Armenian-Turkish Relations

[Federate]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Turks officially have their first Armenian-speaking diplomat.
-------------------------------
Le premier diplomate turc qui parle arménien

jeudi25 septembre 2008, par Stéphane/armenews

Selon la presse turque c’est le consul Arif Eser Tosun qui a pris des cours d’arménien toute l’année dernière conformémént au plan de développement des relations entre la Turquie et l’Arménie.

Le consul Torun a accompagné le président turc Abdullah Gul pendant sa visite à Yerevan.

Le consul Torun est allé à Yerevan en provenance de Jérusalem suite à une directive spéciale et a participé auprès du ministre turc des Affaires Etrangères Ali Babacan aux pourparlers avec les officiels arméniens.

From http://www.armenews.com/article.php3?id_article=45021

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

DIASPORA SHOULD COUNTER TURKEY'S DIVIDE AND CONQUER STRATEGY


Armenians worldwide have been following with great concern sinister Turkish attempts at rapprochement with Armenia.

Their apprehension is based on several factors. The first is that Turkey has pre-conditioned its rapprochement with the demand that Armenia participate in a historical commission on the Armenian Genocide -- a devious stratagem to cast doubt on the long established facts of the Armenian Genocide.

Furthermore, Turkish leaders have publicly announced that their true intent is to let the world know that Armenians and Turks are engaged in serious negotiations on the Armenian Genocide, therefore, it is no longer necessary for the U.S. Congress or parliaments around the world to adopt resolutions on this issue.

Finally, Turkish leaders have stated that by making a separate deal with Armenia, they would be rendering the Armenian and its demands irrelevant.

Nevertheless, in assessing the Turkish attempt at reconciliation with Armenia, one needs to keep in mind the following issues:

In the aftermath of the recent Russian-Georgian war, all countries in the region have re-evaluated their strategic interests. The opening of the Turkish border would reduce Armenia's reliance on Georgian ports to import more than 80% of its supplies. To protect Armenia's national security, the Parliament should immediately adopt legislation prohibiting foreign ownership of strategic resources, vital industries and real estate in sensitive border regions.

Turkey, on the other hand, has several reasons for wanting to improve its relations with Armenia: 1) Having normal diplomatic relations and an open border with all its neighbors, including Armenia, would help realize Turkey's desire of becoming a dominant regional power; 2) To help bring economic prosperity to the most destitute regions of Eastern Turkey; 3) To provide an opportunity for Turkey to project its political and economic power across the Armenian border, all the way to the Central Asian Republics; 4) To downplay the charges of genocide from the Armenian and third countries by establishing a historical commission; and 5) To facilitate Turkey's entry into the European Union, since having open borders with neighboring states is an EU requirement.

The rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey is also being encouraged by Europe and the United States, because it would create an alternate land corridor for the unimpeded transport of vital oil and gas supplies from the Caspian region to the West. This new initiative also serves Russia's interests, as the opening of the Armenian/Turkish border would diminish the value of Georgia's Black Sea ports.

While it is understandable why Armenia and Turkey are seeking improved relations, it remains to be seen whether Armenia would be better off at the end of these deliberations, given Turkey's extensive diplomatic experience compared to that of Armenia. After all, getting concessions from Turkey is not an easy task, as demonstrated by the lengthy and unproductive negotiations over Cyprus. What counts is the end result, rather than the process itself!

Rather than getting involved in acrimonious debates with Armenia's leadership, we should acknowledge that Armenia's interests may sometimes diverge from those of the , and that the two would take different positions on some issues, given the differences in their status. Therefore, communities should pursue their own agenda, independently from that of Armenia.

In order to counter Turkey's attempts to make the irrelevant, Armenians worldwide should continue their efforts to expose Turkish crimes against humanity and go beyond mere genocide recognition by expanding their activities to the following areas: - Pass resolutions in the U.S. Congress and European parliaments, seeking to defend the human rights of the Armenian minority in Turkey, particularly the rights of Armenian churches and schools; - Demand the lifting of an undeclared ban on Armenian citizens of Turkey to enter its diplomatic service or hold high-ranking military posts; - File lawsuits in the European Court of Human Rights and U.S. Federal Courts to force Turkey to return to the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople (Istanbul) the hundreds of Armenian church buildings confiscated by the Turkish government after the Genocide; - Seek the return of personal properties expropriated by Turkey; - Expose the muzzling of Turkish citizens under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code which makes it a crime to refer to the Armenian Genocide; and - Strongly counter all attempts by Turkish officials and their hired lackeys to deny and distort the facts of the Armenian Genocide.

