Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MediaDialogue Newsletter - 05/18/2006

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MediaDialogue Newsletter - 05/18/2006

    Yerevan Press Club presents www.mediadialogue.org web site, featuring the
    most interesting publications from the press of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia
    and Turkey on issues of common concern. The latest updates on the site are
    weekly delivered to the subscribers.

    ************************************ ***************************************


    RECOGNIT ION OF THE GENOCIDE - THE RIGHT TO RETURN


    | "Golos Armenii" newspaper (Armenia) | Aris Ghazinian | 18-May-2006 |

    In early XX, the Armenian people lost not only the demographic majority but
    also the historical homeland - at least 90% of the area, making the natural
    habitat of national settlement. Thus, on the eve of the First World War the
    Armenian factor was still the dominant demographic and cultural-constructive
    element of the upland. In this respect, the catastrophe of the Armenian
    people has no precedent, since there is no other nation forced to build its
    statehood on the tenth part of the historically assimilated Homeland.

    There is an obvious difference between the concepts of Fatherland and
    Statehood. While, due to various historical reasons the Armenian people,
    dozens of times losing political independence, each time found the strength
    and ability to restore the state set-up of national life. The guarantee for
    restoration of sovereignty was not only the traditional vector of
    orientation (general character of the Armenian of pre-20th century, aimed at
    recovery of the lost statehood) but also the fact of the presence of
    Homeland proper. Irrespective of any political formation, the national life
    in a historical Homeland did not interrupt. However, in early past century
    it is the Fatherland that the nation lost first. So if the process of
    restoring statehood is possible to imagine, the mechanism of restoring the
    Homeland (the right for life in natural habitat of national activity) is not
    worked out. To this effect, we need a special ideology.

    In short-term perspective, Turkey may afford recognition of the Armenian
    Genocide, and there is ground to suppose that it will be the case. It is
    obvious however that herein Ankara's traditional preconditions will again
    come up: before expressing official readiness to this revolutionary step of
    theirs, the Turkish authorities will by all means demand guarantees of the
    Armenian side. In particular, Yerevan will be proposed to sign (in exchange)
    under the point for RA being ineligible for setting any territorial claims
    to Turkey.

    Doubtlessly, none of the heads of Armenian state has a right to sign such a
    document. It is also obvious that the refusal of official Yerevan will
    become subject for foreign policy speculations by Ankara. It is also
    possible that Turkey will lift the blockade of the border and will even act
    as apologist for establishing diplomatic relations with RA. However, does
    the Armenian nation today have an ideology, capable of facing the coming
    challenges? What will be the position of the official Yerevan if Ankara
    pledges its willingness before the international community: a) to recognize
    the Armenian Genocide; b) deblock the border; c) establish diplomatic
    relations with Armenia? Won't the Armenian statehood be placed in a certain
    ideological vacuum in this case?

    The official line of RA, aimed at international recognition of the Genocide,
    should be formulated quite clearly and rigidly. In various forms and on
    various levels it is recognized in over two dozens of states, however, the
    priority provision - the Homeland lost after the Genocide - is not mentioned
    in any of respective documents.

    RA President Robert Kocharian repeatedly stated (to the Turkish journalists
    as well) that the issue of Turkey's recognition of the Armenia Genocide is
    not linked to the territorial problem that should be viewed within the
    aspect of the Sevres Treaty. Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian
    stated on his behalf that the current authorities of the country will not
    raise this issue, "however, theoretically it can be raised by one of the
    subsequent heads of the Republic". Nevertheless the fact of losing the
    Homeland proper - the natural habitat of the Armenian settlement - is not on
    the agenda of RA foreign policy. Apparently, no one except Yerevan will
    raise this issue.

    Currently, there is a vital necessity for adapting the previously chaotic
    intention for Genocide recognition on more pragmatic ground with the demand
    for guaranteed (by the international community) right for repatriation of
    the peoples deprived of the homeland. If the Armenian people is now ready
    for repatriation is another matter. However, in any case we need to
    officially state that by the process of Genocide recognition, Yerevan also
    views the right of the Armenian people for return.


    EDWARD SHEVARNADZE: "IF WE ARE NEITHER A NORMAL COUNTRY NOR HAVE A NORMAL
    PRESIDENT, WE CAN EXPECT ANY TROUBLE"


    | "Georgian Times" newspaper (Georgia) | Maya Margvelani | 16-May-2006 |

    - What is your assessment of the recent activities of the Georgian
    authorities, their statements addressed to Russia? How adequate is the
    reaction of the Russian side?

