Armenian-Turkish Relations

[seruven]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

You cannot compare Armenian "extremism" to Turkish extremism

I strongly oppose your stance in this manner. You try to find excuses for Armenian extremists while blaming Turkish ones. One nation's sufferings don't justify its cruel/wrong actions. (please for one moment try to forget what your nationality is.) You don't even mention Armenian extremism without quotation marks as if there is no such thing.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

wow, and you know your name is deceitful, b/c it's not your name, and who knows if your armenian? and Crusader1492 is not a crusader nor from 1492, the same goes with other users so i guess, by your logic we should all be banned

It is well known that garod is a turk. Now stop being such a child.

[Armanen]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I strongly oppose your stance in this manner. You try to find excuses for Armenian extremists while blaming Turkish ones. One nation's sufferings don't justify its cruel/wrong actions. (please for one moment try to forget what your nationality is.) You don't even mention Armenian extremism without quotation marks as if there is no such thing.

Comparing Armenian extremism with turkish is like a 3 year old football player being compared to a 27 year old AC Milan star player.

[crusader1492]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

VOICES OF CAUTION FROM HISTORIC PAST

Turkish President Abdullah Gul's visit to Armenia and the forthcoming visit of President Serge Sargisian have triggered euphoria on both sides of the border, more on the Turkish side than the Armenian.

It is as if the floodgates have been let loose in the Turkish press to give historic significance to this turn of events.

By blockading Armenia and refusing to establish diplomatic relations, Ankara's intention was to bring Armenia to its knees. Although that prospect never materialized, a resentment was built up in the subconsciousness of the Armenia's populace that all the hardships they had been experiencing came because of the Karabagh conflict. Armenia had won its first monumental victory in a thousand years and had liberated a historic piece of her ancestral homeland, but it was never able to digest its victory. Eventually, however, her tenacity paid off.

The lifting of the blockade by Turkey and the establishment of diplomatic relations were conditioned by Ankara by certain compromises which Armenia had to make: official recognition of Turkish Armenian border (defined by The Treaty of Kars, 1923), renunciation of Genocide claims and the return of captured territories to Azerbaijan, including Nagorno Karabagh.

Ankara did not budge on these issues, knowing full well that they were non-starters.

Turkey was very confident and comfortable, and it was left to Armenia to make the first move.

Meanwhile, the Genocide issue was kept on the agenda of Yerevan's foreign policy, while Karabagh's de facto independence was considered a fait accompli.

But Russia's resurgent assertiveness and its war against Georgia shattered the entire set up of the Caucasus' political landscape.

As was revealed in Paul Goble's insightful analysis, Russia had more influence on Turkey than previously assumed by pundits. Moscow's tit-for-tat policy of recognizing Abkhazia's and South Ossetia's independence versus Kosovo placed under revision the entire map of the Caucasus region. Armenia, being Russia's closest ally, suddenly gained prominence. Turkey moved in with its proposal for a Caucasus peace and stability pact which could not be achieved without Armenia's participation.

Turkey's move also intended to contain Iran in the region to please the West and to corner a historic adversary since the Ottoman period.

Suddenly Turkey needed Armenia more than Armenia needed Turkey.

We cannot assume that Turkey's preconditions are already shelved, but they became negotiable. Eventually, Turkey had to come to terms with Armenia to see any movement in its prospects to join the European Union.

At this point, if nothing comes out of these developments the Turkish public opinion will experience a crash course in history. The Turkish media is exuberant with the turn of events and the Genocide issue is once again on the forefront, despite Article 301 of Turkey's penal code.

In the past, an individual writer, namely Kemal Yalçin had dared to apologize for the Genocide. Now we see prominent scholar and political commentator Baskin Oran has come up with the suggestion that Turkey must make amends for the pain it inflicted on the Armenians, and cease espousing the cause of Ittihad and Terraki criminals. This chain of apologies has extended all the way to the diplomats and statesmen who have a say in Turkey's foreign policy, like Tansu Ciller's political advisor, Vulkan Voural.

Fortunately, the Armenian media is more subdued, cautious and analytical. We do not see the ecstasy that is witnessed on the Turkish side of the border.

It was only a short while ago that Prime Minister Erdogan had joined Azeri President Ilham Aliyev and Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvilli to inaugurate the rail system, which intended to isolate Armenia.

Turkey's moves are not motivated by goodness of heart. They reflect cold political calculations.

