Armenian-Turkish Relations

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

i think the only reason turkey wanted to sign an agreement with armenia was to show obama that were in negotiations so dont ruin it by saying genocide and apparently it worked. now we'll probably have to wait till April 23, 2010 before anything happens so turkey can say were working on it dont call it a genocide.

[UrMistake]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations



http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_de...0745Azerbaijan closes Turkish mosque

in Baku: Report
The mosque was built beside the "Turks cemetery" erected in Baku in honour of 1130 Turkish soldiers died fighting withing "Caucasian Islam Army" against Armenian and Russian soldiers that occupied Azerbaijan in 1918.
Sunday, 26 April 2009 13:34
World Bulletin / News Desk

Azerbaijan, which is reacting to Turkey's rapprochement with Armenia, closed a Turkish mosque in Baku, Turkish newspaper Vatan reported.

Also, Azerbaijan decided to raise the price of natural gas it is selling to Turkey.

Azerbaijani police met religious officials after noon prayers at the Baku Martyrs Mosque, built by Turkish Religious Affairs Directorate. Then, they hang a note on the door of the mosque saying, "the mosque is closed for restoration."

Also, the head of the Azerbaijani oil company said, "the raised natural gas prices will be valid as of April 15." Therefore, Azerbaijan will ask Turkey to pay the retrospective difference.

The mosque was built on 28 June, 1995 beside the "Turks cemetery" (Martyrdom) erected in Baku in honour of 1130 Turkish soldiers died fighting withing "Caucasian Islam Army" against Armenian and Russian soldiers that occupied Azerbaijan in 1918.

"Road map"

Last week, Turkey and Armenia have agreed on a comprehensive framework for the normalization of their bilateral relations in a "mutually satisfactory manner".

The agreement between Turkey and Armenia depends on Karabakh even it's not mentioned in the road map.

Acoording to the report, Nagorno-Karabakh problem is not included to the agreement between two countries. Hovewer, it is said the road map, that contains of parallel steps to be taken, depends on Nagorno-Karabakh issue as a "de facto" point.

Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 in support of Azerbaijan after Armenia occupied Nagorno-Karabakh.

[Virgil]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

AZG Armenian Daily #075, 25/04/2009

Interview

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSIAN'S INTERVIEW TO RUSSIA TODAY TV

Question - Alexander Gurnov: Good evening, Mr. President. Thank you
for accepting our interview invitation. The first question, I would
like to address is the following: what is the meaning of the date of
April 24 for you as the President of the Republic of Armenia.

Answer: Serzh Sargsian, President of Armenia: Good afternoon! The
history of the people of Armenia is calculated in thousands of
years. Throughout that history we've had victories and defeats; we
have had gains and losses. But throughout our history there is one
turning point which is a dividing line. And that point is the April 24
of 1915. After that we deal with absolutely different
reality. Hundreds of thousands and millions of people were living and
creating a cultural heritage and their daily life in their homeland,
but were made to leave those lands ` part of which were massacred and
the other part had to escape to survive. And today in the world there
is no, almost no country where are no Armenians. The population of
today's Armenia, almost half of it, are the heirs of the survivors of
the genocide. And these are realities which are in our life every day.

Today if you move from Yerevan 15`20 km towards Turkey you would see
the last closed border of Europe. Armenia gained its independence in
1991. And for 18 years now that border is closed. I cite this example
not to say that we are under blockade, but to make it clear that April
24 of 1915 is everyday present in our lives. April 24 is officially
announced as the day of the victims of the genocide. But even before
being officially recognized as such a date, April 24 has always been
for our people such a day of memory and remembrance, also for me as
one of the representatives of our people.

But for me as the President of Armenia it is my duty to take measures
to soften the impact of that terrible tragedy and to take measures to
make sure that such crimes will not repeat in the future. And the most
efficient way for that is the international recognition of the
genocide.

Question - Alexander Gurnov: These days many believe that the
President of the United States Barak Obama is likely to recognize the
Armenian genocide as he had promised during his election
campaign. What is the reason Armenians attach such a big importance to
the genocide recognition?

Answer: Serzh Sargsian, President of Armenia: Firstly, the recognition
of the genocide is the most efficient way for the prevention from such
crimes in the future. Secondly, justice means much for the Armenian
people. And recognition of the genocide is also affected by that
belief. There is no single Armenian in the world that is not affected
somehow by that genocide. And obviously each Armenian wants to see
justice in that regard.

