Armenian News
Is Armenia a Poor or Developing Country?
By Appo Jabarian
Executive Publisher / Managing Editor
USA Armenian Life Magazine
Armenia is a developing country. In fact, during the last decade, Armenia
has registered an
impressive economic growth rate. But how fast is Armenia moving to being
fully developed?
It survived a devastating earthquake in 1988. It overcame the calamities of
war with Azerbaijan in the 1990's. It underwent brutal transition from
Soviet centralized economy to free market economy. Since then the Armenian
economy has been steadily developing. Armenia now is economically one of the
more advanced states in the Caucasus region.
However, unlike developed countries such as the United States, and the
European Union, Armenia has more than its share of poverty. Is this a
temporary problem?
"In the wake of the global recession, poverty has come to afflict much of
Armenia once again. For the first time in over a decade, poverty increased
in Armenia in 2009, with as many as half of Armenia's residents now living
below the poverty line and unable to meet basic food, shelter and healthcare
needs. And yet, these families continue their struggle to live, carving out
an existence at society's margins where people regularly live off garbage
dumps, children battle malnutrition, and families sleep in barns and tin
shacks," reported a press release disseminated by Tufenkian Foundation, the
main sponsor of "How We Live: Life on the Margins in Armenia", a special
exhibit by photographer Sara Anjargolian.
The press release was published in the March 19 issue of USA Armenian Life
Magazine. The publication of the photo on the cover of the same issue has
ignited communitywide discussions on the issue of poverty in Armenia.
When the idea emerged to give the exhibition front-page coverage, I
struggled between my objective to market Armenia as a very desirable tourism
and investment destination; and my journalistic duty to help our people to
adequately address the crucial issue of poverty.
Even before its opening in late March in Los Angeles, the exhibit sparked a
strong reaction from the Consulate General of Armenia in Los Angeles.
On March 29, Consul General Grigor Hovhannissian issued a statement to USA
Armenian Life saying: "We would have welcomed this intention of charity had
there been no texts accompanying the exhibition photographs. The
generalizations of the phenomenon of the lifestyle and living conditions of
socially vulnerable families in Armenia may create a wrong perception about
the country's and its population's living conditions."
Hovhannissian continued: "The webpage of this art exhibition literally says
the following: 'Today, Armenia's families struggling with poverty are
living off garbage dumps, children are battling malnutrition, and alcoholism
and domestic violence have become commonplace and families are sleeping in
tin shacks.' This paragraph does not reflect the overall image of Armenia's
population, including those living in poverty. The tragic condition of
families living off garbage and struggling with alcoholism and violence is
not a common phenomenon and can not become 'ordinary' for Armenian
families."
Despite acknowledging the existence of poor families in Armenia, Mr.
Hovhannissian stressed: "We believe that the exhibition organizers have
intensified the colors of poverty, and as a consequence, many people may be
disappointed with a country that's full of negative aspects of life. Many
entrepreneurs may refrain from investing and several tourists may be afraid
to visit a country where 'living off garbage dumps' and struggling with
addiction and domestic violence are commonplace. It would have been better
had the evaluations been made for specific cases. It would have been good to
see the authors of those texts go overboard in order to win the hearts of
donors; and in the process, not end up hurting Armenia, instead of helping.
We ourselves agree that indeed those families are in desperate need of
assistance, but not at the price of their dignity and ours."
Regardless of the extent of poverty in Armenia, it is unacceptable to see
even a tiny segment of its population live in inhumane conditions caused by
poverty.
According to a United Nations report in early 2000's by Thomas Kelly and
Armen Yeghiazarian, income has been distributed across the population in
Armenia as follows: "One half of all income accrues to just the richest 12
per cent of the population; the income of the wealthiest quintile is 32
times higher than that of the poorest quintile; and the poorest 55 per cent
of the population - those whose fall below the poverty line - receive just
16 per cent of the total income. ... Income inequality in Armenia is
extremely high. ... Armenia's income inequality is among the highest for
transition economies."