    - Russia's actions towards Georgia are a factual blockade. It is a classical
    manifestation of Russian policy. Wine, alongside "Borjomi", are our maim
    products. When they are not sold in Russia, it naturally raises concerns. In
    fact, the world market already has set preferences, and the loss of the
    Russian market is very alarming.

    - Is it Russia's response to the tough policy of our authorities?

    - We had quite a negative experience with the Russian authorities but it did
    not go as far as the breakup of the union. Georgia's accession to CIS was
    not a forceful one, though Russia insistently recommended us to join the
    Commonwealth. If my friends - presidents of other countries - had not joined
    the CIS, we would probably do the same. I heeded their opinion; without
    mutual support, it would be hard to find common ground with Russia. We are
    on good terms with President Putin though even then both in Abkhazia and
    South Ossetia their behavior was very bad. However, Putin is a flexible
    person with a mild character.

    - If he has a mild character, how do you explain his attitude to Georgia?

    - We should pay attention to Putin's speech in response to the statements of
    our leaders. It was a balanced political speech. He said, "The friendly
    Georgian people experiences grave economic problems, and we will try to find
    a solution". However, subsequent statements of our high-ranking officials
    aggravated the situation.

    - You mean the Defense Minister?

    - The statement of the Defense Minister would be insulting for any country.
    I am not initiated into the details but possibly the speech of the
    Parliament Chairman in Saint Petersburg also had its share. Burjanadze
    enraged Duma. I do not justify Russia, a lot happens with its approval. At
    the same time, I would note that Putin's speech was more balanced and sound.


    - Where is the way out?

    - We are now in actual blockade. I think the meeting of the Presidents of
    Russia and Georgia is obligatory. Besides, it is the Georgian President who
    should take the initiative. The relations will not improve without the
    high-level meeting, moreover they might deteriorate.

    - Can Russia toughen the sanctions still more?

    - Russia has many levers of pressure. It may stop the supply of gas and oil
    products. Once we have other gas, we can speak on different terms. When the
    gas pipeline was blown up, we accused the Russian authorities. Indeed,
    someone blew it up but it might be an Ossetian, a Russian or a Georgian! The
    Russian authorities had no motivation for the explosion of the pipeline: we
    buy gas from them and at quite high prices. In the future, it might grow
    even more expensive. So that Russia may enact quite a lot of levers, as I
    already mentioned... I think Russia's irritation comes from the dislocation
    of its bases. I also was categorical about their liquidation. They mostly
    withdrew the bases. As for Akhalkalaki base, it was decided back in 1998,
    however I was not very anxious to dislocate the base, since several
    thousands of locals were employed there, while we did not have an
    opportunity to give them jobs. By the way, during my presidency we
    dislocated the Russian military base from Vaziani without any scandal. I
    think the dislocation of the Akhalkalaki base was not a very urgent issue.

    - You mean to say that Putin must not be negatively disposed to the
    Georgians?

    - Actually he was not. I will bring an example. I always tried to have as a
    priority Georgia's good relations with both Russia and US, as far as it is
    possible. The recent meeting with Putin took place in Alma Ata. I told him
    about my request to USA for support in army training. He was a bit upset
    over it and said that Russia could also help. Then by the end of the summit,
    someone asked him about his attitude to US supporting the Georgian army.
    Putin turned around and replied, "Georgia is an independent country with a
    right for choice. If it views America as its friend, how can we object?" So
    we can see that Putin is a flexible person, open to cooperation and
    compromise. In Georgia, there is a tough opinion about him, and he is now
    thinking over a possible solution. Our tense relations really need
    discharging.

    - What is your opinion about the special operations of the Interior
    Ministry, which often end up with victims...

    - During my presidency, there was an escape of the prisoners but we did not
    shoot them... Law is binding for all! So when the officials neglect the law,
    it is already troublesome.

    - It is a fact that you personally expressed condolences to the Girgvliani
    family (scandalous murder of the young man, in which high-ranking officials
    are involved - Trans.), while Mikhail Sahakashvili is still silent about
    this barbarous crime.

    - It is impossible in a normal country. I am convinced that sooner or later
    the President will provide adequate assessment of this murder, and the
    public will be informed about his decision. I repeat that it is the case in
    a normal country, and if we are neither a normal country nor have a normal
    president, we can expect any trouble. I am convinced that Sahakashvili will
    give a proper assessment of the incident. He is well aware that he should
    give his reaction to such facts.


