Armenian-Turkish Relations

[Karapapak]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I m surprised that some bandits didn't storm into parliament and killed some MPs by now...

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I m surprised that some bandits didn't storm into parliament and killed some MPs by now...

Yeah, and you're still waiting for democracy in azerbaijan. Who will take over after dictator aliyev is gone? Will it be his sl*t daughter or the chubby son?

[AlphaPapa]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I m surprised that some bandits didn't storm into parliament and killed some MPs by now...

I think next time we'll do it in baku

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I m surprised that some bandits didn't storm into parliament and killed some MPs by now...

"President for Life...," surely, that is democratic.

[AlphaPapa]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Before I copy/paste the article from armenianow.com, let me remind Hye yeghpairners that when the Turks think of Armenian nationalism, they always think of ASALA.

Armenian-Turkish protocols signed on October 10 in Zurich must not be ratified as they impose a direct threat to Armenia’s security, was stated by Tigran Pashabezyan, coordinator of Armenian Secret Army for Liberation of Armenia’s ‘Oukht Ararati’ (Vow to Ararat) organization.

According to Pashabezyan, the signing of the protocols has activated a number of Islamic terrorist organizations which have already implemented numerous acts of terror in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan since October 10; and there is apprehension that if the document is ratified something similar would start happening in Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and Samtskhe-Javakheti.

“After their signing Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan undertook a trip to the countries with major Armenian communities; why, in that case, did Turkish President Abdullah Gul not take such a trip? The answer is obvious – the protocols are of openly pro-Turkish character,” says Pashabezyan.

He informed that the organization he represents has addressed an open letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, US President Barack Obama, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, presidents of Armenia and Turkey Serzh Sargsyan and Abdullah Gul, as well as to the presidents of the UN Security Council’s member countries – China and the United Kingdom, saying that the Zurich protocols question the Sevres Treaty of 1919 which is the guarantee of the stability of the state borders in the region.

The US Department of State has blacklisted ASALA – an Armenian transnational ethnic organization founded in 1975 in Beirut – as a terrorist organization.

The organization’s main purpose is the restoration of Armenia’s historic land. The organization has been mostly dormant since the end of hostilities in Nagorno Karabakh.

By the way, their website is http://www.oukhtararati.com/

[KarotheGreat]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Charles Aznavour reminded Turkey about Armenia’s lands
03.11.2009 20:26 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ In an interview with RAI 3 Italian TV channel Armenia’s Ambassador to Switzerland, acclaimed chansonnier Charles Aznavour raised an issue of Armenia’s territorial claims for Turkey.

“It is nice to see Turkish-Armenian opening in the last period of my life. They promised lands to Armenians in 1924, in the year I was born. It has not happened yet. I have been waiting all the time, and I cannot wait another 85 years,” Hurriyet cited him as saying.

Talking to Italian RAI 3 television, famous Armenian singer reminded about Soviet Leader Stalin’s promise and Sevres agreement stipulating for return of Trabzon, Erzurum, Van and Bitlis provinces to Armenia.

http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=38829

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

ankara will never agree to deterioration of relations with the U.S. because of azerbaijan

Over the past few days the Turkish press has stopped writing about its “brotherly” neighbour. Moreover, there appear articles about the myth of “one nation, two states”.
The level of nervousness in Baku after the signing of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols has reached its highest. The authorities apparently realized that, despite the assurances of “brotherly” Turkey, no parallel processes will go with the Karabakh conflict settlement. Though immediately after the signing of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols in Zurich, the rhetoric of high-ranking Turkish officials significantly intensified with regards to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, it didn’t last long and it had its reasons.

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Ankara will never agree to deterioration of relations with the U.S. or any other party concerned about a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Moreover, if we believe certain media reports - and sometimes they really should be believed - Washington actually issued a tough ultimatum to Azerbaijan: she made it clear that “Karabakh independence will be recognized, should Azerbaijan attempt to launch military operations in NKR,” Yeni Musavat Oppositional Azeri Party official website reported on Tuesday, followed by other Azeri media representatives.

In observer’s opinion, Baku’s military rhetoric is caused by the fact that in the agenda of Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations on Karabakh status, mediated by Russia, US and France, Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity is not discussed, as required by the country’s President Ilham Aliyev, NEWSru.com reports.

However, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Elkhan Polukhov said he knew nothing about Washington’s ultimatum. “Azerbaijan is not a country to be spoken with in the language of ultimatum,” he said. “We are conducting an independent foreign policy based on our national interests,” Polukhov added.

How independent a foreign policy the South Caucasus countries can have, is probably not worth mentioning. But Baku so deeply believes in her own power and energy, that she does not see what is obvious. And the obvious fact is that over the past few days, the Turkish press has stopped writing about its “brotherly” neighbour. Moreover, there appear articles about the myth of “one nation, two states”. Speaking at the rally of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Prime Minister Erdogan spoke about everything: the Kurdish problem, cooperation with Iran on regional projects and Turkey’s EU membership. However, he said not a single word about Karabakh, and it is symptomatic.

