Tweet
THE FINANCIAL TIMES: THE AGREEMENT ON 'ROAD MAP' SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN RUSHED OUT TO ENABLE BARACK OBAMA TO ISSUE A STATEMENT COMMEMORATING THE 1915 MASSACRES WITHOUT USING THE WORD "GENOCIDE"
ArmInfo
2009-04-28 12:39:00
'The agreement between Turkey and Armenia on a "road map" to normalise
their relations is very good news. Their historic animosity since
the slaughter and mass deportation of Armenians from the collapsing
Ottoman empire in 1915 has destabilised the region, poisoned internal
politics, isolated and impoverished Armenia, and cast a shadow over
Turkey's relations with Europe and America. Now there is a chance of
beginning to heal the wounds', The Financial Times wrote in an item
'Armenia's grief'.
'Yet first a word of caution. Last week's declaration gave no clues
to the precise terms of the agreement, nor a timetable. It seems to
have been rushed out to enable Barack Obama, US president, to issue
a statement commemorating the 1915 massacres without using the word
"genocide" to describe them. That marked a sensible retreat from his
election campaign position in order not to alienate Turkey.
The prize of Turkish-Armenian reconciliation is worth it, but the
process remains fragile and bedevilled by mistrust. Both sides are
still only inching forward, and both face strong resistance at home
to making any concessions at all.
The deal would provide for diplomatic recognition, and reopening
of the border between them, which was closed by Turkey in 1993
after ethnic Armenian forces seized control of Nagorno-Karabakh in
neighbouring Azerbaijan. Both moves would be done gradually to build
confidence. That is sensible.
On two vital points, however, there is still no clarity. A historical
commission is to be set up to investigate the events of 1915. How
will it be constituted and how will it work? If it decides that
the massacres did amount to genocide, or did not, it will still be
politically explosive unless there is agreement to abide by its
results. Second, what progress needs to be made on resolving the
Karabakh dispute for Turkey to reopen the border fully?
There seems to be a serious intent in both Ankara and Yerevan to find
a way forward in spite of opposition, including from the influential
Armenian diaspora in the US and European Union. But pressure on them
both from Washington, Brussels and - most significantly - from Moscow
for more progress and a clear timetable is still essential.
The one country that might try to scupper progress is Azerbaijan,
fearful that reopening the border would take away pressure for Armenia
to do a deal over Karabakh, or at least to withdraw from the buffer
zone where 500,000 Azeri refugees used to live. But the 19- year border
closure has done nothing to hasten an agreement on that score. All
sides have an interest in reconciliation, not confrontation', the
newspaper reported.
ArmInfo
2009-04-28 12:39:00
'The agreement between Turkey and Armenia on a "road map" to normalise
their relations is very good news. Their historic animosity since
the slaughter and mass deportation of Armenians from the collapsing
Ottoman empire in 1915 has destabilised the region, poisoned internal
politics, isolated and impoverished Armenia, and cast a shadow over
Turkey's relations with Europe and America. Now there is a chance of
beginning to heal the wounds', The Financial Times wrote in an item
'Armenia's grief'.
'Yet first a word of caution. Last week's declaration gave no clues
to the precise terms of the agreement, nor a timetable. It seems to
have been rushed out to enable Barack Obama, US president, to issue
a statement commemorating the 1915 massacres without using the word
"genocide" to describe them. That marked a sensible retreat from his
election campaign position in order not to alienate Turkey.
The prize of Turkish-Armenian reconciliation is worth it, but the
process remains fragile and bedevilled by mistrust. Both sides are
still only inching forward, and both face strong resistance at home
to making any concessions at all.
The deal would provide for diplomatic recognition, and reopening
of the border between them, which was closed by Turkey in 1993
after ethnic Armenian forces seized control of Nagorno-Karabakh in
neighbouring Azerbaijan. Both moves would be done gradually to build
confidence. That is sensible.
On two vital points, however, there is still no clarity. A historical
commission is to be set up to investigate the events of 1915. How
will it be constituted and how will it work? If it decides that
the massacres did amount to genocide, or did not, it will still be
politically explosive unless there is agreement to abide by its
results. Second, what progress needs to be made on resolving the
Karabakh dispute for Turkey to reopen the border fully?
There seems to be a serious intent in both Ankara and Yerevan to find
a way forward in spite of opposition, including from the influential
Armenian diaspora in the US and European Union. But pressure on them
both from Washington, Brussels and - most significantly - from Moscow
for more progress and a clear timetable is still essential.
The one country that might try to scupper progress is Azerbaijan,
fearful that reopening the border would take away pressure for Armenia
to do a deal over Karabakh, or at least to withdraw from the buffer
zone where 500,000 Azeri refugees used to live. But the 19- year border
closure has done nothing to hasten an agreement on that score. All
sides have an interest in reconciliation, not confrontation', the
newspaper reported.