    COMPLICATED ISSUES


    | "Milliyet" newspaper (Turkey) | Sami Kohen | 16-May-2006 |

    When Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper made a statement on April 24 in
    support of the Armenian Genocide allegations, it slipped the attention of
    the Canadian public. The Canadian media took up this issue only after Turkey
    has summoned its Ambassador in Ottawa Aydemir Erman to Ankara for
    consultation. This speech by the Prime Minister is not the first event in
    Canada, supporting Armenian Genocide allegations. In Canada, there are a
    hundred thousand Armenians with an active Armenian lobby. Two years ago, the
    Canadian Parliament adopted a law on the recognition of the Genocide. A
    large share of it was with the Conservative Party, then oppositional, headed
    by Harper. After the victory of the conservatives at the elections, the
    Armenian lobby started to pressure the government of the country to ratify
    the law adopted by the Parliament. Prime Minister Harper kept to his stance
    and made a statement recognizing the fact of Genocide. Thus, the Genocide
    allegations are supported in Canada both on parliamentary and government
    level.

    The Situation is Different in France

    In this respect, the situation in Canada and France is different. Thus, In
    France the government did not make any clear and official statements,
    recognizing the Armenian Genocide. However, today the French Parliament is
    considering a draft law, stipulating a punishment for denying the Armenian
    Genocide, which is even worse.

    The presence and influence of the Armenians in France is a common knowledge.
    Internal political factors often make the French parliamentarians take the
    side of the Armenian community.

    What is the case in Canada? Not only in Canada: in many countries of Latin
    America and Europe, where the Armenian communities are not numerous, the
    Parliaments take similar decisions.

    Herein, the organized activity of the Armenian Diaspora and its influence in
    these countries doubtlessly has a large role.

    On the other hand, Turkey itself has long abstained from these campaigns. It
    cannot boast with effective presentation of its position, nor did it work
    out new strategies on the "Armenian issue".

    Overall, Ankara takes measures on this issue post factum, and they are
    usually short-term. In certain cases, the feedback of Ankara not only lacks
    preventive force but also impedes bilateral relations. It has already been
    the case with France and other European countries...

    Canada's Example

    What to do with Canada?

    Turkey recalled its ambassador in Ottawa for a few days, and prior to it,
    the country did not participate in NATO exercise in Canada...

    Alongside such "symbolic" steps, other measures, like weakening of trade and
    economic relations, are also discussed. The turnover between the two
    countries makes about 1 billion dollars today, and the investments of the
    Canadian firms in Turkey - 700 million dollars... Besides, there are other
    important joint projects (for example in nuclear energy sphere). The issue
    is what will be the practical results of Canada's isolation? Will such a
    "punishment" change the position of its authorities? What will be the impact
    of the isolation of large international companies on the inflow of
    international investments in Turkey as a whole? Shouldn't we think over this
    aspect of the issue as well?


    IRAN WILL REMIND BAKU OF ITS ANTIIRANIAN STATMENTS, expert from Iran
    President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad milieu announces


    | "Zerkalo" newspaper (Azerbaijan) | G. Inanj | 16-May-2006 |

    Azerbaijan unwillingly finds itself in the epicenter of regional processes
    that are sometimes quite dangerous for it. At this stage official Baku is
    given a very disguised role of mediator between the USA and Iran, claiming
    to be a regional power. Yet Tehran has not forgiven the official Baku
    certain steps and statements on Iran,.

    In the exclusive interview to "Zerkalo", given by Iranian expert Jalal
    Mohammadi, known in the West for his proximity to the President of Iran
    Ahmadinejad, interesting aspects of Azerbaijani policy of official Tehran
    can be traced between the lines. Notably, in the West the statements by
    Mohammadi are equaled to the opinion of official Tehran.

    - The threats of US about attacking Iran that have been going on for four
    years is nothing but a psychological war. Washington discusses different
    ways, including a military way of solving the uranium enrichment issue in
    our country. For this reason some statements voiced by American officials on
    the plans of attacking Iran must not be considered as a fact.

    - Do you exclude the military attack on Iran?

    - The USA cannot apply military force against Iran. In the modern history
    our country is a strong state of both Middle East and of Islamic world.
    Under the circumstances the intrusion into Iran is not a simple question.
    The aim of the Cold War is to present Iran as an unstable country and to
    obstruct the development of its cooperation with other countries, including
    its neighbors.

    The promotion of the idea of how invincible the USA are among the smaller
    countries is a part of the US anti-Iranian policy. Washington attempts to
    frighten all these states into worshipping it. Contrary to everything I
    would like to state that Iran is thoroughly ready for any form of aggression
    from the USA, including military.

