "without
any preliminary terms or conditions". Representatives of the
Dashnaktsutjun party explained meanwhile that the terms and conditions
in question included Yerevan's demands for acknowledgement of genocide
by Turkey and restoration of the Armenians' rights. Dashnaktsutjun
leadership condemned the joint declaration signing as "despicable and
unacceptable behavior" that indicated "a negative change in the
foreign policy of Armenia." It even promised to consider expediency of
continued participation in he government coalition one of these days.

Approached for comments, Alexander Iskandarjan (Director of the
Armenian Institute of the Caucasus), admitted that he was "reasonably
confident that Obama will make a stiffly-worded statement indeed, but
omit the term "genocide" from it." "What will happen in Washington
this Friday is important to Turkey. What is happening in the relations
between Armenia and Turkey on the other hand is important to
Washington," the political scientist said.

"The joint Armenian-Turkish declaration gives Obama leave not to use
the term "genocide" in his speech," Melikjan said. "That's a tactical
move, one that enables the Americans and Turks alike to save
face. Were it not for Armenia's goodwill, the relations between them
could be compromised." Melikjan suggested that Ankara, while remaining
Washington's ally, might initiate a closer rapprochement with
Russia. "It will make these two countries (Russia and Turkey - Vremya
Novostei) strategic partners and alter the correlation of forces in
the region," Melikjan said.

There is, however, a possibility of a wholly different turn of events,
one that will affect Russia's current positions in the
region. "Suggesting normalization of relations with Armenia, Ankara
put forth several demands including withdrawal of the Russian troops
from Armenia and specifically from the Turkish-Armenian border,"
Melikjan explained. He said that the Armenian-Turkish border might be
opened indeed, but with the risk of closing again. "This particular
issue will always be on the agenda, pending the establishment of a new
geopolitical configuration."

As if to add to the intrigue of the latest developments, all these
matters were discussed by presidents of Armenia and Russia in Dmitry
Medvedev's residence near Moscow, last night. Presidential press
service reported that the talks were centered around bilateral
cooperation, security issues, and Nagorno-Karabakh settlement.

Sargsjan thanked Medvedev for his "invaluable contribution to Karabakh
settlement" and for having retained Russia's previous position even
after the visit of the president of Azerbaijan to Moscow. Elaborating
on this position, Sargsjan said that Russia believed in settlement of
the conflict in accordance with international law (it was clearly a
reference to the right to self-determination).

President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev did visit Moscow several days ago
and also praised Russia's faithfulness to international law. unlike
Yerevan, however, official Baku made an emphasis on recognition of the
principle of territorial integrity (of Azerbaijan, of course). The
whole conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is a collision between these two
principles promoted by the warring sides. It seems that Baku and
Yerevan had better meet each other halfway and agree to table the
matter of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh (to be determined by a
referendum in the enclave itself). At least, this is what Medvedev and
Aliyev agreed on in the course of the talks.

There is no saying if Medvedev succeeded in persuading Sargsjan to
refrain from participation in NATO's military exercise in Georgia
scheduled for early May. Armenia is the only member of the CIS
Collective Security Treaty Organization that accepted the invitation
to the exercise. A seasoned Russian diplomat commented that relations
of allies with Yerevan notwithstanding, the new president of Russia
finds his Azerbaijan opposite number easier to deal with than the
Armenian counterpart.

Source: Vremya Novostei, No 71, April 24, 2009, pp. 1 - 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~