The United States has been extensively present in the Ottoman Empire
through their diplomatic corps, through their missionaries,
businesspeople. We all know they had insurance companies functioning
in the Ottoman Empire. And for the US there is no doubt about the
historic nature of the genocide as it has taken place. They do not
need any additional proves or witnesses from us. I want to remind that
42 states of the US have recognized the genocide. I want to remind
that when the US Congress Foreign Affairs Committee was hearing the
case and they do it on regular basis discussing the issue of the
Armenian genocide ` it is almost unanimous recognition that there was
genocide. But some of the congressmen say: "Yes, there has been
genocide, and the US has to recognize that reality". And the others
say: "Yes, it has taken place, but now it is not in the national
interests of the US to recognize it."

Question - Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, you described the border
with Turkey as the last closed one in Europe. In what degree the
events of 1915 hinder your relations with Turkey nowadays, about 100
years after the Genocide? What are the current perspectives of
normalization of relations?

Answer: Serzh Sargsian, President of Armenia: As I have mentioned,
April 24 1915 has everyday presence in our live. But also as you know
I have invited the President of Turkey Mr. Gul to come to Yerevan last
year in September to jointly watch the football game between Armenia
and Turkey and also to talk about our relations. And as you know
Mr. Gul accepted that invitation and visited Yerevan. We have started
an intensive negotiation stage with Turkey to establish diplomatic
relations.

We base ourselves on the fact that there has been genocide, but
non-recognition of that genocide by Turkey is not watched by us as an
insurmountable obstacle for the establishment of the relations. We are
in favor of having relations with Turkey without any preconditions. As
you know before Gul`s visit to Armenia Turkey was offering two
preconditions. One of them ` genocide related and the other ` Naghorno
Karabakh problem. In the negotiations that we have had since, we both,
Armenia and Turkey, took stance that our negotiations shall proceed
without any preconditions: establishment of relations without
preconditions and then discussion of any questions that might be of
interest to the parties.

And as you know Mr. Gul invited me to Turkey to jointly watch the
return football game and I will be happy to accept that invitation and
will visit Turkey, if by that time the border is open or at least we
are very close to that. Till recent period of time, everyone was
convinced that we have significantly progressed and there was some
expectation that would allow having a historic breakthrough, but
recently there have been statements by the Prime Minister of Turkey to
the effect that the Armenian-Turkish relations can improve if Armenia
compromises on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We watch this as a step back
from the existing agreements and as a precondition being put
forward. I believe that in our relations we have progressed
sufficiently. And now the ball is on the Turkish side of the
field. And if we use the football terminology (as this process has
been labeled as "football diplomacy" by the media) then we can say
that any football game has a certain timeframe that limits it.

Question - Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, you mentioned the
Naghorno-Karabakh conflict. What are the perspectives of peaceful
settlement of Naghorno-Karabakh conflict and normalization of
relations with Azerbaijan - another important neighbor?

Answer: Serzh Sargsian, President of Armenia: As you know, the problem
of Nagorno-Karabakh is dealt with by the Minsk group and its
co-chairs: Russia, the US and France. And from the beginning of the
presidency, I have had three meetings with my Azeri counterpart
Mr. Ilham Aliev. And I think this one year has been a sufficient
period for us to understand each other's positions, clarify those
positions, and make our judgments on them. I think now it is the right
time to speed up the whole process and to move towards mutually
acceptable solutions. And as you know the key point of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is the right to self determination of the
people of Nagorno-Karabakh. If this issue is solved, then all the
other issues of concern can be solved.

I am happy that most recently the leadership of Azerbaijan has been
talking about solving this conflict on the basis of all principles of
the international law. A few days ago the President of Azerbaijan has
met the President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev and he has talked to the
Russian media and reiterated that this problem has to be solved on the
basis of all principles of international law. And to remind you I want
to tell that for a long time the leadership of Azerbaijan has been
talking about solving this Nagorno-Karabakh conflict either by
military means or only on the principle of the territorial integrity.

In general when I hear people speaking about territorial integrity in
many cases not knowing the substance of the conflict or due to
political considerations many people prefer to say things that put
them into a very delicate condition ` in many cases I start to think
that there are not only double, but also triple standards. Within the
last twenty years, the membership of the United Nations has been
increased by forty sovereign states. Forty out of 192 member states of
the UN have joined the organization in the last twenty years. How
could one then speak about inviolability of frontiers? Of course, I am
in favor of, and I can never be against the principle of territorial
integrity of states and we have never had any territorial claims
towards Azerbaijan. The problem is being deformed here.