Such actions would make it perfectly clear to Turkish officials that unless they deal directly with the and reach a fair settlement on the damages emanating from the Armenian Genocide, they would continue to be hounded around the globe, regardless of any agreements they might have reached with the Armenian government.

By Harut Sassounian, Publisher, The California Courier

http://www.armtown.com/news/en/azg/20080926/2008092602/

[seruven]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Thanks for the post Armanen. Let me explain my thoughts about this article.

The author wants to give the impression that it is mostly beneficial for Turks rather than Armenians to have open borders. According to him, Turks have 5 reasons to open the border while Armenians have only 1. If it is so, let's just keep the borders closed forever, right?
I think by opening the border, Armenia will obtain concrete benefits (i.e, economic benefits) and Turkey will obtain abstract benefits (i.e, will show the world that she wants better relations with Armenia). Anyway, I guess both sides will benefit from openning the border and I support it (though it doesn't seem to happen before Armenian-Azeri relations ameliorate).

It's not really straightforward to decide what the above mentioned countries (the US, Russia, EU, etc.) want about Armenian-Turkish relations.
I have an Abkhaz friend and after the war between Russia and Georgia, I asked him what would Russia do in order to enhance recognition of Abkhazia's independence internationally. He told that Russia doesn't have such a concern, because an unrecognized Abkhazia would simply be another satellite for Russia which is perfectly ok for Russians.
Thus, although these countries seem to want Turkey and Armenia to improve their relations, actually they are benefitting from the situation. They always keep the Armenian card in order to make pressure over Turkey and it is impossible for Armenia to seek independent policies while surrounded by closed borders, hostile or/and unstable countries. Maybe the real "divide and conquer strategy" is "divide Turkey and Armenian, then conquer both"?

Lastly, I have to admit that this pan-islamic government may be our only chance for decades in order to improve our relations. I truly dislike them (the aforementioned Turkish leaders) and don't believe that they are genuienly democratic. However, once in a year they make something to tempt intellectuals and democrats inside (and EU outside) and their alternative old-school parties don't seem to bring any solutions in Armenian issue.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Seruven the only way I would want the borders to be fully opened is if some of the laws mentioned in the article were passed, if there was no historical commission set up and if a expert economic/political commission set up to weight the costs and benefits decided it would be more favorable to open borders than keep them closed.

For now, I wouldn't mind seeing Armenia sell electricity to turkey and maybe just open the Gyumri-Kars railway.

[meline]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

BAKU MEDIA REPORTS ON YEREVAN’S AGREEMENT TO TURKEY’S MEDIATION ABSURD

Armenia’s stand on resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict is unchangeable, the RA Foreign Ministry’s representative said. “Resolution of the conflict is only possible in the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group, without additional mediators,” head of media relations division Tigran Balayan told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter. “Azeri media reports about Yerevan’s alleged agreement to Turkey’s mediation are absurd,” he added. Earlier today, Bakililar.AZ news agency reported that “Yerevan gave green light to Turkey’s joining the negotiation process.” “Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian welcomed Ankara’s intermediary initiative,” it said. Foreign Minister of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey held their first-ever trilateral meeting during UN General Assembly’s 63rd session.

http://www.armtown.com/news/en/pan/20080927/27191/

[KarotheGreat]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

What do you guys think of this

Part 1

ARMENIANS AND [ANATOLIAN GREEKS] SHALL BECOME OUR CITIZENS AGAIN.

8 September 2008
TARAF

by Nese Duzel.

Translated to English by Ara Topouzian

---Begin translation---

"What had happened is conduct unbecoming to the Republic. If I was
in charge, I would also apologize... We must apologize from the
Armenians and Greeks for the suffering we caused. This is what a
state like ours should do... Armenian issue is solved by the
politician, not by the historian. I do not believe the truths are
not known. Historical truths are known. The real problem is how
these truths will be perceived and how it will influence the
future."