It so happened that these days, Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu participates in the ministerial D-8 Summit in Kuala Lumpur. D-8 is an analogue of the G8 for the countries of Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), in which Azerbaijan has no place. Only Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan and Turkey are members of this association, i.e. countries for which the resolution of the Karabakh conflict is neither necessary nor important. By the way, the countries of OIC, which so recently were spoken about with great enthusiasm in Baku, have quite a different from Azerbaijan position on Nagorno-Karabakh. For example, Iran and Syria, and sometimes Egypt, if we use the lexicon of official Baku, take up a pro-Armenian position, while others simply do not make public their position, reasoning from their own interests and not out of their great love towards Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

Meanwhile, The Jamestown Foundation writes: “Traditionally an ally, brother and last resort of hope, Turkey is no longer trusted in the Azerbaijani capital. In an effort to gain an additional friendly neighbor, Ankara seems to have overstretched and nearly ruined its strategic relations with Azerbaijan. It is clear that the recent developments in the South Caucasus and the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement have seriously damaged the Turkish-Azerbaijani strategic partnership. This partnership has been the backbone of East-West energy and its future transportation corridors, security, political and geo-strategic balance in the region, as well as the overall Turkish (or Western) entrance into the Caspian region,” says the author, who, of course, doesn’t like the fact that Turkey has decided to “free herself” from Baku.

And lastly, US International Republican Institute (IRI) office ends its activity in Azerbaijan. Head of IRI office Jake Johns declared the office would be closed on November 30 of the current year. Chairman of Musavat party Isa Gambar, expressing his regret over the issue, considered it expedient to continue the work of the office in terms of strengthening relations between the U.S. and Azerbaijan, and solving problems associated with democracy and freedom. But the U.S. had different views...

Karine Ter-Sahakyan

http://www.panarmenian.net/details/eng/?nid=1090

[cryingdady]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I agree with you!

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

OIC, BSEC, GUAM: azerbaijan entangled with foreign-policy partners

12:05 / 11/10/2009

By Armen Gevorgyan

President Ilham Aliyev has actually boycotted the sitting of the Standing Committee on Economic and Commercial Cooperation, Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), in Istanbul. Deputy Minister of Economic Development Sevinj Gasanova is representing Azerbaijan, which is unequivocal evidence of deeper political disagreements between Baku and Ankara. The other OIC member-states are represented by the Presidents and Prime Ministers.

What is more, Azerbaijani Vice-Premier Abid Sharifov attended a reception at the Turkish Embassy in Baku on the occasion of Turkey’s Independence Day, while President Ilham Aliyev visited a Russian village in one of the regions thereby trying to suggest a threat of Baku’s “geopolitical turn.”

It is worth recalling Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan’s statement during his recent visit to Kuwait. The Armenian leader stated that Azerbaijan is manipulating the OIC member-states, trying to cash in on religious solidarity. “A lack of awareness of the Artsakh problem, Azerbaijan’s impermissible attempts to cash in on the factor of religious solidarity often result in wrong decisions made by the Organization of Islamic Conference,” the Armenian leader stated at his meeting with the Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Sabah IV Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah.

In this respect, the Azeri leaders not participating in the Istanbul sitting meets Armenia’s interests. The participants themselves will be able to understand the policy of Azerbaijan, which is trying to reap dividends from the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process irrespective of the international agencies’ aims. It is common knowledge that even the projects implemented by the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization (BSEC), which aims at creating conditions for the region’s economic and communication integration, encounter obstacles set by Azerbaijan.

President Aliyev’s visit to the Russian village is a “touching” signal for Moscow: “if our Turkish brothers are befooling us, we are ready to befool them in a team with Russians.” Aliyev has made initial steps by signing a contract for the supply is a symbolic amount of gas to Russia with Gasprom. The Azeri leader must have thought that his step would help him to gain Moscow’s favor to an extent that it would revise its position on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and its relations with Armenia. We see, however, that Russia is among the key lobbyists for the unblocking of the Armenian-Russian border, as it is in Armenia, rather than in Azerbaijan, that Russia has its only military base in the region, which is actually blocked as well.

Russia has actually created a powerful energy basis in Armenia and is preparing for exporting energy to Turkey. Russia is getting ready to open a window on Iran in Armenia. And, finally, Russia will participate in a nuclear-power plant construction project in Armenia. The “anti-Russian” Transcaspian gas pipeline, which has not so far been constructed, may well run southward, to Armenia through Iran, and will thus serve the interests of Armenia and Russia – and, incidentally, of Turkey.

So President Ilham Aliyev can be advised to visit a Georgian village when the OIC holds its next meeting. Azerbaijan, with its limited gas reserves and lack of direct communication with Central Asia, appears to be of interest to Georgia alone. We would like to warn the Azeri leader against visiting Kvemo Kartli, which is part of the Georgian territory. Azerbaijan is known to respect that country’s territorial integrity, Georgia being Azerbaijan’s partner within GUAM.

http://news.am/en/news/8310.html

[Federate]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

My oh my, the cyclops is always full of surprises.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ter-Petrosian Reaches Out To Sarkisian, Blasts ‘Extreme Nationalists’


Opposition leader Levon Ter-Petrosian on Wednesday signaled on his readiness, in principle, to recognize the legitimacy of President Serzh Sarkisian and launched a scathing attack on nationalist critics of Armenia’s ongoing rapprochement with Turkey.

