From the Armenian Press

SERGE SARGSYAN TO LEAVE FOR TURKEY
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/country-lrahos15512.html
14:24:52 - 12/10/2009

Today, Serge Sargsyan, before leaving for Moscow, told reporters
that if nothing extraordinary happens within the following two days,
he will leave for Bursa to support our national football team.

"The Turkish president invited me in written form and I do not have
grounds to refuse my counterpart", said Serge Sargsyan.

ARMENIA IS WAITING PATIENTLY
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics-lrahos15513.html
14:39:39 - 12/10/2009

Today, before leaving for Moscow, Serge Sargsyan told reporters
that Armenia announced about its steps in public and if the Turkish
parliament ratifies the protocols, Armenia will continue the process
if not, "We will not doubt and will do what we said".

Commenting on the statements of the Turkish officials that until
the Armenian army is not withdrawn the border will not be opened,
Serge Sragyan said they thought "we will not be willful and will
yield. Maybe. In any case, the ball is in the Turkish field and
we have enough patience to wait the further development of events,
said Serge Sargsyan.


hetq.online
What Turkish FM Davutoglu Was Ready to Say After Protocol Signing
[ 2009/10/13 | 15:48 ]
Hrant Katarikyan

“Today we are here as Turkey and Armenia to take an important step

in embarking on a journey towards a new horizon of hope. This journey

is long. This journey is fraught with difficulties. However, it is worth taking.

This journey can only be made hand in hand with our partners present here,

as well as all the peoples of the Caucasus.”

This is the opening paragraph of the statement that was purportedly to be

read by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu after the protocol signing

ceremony in Zurich this past Saturday.

As we are all aware, however, things didn’t progress that smoothly inside

the Zurich Central University. A last minute disagreement, regarding the

wording of the closing remarks to be read by the foreign minister of the two

signatory nations, held up the signing by over three hours.

It took the personal intervention of U.S. secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and

a fair degree of arm-twisting, to get both sides to sit down, sign the protocols

and then leave without comments from either side.

“The documents that we have just signed create important ground for the

Turkish and Armenian peoples to rekindle their friendship, to offer next

generations the spirit of living and working together towards a common and

prosperous future.”

The copy of the closing remarks of the Turkish foreign minister, which we

have obtained, continues in this positive light. Further down, FM Davutoglu

makes an apparent reference to the 1915 Genocide that reads:

“Turkish and Armenian peoples have a different perception of the events of

a very tragic period of our common history. We should not leave to the future

generations a legacy of prejudice and vengeance.”

“We are confident that the Sub-Commission foreseen in this Protocol will

scientifically examine the painful episode of our common history and shed

light on the truth.”

Could this be the point of contention that the Armenian delegation objected

to when they asked to see a copy of the Turkish address before the signing

ceremony ever started?

It would seem that Turkey is ready, despite the assurances of RoA President

Serzh Sargsyan, to imply that the sub-commission is being created specifically

because no one is really sure what happened in 1915 and that the “truth” must

be ascertained. Such a start does would thus add more fuel to the fire of those

who object to the protocols and raise this very point in their arguments against it.
In closing, Turkish FM Davutoglu, had he been given the opportunity, would have

made the following assessment before the world:

“This is the only way for these two great and dignified nations to leave behind

the conflict of their collective memories and reach together a just memory.”

Oh, what a tangled web we weave…

hetq.am
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE ARMENIAN NATION
PROTOCOLS AND PRECONDITIONS
By Raffi K. Hovannisian

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.
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

DIASPORA DOES NOT HAVE LOBBY IN ARMENIA
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/society-lrahos15358.html
14:35:24 - 30/09/2009

Active relations between Armenia and the Armenian Diaspora began
immediately after independence. Almost all the country's leaders
publicly acknowledged the right of the Diaspora to participate
in the construction of the Armenian state in its domestic and
foreign policy. However, in Armenia, no one thought about how to
create mechanisms and institutions for the realization of this
right. Actually, someone probably thought, but only in order to
prevent the creation of such institutions.

In principle, the Armenian Diaspora is devoid of any opportunity to
participate in politics in Armenia. This was clearly evident when
it became clear that there are fundamental differences in positions
of the Diaspora and the Armenian authorities on the Armenian-Turkish
relations. But it is obvious that, in spite of the Pan-Armenian tour
of Serge Sargsyan, Diaspora is unlikely to influence the decisions
of the Armenian authorities, tuned to reconciliation with Turkey by
the huge concessions.

There are only a few planes where the participation of the Diaspora in
Armenian politics is possible. It is the All-Armenian Fund "Armenia",
through which the Diaspora can participate in economic and social
projects, is the Lins Fund - also is not engaged in political projects,
large lobbying organizations that are engaged in Armenian interests
in other countries, particularly in the United States. These are a
series of traditional Armenian parties represented in Armenia, but
funded from abroad. And it is the Ministry for Diaspora Affairs,
established a year ago. There are a couple of organizations and
institutions, through which communication takes place between the
Armenian authorities and the Diaspora.

However, none of them ensures the impact of the Diaspora in the
policy of the Armenian authorities, and not only in matters relating
to the state, but also the interests of most of the Diaspora. In
fact, the Diaspora has a lobby in many countries, but no lobby in
Armenia. There is no institution that could defend the interests
of the Diaspora in Armenia. This interest is entirely dependent on
the whims of government, on their likes and relations with certain
personalities. And not to repeat the well-known definition of "milk
cow", we can say that the Armenian authorities need the Diaspora only
for economic purposes.

In Armenia, there is not even television, funded by the
Diaspora. However, this is understandable - Diaspora has always tried
to bypass the internal political problems in Armenia, even if they
are related to fundamental democratic values. Images of Armenia and,
in particular, Artsakh Diaspora kept as an icon. Every day, wiping the
dust from it, it was perceived as something sacred. I never thought
about the fact that specific levers will be needed to defend their
interests.

And now, Serge Sargsyan decided to hear the opinion of the
Diaspora. Why? It is unlikely to change his decision. Moreover, the
Armenians throughout the world simply cannot influence the policy of
Armenia. Yes, Serge Sargsyan knows their opinions, they may even be
allowed to express negative opinions. But they cannot do anything,
if Serge Sargsyan does not change his position. This should be thought
about in right time. However, the Armenian society does not have levers
of influence on decision-making either. They can listen very carefully,
but will make their own way, and no one can do anything. And they
will show Hrant Vardanyan on TV, who says that his staff is praying
day and night for the border to be open.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~