[Duzel] In response to an invitation by the president of Armenia,
President Abdullah Gul went to Yerevan to watch the soccer game
[between the Turkish and Armenian national teams]. We have a dispute
with Armenia over historical events. Was not the Armenian president's
invitation to Gul before the resolution of this dispute a political
risk for himself?

[Vural] Of course it was a risk. The decision to invite the Turkish
president to the soccer game was not an easy decision for Armenia. We
view the world solely through our own lens. We must also look at
events from the perspective of others. There is a neurosis about
Turkey in Armenia. Consequently, it is not easy to make any decision
related to Turkey. Politicians may have to pay--indeed have paid--a
high price for such decisions.

[Duzel] Who paid such a high price?

[Vural] Former President Levon Ter Petrosyan was ousted from office
because he sought a solution to the Karabakh problem and to establish
ties with Turkey. They made him pay the price of establishing ties
with Turkey.

Today, even though a major portion of the people of Armenia want
relations [with Turkey] to develop and the borders [between the two
countries] to open--the Turkey dossier is not so easy to handle as it
is thought.

[Duzel] Is it easy to handle the Armenia dossier in Turkey?

[Vural] It is also difficult in Turkey. However, the reality is that
the problem between us and Armenia is not something that can be
resolved by historians alone. That is because this is psychological
and political issue rather than a historical matter. There is a
certain psychology, distrust, fear, and terror that the events of the
past have created among people.

[Duzel] Do you not think that Armenian and Turkish historians can
solve this problem if they discuss the events of the past freely and
describe them objectively?

[Vural] A solution to this problem cannot be found via history alone,
because a solution requires overcoming the psychological problems this
issue has created among people. A solution requires the creation of a
climate of trust in which the two peoples can draw closer with
affection and respect and where they can talk to each other with ease.
This is not a situation that historians can overcome. The Armenian
question is a problem that needs to solved by politicians, not
historians. History can only shed light on certain issues and play a
role that facilitates a soluti on. That is all.

[Duzel] Do you think that any diplomatic steps will be taken in the
aftermath of the [Turkish] president's visit to Armenia?

[Vural] I expect and hope that they will be taken. This visit may
serve as the foundation of a new beginning between Turkey and Armenia.
Diplomatic relations between the two states must be established
without delay.

[Duzel] What do you mean by "diplomatic relations"?

[Vural] "Diplomatic relations" means Turkish diplomats are resident in
Yerevan and Armenian diplomats are resident in Ankara. This would
mean a normal relationship between the two states, which would mean
the opening of borders between them. The first step in the
normalization of relations must be the exchange of representative
missions in the two countries. We have to sign an agreement and say
that "we will exchange embassies with each other."

The opening of the borders is not a necessity just for the Armenians.
I have seen that border gate.

[Duzel] What did you see?

[Vural] I went to the Alican [Margara] border gate [from the Armenian
side]. I waved to our soldiers from afar. This gate is 10 to 15
kilometers away from Yerevan. Look, we have been in contact with
Armenia, which gained independence after the dissolution of the Soviet
Union, since 1991.

[Duzel] How so?

[Vural] For example, I am the first Turkish ambassador who visited
Armenia. At that time I was [Turkish] ambassador to Moscow. This was
the time when Armenia was on its way to becoming independent. Shnork
Kalustian, then the Armenian patriarch in Turkey, had died during his
visit to Yerevan. I sent a message to the Armenian president. I
wrote in my message that "taking an interest in the funeral of the
patriarch, who is our citizen, and facilitating the return of his
remains to Turkey is my duty" and that "I am prepared to contribute in
every way, including attending any ceremonies that may be held."

[Duzel] Did you do this in consultation with Ankara?

[Vural] No, I did it at my own initiative, because the patriarch was a
Turkish citizen. He was the spiritual leader of one of our religious
minorities. There was no relationship whatsoever between Armenia and
Turkey. At that time, Armenia was one of the constituent republics of
the Soviet Union. =3D2 0As Turkish ambassador to Moscow, it fell
within my purview like the other Soviet republics. [Kalustyan's]
funeral rites were conducted in the Armenian church in Moscow. I
attended that ceremony to the astonishment of the Armenians who were
there. They were really taken aback by the presence of a Turkish
ambassador at a funeral ceremony in an Armenian church. This was my
first contact with Armenia as ambassador.

[Duzel] Did these contacts with Armenia continue? If they did, how
did they go?

