–Boundary_(ID_wL//i1wRki9whz2dIQAowg)
Content-typ e: message/rfc822

From: Sebouh Z Tashjian <seb_tashjian@hotmail.com>
Subject: ‘There will be shift in Armenian-Turkish relations but Armenia will….
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

AZG Armenian Daily #087, 14/05/2005

Interview

‘THERE WILL BE SHIFT IN ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS BUT ARMENIA WILL EASIER
COME TO TERM WITH USA THAN TURKEY’

Famous American-Armenian publicist Yervand Azatian arrived in Yerevan to
take part in “Ultimate Crime, Ultimate Challenge. Genocide and Human Rights”
international conference late last month. As always during his visits, he
called in daily Azg publishing house, and we availed ourselves the
opportunity to interview Mr. Azatian for an impartial evaluation of the
conference. He presented not only his personal views on Armenia-Turkish
relations but also introduced official Washington’s stance on the matter.

– How do you evaluate the international conference dedicated to the 90th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide?

– Owing to the high level of the conference, the reports it comprised, it
was one of the most impressive initiatives of last years. Of course, there
were inequalities but most of the reports were significant. Although the
conference was under the state’s patronage, something that as a rule evokes
biased attitude within academic circles just the way we are preconceived in
regard to the commission headed by the president of Turkish Historic
Foundation Yusuf Halacoglu considering it one of the Turkish state’s wings,
there could be no other alternative. The arrangement was linked to the 90th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide in the end. This fact gave the
anniversary a somewhat scientific appearance. Another positive moment was
that we had international lawyers who rendered independent jural commentary
of the Genocide. Particularly, Irishman William Schabas’ speech was very
impressive. The voice of UN was heard through the speech of Alfred de Zayas.
But it was not that impressive for me as he dwelled on genocides in general
trying to show that everything he says concerns the Armenian Genocide.
Without naming it, Zayas defined the Armenian Genocide. I want to point out
President Robert Kocharian’s speech, especially his accent on the fact that
the remnants of Taleat were transported to Turkey and were buried on the
Hill of Freedom. Obviously, that was a sign of passing the baton to new
generation. Kocharian showed that today’s Turkish state is the heir of the
crime of Armenian Genocide and is the owner of the Western Armenia that was
seized as a result of the massacre. This was very important. I also want to
say words of appreciation in regard to foreign minister Vartan Oskanian’s
speech. I was afraid that his emotional speech might overflow diplomatic
norms. But, fortunately, his emotions did not cause any slip-up.

– Baskin Oran and Murad Belge from Turkey were also participating in the
conference. How do you evaluate their speeches?

– I want to make evaluation of all Turkish participants that is why I will
add the names of Taner Akcam and Halil Berqtay. As you know, all of them
were the victims of Turkish military authorities. As a result, they feel
bitterness. I see those Turkish historians as patriots who want to wipe
Turkey’s bloody past off. That is their initiative and is not necessarily
the result of their sympathy or wish to endow us with rights. Today, Turkey
faces the serious challenge of EU accession and those scientists therefore
want to throw off the burden of history first of all and then free their
people. Why I describe them as Turkish patriots? Because they want to
justify their people in the face of history. The speeches and studies of the
Turkish scientists show though that there is a line that they do not cross.
Though they say that Turkey has to recognize the Armenian Genocide and its
responsibility before the history, they make us understand that we should
not expect anything more than recognition. Though some speak of apology,
they never say anything about reparation, return of the lands or even the
protection of Armenian cultural monuments on the territory.

– Does all these apply to Taner Akcam as well?