It is the initiative of self-determination of the people of
Nagorno-Karabakh that has been represented as a territorial claim of
Armenia towards Azerbaijan, which is of course not
true. Nagorno-Karabakh was merged to Azerbaijan in the Soviet period
by the decision of the Communist Party Body and even in that case the
Constitution of the Soviet Union was straightforwardly providing for
the autonomous status of Nagorno-Karabakh as a district. In other
words, it was recognized as some national state arrangement. And
Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous district succeeded from the Soviet Union
and Azerbaijan according to the legislation of the Soviet Union. When
Azerbaijan today is speaking about the occupation of the part of its
territory, to put it in a most soft way, they forget how these events
unfolded. In 1991, along with Azerbaijan, Naghorno Karabakh succeeded
from the Soviet Union after which it suffered an aggression from
Azerbaijan and as the result of the military actions that were imposed
by Azerbaijan we have what we have today.

Indeed, today forces of self-defense of Naghorno Karabakh control also
such territories which in the past have not been part of Naghorno
Karabakh autonomous district, but it should be remembered, that people
of Naghorno Karabakh call those territories "security zone". Despite
the fact that the cease-fire stands for 15 years, the
cause-consequences relationships in that conflict have not
changed. From those territories on a daily bases thousands of shells
were thrown on peaceful inhabitants of Naghorno Karabakh, and it is
not right to accuse the people of Naghorno Karabakh, Armenians that
they have been able to secure their right for life by a heavy price of
their blood, and to call that an `occupation.' I don't think it is a
just approach.

I want to repeat that I am very happy that the President of
Azerbaijan, a few days ago, when he was speaking about international
law principles he also spoke about the fact that this also has to be
addressed on the basis of all founding principles of the UN and
OSCE. Of course, this is the way to move forward. As we all know, the
most recent ministerial summit of OSCE that took place at the end of
2008 in Helsinki has stated three principles: the right to self
determination, territorial integrity and non-use of force as the
guiding principles for the solution of this conflict. And these
principles are the basis for the negotiations also incorporated into
the framework document offered to us by the Minsk Group co-chairs. So,
if we look from this perspective we have advanced significantly. There
are possibilities and chances that situation can greatly change as
well.

Question - Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, there is an opinion that
many problems in the post soviet area can be resolved through CIS
structures. According to another opinion, CIS has already exhausted
itself. Do you think that this is true or are there resources to be
used?

Answer: Serzh Sargsian, President of Armenia: I do not think that the
CIS has exhausted its resources and I have to state that the cease
fire that has been signed in 1994 has been signed exactly under the
auspices of the CIS. And this once again comes to prove that the CIS
is definitely needed. Any organization can be only what its members
want to see and make out of it. We have lived within one country for
70 years. And many countries for decades had been the part of the
Russian Empire before that. And to immediately interrupt all those
connections and ties ` I do not think it is right or productive. If
countries like Canada or Australia till now keep their connections and
do not cut their ties with the United Kingdom, with the Royal dynasty
of the UK ` it does not mean that Canada or Australia are less
sovereign states than we are. Within decades and centuries they have
created ties and connections that can be very beneficial within the
Commonwealth. Here much depends on Russia. If Russia believes that the
CIS is an important and needed structure, I think that the resources
of the CIS are increasing.

Question - Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, Russia is actively voicing
the idea of the need to review the existing system of European
security and stressing the necessity to sign a new Treaty on European
security. In what degree official Yerevan shares this approach?

Answer: Serzh Sargsian, President of Armenia: I understand the
motivation of my Russian colleagues. I understand the position of the
Russian Federation. The security system that we see today was formed
decades ago, when it was difficult to take into account all the
realities, when the threats and challenges were significantly
different from what we face today. And exactly for that reason there
is need for some amendments and changes to the security system. Let me
bring a few examples. If we speak about the efficiency of OSCE, as you
know, there is an agreement regulating the conventional forces in
Europe and providing for certain quotas for each signatory country.

For a long period of time, Azerbaijan is significantly violating those
quotas. It was violating these quotas by getting supplies from one or
a few countries which are parties to the same treaty. And it seems
that no one is ready to take necessary steps to show us mechanisms for
those quotas. Security systems are usually being formed at the time of
global shocks ` and the two world wars were the shocks like
that. There are analysts who even believe that it is a precondition
for the formation of a new security system ` there should be a global
shock before a new international security architecture can be
formed. But I hope, that at the time of this global economic crisis
the big powers of the world will consider this as the major
international shock that would allow changing the security
architecture as well within the European model of security.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

WHAT IS KARS AGREEMENT?

By Armen Manvelian, translated by L.H.

Armenian-Turkish last statement has kicked up a fuss in Armenia. We can underline that there is no neutral and impartial analysis here. Trying to fill up the gap here, "Azg" daily publishes so-called Kars agreement that according to the Turkish press is one of the preconditions that the official Ankara puts forward for improvement of Armenian-Turkish bilateral relations and opening of the border. And in this situation the main question is – what is Kars agreement and what subject does it touch upon?