[Vural] The contacts continued. They invited me to Armenia on a
winter day. Ter Petrosyan was president. Armenia was in dramatic
conditions. It was suffering tremendous deprivations, including the
lack of any electricity. I had a long and very useful meeting with
President Ter Petrosyan about ways of developing Turkish-Armenian
relations and dissipating hostility between the two nations. Ter
Petrosyan shared my views.

[Duzel] What did Ter Petrosyan, who is the leader of the main
opposition party today, tell you?

[Vural] He said: "I cannot forget the agony of the past, but I do not
want to be stuck in the past. As a responsible statesman, I have to
think about the future of my grandchildren. I sincerely want the
development of relations with Turkey." At that time, Turkey was
perturbed by developments such as Armenia's new constitution and
declaration of independence.

[Duzel] Do certain expressions in the Armenian constitution and its
declaration of independence still annoy Turkey?

[Vural] They still annoy Turkey. However, Ter Petrosyan gave me the
impression that these issues can be overcome and I conveyed this
situation to Ankara in a lengthy=3D2 0report. Subsequently, republics
seceding from the Soviet Union declared their independence. At that
point, I returned to Ankara and all this information was evaluated.

[Duzel] Yes.

[Vural] During those meetings, it was decided that Turkey should
recognize the independence of all the republics and that it should
establish diplomatic ties with all of them except Armenia.
Unfortunately, Turkey did not establish diplomatic ties with Armenia.
This is a period that I have always seen as "lost years" for Turkey
and that I have found most regrettable. This is the year 1991 and
immediately after that. By 1993, matters were completely out of
control, and Armenia occupied Nagorno Karabakh.

[Duzel] Had diplomatic relations with Armenia been established then,
what would be happening now? Would the Armenian question have been
resolved?


[Vural] There would still be an Armenian question in Turkey, but
Turkey would be a country that has normalized its relations with
Armenia. Both sides would have benefited from this normalization. In
other words, we would have had a different evolution and a different
game, and this would have had an effect on the Diaspora Armenians.
However, we could not create this equilibrium like a great power. I
also think that this normalization would have helped to improve ties
between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The occupation of Nagorno Karabakh
could perhaps be prevented. However, we did not pay the necessary
attention to Ter Petrosyan then; we failed to help him and to seize
the moment. Later, Ter Petrosyan was ousted and [Robert] Kocharian
became president. Kocharian pursued radical policies of Armenian
nationalism. Had we helped Ter Petrosyan to alleviate the
deprivations in his country, nationalism in Armenia might not have
been so rabid.



source:http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg245671.html

[KarotheGreat]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Part 2:

[Duzel] At that time [Turgut] Ozal was president and [Suleyman]
Demirel was prime minister of a True Path Party-Social Democratic
People's Party coalition. Who opposed the establishment of diplomatic
ties with Armenia? Was it the bureaucrats or the politicians?

[Vural] Many people within the bureaucracy of the Foreign Ministry
opposed this. Ozal was very upset that this opportunity was missed.
The [Armenian] declaration of independence naturally made many
references to western Armenia--that is Turkish soil--and pledged
efforts to win recognition for the genocide. That gave the impression
that Armenia has territorial claims on Turkey. All these could have
been overcome with the establishment of diplomatic relations. I
already had prepared some proposals to change the declaration of
independence. However, there was opposition to this at the time.

[Duzel] Why was there opposition?

[Vural] I see that as a lack of courage. I reported my meeting with
Ter Petrosyan but [ellipsis]. Had we established diplomatic
relations, Turkey would not be in the tight corner it is now across
the world over the Armenian question. It would not have been so easy
to condemn a Turkey that maintains very good relations with Armenia.
We should not be too preoccupied with the matter of genocide on this
issue.

[Duzel] So what must we do?

[Vural] We are an important country of this region. Peace and
stability in this region is to our advantage. From a wider
perspective, the normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia
are very important in terms of the interests of Turkey, Azerbaijan,
and Armenia. When I say "we should not be too preoccupied with
allegations of genocide," I mean the following: Allegations of
genocide have become a vehicle of survival for the Diaspora. The
allegation of genocide has become an industry; it has created its own
people, entrepreneurs, politicia ns, artists, and money mechanisms.

[Duzel] Has not Turkey become too obsessed with genocide by not
establishing relations with Armenia?