– Yes, even Akcam. I told him that I appreciate him as a historian. But we
often think that the Turkish scientists have the same understanding of the
Genocide as we do. If you have noticed, Baskin Oran told during the
conference that he would like to see thinkers like Halil Berqtay and Taner
Akcam among the Armenian scientists. That is they want to see scientists who
would announce, “There was no genocide”. This is how I understand Oran’s
words. By the way, Oran who was sitting beside me while Arkady Ghukasian was
reporting asked me, “Who is this man?” Learning that he is the president of
Nagorno Karabakh, Oran said, “Do you see what a chauvinistic person he is?
He is speaking of lands”. That’s the reason why I say that they do not
consider any land reparation. They simply want to free their state from
bloody past. But still they are somehow our allies because no one was
mentioning of Genocide yesterday but today it turned into a serious issue
thanks to their work. Nonetheless, I stand for Armenian-Turkish dialogue and
even more for the meetings of Armenian and Turkish scientists at
international conferences.

– Mr. Azatian, as we know, Turks were concerned with the “Armenian tsunami”
months before the 90th anniversary. Did the tsunami take place?

– I think it took place more in our minds as well as in Armenia and Diaspora
but for the world press the 90th anniversary remained a secondary issue. It
more earnestly covered the 60th anniversary of victory over fascism and the
liberation of Auswentsin than the Armenian Genocide.

– So, you said it did not happen to the degree we wanted. Do you think that
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s letter to President Kocharian played a role
here?

– I think that Erdogan’s letter pursuit that very aim. Having good
diplomacy, Turks were looking for ways to withstand the tsunami and tried to
eliminate its consequences by Erdogan’s letter. In effect, the letter was a
trick for Armenia to fall for. There were even voice echoing Erdogan,
particularly President Bush highlighted in his April 24 speech the
“wonderful proposal”. Germany’s Chancellor Gerhard Schroder joined him
highly evaluating the proposal. Bush and Schroder undoubtedly knew that it
was Turkey’s trap. They, in fact, hinted to Armenians that they have no
strength and will fall for. It’s evident that if we agree with Erdogan’s
proposal of creating a group to find out whether there was a Genocide or
not, that would mean to go 90 years back. I am glad that all our scientists,
leaders of the state declared, “The fact of Genocide is beyond doubt”.
Despite the fact that the international historiography has confirmed the
Genocide, it was introduced in the UN as a commentary. That is there was no
official confirmation as it was in case of the Holocaust. Apparently, there
is no possibility for that as it is connected with strength. But I don’t
want to be skeptical about our work. We have done great work of creating
huge literature on Genocide in English, French and Turkish languages. Thanks
to all these we got a political tramp card as well. I am glad that the
Genocide issue tops our foreign policy agenda. It played its role in
international circles.

– Though Turks hold firmly to negation, the issue of the Armenian Genocide
is also on Turkey’s agenda. They cannot avoid it. I want to know what do you
think of Kocharian’s reply to Erdogan’s letter.

– I think that the answer should be view as positive. President Kocharian, i
fact, passed by Erdogan’s trap saying, “The responsibility of states differs
from that of historians”. He emphasized meanwhile that the historians’
conclusions are obvious for us, so let’s sit down and take up practical
steps of border opening and establishing diplomatic relations. I think the
President gave an irrefragable answer.

– What is Washington’s approach to Erdogan’s proposal of treating historic
issues and then considering relations on one hand and Kocharian’s offer to
establish intergovernmental relations first and then put forward all issues
on the other? If Washington is concerned to see Armenia-Turkish relations
improved then Kocharian’s reply must be more acceptable.

– I don’t doubt that Erdogan’s political line that looms in the letter was
accorded with Washington. It was not accidental in the end that Bush
reminded about Erdogan’s proposal in his April 24 speech. Thus, Washington
was aware of that, and they made us understand that we have to jump at the
bait to free America from this issue. It must be note that our lobby, though
rather unsatisfying, is doing its job. It’s a certain power and its strength
was visible in Bush’s statement. Each year making his speech on April 24, he
notes that he feels obliged to USA-born Armenian citizens.

to be continued

By Hakob Chakrian

–Boundary_(ID_wL//i1wRki9whz2dIQAowg)–