Liberation of Western Armenia

[skhara]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

so you dont consider Istanbul or Western Turkey to be apart of you ancestral lands?

Uhhh nooo. those are greek.

[truAnatolian]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

i dont think anyone is dumb enough to start a nuclear war. so you dont consider Istanbul or Western Turkey to be apart of you ancestral lands?

Nope. Eastern Turkey is though.

[yerazhishda]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

i dont think anyone is dumb enough to start a nuclear war. so you dont consider Istanbul or Western Turkey to be apart of you ancestral lands?

No of course not. Armenians only consider from Karabagh to a little west of Kharpert (Elazig) to be ancestral Armenian lands in terms of length from east-west.

This should help:

[SoyElTurco]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

No we just want to nuke downtown Constantinople and Ankara.

i dont think anyone is dumb enough to start a nuclear war. so you dont consider Istanbul or Western Turkey to be apart of you ancestral lands?

[yerazhishda]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

Nukes? You want a nuke race? Turkey is already considering to build a nuclear reactor for energy purposes. If Armenia acquires a bomb, then Turkey will respond likewise.

You want to nuke your ancestral lands that you want to retake?

No we just want to nuke downtown Constantinople and Ankara.

[SoyElTurco]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

Whether or not Armenia develops and nuclear bomb

Nukes? You want a nuke race? Turkey is already considering to build a nuclear reactor for energy purposes. If Armenia acquires a bomb, then Turkey will respond likewise.

You want to nuke your ancestral lands that you want to retake?

[jgk3]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

good idea.

[Armenian]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

Since we are haveing another infestation of Turks here, I wanted to resurrect this thread once more...

[Armenian]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

Is Armenia’s non-recognition of Turkey’s borders main obstacle to normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations?

The number of Armenians willing normalization of relations with Turkey has increased recently, head of the department of international relations at University of Economic and Technology, professor Mustafa Aydin said in an interview with PanARMENIAN.Net. “Of course, problems still exist. One of them is Armenia’s recognition of present-day Turkey’s borders, according to the Treaty of Kars. The second is the tragedy of 1915 which is viewed by many Turks as history having nothing in common with the modern Turkish State. The 1915 events shouldn’t hamper the Armenia-Turkey public dialog,” he said. Armenians from Diaspora insisting on recognition of the 1915 events as Genocide pose obstacle to the dialog, according to him. “Armenians in Armenia and more tolerant and it’s easier to hold talks with them. But it’s my personal opinion,” prof. Aydin remarked.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=26187

[Armenian]

Re: Liberation of Western Armenia

Woodrow Wilson’s arbitration award important for Russia

Armenian Historian And Diplomat Ara Papian

“Russia should understand that realization of Woodrow Wilson’s arbitration award is very important, since it meets all security demands in the South Caucasus. It’s high time to come to decision,” historian and diplomat Ara Papian said in an interview with PanARMENIAN.Net. “The Russian power is divided in two groups. One wants close relationship with Turkey proceeding from personal profit, the other upholds security issues in the light of Turkish nationalism. Actually, if the international community understands that the time to recognize the arbitration award has come, it will be to interest of Russia, Armenia and even Iran,” he said. “Interest in the decision is being observed, since it could become an extra tool of pressure on Turkey. According to the Treaty of Sevres, military monitoring units should be deployed in Turkey and this could deprive the latter of the possibility to uncontrolledly build up arms,” he said.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24188

No one canceled Sevr Treaty on Armenia

After conclusion of the Sevr Treaty on August 10, 1920 borders with independent Armenia had to be set by a neutral mediator – the United States. In this view, representatives of UK, France and Italy appealed to U.S. President Woodrow Wilson for an arbitration award on the Armenian-Turkish border. Mr Wilson outlined Armenia’s territory of 110 square km,” Ara Papyan, orientalist, specialist in international law and Armenia’s former Ambassador to Canada told a news conference in Yerevan. “The arbitration award on the Armenian-Turkish border is an international agreement which is not subject to appeal and restriction of time. The big Parisian Four addressed a joint note to the U.S. President in order to determine Armenian and Turkish borders on the territory of Van, Bitlis, Erzrum and Trapezund,” Papyan said.

The fate of the arbitration award is not bound with the ratification of the Sevr treaty, according to him. “Westerman’s committee responsible for determination of borders was formed in the U.S. Congress. The map and award affixed by the state seal marking the significance of the documents are kept in the U.S. Congress Library. Another committee dealing with the demarcation of borders at the site was headed by Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey in the times of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire,” the Armenian diplomat said. However, Papyan noted, November 29 the 11th Red Army entered Armenia and the First Republic stopped existence as an international element. “That is why the conditions of the Sevr and Lausanne treaties were not fulfilled. The USSR was not the assignee of the Republic of Armenia,” he said.