[Vural] In effect, yes. The development of relations between Turkey
and Armenia would not entirely push aside allegations of genocide but
[ellipsis]. Ter Petrosyan once pointed at the Alican border gate and
told me: "Look, if this gate is opened, people will see and know each
other; they will commingle with each other. We will end up buying
many things we need from you. This will help the resolution of the
problems of the past."

However, we have a strange reticence. We are a country with too many
red lines and taboos. We are told that "Armenia is hostile to us" and
that "it has territorial claims on Turkey." It is time to distinguish
between rhetoric and the realities of life.

[Duzel] What are the realities of life?

[Vural] People may say, demand, and dream certain things rhetorically.
They may dream about a very large Armenia. There is no limit to
dreaming. However, the realities are evident Can Armenia take any
land from Turkey? Which sensible person can contemplate that? The
number of soldiers in our armed forces is as big as the entire
population of Armenia. We must have more confidence in ourselves.

[Duzel] The man in the street may harbor fears or may be made to
harbor fears, but how do you explain the phobias and red lines of
military and civilian bureaucrats who know the realities?

[Vural] This is Turkey. The Foreign Ministry is cautious, as
expected.

Acting with extreme caution is a rule of that profession, but no
problem can be solved without taking any risks. This also partly
reflects a desire to avoid the risk of being criticized by the Turkish
public. The entire problem is this: There is a certain circumstance
and you can either become the slave of that circumstance or find ways
of changing it. We became a slave of the circumstances.

[Duzel] Turkey became a slave of the Armenian question.

[Vural] Yes. We should have sought another equation to solve this
issue, but the risk was not taken out of fears of making mistakes and
facing criticism at home. As a result, we reduced ourselves to the
point of doing nothing.

[Duzel] As diplomatic relations develop with Armenia, will the events
of the past be discussed?

[Vural] They will be discussed inevitably. In my opinion, this is not
an impediment blocking the normalization of relations. The term
"genocide" is a descriptor that was created long after our historic
events. However, this descriptor has become largely banal today.
Every inhuman act is termed "genocide" at some point. There is little
doubt that the events we went through had very painful and tragic
aspects. There is also little doubt that the Armenians see them as a
tremendous act of injustice against them.

It is fact that they think that they were forcefully uprooted from the
places where they were born and raised. You cannot erase those
sentiments.

You cannot tell them not to think this way. Nonetheless, you can tell
them:

"Yes, these events occurred, but we cannot spend our lives on those
events. We have another life ahead of us. Let us build that life
together in friendship."

[Duzel] Does Armenia really expect only this little from Turkey in
connection with history? Is it enough to say these to them to
establish peace?

[Vural] The Armenians will of course stir up the issue of genocide.
They will seek ways of doing that. There will always be movements to
make the entire world accept this position. In the meantime, the
establishment of a "joint history commmission" between the two
countries may, at first glance, be a good step forward, but I think
that Armenia is not in a position to make a significant contribution
with respect to history. In my opinion, the problem is not in
history. I do not share the assumption that the historical facts are
not known. The facts are known. Very many things are known. The
whole problem is how these known facts are perceived, what marks they
have left, and how those marks can affect the future.

[Duzel] I did not understand.

[Vural] An Armenian may sincerely think that what happened to his
nation was genocide. We may think otherwise. If we get stuck on
this, we cannot get anywhere. Arguing that=3D2 0"the historians
should clarify this to us" means giving too much importance to
historians. Every historian has a different interpretation of every
event. The problem revolves around how the psychological problem will
be overcome. Ter Petrosyan told me: "Let us put that issue to one
side. Let us look at the future. It is obvious that we will not
reach an agreement on this issue. We should allow the two peoples to
commingle by other means. Let us bypass the genocide issue this way."
I also think that this is what needs to be done. There is no point in
delving too much into this issue.

[Duzel] There is a very large Armenian Diaspora, mainly in the United
States and France. Will they not insist on the recognition of the
genocide?

[Vural] Of course they will. However, if relations between Turkey and
Armenia improve, the Diaspora cannot have its present influence. This
is because the people of Armenia will see the concrete benefits of
good neighborly ties. When the borders open, trade will grow and th
ey will become rich.

[Duzel] Could Turkey acknowledge that the Ittihadists perpetrated a
great massacre of the Armenians?