Once more we want to underline that it is not clear yet if the Kars agreement is a precondition or not, but we want to note that it is signed on October 13, 1921, between Turkey, on the one hand, and Soviet Republics of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan, on the other hand. This multilateral agreement was signed in the presence of Russian delegation representatives and was actually the reflection of the Russian-Turkish agreement signed in March of 1921. Foreign Minister Asqanaz Mravian and Minister of Internal Affairs Petros Makintsian signed the agreement on behalf of Soviet Armenia. After one year of signing the agreement it was ratified by the Transcaucasian three republics and the ratification documents were handed to the Turkish side in Yerevan. Practically, the Armenian-Turkish present-day border has been marked by this agreement. It is the only agreement that regulates the relations between the two countries. Subsequently, a memorandum of using drinking and irrigation water on Armenian-Turkish border, and also other documents were signed on the basis of this agreement.

People, who are against this agreement’s reaffirmation, mention that it is against our claim and with this agreement we actually recognize modern Turkey’s territorial integrity. In 1991, when Armenia proclaimed its independence, it was announced that the newly independent Armenia is the legal successor of the Soviet Republic. It stands to reason that the third republic recognizes all agreements signed by the Soviet Armenia.

Besides, in March of 1991, when Armenia became a UN member, the Armenian authorities actually recognized the territorial integrity of the UN member-countries. It means that Armenia has already de jure recognized the neighboring Turkey’s territorial integrity for several times. Consequently, the clamor set up by the Armenian political parties is only a PR and is delayed from the aspect of international law.

However, the Kars agreement has defects as well. In particular, it is underlined in the agreement that under concept of Turkey the territories are kept in view that are involved in the National Oath adopted by the Ottoman Parliament in Costandinopolis (Istanbul) on January 28, 1920. It means that Armenia taking into account the above-mentioned can renounce this agreement, because according to so-called National Oath such territories were involved in the borders of Turkey that today are not part of it and belong to Iran and Iraq. Besides, the Kars state was out of the borders of that Turkey.

Therefore, the agreement needs detailed and impartial discussion and analysis to understand if it is advantageous or not.

Nevertheless, I think that Armenia should step boldly forward and carry on an active dialogue with Turkey that will not only solve the issue of the border but also will create a new political situation in the whole South Caucasus and will strengthen Armenia’s position in the international scene.

"Azg" daily will touch upon the Kars agreement in detail in its future issues.

The complete text of Kars agreement is available only in Russian. You can read it on our website’s Russian section.

http://www.azgdaily.com/EN/2009042801

[Gavur]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

This sounds like a deal breaker unless it's modified to satisfy present day concerns.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

Like Serge said Armenia does not accept the Kars treaty because by accepting it its as if Armenia accepts there was no genocide. I think they had the defect of the agreement in mind when they agreed to it.

[Gavur]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

"Turkey wants Armenia to cede territories"


08:06 pm | April 27, 2009
Armenia's ex Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian thinks Armenian people could commemorate the 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide in more encouraging conditions.

"This year we wanted to read in the eyes of our neighbours a readiness to shoulder the burden of history. But our expectations didn't come true. On the contrary, today I experience more bewilderment and doubt than I did in the previous years," Mr. Oskanian said in Beirut.

The ex FM criticized the establishment of Armenian-Turkish historians' commission.

"What are they talking about? Only Turkey claims that the issue needs to be studied. Only Turkey casts doubt on historic facts. Establishment of a commission to study the authenticity of the genocide is inadmissible," said Mr. Oskanian.

Under the Sèvres treaty, Armenia's territory was to be ten times larger today.

Turkey renounced the treaty signed by the Turkish government and created a new de-facto situation by force which led to the signing of the Lausanne agreement which determined the current borders of Armenia.

Asked whether Armenia will make concessions to Turkey regarding the Karabakh conflict, Vartan Oskanian said: "Turkey wants Armenia to cede the territories which will protect us from the reoccurence of the 1915 events. But Turkey's expectations run counter to ours. There is no coincidence of interests in this issue. Moreover, as Turkey fully realises that the Karabakh conflict cannot be resolved in the near future, it claims that the territories around Karabakh be returned to Azerbaijan. If in case of the preceding prerequisites there are chances to reach a diplomatic agreement, in this case it is quite impossible. "

http://www.a1plus.am/en/politics/2009/04/27/vardan-oskanyan

[gegev]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

i dont know how accurate this is but according to the azeris
The roadmap, which will determine the fate of Turkey-Armenia relations, consists of 5 main items:

-Armenia will recognize Gars treaty signed between the USSR and Turkey in 1921;

-Joint commission of historians will be set up to investigate the genocide claims and the third countries may join the commission;

-The borders will be reopened between the two countries and relevant agreements will be signed to begin trade;

-The two countries will accredit their ambassadors to Georgia in Ankara and Yerevan, after that direct diplomatic relations will be established;

-The issues in the roadmap requiring approval of the legislative body will be discussed in the parliament.