The report further elaborated on income inequality: "This high level of
inequality appears to be caused by the extreme concentration of incomes in
the top deciles of Armenian households. ... Armenia's transition to a market
economy can be divided into two stages. The first stage, from 1990 to 1994,
included an energy crisis, international conflict, and the disruption of
trade routes, hyper-inflation, and a severe contraction of output. The
second stage, beginning in 1995, has been characterized by solution to the
energy crisis, an end to conflict, easing of transportation restrictions, a
return to macroeconomic stability, and moderate economic growth."
The report continued: "Since the second stage of the transition began, the
economy has been growing at roughly five per cent a year. The current
pattern of economic growth will not cause inequality to fall, however. There
are several reasons for this. The most important is that the base of growth
in industry, construction, and services is quite narrow and is not
generating a great deal of employment. At the same time, the drive for
higher productivity per worker in agriculture and the reforms in the social
sector will substantially reduce employment in these sectors."
New sectors, namely High-Tech, Renewable Energy, and Agricultural Exports
have been added. But more are needed to generate enough growth to enable the
national economy to absorb the high levels of unemployed workers from
obsolete and noncompetitive industrial firms, from agriculture, and from the
overstaffed social infrastructure. Plans must be developed to change the
distribution of assets in order to expedite employment growth to ultimately
alleviate the magnitude of inequality.
During the second stage of the transition, Armenia has registered impressive
growth rate, but little poverty reduction has been achieved because of
unequal redistribution of wealth.
Obviously, Armenia has not completed its transition to free market economy.
The first (1989-1994) stage was totally mishandled, and the second stage
(1995-present) was poorly handled albeit there has been notable economic
development.
One can easily envision the real growth Armenia is capable of by simply
taking into consideration the industrious characteristics of Armenians.
How can a nation like Armenia produce successful entrepreneurs, and
reputable industrialists, on international scale and still allow a sizeable
segment of its homeland population subsist in abject poverty?
High levels of inequality, greed, and corruption hinder both economic growth
and poverty reduction.
I propose that we collectively increase business investments particularly in
the sectors of Tourism, High-Tech, Education, Agriculture, Consumer Goods,
coupled by massive and long-term educational efforts to eradicate
corruption, and greed in the entire spectrum of Armenian society. We must
break up the monopolies that grossly perpetuate income inequality.
Armenia's domestic and international affairs urgently need to be governed
more efficiently so that we can collectively empower Armenia leapfrog into
the status of a developed nation.
It's high time that an increased number of pro-active Armenians everywhere
take full ownership of both Armenia-Artsakh and the Diaspora. It is
absolutely necessary that Armenians worldwide further harmonize their
collective human and material resources for the sake of a fresh and
promising re-start.
By Appo Jabarian
Executive Publisher / Managing Editor
USA Armenian Life Magazine
Armenia is a developing country. In fact, during the last decade, Armenia
has registered an
impressive economic growth rate. But how fast is Armenia moving to being
fully developed?
It survived a devastating earthquake in 1988. It overcame the calamities of
war with Azerbaijan in the 1990's. It underwent brutal transition from
Soviet centralized economy to free market economy. Since then the Armenian
economy has been steadily developing. Armenia now is economically one of the
more advanced states in the Caucasus region.
However, unlike developed countries such as the United States, and the
European Union, Armenia has more than its share of poverty. Is this a
temporary problem?
"In the wake of the global recession, poverty has come to afflict much of
Armenia once again. For the first time in over a decade, poverty increased
in Armenia in 2009, with as many as half of Armenia's residents now living
below the poverty line and unable to meet basic food, shelter and healthcare
needs. And yet, these families continue their struggle to live, carving out
an existence at society's margins where people regularly live off garbage
dumps, children battle malnutrition, and families sleep in barns and tin
shacks," reported a press release disseminated by Tufenkian Foundation, the
main sponsor of "How We Live: Life on the Margins in Armenia", a special
exhibit by photographer Sara Anjargolian.