Already, the first president of the Third Republic and opposition leader Levon Ter-Petrosian has cautioned that Turkey intends to pit the diaspora against Armenia. Indeed, that is a recurring theme in the Turkish media and Ankara's political circles. The argument by the Turks is that Armenia's distressed population is concerned with bread-and-butter issues and is eager to improve relations with Turkey, while Diaspora Armenians, who have settled comfortably in affluent Western societies, are fanning the flames of the Genocide issue.

Of course, there is some truth in that but not the whole truth, because, the Diaspora Armenians are the survivors and descendents of survivors of the Genocide. Except for Vaspouragan and Kars area Armenians who fled to the Caucasus, the population of the present day Armenia lived under the Tsarist rule and they were spared the Ottoman Turkish genocidal policies. Also, for 70 years, the Soviet authorities, in deference to the Turks, repressed any reference to the Genocide. Finally, when the time comes for a settlement, Armenia is the legal entity to negotiate the terms, always taking into consideration the Diaspora concerns.

Historic precedents need to caution us against Turkish goodwill. Of course, we need to improve relations with Turkey and resolve long-standing problems. But with a realistic approach based on history.

My mother was from Adana in Cilicia and had a revealing story about Turks; a blind Turkish beggar at the gate of the Armenian Church survived through the charity dispensed by Armenian parishioners. The beggar blessed the Armenians every time alms were placed in his palm. Come the Adana massacres of 1909, the beggar was pleading his fellow Turks to drop an Armenian in his lap so that he could deserve the heavens by slitting the throat of his victim.

Of course, our legendary hero and military genius General Antranik was more experienced than my mother. He never trusted Turks and for that reason he resigned from the Dashnag party when the latter cozied up to the Turks.

In 1895, Sultan Abdulhamid organized widescale massacres, murdering some 300,000 Armenians. Armenagan party members in Van took up arms when they found out the atrocities were closing in on their town and they stopped the overwhelming Ottoman Army. The British consul negotiated a truce and the Armenians were promised safe passage to Iran. After they were disarmed, they were ambushed on their way and 800 freedom fighters were murdered.

In 1908, the Ittihadists brought about a revolution and adopted a constitution. Armenian political parties gave up their arms and they declared, "we are all Ottomans." A year later, 30,000 Armenians were massacred in Adana. Armenians were not awakened and they were lulled into believing that Turks had changed. Krikor Zohrab, a member of the Ottoman Parliament was a close friend of Talaat, the mastermind of the Armenian Genocide. One evening Talaat treated his good friend Zohrab to dinner, only to arrest him the next morning and eventually to have his skull crushed with a rock on his way to exile.

Armenian volunteers joined the Allies during World War I, and in the aftermath of the war, they returned to Cilicia victoriously. Many Turks joined Armenians to live peacefully in Cilicia. Some even converted to Christianity, only to turn their guns against Armenians when the Kemalist hordes invaded Cilicia, after shameful betrayal of the French army.

The historic precedents are too numerous to cite.

This rare opportunity cannot be missed. Yet, we should not underestimate the shrewdness of Turkish diplomacy. After all, they ruled a huge empire for more than six centuries. They make their political moves with cold-blooded calculation. We need to respond in kind, something which we have failed to do in our history.

By Edmond Y. Azadian

[crusader1492]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

...a example of "tolerant" Turkish behavior:

TURKISH HACKERS "TAKE VENGEANCE" ON BULGARIAN CHURCH FOR CONDOLENCES IT SENT TO ARMENIA OVER GENOCIDE ANNIVERSARY

PanARMENIAN.Net
10.10.2008 17:30 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ A group of Turkish hackers cracked the website
of Bulgarian Orthodox Church and posted an offending message on the
front page.

Presently, the website is unavailable. The administrators promise to
recover it within several days.

It is supposed that the attack was undertaken because of the
condolences the Bulgarian Orthodox Church extended to Catholicos
of All Armenians over an anniversary of the Armenian Genocide,
NEWSru.com reports.

[ArmSurvival]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I strongly oppose your stance in this manner. You try to find excuses for Armenian extremists while blaming Turkish ones. One nation's sufferings don't justify its cruel/wrong actions. (please for one moment try to forget what your nationality is.) You don't even mention Armenian extremism without quotation marks as if there is no such thing.