Almost a week passed after signing the Armenian – Turkish agreement and our Foreign Minister refuses to confirm or refuse to agreement above. And says only one thing that Turks didn’t consider Artsakh issue settlement as a precondition.

OK, thanks we learned it already. We are asking another question.

Dear, dear, dear Minister you are answering the wrong question. The question is;

Did Turkey set against Armenia the two preconditions above? Let me quote them again below for being more precise.

• Armenia must recognize the Kars Agreements signed between SSCB and Turkey. The agreement is not open to renegotiation.
• Third-party nations may also join the commission of historians which will handle the genocide accusations.

Do you agree that the above quoted terms are preconditions from Turkish side to sign the agreement?

If you claim that the quoted terms are not preconditions it will mean that the Armenian side insisted to include them in the agreement text.

If the two preconditions are not included in the agreement text you can declare that it is wrong the terms above are not included in the Agreement text without disclosing it.

Please answer yes or not without disclosing the Agreement text.

And your further silence, for sure, will mean that they, in fact, are included in the agreement text.

Gegev

[JohnCanadian]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I dont believe all this propaganda, retaliation, and offensive photo kind of behaviour is going to assist in the piece and bilateral relationship building process. Yes I understand the Armenian Genocide is a very sensitive issue for both Turkey and Armenia, but all this rhetoric is just unacceptable on both sides and should stop its going to make the situation between Turkey and Armenians worse.

You may debate this for as long as you want but not in a provoking manner. Yes that photo is highly offensive and it should be removed.

Armenia may be an extremely poor country but I dont believe that is entirely the Turkish fault, yeah the extreme poverty may have been contributed to the Turkish side on some counts but not entirely.

Both Countries must be able to work together and assist in the relationship and trust building process without that Armenia and Turkey will not prosper in peace and reconciliation and Armenia will not be at peace with its neighbors.

The main reason for Armenia being an extremely poor country is because of the collapse of the Former Soviet Union, when the USSR collapsed every Former Soviet Republics economy, political, and social aspects fell down with it including Russia which is still very much struggling in a lot of ways.

Dont think I am trying to take sides cause I am not I am being neutral. Canadians have a long history of being a neutral country with its citizens and I am one of those citizens contributing to Canada's neutrality.

[UrMistake]

Re: Armenian-Turkish Relations

I dont believe all this propaganda, retaliation, and offensive photo kind of behaviour is going to assist in the piece and bilateral relationship building process. Yes I understand the Armenian Genocide is a very sensitive issue for both Turkey and Armenia, but all this rhetoric is just unacceptable on both sides and should stop its going to make the situation between Turkey and Armenians worse.

You may debate this for as long as you want but not in a provoking manner. Yes that photo is highly offensive and it should be removed.

Armenia may be an extremely poor country but I dont believe that is entirely the Turkish fault, yeah the extreme poverty may have been contributed to the Turkish side on some counts but not entirely.

Both Countries must be able to work together and assist in the relationship and trust building process without that Armenia and Turkey will not prosper in peace and reconciliation and Armenia will not be at peace with its neighbors.

The main reason for Armenia being an extremely poor country is because of the collapse of the Former Soviet Union, when the USSR collapsed every Former Soviet Republics economy, political, and social aspects fell down with it including Russia which is still very much struggling in a lot of ways.

Dont think I am trying to take sides cause I am not I am being neutral. Canadians have a long history of being a neutral country with its citizens and I am one of those citizens contributing to Canada's neutrality.

Well Armenian President said open borders for bissunes,but how can u accuse Armenia for turkeys demands?
Were is justice,i dont know what u know about turkish history but,in europe they all know what turks will do they just hope that they can make turks more europeans cause they will benefit from an lesser agressor in europes borders

They just belive turkeys will to be more civilized state,well till now turks are good for cheap laybor and products,weapon buyer,

From the beginning of the state they only make fool of europeans working on there personal agenta,they invade Cyprus for no reason,they were ready to invade armenia for no real reason,they tried to take an island creating serious tension with Greece,even today they violate Greece airspace by combat aircrafts.
Turks havent change as people only there faces,same house with new doors.