Armenian-Turkish Relations

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

You are arguing with me Armanen and you aren't reading what is said above? Are you kidding me? Aliyev wants Sunik. The protocols are deadly for our sovereignty and you and Haykakan are arguing with me and some others? I cannot beleive this. Step outside of the box and think through what's happening. The protocols are being signed because Mr. Serje is lacking in legitimacy to rule the country in a manner that is good and prosperous for his countrymen. He is a selfish bastard and only thinking about himself. By signing these deadly protocols he is signing off the Genocide recognition, our remuneration possibilities to our right of at least some parts of Western Armenia, not to let Armenia to have a say in Artsakh matters or help Artsakh to be recognised by OSCE Minsk group and now Gul and Aliyev want to steal more lands from us; our Syunik, our only small land that is attached to our only good neighbours, Iran.

Now go and argue with the Russians, Gul and Aliyev. Good luck.

I don't know what protocols you have read but it is obvious that you are looking at this from a purely emotional angle which is exactly what you should not be doing. Either way, you are entitled to your opinion.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Actually they were permitted to do so by the said powers because of geopolitical interests of their own - just like now, with these protocols that have been charted by the Turkish side and their allies (US, Britain and Switzerland amongst others). Both the British and the French at the sealing of the Treaty of Lausanne still occupied large segments of Turkey. The Turkish army - although not the ragtag of 1920 - was no match for neither side.

I realize that they served the geopolitical interests of the great powers as they do to this day. But they were in a lot better position thanks to ataturk and both France and the u.k. were broke and demoralized, so there was military/economic reasons not to fight with the turks as well.

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I realize that they served the geopolitical interests of the great powers as they do to this day. But they were in a lot better position thanks to ataturk and both France and the u.k. were broke and demoralized, so there was military/economic reasons not to fight with the turks as well.

Yes better, but still no match for neither France or the British Empire that unlike Turkey, were the victorious side in WWI with substantial losses but still far from broke or demoralized. As I said, a decision was made by Britain, France and other Triple Entente powers to keep Turkey afloat with the leadership of Mustapha Kemal.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Yes better, but still no match for neither France or the British Empire that unlike Turkey, were the victorious side in WWI with substantial losses but still far from broke or demoralized. As I said, a decision was made by Britain, France and other Triple Entente powers to keep Turkey afloat with the leadership of Mustapha Kemal.

The French and british publics were both demoralized that a war which was promised to last for only a few months cost them millions of soldiers and billions in their respective currencies. There was not enough political/economic gain for either of them to take on the turks and enforce the previous agreement.

In US dollars of the time the uk spent over 35 billion and France spent over 24billion. If you can convert that into today's dollars that is a staggering amount of money that just those two spent.

Also, in 1918, Europe was hit by the Spanish flu and an estimated 25 million people died, which added to the feeling of bitterness and despair that ran through the citizenry of the two said countries.

Sure there was other reasons why the turks got what they wanted, but you can't deny that the allies would have been bogged down in turkey for years and would have got very little in return for their efforts. It was NOT worth the lives and money.

[Gavur]

Turkey, Armenia to sign peace agreement

WtF !
Now its called the peace agreement ??

ISTANBUL, Turkey (CNN) -- The governments of Armenia and Turkey will sign a peace agreement in Zurich on Saturday that would normalize relations after nearly a century of animosity between the neighboring nations, the Swiss government said Friday.


The Swiss-mediated peace deal would also open the border between the countries, which has been shut since 1993.

The signing ceremony comes more than a month after Armenia and Turkey announced they had agreed to start six weeks of "internal political consultations" on two protocols aimed at establishing diplomatic and bilateral relations.

The Swiss-mediated peace deal would also open the border between the countries, which has been shut since 1993. The border was closed after Turkey objected to Armenia's war with Turkish ally Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabagh. Neither country has an embassy in the other's capital.

Turkish-Armenian relations have often been overshadowed by the dispute over the massacre of ethnic Armenians in the final days of the Ottoman Empire, more than 90 years ago. Armenians accuse Ottoman Turks of committing genocide, killing more then a million Armenians starting in 1915. Modern-day Turkey vehemently rejects the allegations.

The proposed protocols for normalizing relations call for creating a committee of international experts to research archives and "restore mutual confidence between the two nations." There is no mention of the disputed territory of Karabagh, which Armenian troops have controlled since the 1993 Armenian-Azerbaijan war.

But the success of the protocols is still uncertain, as the parliaments of both countries still must ratify the agreement.

A senior U.S. State Department official -- authorized to brief reporters without attribution because of diplomatic sensitivities -- said the situation remains "difficult."

"There's opposition both in Turkey and in Armenia," the senior official said Thursday, "but both governments realize ultimately it's in their interest to have normalized relations and an open border after years of tension and the economic isolation, particularly of Armenia."

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will attend the signing, along with dignitaries from several other countries, including the European Union, according to the Swiss government.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/turkey.armenia.peace/

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

The French and british publics were both demoralized that a war which was promised to last for only a few months cost them millions of soldiers and billions in their respective currencies. There was not enough political/economic gain for either of them to take on the turks and enforce the previous agreement.