[Vural] That would be hard. I think that we painted ourselves into a
corner. Initially, we acted as if nothing like this happened. Now we
are saying that "yes, some things happened but they were reciprocal."
I do not know where these discussions may go tomorrow, but I think
certain psychological steps may be taken on this issue.

[Duzel] What can be done?

[Vural] What would I do if I was in a position of authority? I would
say: "All Armenians and members other minorities who20lived within the
current borders of Turkey at the time of the Ottoman Empire and who
were subjected to deportation in one way or another--even if this
deportation was to other regions of the Empire--will be admitted to
Turkish citizenship automatically if they request it." I do not know
how many people would take up this offer, but, at a minimum, people
who were driven out of their villages, towns, or cities by force would
have been told: "The republic is granting you and people of your
ancestry the right to return and to become citizens of this country."
People who apply would be granted this right.

[Duzel] So what would happen to the properties and assets the
Armenians left behind during the deportation?

[Vural] These can be discussed. A fund may be established. The
return of the properties and providing a full accounting for them is
now very difficult, but a symbolic reparation is possible. What
matters is that we show that we are not insensitive in the face of a
painful situation, that we empathize with the situation, and tha t we
are considering certain ways of compensation as a humanitarian
responsibility. I would actually apologize.

It is quite debatable under what conditions but [ellipsis].
Regardless, if someone is forced to leave this country [ellipsis]. I
do not mean this only for Armenians. I also mean it with respect to
people who left after the 6-7 September [1955] incidents. I mean it
with respect to our Greek citizens.

[Duzel] When you say "apologize," what form of apology do you have in
mind?

[Vural] These events are unbecoming for Turkey. We do not approve
them. The people who were forced to leave this country have our
sympathy. We see them as our brothers. If they wish, we are prepared
to admit them to Turkish citizenship.

[Duzel] And we apologize for the pain we have caused them.

[Vural] Yes. For the pain [ellipsis]. Yes. These are the best steps
that can be taken. This is what a state like ours should do.

---End translation---

http://www.taraf.com.tr/yazar.asp?mid=1841

[seruven]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Let me translate the missing introductory paragraph of Neşe Düzel's interview:

WHY? VOLKAN VURAL
With President Abdullah Gül's visit to Yerevan, Turkey made a very important step. Two countries, which refuse to establish diplomatic relations due to historical events, made connections in the level of presidents for the first time. Now, expectation of this new movement's advance has emerged. What have two countries gained from the tension that they have continued so far? What will they gain from friendship? Why has Armenia invited Gül "now"? Why has Gül accepted this invitation? What will be the effects of this rapprochement to the balance in Caucasus? What should the state do about historical problems? Can the Armenian Question be solved by historians or politicians? We have asked all these questions one of Turkey's most experienced and leading diplomats, retired ambassador Volkan Vural. Volkan Vural, who was Moscow ambassador during the period USSR was dissolved and Armenia gained her independence, was Prime Minister Tansu Çiller's chief adviser in 1993. Later, he became ambassador in Bonn and EU secretary general.

P.S. Advices related to translation/English are always welcomed. Please PM to me.
P.P.S. for KarotheGreat: Thanks for the interview. However, the second part (published on the following day) is also missing. Could you find the translation? I also wonder what "you" think as you asked others.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Karo, I think this is the typical turkish tactic of good turk, bad turk. Right now vural is playing the role of the good turk, understanding and compassionate, just looking for peace. I wouldn't be suprised if he is doing this with the full blessing of official ankara.

But he still won't go as far to admit a Genocide did occur, that Armenians have not only moral and historical claims to the land, but also legal. Plus notice how he says ltp told him during their talks that an open border would be Armenia buying things from turkey, but no mention of what turks would buy from Armenia. All of this is why I don't support open borders with turkey until some of the things that Harut Sassounyan suggested are implemented and only if they show positive implecations for Armenia. In other words if the costs are not greater than the benefits, which I would want to be much higher than the costs.

[meline]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

It might look ok at first glance, but then it is the classic example of what "lezou vosgor chunee" means. It's just media talk aimed at embellishing the image of Turkey, and like Armanen said it's probably encouraged by official Ankara. One might ask how come the tables turned so quickly and the Turkish press suddenly became so friendly and oh, understanding. I think they just want the West to buy it