The press release was published in the March 19 issue of USA Armenian Life
Magazine. The publication of the photo on the cover of the same issue has
ignited communitywide discussions on the issue of poverty in Armenia.
When the idea emerged to give the exhibition front-page coverage, I
struggled between my objective to market Armenia as a very desirable tourism
and investment destination; and my journalistic duty to help our people to
adequately address the crucial issue of poverty.
Even before its opening in late March in Los Angeles, the exhibit sparked a
strong reaction from the Consulate General of Armenia in Los Angeles.
On March 29, Consul General Grigor Hovhannissian issued a statement to USA
Armenian Life saying: "We would have welcomed this intention of charity had
there been no texts accompanying the exhibition photographs. The
generalizations of the phenomenon of the lifestyle and living conditions of
socially vulnerable families in Armenia may create a wrong perception about
the country's and its population's living conditions."
Hovhannissian continued: "The webpage of this art exhibition literally says
the following: 'Today, Armenia's families struggling with poverty are
living off garbage dumps, children are battling malnutrition, and alcoholism
and domestic violence have become commonplace and families are sleeping in
tin shacks.' This paragraph does not reflect the overall image of Armenia's
population, including those living in poverty. The tragic condition of
families living off garbage and struggling with alcoholism and violence is
not a common phenomenon and can not become 'ordinary' for Armenian
families."
Despite acknowledging the existence of poor families in Armenia, Mr.
Hovhannissian stressed: "We believe that the exhibition organizers have
intensified the colors of poverty, and as a consequence, many people may be
disappointed with a country that's full of negative aspects of life. Many
entrepreneurs may refrain from investing and several tourists may be afraid
to visit a country where 'living off garbage dumps' and struggling with
addiction and domestic violence are commonplace. It would have been better
had the evaluations been made for specific cases. It would have been good to
see the authors of those texts go overboard in order to win the hearts of
donors; and in the process, not end up hurting Armenia, instead of helping.
We ourselves agree that indeed those families are in desperate need of
assistance, but not at the price of their dignity and ours."
Regardless of the extent of poverty in Armenia, it is unacceptable to see
even a tiny segment of its population live in inhumane conditions caused by
poverty.
According to a United Nations report in early 2000's by Thomas Kelly and
Armen Yeghiazarian, income has been distributed across the population in
Armenia as follows: "One half of all income accrues to just the richest 12
per cent of the population; the income of the wealthiest quintile is 32
times higher than that of the poorest quintile; and the poorest 55 per cent
of the population - those whose fall below the poverty line - receive just
16 per cent of the total income. ... Income inequality in Armenia is
extremely high. ... Armenia's income inequality is among the highest for
transition economies."
The report further elaborated on income inequality: "This high level of
inequality appears to be caused by the extreme concentration of incomes in
the top deciles of Armenian households. ... Armenia's transition to a market
economy can be divided into two stages. The first stage, from 1990 to 1994,
included an energy crisis, international conflict, and the disruption of
trade routes, hyper-inflation, and a severe contraction of output. The
second stage, beginning in 1995, has been characterized by solution to the
energy crisis, an end to conflict, easing of transportation restrictions, a
return to macroeconomic stability, and moderate economic growth."
The report continued: "Since the second stage of the transition began, the
economy has been growing at roughly five per cent a year. The current
pattern of economic growth will not cause inequality to fall, however. There
are several reasons for this. The most important is that the base of growth
in industry, construction, and services is quite narrow and is not
generating a great deal of employment. At the same time, the drive for
higher productivity per worker in agriculture and the reforms in the social
sector will substantially reduce employment in these sectors."
