Armenian-Turkish Relations

[KanadaHye]

Turkey Calls Armenian High Court Ruling ‘Unacceptable’

Turkey Calls Armenian High Court Ruling ‘Unacceptable’


Armenia's Constitutional Court discusses the protocols on establishing diplomatic ties with Turkey. Ankara in turn rejected Yerevan's approval.


January 19, 2010

The Turkish Foreign Ministry has rejected the formal ruling handed down on January 12 by the Armenian Constitutional Court approving the protocols signed by the two countries on establishing and developing formal diplomatic relations.

In a brief statement posted on January 18 on its website, the ministry states that the Armenian ruling "contains preconditions and restrictive provisions which impair the letter and spirit of the protocols. The said decision undermines the very reason for negotiating these protocols as well as their fundamental objective."

The Armenian Constitutional Court ruling found the two protocols, signed in Geneva on October 12 by the Armenian and Turkish foreign ministers, to be "in conformity with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia."

That statement was preceded by several pages of explanation, summarizing the text of the two protocols and their significance and implications in international law.

Two aspects of that argumentation may be unacceptable to Turkey.

First, paragraph 4 of the preceding argumentation concludes that the mutual obligations undertaken by the two countries "are, under the principles of international law, exclusively of a bilateral nature, and cannot concern, or by various references be attributed to, any third party or the relations with such third party of the signatories of the protocols."

That formulation has been construed in Yerevan as a rejection of the argument, repeatedly adduced in recent months by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, that ratification of the protocols by the Turkish parliament must be contingent on concessions by Armenia in the Karabakh peace process, specifically, the withdrawal of Armenian forces from seven districts of Azerbaijan they currently control.

Second, as veteran commentator David Petrosian pointed out on January 18, paragraph 5 of the Armenian Constitutional Court argumentation affirms that the protocols "cannot be interpreted...in a way that would contradict the provisions of the preamble to the Republic of Armenian constitution and the requirements of Paragraph 11 of the [1990] Declaration of Independence of Armenia." That paragraph reads: "The Republic of Armenia is for the international recognition of the Armenian genocide of 1915 committed in Ottoman Turkey and Western Armenia."

The second of the two protocols signed in Geneva stipulates that the two sides agree to "implement a dialogue on the historical dimension with the aim to restore mutual confidence between the two nations, including an impartial scientific examination of the historical records and archives to define existing problems and formulate recommendations." It does not specifically mention the massacres of 1915.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry statement reaffirms Ankara's "adherence to the primary provisions" of the protocols, and makes clear that it expects the same from Armenia. The protocols do not, however, differentiate between "primary" and "secondary" provisions.

http://www.rferl.org/content/Turkey_...e/1933592.html

[Alexandros]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations


Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian.


Armenia urges annulment of protocols if Turkey insists on Karabakh

Friday, December 18, 2009

CANSU ÇAMLIBEL

YEREVAN – Hürriyet

The historic protocols signed by Turkey and Armenia to establish diplomatic links and open their sealed border risk becoming null and void if Turkey insists on making the Nagorno-Karabakh issue a precondition, Armenia has said.

“We very much hope the Turkish Parliament will not take a step that would mean a miscarriage of the agreements. If this happens, our parliament would [essentially declare] the protocols to be null and void. We would be back to square one,” Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian told the daily Hürriyet in an interview in Yerevan last week.

In a move to normalize relations, the two countries signed two important documents in October but these have not yet been ratified by the two countries’ parliaments.

Following strong reaction from Azerbaijan, whose territory has been partially occupied by Armenian forces, the Turkish government announced that it would not move forward with the protocols unless Armenia and Azerbaijan make progress in negotiations for the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. Armenia says the process should be free of preconditions.

“Our position has not changed. Judging from Prime Minister [Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan’s statements, it seems that the Turkish position has shifted, which means that the Turkish Parliament may propose certain preconditions,” Sarkisian said.

“If Turkey comes up with preconditions, Armenia would be free to do so as well itself,” he said, citing genocide recognition and not entering any negotiations until borders are opened as examples. He also emphasized that the Turks were originally responsible for closing the border.

One of the most fundamental problems between the two countries is the 1915 incidents that caused the deaths of many Armenian citizens of the Ottoman Empire. Terming it “genocide,” Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have worked hard for the events to be recognized as such by third countries.

