Tweet
Washington Times
May 15 2005
A promising start?
By Tatoul Markarian
As the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide approached last
month, Turkish Prime Minister Receip Tayyip Erdogan came up with an
initiative in a letter to Armenian President Robert Kocharian,
proposing creation of a joint commission to address the history. In
response, Mr. Kocharian called on Turkey to establish diplomatic
relations and open its border with Armenia without preconditions, and
to form an intergovernmental commission to address all bilateral
concerns.
No matter how unconventional this type of public communication
may be between leaders of two neighboring nations, it is tempting to
see Turkey may really open up for serious dialog.
Mr. Erdogan's initiative, assuming its sincere aim is
normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations, still raises many
questions. A genuine effort by the Turkish government to allow the
Turkish scholars to investigate the dark chapters of Turkish history
would be worthy, though much belated. Such a move by the Turkish
government would undoubtedly be applauded by our nations' true
friends, as it would indeed begin a process of alleviating the burden
of history in our region.
Armenia would be the first to welcome such a move by the Turkish
government. This would allow Turkish scholars to reveal the truth and
help its political leadership accept and condemn it. Let us hope,
however, that Prime Minister Erdogan's call to concentrate on
addressing the past will not deflect from addressing pressing issues
of the present and the future and that this will not deepen still
further the division on both sides about what happened in 1915.
Yet, as long as there are political taboos and legal obstacles to
the free discussion and comprehension of this issue in Turkey,
including criminal penalties in the new Turkish Penal Code for mere
assertion of the term genocide, any investigation mandated by the
Turkish government will have a pre-determined outcome. A Turkish
newspaper, Zaman, noted on April 23 that the Turkish Government
should "lift all legal and other obstacles to the free investigation,
discussion, and comprehension of 'What happened in 1915?' "
Also, we witness the dangerous temptation of modern-day Turkish
officials to present the extermination of the Ottoman Empire's
Armenian population as a result of World War I. We want to remind all
that it was the exact hope, argument and calculation of the
perpetrators that the massacres and deportations of Armenians would
pass unnoticed under the cover of World War I. Neither war nor
anything else can explain or justify the murder of 1.5 million
innocent Armenian children, women, and men in the Ottoman Turkey.
Turkish officials claim Armenians alone define the history of
those days. First, the historical record is both rich and
well-documented. The process for establishing the truth started in
the wake of World War I, as the Turkish military tribunal sentenced
the perpetrators of the massacres and deportation of Armenians to the
death penalty in 1919. That fact is deliberately bypassed by
governments in modern-day Turkey.
This process has progressed very far, especially in the last
decade, with a growing number of countries properly recognizing and
strongly condemning the events of 90 years ago. Turkey coming to
terms with its past has become a test of its willingness to embrace
human rights and fundamental values. And it is Turkey that is
"missing the bus," at a cost of credibility and time.
Second, we should not be blamed for defining the history alone:
Ever since its independence, Armenia has consistently proposed,
without preconditions, establishing diplomatic relations, opening the
border and allowing the people to interact freely, thus helping
create the proper environment for a discussion of all issues of
bilateral importance. However, Turkey's denial of history has not
been the only problem. Turkey has persistently refused to establish
diplomatic relations with Armenia, imposed a blockade on the
Turkish-Armenian border and prioritized ethnic solidarity with
Azerbaijan over Turkey's international obligations, instead of
helping settle the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Thus, Turkey's
rejection of not only the past but also the present left Armenians
with no choice but to pursue its quest for justice -- both historical
and contemporary -- within the international framework.
Armenia is firm on its intent to seize on the opportunity
presented by the exchange between our two countries' leaders.
However, caution is also inspired by the fact Prime Minister
Erdogan's letter was hurriedly circulated to European capitals and
the United States Congress prior to the April 24 Commemoration Day
and even before Armenian President Kocharian had an opportunity to
respond formally. This left an impression the initiative may not have
been mainly directed at Armenia. Could it have been a tactical
maneuver intended to upstage the 90th anniversary of the Armenian
Genocide, or to sidetrack European and other inquiries?
We are interested in concrete steps and results, never in a vague
process for the sake of process. That is why we proposed and are
proposing again the establishment without preconditions of normal
relations between Armenia and Turkey. As President Kocharian
mentioned in his reply, that will allow an intergovernmental
commission to meet and discuss any and all outstanding issues between
our nations, with the aim of resolving them and reaching an
understanding.
Tatoul Markarian is the ambassador of Armenia to the United
States.