New sectors, namely High-Tech, Renewable Energy, and Agricultural Exports
have been added. But more are needed to generate enough growth to enable the
national economy to absorb the high levels of unemployed workers from
obsolete and noncompetitive industrial firms, from agriculture, and from the
overstaffed social infrastructure. Plans must be developed to change the
distribution of assets in order to expedite employment growth to ultimately
alleviate the magnitude of inequality.
During the second stage of the transition, Armenia has registered impressive
growth rate, but little poverty reduction has been achieved because of
unequal redistribution of wealth.
Obviously, Armenia has not completed its transition to free market economy.
The first (1989-1994) stage was totally mishandled, and the second stage
(1995-present) was poorly handled albeit there has been notable economic
development.
One can easily envision the real growth Armenia is capable of by simply
taking into consideration the industrious characteristics of Armenians.
How can a nation like Armenia produce successful entrepreneurs, and
reputable industrialists, on international scale and still allow a sizeable
segment of its homeland population subsist in abject poverty?
High levels of inequality, greed, and corruption hinder both economic growth
and poverty reduction.
I propose that we collectively increase business investments particularly in
the sectors of Tourism, High-Tech, Education, Agriculture, Consumer Goods,
coupled by massive and long-term educational efforts to eradicate
corruption, and greed in the entire spectrum of Armenian society. We must
break up the monopolies that grossly perpetuate income inequality.
Armenia's domestic and international affairs urgently need to be governed
more efficiently so that we can collectively empower Armenia leapfrog into
the status of a developed nation.
It's high time that an increased number of pro-active Armenians everywhere
take full ownership of both Armenia-Artsakh and the Diaspora. It is
absolutely necessary that Armenians worldwide further harmonize their
collective human and material resources for the sake of a fresh and
promising re-start.
ARMENIA'S PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSYAN ABOUT HISTORICAL
JUSTICE
Aysor
April 5 2010
Armenia
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan's has spoken to Der Spiegel paper;
here is the interview.
Der Spiegel: Referring to the 1915 happenings, Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in his interview with Der Spiegel that
'the Genocide against Armenians is out of the question.' Why your
neighboring nation can't accept its past?
Serzh Sargsyan: Well, recently another statement has been made, that
'Turks couldn't commit Genocide, while the Turkish history is clear
and bright like the sun.' Turks are against branding the 1915 massacres
as Genocide; however, this is not the issue to be solved by Ankara.
Der Spiegel: Erdogan now is even threatening to expel Armenians,
who illegally live in Turkey.
Serzh Sargsyan: Such kind of unacceptable statements remind us of
the Genocide. Unfortunately, I am not actually surprised that Turkish
officials make the statements of that kind.
Der Spiegel: What position should the international community show?
Serzh Sargsyan: It should respond to this; the U.S., Europe, Germany
and other countries, involved in Armenia-Turkey reconciliation should
respond and show their position in open daylight. If all the nations
recognized the 1915 Genocide, then neither statement by Turks would
have been made. However, protests by numerous youth activists against
the statement are encouraging. There is a new generation there,
whose opinion must be looked up to by the political authorities.
Der Spiegel: Turkey accuses you of strong position against the
commission of historians. Why are you against it?
Serzh Sargsyan: How the commission may work neutrally, if it is a
criminal case to use g-word in Turkey, and one can even be brought
to a trial for using Genocide-word. It's is important to Ankara to
stretch the solution-making process; and when the governments of
certain nations are voting over the Resolution on Genocide, Turkey
may say - don't be in the way; look, our historians are studying the
issue. The creation of the commission would mean the questioning the
Genocide. It is unacceptable.
Der Spiegel: Why the issue of recognition of the 1915 Genocide is so
important to Armenia now, after 95 years?
Serzh Sargsyan: This is an issue of historical justice and issue of
Armenia's security; the best way to prevent such kind of crimes is
its clear condemnation.
Der Spiegel: You can see Ararat, symbol of Armenia, through your
cabinet's window. The Ararat Mountain is now on Turkey's territory;
Turkey is afraid of territorial claims and compensations. Do you want
to bring Ararat back?