Turkey, on the other hand, admits the killings but says it had nothing to do with the crime of genocide. If the protocols enter into force, the two countries will set up an independent commission to explore the incidents.

If the process fails because of Turkey’s preconditions, Sarkisian said, “Turkey will have to explain to [international powers] why it has broken its own agreement. Turkey’s credibility will be at stake. It would be questionable to sit down with Turkey again.”

He continued: “We are not playing any games with Turkey, we are committed to an open and transparent foreign policy, we do not make different statements to others and we do not see an alternative to this process.”

Process should not be stalled artificially

When asked about the deadline for the ratification of the protocols, Sarkisian refrained from giving an exact timeframe but urged “Turkey not to stall the process artificially.”

“[Our] clear deadline is the Turkish legislation. We are closely following this process. If we observe that the Turkish Parliament is not stalling the process, we will make our own conclusions,” he said.

The Turkish government has already submitted the protocols to its Parliament for broad discussions in the relevant sub-commissions. Armenia, however, must first get the approval of its Constitutional Court before proceeding with parliamentary ratification.

Karabakh deal depends on Baku

On the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Sarkisian said the pace of the negotiations depended on Baku. Criticizing the Azerbaijani leadership for making “war calls,” Sarkisian said, “We have to be ready for war as history taught us.”

“The best way to prevent war is to be ready for it. If there is any time that Azerbaijanis feel that we are not ready for war, nothing will stop them from breaking the peace, which is why we are not afraid. What would we lose other than our chains?” he said.

Arguing that Turkey could not play a role on the solution of the Karabakh issue because it cannot be neutral, Sarkisian also drew attention to the risks of linking Turkish-Armenian rapprochement with the Karabakh process.

“The first is that it will not contribute in any way to the resolution of the Karabakh issue, on the contrary, it will impede it since Turkey is not neutral. Secondly it will impede with the development of our relations, which is neither in Turkey’s nor our interest,” he said.

“The third dimension is that Erdoğan was pretty tough this time [in Washington]. The impression is that he might have wanted to create an equilibrium between the acknowledgements of no preconditions in the protocols,” Sarkisian said.

‘We must overcome our complex’

Sarkisian emphasized that the alleged genocide is an essential point for Armenians and the government, but said Armenian people should overcome their complex toward the Turkish people.

“I have even stated that in our parliament. The attitude of our people toward Turks and Turkey needs to change, however difficult that may be. Our foreign policy should not be anti-Turkish. It should be pro-Armenian. We need to be able to change the attitude of our nation,” he said.

Sarkisian said one of the most important tools in developing ties between the two countries is public acknowledgement.

“In my opinion, the eventual recognition of the genocide will help Turkish society break through. This is the road to becoming a full-fledged member of the European Union. Its psychological complex must be overcome,” Sarkisian said.

“The Germans succeeded in overcoming their complex, helping their society to unprecedented social and economic development,” he said.

Link

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Armenia-turkey process in light of Kurdish problem

16:33 / 12/12/2009


The Turkish Government’s democratic initiative deigned to resolve the Kurdish problem and improve relations with Armenia and Cyprus resulted in rather extraordinary developments. After a number of shows, such as the translation of the Koran into Kurdish and Ministers’ trips to Lake Van, the Turkish Establishment reverted to its usual methods of settling national problems: they banned the only Kurdish political force represented in the Turkish Parliament, the Democratic Society Party (Turkish: Demokratik Toplum Partisi, DTP), which caused the Kurdish population’s discontent throughout the country. It is noteworthy that, right from the start, Turkey’s Kurdish population showed distrust toward the Gul-Erdogan bloc’s good intentions.

Thus, now we can state the failure of one of the most important and complicated components of the democratic reforms planned by the Islamists – the settlement of the Kurdish problem. It is noteworthy that the Turkish Government and Parliament had been discussing the draft solution to the Kurdish problem simultaneously with the Armenia-Turkey normalization process, which, however, seemed to remain unnoticed in Armenia.

The Armenian expert circles actually ignored the Kurdish component of Turkey’s strategy, exerting tremendous efforts to understand a link between the Armenian-Turkish dialogue and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. From the outset it was clear, however, that the issue was a tactical one, as Turkey was doing its best to “create” such a link, while Armenia was trying to avoid it. And Armenia’s position was much more important, as, in case Turkey showed an uncompromising approach, Yerevan reserved the right to pull out of the negotiations, referring to the agreements on unacceptability of any preconditions reached at the highest international level.