    The US attempts to weaken Iran from inside, to ignite a domestic crisis
    bring the Iranians together around the national idea which is today the
    nuclear program.

    Washington, on the one hand uses international organizations to exercise
    pressure on Iran, on the other - it attempts to create ethnic problems
    inside the country. the USA allocated 74 million USD for the Iranian
    opposition.

    - The "Zerkalo" sources in Tbilisi confirm the rumors, disseminated in media
    about a certain arrangement between Georgia and USA about the use of
    Georgian basin of the Black Sea in the case of military aggression against
    Iran. In the US-Iranian confrontation Washington has a different role for
    Azerbaijan.

    - The leader of Islamic revolution Ayatollah Imam Khomeini once announced
    that if the US decides to wage a war against Iraq, they will face a war from
    all sides. For me the war from all sides means one thing - all the parties,
    supporting the aggressor in the war launch, will get their punishment.

    - After the well-known incident during the Second Congress of Azerbaijani,
    Baku and Tehran have a concealed tension between them. Does Iran have a
    stone in the pocket?

    - Much earlier, after the presidents exchanged visits, Baku and Tehran had
    positive relations. Yet the anti-Iranian statements at the 2nd Congress of
    Azerbaijanis in Baku revealed the lack of firmness in the Iranian policy of
    Azerbaijan and set ground for the lack of trust between the countries. Iran
    does recognize the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and the fact of
    Mountainous Karabagh occupation, and the official Baku allows some
    questionable people to speak against the territorial integrity of Iran. Such
    statements set fertile soil for Armenia and other unfriendly countries to
    actively oppose our cooperation. The response of Iran on the statements
    questioning the territorial integrity of the country will become known
    later.

    - You are implying Israel. But the Jewish lobby supports Azerbaijan in the
    issues, important for the country, such as confronting Armenian lobby.

    - Since the rule of the Popular Front a group of Azerbaijani politicians
    believes that by cooperating with Jewish lobby and Israel they can oppose
    the Armenian lobby.

    The illusions about solving the Mountainous Karabagh conflict with the help
    of Jewish lobby have vanished. Not a centimeter of occupied territories has
    been liberated as a result of 15-year long cooperation between Baku and
    Jerusalem. These politicians obviously are unaware of the priorities of
    world political relations. the Western empire has two wings - the Armenian
    and Jewish lobby.

    - One of the reasons the USA gave up the idea of "colored revolution" in
    Azerbaijan is the Iranian policy of Washington and the role given to Baku in
    the scenario. The White House did not risk shattering the stable political
    situation in the neighboring Azerbaijan before the serious dialogue with
    Tehran.

    - Firstly, the official Baku has made its conclusions after the Georgian and
    Ukrainians events and cleared the government of officials, capable of
    supporting the "colored". Also, the Azerbaijani opposition is weak and does
    not enjoy the support of the people. No one supports it but for the US
    Embassy in Baku.

    But the USA are not that omnipotent. Washington did not manage to clear the
    way for a <colored> coup in Azerbaijan. Certainly, the refusal of the White
    House from the scenario of the power change in Baku also includes the
    neighborhood of Azerbaijan and Iran, the Shiite Islam in the two countries,
    the culture and history, uniting our nations.

    - To a certain extent the lack of solution to the Mountainous Karabagh
    conflict also ties the hands of the White House in terms of realization
    their interest-related plans. Is it the reason for the recent haste that the
    West displays in the Mountainous Karabagh resolution process?

    - The haste of the West in the resolution of the conflict is related to the
    inner problems in Armenia and Azerbaijan, the international ties of
    Azerbaijan and geopolitical situation. The factors listed complicate the
    conflict resolution even more. The occupied territories are not liberated at
    a negotiations table. Certainly, the war results in losses of human force as
    well as inflicts moral and financial damages. What can be done, the
    political organization of the world is unfair.

    Many countries use the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict in their interests.
    They use their present status quo, but are in no way interested in the
    resolution of the conflict. The continuation of the conflict is in the
    interests of France, Russia and Turkey.

    Turkey links the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict with the relations between
    Armenia and Turkey and the interstate problems. Ankara, waving the
    occupation of MK as a flag, tries to prove the aggressive policy of Armenia
    and to protect itself against the psychological and political pressure of
    Armenian lobby demanding the recognition of the Armenian genocide in the
    Ottoman Empire.


    ************************************************ ***************************
    For comments or questions please contact the Editor: [email protected].
    Website: www.mediadialogue.org
Working...
X