Serzh Sargsyan: Ararat is in our hearts; in any Armenian's house
anywhere in the world you'll find a picture of Ararat, no one can take
it away. I believe that time will come when Ararat will be a symbol
of understanding between the two nations, not division. However, I'd
like to point out the following: neither Armenian government has ever
claimed for territories; Turks themselves are ascribing them to us.
Maybe, guilt?
Der Spiegel: Armenia's borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan are closed;
Iran and Georgia are in some kind of complicated neighbors; isn't it
a better way to break this isolation?
Serzh Sargsyan: We don't link the issue of recognition of the Genocide
with borders' opening. And is not our fault that the reconciliation
isn't coming true.
Der Spiegel: Turkey wishes for linking the border's opening with
settlement to the Karabakh conflict. Armenians fought in this inflicted
war on the territory that Azerbaijan claimed after USSR's collapse.
Serzh Sargsyan: Turks want us to compromise. However, this is
impossible. Right to self-determination of the people of Nagorno
Karabakh is an issue of greatest importance. If Azerbaijan recognizes
independence of Nagorno Karabakh, then the issue can be solved in a few
hours. Unfortunately, up to now Azerbaijan claims Nagorno Karabakh;
while Karabakh's joining to Azerbaijan means a certain deportation
of Armenians from Nagorno Karabakh, and this all just in a very
short period.
Der Spiegel: Do you have a solution to this?
Serzh Sargsyan: Why former Yugoslavia's nations could receive the
independence? So why can't Nagorno Karabakh practice the same right?
Is the reason - gas and oil resources of Azerbaijan and Turkey's
patronage? We consider this to be unfair.
Aysor
April 5 2010
Armenia
Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan's has spoken to Der Spiegel paper;
here is the interview.
Der Spiegel: Referring to the 1915 happenings, Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in his interview with Der Spiegel that
'the Genocide against Armenians is out of the question.' Why your
neighboring nation can't accept its past?
Serzh Sargsyan: Well, recently another statement has been made, that
'Turks couldn't commit Genocide, while the Turkish history is clear
and bright like the sun.' Turks are against branding the 1915 massacres
as Genocide; however, this is not the issue to be solved by Ankara.
Der Spiegel: Erdogan now is even threatening to expel Armenians,
who illegally live in Turkey.
Serzh Sargsyan: Such kind of unacceptable statements remind us of
the Genocide. Unfortunately, I am not actually surprised that Turkish
officials make the statements of that kind.
Der Spiegel: What position should the international community show?
Serzh Sargsyan: It should respond to this; the U.S., Europe, Germany
and other countries, involved in Armenia-Turkey reconciliation should
respond and show their position in open daylight. If all the nations
recognized the 1915 Genocide, then neither statement by Turks would
have been made. However, protests by numerous youth activists against
the statement are encouraging. There is a new generation there,
whose opinion must be looked up to by the political authorities.
Der Spiegel: Turkey accuses you of strong position against the
commission of historians. Why are you against it?
Serzh Sargsyan: How the commission may work neutrally, if it is a
criminal case to use g-word in Turkey, and one can even be brought
to a trial for using Genocide-word. It's is important to Ankara to
stretch the solution-making process; and when the governments of
certain nations are voting over the Resolution on Genocide, Turkey
may say - don't be in the way; look, our historians are studying the
issue. The creation of the commission would mean the questioning the
Genocide. It is unacceptable.
Der Spiegel: Why the issue of recognition of the 1915 Genocide is so
important to Armenia now, after 95 years?
Serzh Sargsyan: This is an issue of historical justice and issue of
Armenia's security; the best way to prevent such kind of crimes is
its clear condemnation.
Der Spiegel: You can see Ararat, symbol of Armenia, through your
cabinet's window. The Ararat Mountain is now on Turkey's territory;
Turkey is afraid of territorial claims and compensations. Do you want
to bring Ararat back?