Thus, from the outset, Armenia did not link the Armenia-Turkey dialogue to the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. Moreover, should such a link “emerge”, the Armenian side would pull out of the negotiations. As a matter of fact, such a scenario seems to be the most likely one after Turkish Premier Recep Erdogan’s statements in the United States and RA President Serzh Sargsyan’s response. A different thing is of importance, however. Like the Kurdish project, the Armenian-Turkish dialogue may fail due to Turkey’s foreign policy rather than due to regional process or positions taken by Armenia and international experts.

The Islamists’ democratic initiatives designed to show the Turkish society their aim to build up a truly democratic state of rule of law, consistent democratization policy and priority to join the European Union (EU) must have been the means of internal struggle. Indeed, the gravest charge brought against the Recep Erdogan Government by the Ergenekon movement, which, according to some information, was supported by Israel and involved influential members of the Turkish top brass, was that Islamists, slowly but surely, were turning from the way of building up a secular state to that of forming a “theocratic” state ideology. It is Israel’s active involvement in Turkey’s domestic policy that actually worsened the Ankara-Tel Aviv relations. One can hardly believe it is only now that the Turkish Premier is “suffering a mental torment” in thinking about the people of Palestine – he has been vigorously defending the Palestinians’ rights over the last year, though the Middle East conflict has been developing for decades.

On the other hand, the ambitious Turkish Establishment, with its independent decisions on the degree of the country’s participation in the U.S. military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, relations with Iran, initiatives on mediation formats in the Middle East and South Caucasus, must have become a stumbling block to the United States. Washington is well aware that, without absolutely reliable control over Turkey’s political system, any activity in the vast region — from the Balkans to Iran and China – may result in a complete collapse. That is the reason why, with a carrot in one hand, the U.S. is holding a stick in the other for Turkey. The United States is still playing the card of the Armenian Cause, which has turned into a most important political instrument for U.S. President Barack Obama, evidence thereof being the intensified activities of the U.S. Congressional Armenian Caucus simultaneously with the Armenian-Turkish dialogue. According to reliable sources, the possible adoption of a resolution on the Armenian Genocide by the U.S. Congress and Senate may become the first step in “subduing” Turkey. That step may be followed by the formation of a Western Armenian government in exile, which will comprise outstanding representatives of the Armenian Diaspora, a new emphasis on the Treaty of Sèvres and Woodrow Wilson’s decision and, as result, material and territorial claims on Turkey.

RA President Serzh Sargsyan has recently twice thanked U.S. President Barack Obama for his position on the Armenian Cause. It is no mere coincidence, considering the fact that, in his latest speech, the U.S. leader avoided pronouncing the term “genocide.” Nonetheless, the process is going on, and the U.S. leader will have to speak on the Armenian Genocide on April 24, 2010. Mr. Obama is unlikely to always carry the burden of responsibility Turkey is supposed to. “Barack Obama has repeatedly stated his position on the Armenian Genocide, pointing out the necessity for Turkey’s admitting the genocide as well as unacceptability of that country’s distorting its own history. Barack Obama stated that even in Turkish Parliament,” The Armenian leader stated, addressing his U.S. counterpart at a news conference in Yerevan on December 10. The following day, December 11, during his telephone conversation with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Armenian President asked her to convey his gratitude to President Barack Obama for his consistent assistance to Armenia in establishing relations with Turkey. The U.S. President must be the guarantor of the agreements reached with Turkey, being responsible for a possible failure, which, in turn, may have unpredictable consequences for the entire region and affect his reputation. Considering the above, we can conclude that the talks Turkish Premier Recept Erdogan held in the United States were hardly an enjoyable pastime. Evidence thereof is Turkish Ambassador to United States Nabi Şensoy’s resignation immediately after the Turkish Premier left Washington.

The causes and consequences of the failure of the Kurdish project in Turkey must be thoroughly analyzed in Armenia, as they can have a much more serious impact on the Armenian-Turkish process that Ankara’s sham activity in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. Also, Yerevan must make a most serious analysis of the United States’ aims and resources in the region, particularly in its relations with Turkey. Armenia may become one of the key factors in U.S. regional policy and, with the Armenian Diaspora’s influence in the United States, as well as in the Near East (Lebanon, Syria etc…) considered, Washington’s important partner that would not be inferior to Israel.