May 15 2005
A promising start?
By Tatoul Markarian
As the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide approached last
month, Turkish Prime Minister Receip Tayyip Erdogan came up with an
initiative in a letter to Armenian President Robert Kocharian,
proposing creation of a joint commission to address the history. In
response, Mr. Kocharian called on Turkey to establish diplomatic
relations and open its border with Armenia without preconditions, and
to form an intergovernmental commission to address all bilateral
concerns.
No matter how unconventional this type of public communication
may be between leaders of two neighboring nations, it is tempting to
see Turkey may really open up for serious dialog.
Mr. Erdogan's initiative, assuming its sincere aim is
normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations, still raises many
questions. A genuine effort by the Turkish government to allow the
Turkish scholars to investigate the dark chapters of Turkish history
would be worthy, though much belated. Such a move by the Turkish
government would undoubtedly be applauded by our nations' true
friends, as it would indeed begin a process of alleviating the burden
of history in our region.
Armenia would be the first to welcome such a move by the Turkish
government. This would allow Turkish scholars to reveal the truth and
help its political leadership accept and condemn it. Let us hope,
however, that Prime Minister Erdogan's call to concentrate on
addressing the past will not deflect from addressing pressing issues
of the present and the future and that this will not deepen still
further the division on both sides about what happened in 1915.
Yet, as long as there are political taboos and legal obstacles to
the free discussion and comprehension of this issue in Turkey,
including criminal penalties in the new Turkish Penal Code for mere
assertion of the term genocide, any investigation mandated by the
Turkish government will have a pre-determined outcome. A Turkish
newspaper, Zaman, noted on April 23 that the Turkish Government
should "lift all legal and other obstacles to the free investigation,
discussion, and comprehension of 'What happened in 1915?' "
Also, we witness the dangerous temptation of modern-day Turkish
officials to present the extermination of the Ottoman Empire's
Armenian population as a result of World War I. We want to remind all
that it was the exact hope, argument and calculation of the
perpetrators that the massacres and deportations of Armenians would
pass unnoticed under the cover of World War I. Neither war nor
anything else can explain or justify the murder of 1.5 million
innocent Armenian children, women, and men in the Ottoman Turkey.
Turkish officials claim Armenians alone define the history of
those days. First, the historical record is both rich and
well-documented. The process for establishing the truth started in
the wake of World War I, as the Turkish military tribunal sentenced
the perpetrators of the massacres and deportation of Armenians to the
death penalty in 1919. That fact is deliberately bypassed by
governments in modern-day Turkey.
This process has progressed very far, especially in the last
decade, with a growing number of countries properly recognizing and
strongly condemning the events of 90 years ago. Turkey coming to
terms with its past has become a test of its willingness to embrace
human rights and fundamental values. And it is Turkey that is
"missing the bus," at a cost of credibility and time.
Second, we should not be blamed for defining the history alone:
Ever since its independence, Armenia has consistently proposed,
without preconditions, establishing diplomatic relations, opening the
border and allowing the people to interact freely, thus helping
create the proper environment for a discussion of all issues of
bilateral importance. However, Turkey's denial of history has not
been the only problem. Turkey has persistently refused to establish
diplomatic relations with Armenia, imposed a blockade on the
Turkish-Armenian border and prioritized ethnic solidarity with
Azerbaijan over Turkey's international obligations, instead of
helping settle the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Thus, Turkey's
rejection of not only the past but also the present left Armenians
with no choice but to pursue its quest for justice -- both historical
and contemporary -- within the international framework.
Armenia is firm on its intent to seize on the opportunity
presented by the exchange between our two countries' leaders.
However, caution is also inspired by the fact Prime Minister
Erdogan's letter was hurriedly circulated to European capitals and
the United States Congress prior to the April 24 Commemoration Day
and even before Armenian President Kocharian had an opportunity to
respond formally. This left an impression the initiative may not have
been mainly directed at Armenia. Could it have been a tactical
maneuver intended to upstage the 90th anniversary of the Armenian
Genocide, or to sidetrack European and other inquiries?
We are interested in concrete steps and results, never in a vague
process for the sake of process. That is why we proposed and are
proposing again the establishment without preconditions of normal
relations between Armenia and Turkey. As President Kocharian
mentioned in his reply, that will allow an intergovernmental
commission to meet and discuss any and all outstanding issues between
our nations, with the aim of resolving them and reaching an
understanding.
Tatoul Markarian is the ambassador of Armenia to the United
States.