Serzh Sargsyan: Ararat is in our hearts; in any Armenian's house
anywhere in the world you'll find a picture of Ararat, no one can take
it away. I believe that time will come when Ararat will be a symbol
of understanding between the two nations, not division. However, I'd
like to point out the following: neither Armenian government has ever
claimed for territories; Turks themselves are ascribing them to us.
Maybe, guilt?
Der Spiegel: Armenia's borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan are closed;
Iran and Georgia are in some kind of complicated neighbors; isn't it
a better way to break this isolation?
Serzh Sargsyan: We don't link the issue of recognition of the Genocide
with borders' opening. And is not our fault that the reconciliation
isn't coming true.
Der Spiegel: Turkey wishes for linking the border's opening with
settlement to the Karabakh conflict. Armenians fought in this inflicted
war on the territory that Azerbaijan claimed after USSR's collapse.
Serzh Sargsyan: Turks want us to compromise. However, this is
impossible. Right to self-determination of the people of Nagorno
Karabakh is an issue of greatest importance. If Azerbaijan recognizes
independence of Nagorno Karabakh, then the issue can be solved in a few
hours. Unfortunately, up to now Azerbaijan claims Nagorno Karabakh;
while Karabakh's joining to Azerbaijan means a certain deportation
of Armenians from Nagorno Karabakh, and this all just in a very
short period.
Der Spiegel: Do you have a solution to this?
Serzh Sargsyan: Why former Yugoslavia's nations could receive the
independence? So why can't Nagorno Karabakh practice the same right?
Is the reason - gas and oil resources of Azerbaijan and Turkey's
patronage? We consider this to be unfair.
RFE/RL Report
Turkish-Armenian History Panel `Unacceptable' To Sarkisian
05.04.2010
President Serzh Sarkisian has reportedly rejected as `unacceptable' the
idea of a joint Turkish-Armenian study of the World War One-era mass
killings and deportations of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey.
`The creation of a [Turkish-Armenian history] commission would make
sense only if Turkey finally confessed its guilt,' he said in an
interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel published over the
weekend. `After that scholars would be able to jointly determine the
causes of that tragedy.'
In two protocols signed last October, the Armenian and Turkish
governments agreed to set up a joint commission tasked with expediting
the normalization of their historically strained relations. It would be
divided into several `subcommissions' specializing in various areas of
mutual interests.
One of those subcommissions would engage in an `impartial scientific
examination of historical documents and archives.' This was widely seen
as an official euphemism for a joint examination of the Armenian
massacres.
Official Yerevan has been at pain to assure Armenian critics of the
protocols that the panel would not seek to determine whether the
massacres constituted genocide. Turkish leaders have implied the
opposite, however.
`The main thing for Ankara is only to delay decisions,' `Der Spiegel'
quoted Sarkisian as saying. `Every time the parliaments or governments
of foreign states try to adopt genocide resolutions, they would say,
`Let's first wait for the findings of the historical commission.''
`Setting up such a commission would mean calling into question the fact
of the genocide perpetrated against our people,' he said, echoing a key
argument of Armenian opponents of his conciliatory line on Turkey.
The idea of a Turkish-Armenian history commission was first floated by
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in a 2005 letter to then
President Robert Kocharian. The latter rejected the proposal as a
Turkish ploy designed to scuttle greater international recognition of
the Armenian genocide.
Shortly after taking office two years ago, Sarkisian indicated that he
is ready, in principle, to embrace the idea. `We are not against the
creation of such a commission, but only if the border between our
countries is opened,' he declared during a June 2008 visit to Moscow.
The apparent policy shift in Yerevan cleared the way for an
unprecedented rapprochement between the two nations that culminated in
the signing of the Turkish-Armenian agreements.