T.P.

http://news.am/en/news/10514.html

[londontsi]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

True, the information coming from the EU and US sides can be quite negative in regards to that. But I can summarise it in follows "Armenian's have no right to compensation or reparations, and they are not demanding them".

Of course the people that make these claims are possibly tied or friendly with German, Turkish or European banks that had accounts with Armenian's that were wiped out in the genocide and their money stolen.
xxxs are still trying to find their money after their holocaust too, yet foreign banks refuse to hand it back. In this wiki are examples of a banks withholding money, and after pressure handing it back:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_gold

Demand for compensation normally comes from the side that has a grievance.
It does not come from third parties nor from the perpetrators of the crime.

The problem is with the incompetent and corrupt Armenian government who have become easy prey to outside pressure and manipulation.


P.S. I saw the pictures of Berlusconi last night and made a wish!!

[hipeter924]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

The whole point of recognition of the genocide (from the Armenian side) is not to prove just a point of fact.

Recognition of the Genocide brings with it legal obligations including reparation both financial as well as material (land).

The protocols guarantee Turkey that these cannot be asked since the current borders will be recognized by Armenia.

Turkey got what they want.
Now they are fighting for their brother Azerbaijan.

The rest is playacting.

True, the information coming from the EU and US sides can be quite negative in regards to that. But I can summarise it in follows "Armenian's have no right to compensation or reparations, and they are not demanding them".

Of course the people that make these claims are possibly tied or friendly with German, Turkish or European banks that had accounts with Armenian's that were wiped out in the genocide and their money stolen.

xxxs are still trying to find their money after their holocaust too, yet foreign banks refuse to hand it back. In this wiki are examples of a banks withholding money, and after pressure handing it back:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_gold

[londontsi]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

ive been thinking about the protocols and how Turkey keeps backtracking now and was wondering. I had read an article about a few years ago when i think Kocharyan was President. The article stated that Armenia and Turkey had agreed to a historical commission to look at the archives but then Turkey withdrew. Now i began thinking that Turkey didnt think Armenia would sign the protocols if the commission was involved and it would make Armenia look bad but when Armenia signed it Turkey became scared that the truth about the genocide would come out. So that is why, in my opinion, they began demanding Armenia get out of Artsakh, knowing full well we will not, for them to ratify the protocols.
I think its Turkey just wanting to show the world, especially the EU, they want to normalize relations with Armenia when they really dont. Armenia knows this and that is why they signed the protocols because they knew Turkey would backtrack and Armenia will look good in front of the world. I dont know if you guys agree or not but thats what i came up with.

The whole point of recognition of the genocide (from the Armenian side) is not to prove just a point of fact.

Recognition of the Genocide brings with it legal obligations including reparation both financial as well as material (land).

The protocols guarantee Turkey that these cannot be asked since the current borders will be recognized by Armenia.

Turkey got what they want.
Now they are fighting for their brother Azerbaijan.

The rest is playacting.

[Haykakan]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

That makes a lot of sence. We will see what happens.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

ive been thinking about the protocols and how Turkey keeps backtracking now and was wondering. I had read an article about a few years ago when i think Kocharyan was President. The article stated that Armenia and Turkey had agreed to a historical commission to look at the archives but then Turkey withdrew. Now i began thinking that Turkey didnt think Armenia would sign the protocols if the commission was involved and it would make Armenia look bad but when Armenia signed it Turkey became scared that the truth about the genocide would come out. So that is why, in my opinion, they began demanding Armenia get out of Artsakh, knowing full well we will not, for them to ratify the protocols.
I think its Turkey just wanting to show the world, especially the EU, they want to normalize relations with Armenia when they really dont. Armenia knows this and that is why they signed the protocols because they knew Turkey would backtrack and Armenia will look good in front of the world. I dont know if you guys agree or not but thats what i came up with.

[londontsi]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I hope the protocols will not be passed by Turkey and the Armenian Genocide recognition will be very soon!!!

Fingers crossed !!

Then hopefully work starts on plan B.

[Anoush]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I hope the protocols will not be passed by Turkey and the Armenian Genocide recognition will be very soon!!!