The Treaty of Versailles had very steep reparations for the defeated Central Powers. By 1923 the noted financial losses of the Great War were reimbursed as vast segments of territories (including resource rich overseas colonies), had already paid off huge dividends to both the British and French.

In US dollars of the time the uk spent over 35 billion and France spent over 24billion. If you can convert that into today's dollars that is a staggering amount of money that just those two spent.

As I said above, the noted reparations by 1923 had already eliminated this. In fact the reparations were in trillions. A key defeated nation of Germany in fact was so depleted that many argue that the reparations as stipulated by the Treaty of Versailles were so high that they laid the seeds for discontent throughout Germany and a revanchist spirit that eventually led to World War II.

Also, in 1918, Europe was hit by the Spanish flu and an estimated 25 million people died, which added to the feeling of bitterness and despair that ran through the citizenry of the two said countries.

Sure there was other reasons why the turks got what they wanted, but you can't deny that the allies would have been bogged down in turkey for years and would have got very little in return for their efforts. It was NOT worth the lives and money.

It was worth it, because the British and the French got what they wanted which included the possession of all of the Arab domains that were formerly part of Turkey/Ottoman Empire. The Turks, dethroned of their empire and the sultan, were suppose to have a state in Anatolia along with Armenians and Greeks. However, Mustapha Kemal, was able to not only keep all of Anatolia for the Turks, but also parts of Thrace (with vital Constantinople) and even territories like Kars and Ardahan that were part of "Russian Armenia" and were an integral part of the First Republic of Armenia.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

The Treaty of Versailles had very steep reparations for the defeated Central Powers. By 1923 the noted financial losses of the Great War were reimbursed as vast segments of territories (including resource rich overseas colonies), had already paid off huge dividends to both the British and French.



As I said above, the noted reparations by 1923 had already eliminated this. In fact the reparations were in trillions. A key defeated nation of Germany in fact was so depleted that many argue that the reparations as stipulated by the Treaty of Versailles were so high that they laid the seeds for discontent throughout Germany and a revanchist spirit that eventually led to World War II.



It was worth it, because the British and the French got what they wanted which included the possession of all of the Arab domains that were formerly part of Turkey/Ottoman Empire. The Turks, dethroned of their empire and the sultan, were suppose to have a state in Anatolia along with Armenians and Greeks. However, Mustapha Kemal, was able to not only keep all of Anatolia for the Turks, but also parts of Thrace (with vital Constantinople) and even territories like Kars and Ardahan that were part of "Russian Armenia" and were an integral part of the First Republic of Armenia.

Wait, you just said the brits and French got the Arab lands that formerly belonged to the ottoman empire, so why would they fight a war with ataturks turkey for Armenians and Greeks?

I am not doubting that the French and british could and would have won, just that it was not worth it for them, and you even said, they got what they wanted. The british had learned what an insurgency was in the 19th century, an occupied turkey would have been worse than what the british saw in afghanistan in the 19th century. I am of course referring to the Great Game and the two Anglo-Afghan wars.

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Wait, you just said the brits and French got the Arab lands that formerly belonged to the ottoman empire, so why would they fight a war with ataturks turkey for Armenians and Greeks?

Exactly, that is my point. As I said earlier, the reason for Lausanne, was NOT that the British and the French were demolarized as you said, but that they got what they wanted and in the meanwhile the Greeks and the Armenians were sacrificed to Kemal.

I am not doubting that the French and british could and would have won, just that it was not worth it for them, and you even said, they got what they wanted.

Same as above, the actual reason was not because of exhaustion, but rather they divided up the Ottoman Empire and got what they were after.

The british had learned what an insurgency was in the 19th century, an occupied turkey would have been worse than what the british saw in afghanistan in the 19th century. I am of course referring to the Great Game and the two Anglo-Afghan wars.

They were quite successful occupying Turkey for years. They also for decades held the formerly Ottoman possessions in primarily Arab lands. Was it not for World War II, they would probably hold it for much longer.

[Gavur]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Catharsis I concur with your historiacl accuracy.I just hope you are not "The Catharsis before tragedy"

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Catharsis I concur with your historiacl accuracy.I just hope you are not "The Catharsis before tragedy"

Every crisis creates a Catharsis, a two-fold path either towards an abyss of annihilation - or - towards ever-greater regeneration. We must of course do everything in our power to see the latter come to pass.

There are still several key battles ahead after the signing of the protocols by the Foreign ministers of Armenia and Turkey (possibly including the signatures of the "brokers" as well) - as we have now some 7 hours to go. Sargsyan is planned to also sign and affirm the protocols along with his Turkish counterpart in Turkey as well. The most important legal battle, will be in Armenia's National Assembly during the ratification process.

As the legal and political implications of the newly created international document set in throughout the public, the calls for resignation of Sargsyan would be ever widespread, even perhaps within the ranks of his own party that so far has managed to keep these gruesome discussions private.