Sarkisian acknowledged in the magazine interview that the rapprochement
is now `unraveling.' `The Turks are constantly demanding concessions
from us. But that is not possible,' he said, referring to Ankara's
linkage between Turkish ratification of the protocols and a resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
05.04.2010
President Serzh Sarkisian has reportedly rejected as `unacceptable' the
idea of a joint Turkish-Armenian study of the World War One-era mass
killings and deportations of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey.
`The creation of a [Turkish-Armenian history] commission would make
sense only if Turkey finally confessed its guilt,' he said in an
interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel published over the
weekend. `After that scholars would be able to jointly determine the
causes of that tragedy.'
In two protocols signed last October, the Armenian and Turkish
governments agreed to set up a joint commission tasked with expediting
the normalization of their historically strained relations. It would be
divided into several `subcommissions' specializing in various areas of
mutual interests.
One of those subcommissions would engage in an `impartial scientific
examination of historical documents and archives.' This was widely seen
as an official euphemism for a joint examination of the Armenian
massacres.
Official Yerevan has been at pain to assure Armenian critics of the
protocols that the panel would not seek to determine whether the
massacres constituted genocide. Turkish leaders have implied the
opposite, however.
`The main thing for Ankara is only to delay decisions,' `Der Spiegel'
quoted Sarkisian as saying. `Every time the parliaments or governments
of foreign states try to adopt genocide resolutions, they would say,
`Let's first wait for the findings of the historical commission.''
`Setting up such a commission would mean calling into question the fact
of the genocide perpetrated against our people,' he said, echoing a key
argument of Armenian opponents of his conciliatory line on Turkey.
The idea of a Turkish-Armenian history commission was first floated by
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in a 2005 letter to then
President Robert Kocharian. The latter rejected the proposal as a
Turkish ploy designed to scuttle greater international recognition of
the Armenian genocide.
Shortly after taking office two years ago, Sarkisian indicated that he
is ready, in principle, to embrace the idea. `We are not against the
creation of such a commission, but only if the border between our
countries is opened,' he declared during a June 2008 visit to Moscow.
The apparent policy shift in Yerevan cleared the way for an
unprecedented rapprochement between the two nations that culminated in
the signing of the Turkish-Armenian agreements.
Sarkisian acknowledged in the magazine interview that the rapprochement
is now `unraveling.' `The Turks are constantly demanding concessions
from us. But that is not possible,' he said, referring to Ankara's
linkage between Turkish ratification of the protocols and a resolution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Sarkissian: Open Letter to Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu
Below is an open letter by K. M. Greg Sarkissian of the Zoryan Institute to
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu in response to his interview as
quoted in F. Bila’s Milliyet column (March 26, 2010).
March 28, 2010
Your Excellency Mr. Ahmet Davutoglu:
You are right to want to normalize relations not only with Armenia, but also
Armenians in the Diaspora, and you will find that most Armenians also want
to normalize relations, but without any preconditions.
You are right that Diaspora Armenians are not one category. Four generations
removed from 1915, they are integrated in their adopted countries and some
are totally assimilated. They see themselves as American, Argentinean,
French, Iranian, Lebanese, Russian or Syrian. There are some who have
married Moslems and converted to Islam. They are all quite different from
each other, depending on where they live.
They all share a common history and unshakeable trauma, however, resulting
from the crime of genocide committed by the Ottoman Turks in 1915. This has
created a very strong collective sense of responsibility in them to pursue
justice. If the “prominent names who participated in the funeral after the
death of Hrant Dink” in 2007 were touched when Turkish people embraced Hrant
Dink,” it is because those Turks carrying placards saying “we all are
Armenians” were in fact acknowledging that their countrymen who had killed
Hrant Dink displayed the same mentality as that of the Young Turks in 1915.
I am sure that the Armenian people worldwide would embrace the whole nation
of Turkey, if the Government of Turkey acknowledged the responsibility of
its predecessor, the Ottoman Government, in the planned annihilation of its
Armenian citizens, expressed a sincere apology, and made appropriate efforts
at atonement. That would build trust between the parties and allow peace to
prevail.