Please name one extremist policy conducted by the Armenian government. Until you have a concrete example, you have no right to talk about Armenian "extremism".

On the other hand there is Turkish extremism which I explained to you in another thread and repeated in this one. We can name several extremist government policies which had consequences on a massive scale. We can even name several current extremist government policies enforced by Ankara. These are very real and threaten the very existence of Armenia. Unfortunately for you the only argument for Armenian "extremism" I have heard so far is ASALA, which only had around 100 members worldwide and who only killed diplomats, and have not existed since the mid-80's. I'm sorry, but Turks can't keep using a tiny, non-existant group as proof of "Armenian extremism", especially when they acted independently of mainstream Armenians and had nothing to do with any government. This is completely different than Turkish extremism which is completely backed by the central government, and which has millions of supporters, not just 100 like ASALA. Armanen is right, you are comparing a child football player to an AC Milan star.

[crusader1492]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Please name one extremist policy conducted by the Armenian government. Until you have a concrete example, you have no right to talk about Armenian "extremism".

On the other hand there is Turkish extremism which I explained to you in another thread and repeated in this one. We can name several extremist government policies which had consequences on a massive scale. We can even name several current extremist government policies enforced by Ankara. These are very real and threaten the very existence of Armenia. Unfortunately for you the only argument for Armenian "extremism" I have heard so far is ASALA, which only had around 100 members worldwide and who only killed diplomats, and have not existed since the mid-80's. I'm sorry, but Turks can't keep using a tiny, non-existant group as proof of "Armenian extremism", especially when they acted independently of mainstream Armenians and had nothing to do with any government. This is completely different than Turkish extremism which is completely backed by the central government, and which has millions of supporters, not just 100 like ASALA. Armanen is right, you are comparing a child football player to an AC Milan star.

What else do you expect from him? Intellectual honesty? Logic? Objectivity? Moral decency?

...I said it before, these Turks all suffer from group-think, founded on Turkish cheuvenism. They're all the same.

[seruven]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Please name one extremist policy conducted by the Armenian government. Until you have a concrete example, you have no right to talk about Armenian "extremism".

Dear ArmSurvival,
Existence of one nation's extremism does not require that nation's government to conduct similar radical policies. Telling that there is no radical Armenian is same with telling no communists or nationalists or liberals in Armenian society.
I believe that both Turkish and Armenian nations include people with various political stances. Some of them are fascists and chauvinists and I condemn that kind of people.
I met with people who truly wish annihilation of J'ewish people or people who start to swear as soon as they hear the word "Kurd". These are whom I call extremists and I have always opposed them.
I expect people to object to the ideas of other people who act with nothing but pure hatred.
As I mentioned earlier, in that forum one can claim that "the only good Turk is the that Turk". Who is a Turk anyway? Who has the right to decide who is good, who is bad, who has the right to live?
Or one can call Turkish as dog barking.
You should react such things. Don't lecture me about Turkish extremists, because I try my very best with them.

ASALA hasn't existed since 1985. Don't use them as some kind of boogey-man. You cannot compare Armenian "extremism" to Turkish extremism: genocide of half our nation, theft of countless businesses and personal properties, destruction of virtually all our cultural monuments, denial of genocide for 100 years by government propaganda and lobbyists, blockading Armenia into a stage of virtual siege and backing Azerbaijan's militarily while they are yelling that 'Yerevan belongs to Azerbaijan'.

Destruction of Armenians is of course undefendable. But how can you give this example as you justify ASALA by telling it is history. Apply same criteria for both Turks and Armenians. Closing the borders with Armenia (I oppose that) or supporting Azerbaijan.. These are not examples of extremism, IMHO. This is politics. Armenia is seeking her own benefit as well and acts accordingly which is natural (consider Karabagh [or Artsakh whatever] issue).

as a footnote:

who only killed diplomats

That's wrong and very easy to check. I truly hope it was an unintentional mistake.

[seruven]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

What else do you expect from him? Intellectual honesty? Logic? Objectivity? Moral decency?

This is one of the unforgettable moments of my life as I am accused of lacking such virtues for the first time.
This forum will turn all my hair to white.

[crusader1492]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

What is it with you Turks? Why do you come here? You have no intention to accept the truth. You have no use for the truth.

Anyway, good luck with the nationalist chest beating and screaming until you are all blue in the face. It is not our job to educate you. I just wish you would wallow in your ignorance and venom somewhere else besides this forum.