While again strongly condemning Sarkisian for agreeing to the establishment of a Turkish-Armenian panel of historians, Ter-Petrosian made clear that he and his Armenian National Congress (HAK) support other key provisions of the fence-mending agreements recently signed by Yerevan and Ankara last month. That includes an explicit and official recognition by Armenia of its existing border with Turkey.

In an hour-long speech before the HAK leadership circulated by his office, Ter-Petrosian lambasted the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) and other “extreme nationalists” for insisting that Yerevan should not have shut the door to future Armenian demands of reparations and territory from Turkey. He said that has enabled Sarkisian to “present himself to the world as a realistic and resolute statesman worthy of the 21st century.”

The HAK leader insisted that the notion of “historical rights” is no longer valid in international relations and international law. He also argued that Turkey will never normalize relations with Armenia without precluding possible Armenian claims to its eastern regions that had been populated by Armenians until their 1915 mass killings and deportations.

“From the perspective of Dashnaktsutyun and other irredentist forces, Turkish-Armenian relations must be normalized on the basis of not mutual concessions and a display of good will but Turkey’s unconditional capitulation,” he said. “And since Turkey does not seem to intend to capitulate, they must have the courage to openly state that they are fully against the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations.”

Armenia’s first president went on to accuse Dashnaktsutyun and political groups and figures sharing its views on Turkey of adding “non-existent sins to the numerous sins committed by Sarkisian.” “It was not Sarkisian who first recognized the Turkish-Armenian border -- the Dashnaks and Bolsheviks had done that before with the [1920] treaties of Alexandropol and Kars,” he said. “It’s not he who renounced territorial claims -- it’s [his predecessor] Robert Kocharian.”

The HAK, continued Ter-Petrosian, will therefore not join in the “nationalist hysteria” sparked by the October 10 signing of two Turkish-Armenian protocols that envisage the establishment of diplomatic relations and the reopening of the border between the two states. “For us, the only unacceptable provision of the protocols is the one related to the establishment of a commission of Turkish-Armenian historians,” he said.

The panel is expected to look into the 1915 Armenian massacres in the Ottoman Empire and try to address their markedly differing accounts and interpretations by the two nations. Critics, including both Dashnaktsutyun and the Ter-Petrosian-led alliance, believe that Turkey would exploit the formation of such a body to keep more countries from recognizing the slaughter of up to 1.5 million Ottoman Armenians as genocide.

Ter-Petrosian again stated that the very existence of the historical commission would “cast doubt on the reality of the Armenian genocide and halt the process of its international recognition.” That would deal a “severe psychological blow” to the worldwide Armenian Diaspora, he said, adding that even after that Turkey would continue to make the normalization of bilateral relations conditional on a pro-Azerbaijani solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Ter-Petrosian stood by his claims that Sarkisian willingly made “unforgivable” concession to the Turks in the hope of gaining strong Western support and thereby offsetting what he called a lack of domestic legitimacy. While reiterating that the only way to prevent “dangerous developments” in Turkish-Armenian relations and the Karabakh peace process is Sarkisian’s resignation, Ter-Petrosian stressed that the Armenian president could and should seek to legitimize his rule at home. “What keeps him from seeking that coveted legitimacy from his own people and not having to make such concessions, instead of enduring so much humiliation?” he said.

Ter-Petrosian cited in that regard the example of a 17th century Armenian cleric who became a self-styled spiritual leader of the Ottoman Armenians, allegedly through corruption and deceit. The Armenian Apostolic Church responded to the resulting threat to its unity and legitimacy by electing the cleric as its new supreme leader in 1681.

Ter-Petrosian, who is a historian by training, touted that event as “the most broad-minded and wise manifestation of national thinking in the entire history of the Armenian people.” “Why does Serzh Sarkisian think that the Armenian people are incapable of once again displaying such broad-mindedness and wisdom for the sake of national aims?” he said concluding his speech.

The statement was remarkable given the long-standing HAK claims that Sarkisian rigged the February 2008 presidential election and benefited from the ensuing deadly suppression of opposition protests to succeed Kocharian as president. HAK leaders have until now insisted that his resignation and the holding of fresh national elections is the only way to overcome the lingering fallout from the disputed vote. Ter-Petrosian stated in June that he and his allies will never engage in any dialogue with the current Armenian leadership.

The ex-president did not specify on Wednesday just how he thinks Sarkisian could gain domestic legitimacy, speaking only of the need for solving “internal political problems” and creating “ national solidarity.” He also noted that the HAK will not take “imprudent actions” or opt for “political maximalism.” It was a clear indication that Armenia’s largest opposition force will not resume its anti-government demonstrations, suspended in September, anytime soon.

http://www.azatutyun.am/content/article/1875375.html