“We need to show empathy in order to understand what Armenians lived through
and what they felt, but they need to show respect to our memory…. 1915 may
be the year of the deportations [tehcir] but, at the same time, it is the
year of Canakkale [Battle of Gallipoli].” This is very misguided, because
while Armenians were not the cause of Canakkale, the Ottoman government was
the cause of the annihilation of their Armenian citizens. One can understand
the trauma of Turkish soldiers fighting for their country’s existence, but
how is this comparable to the atrocities committed against unarmed Armenian
civilians? Should we equate the pain and the suffering of the Jews and
others resulting from the Holocaust to the pain of the Germans who were
killed by the Allies during World War II, which was started by their
government?
You state “The issue has a psychological dimension. It has a legal
dimension. And a political and historical dimension.” For Turks, they are
embodied in the loss of a massive amount of the territory of the Empire, the
expulsion of the Moslems from the Balkans, the intervention of the Europeans
in Ottoman internal affairs, and the existential struggle for the existence
of the country. For Armenians, they are embodied in the massacres of
1894-1896, when some 200,000 Armenians were slaughtered, then in the Adana
massacres in 1909, when 15,000 to 30,000 Armenians were killed, followed by
the deportations and murders of 1915 to 1922, when some 1.5 million
Armenians were annihilated. This mistreatment continued after the
establishment of the Turkish Republic with the destruction of Armenian
cultural monuments and churches, the confiscation of church assets, the
forced assimilation and name changes, the Varlik Vergisi of 1942, the
assassination of Hrant Dink in 2007, when the police had their picture taken
proudly with Ogun Samast and holding the Turkish flag as if they were part
of a great patriotic event. These all display a deep and persistent
hostility towards the Armenians and other non-Turkish minorities in your
country, for which no one in Turkey has ever been called to account, and
this impunity has only encouraged further acts of hostility and political
violence. Most recently, on March 17, 2010, the threat of your own Prime
Minister, Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to deport Armenians from Turkey reveals
the extent of political violence in the Turkish psyche and a complete
disrespect for human rights.
The people of the world are becoming increasingly aware of the phenomenon of
genocide every day. These are people with a strong commitment to universal
human rights. They demand their governments intervene to prevent injustices,
such as in Darfur. They understand that to be able to prevent genocide from
recurring, they have to stop being accomplices in the denial of genocide.
That is why places like Catalonia, Sweden and the United States House
Foreign Relations Committee still pass resolutions recognizing the Armenian
Genocide. Because forgetting and impunity for violence encourage further
violence.
You say that “If intellectuals and politicians fulfill the parts that fall
on their shoulders, a new and possibly a more rooted period of peace
stretches before us.” We heartily agree. Therefore, please give your
intellectuals the freedom to talk openly about the historical facts
surrounding 1915. Do not prosecute them when they speak about these events
as genocide. Do not call them “traitors trying to stab the nation from the
back” when they organize conferences as they did in Istanbul in 2005. Do not
let them be killed like Hrant Dink.
Most Armenians can distinguish between the Turkey of 1915 and that of today.
No one holds any Turk living today responsible for the crime of the genocide
committed by the Ottomans. Yet, they do hold your country and your
government responsible for the act of denial, which itself is considered the
continuation of the crime of genocide.
“Defending our national honour” will occur when your own countrymen are
allowed to learn about their history without risk of persecution. This would
empower them with the knowledge to find a new language for dialogue. That is
the most important psychological barrier to overcome. When your country is
able to accept the fact that there was a planned annihilation of the
Armenians in 1915, not only would you find “Armenian communities with which
you will be able to start a dialogue,” but you would be able to win the
hearts and the minds of the people of your neighbouring country, the
Republic of Armenia, and Armenians worldwide would become ambassadors of
goodwill for Turkey and its people.
Respectfully yours,
K. M. Greg Sarkissian
No comments:
Post a Comment