Source: http://www.panarmenian.net/news/arm/?nid=22212

De jure Boundary between Turkey and Armenia: as Determined by Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States of America

By Ara A. Papian

No other single issue has aroused so much passion and controversy and occupied the attention of the present Armenian public and political life as the relationship with Turkey. The lawful claims of Armenians for moral satisfaction, financial indemnification and territorial readjustment, remain the longest, most intractable, and potentially one of the most dangerous unsolved problems of international relations and world community of the modern times.

The emergence of the Armenian state – the Republic of Armenia, and its presence on the world political stage as the successor of the first Armenian Republic (1918-1920), adds a critical dimension to the matter. The importance of the new dimension is based on the fact that as a subject of international law the Republic of Armenia is in full power and has all legal rights to pursue the implementation of the legal instruments and to insist on the fulfillment of international obligations assumed by the Turkish states – the Republic of Turkey or the Ottoman Empire, as a legal predecessor of the Turkish Republic.

It is therefore imperative to analyze all relevant legal instruments, i.e. bilateral and multilateral treaties, Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award (November 22, 1920), diplomatic documents and international papers, resolutions of international organizations, recommendations of special missions, decisions of law-determining agencies (particularly of the International Court of Justice), the opinions of authoritative institutions, etc. to clarify the legal state of Armenian-Turkish confrontation and determinate the legal aspects of the Armenian claims regarding Turkey.

Due to final and binding character of the arbitral awards it seems the most appropriate to begin the elaboration of the legal instruments with the arbitral award of the President of the United States of America Woodrow Wilson (November 22, 1920): “Decision of the President of the United States of America respecting the Frontier between Turkey and Armenia, Access for Armenia to the Sea, and the Demilitarization of Turkish Territory adjacent to the Armenian Frontier.”


1. Arbitration as a procedure for peaceful settlement of disputes between the States Arbitration exists under both domestic and international law, and arbitration can be carried out between private individuals, between states, or between states and private individuals. Arbitration, in the law, is a legal alternative to the courts whereby the parties to a dispute agree to submit their respective positions (through agreement or hearing) to a neutral third party - the arbitrator(s) for resolution.

International Public Arbitration (hereafter- Arbitration) is an effective legal procedure for dispute settlement between the states . According to 1953 report of the International Law Commission arbitration is a procedure for the settlement of disputes between States by a binding award on the basis of law and as a result of an undertaking voluntary accepted .The essential elements of Arbitration consist in – (1) An agreement on the part of States having a matter, or several matters, in dispute, to refer the decision of them to a tribunal, believed to be impartial, and constituted in such a way as the terms of the agreement specify, and to abide by its judgment; and in – (2) Consent on the part of the person, persons, or states, nominated for the tribunal, to conduct the inquiry and to deliver judgment.

Arbitration has been practiced already in antiquity and in the middle ages. The history of modern arbitration is usually considered to begin with the treaty of arbitration between Great Britain and the United States of 1794 , /Jay’s Treaty - Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation, between His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, by their President, Signed on November 19, 1794, ratified on June 24, 1795/. The rules of arbitration were codified by The Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, concluded on July 29th, 1899, and very slightly amended in the Convention of the same name concluded October 18th, 1907 (entered into force January 26, 1910). The Hague Convention [Article 15 of 1899 and article 37 of 1907] defines the international arbitration as: “the settlement of disputes between States by judges of their own choice and on the basis of respect of law”.
The Covenant of the League of Nations (Article 13) provides arbitration and judicial settlement as one of two major procedures of peaceful settlements:

The Members of the League agree that whenever any dispute shall arise between them which they recognize to be suitable for submission to arbitration and which cannot be satisfactorily settled by diplomacy they will submit the whole subject-matter to arbitration. The Charter of the United Nations [Article 33, paragraph 1] expresses its preference for a dispute settlement through arbitration: “The parties in any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace an security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.”

2. The Historical Background of Wilson’s Arbitration On January 19, 1920, the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers in Paris (Prime Ministers of Great Britain, France and Italy; respectively-Mr. Lloyd George, Mr. Clemenceau and Mr. Nitti ) agreed to recognize the government of the Armenian State as a de facto government on the condition that the recognition should not prejudge the question of the eventual frontier . The United States recognized the de facto government of the Republic of Armenia on April 23, 1920 , on the condition that the territorial frontiers should be left for later determination.

[...]

Ottawa, April 24, 2006