AGBU Press Office
55 East 59th Street
New York, NY 10022-1112
Phone: 212.319.6383, x118
Fax: 212.319.6507
Email: press@agbu.org
Website:
PRESS RELEASE
Friday, October 23, 2009
AGBU President Mr. Berge Setrakian Addresses Questions on the Protocols
for the Process of Normalization of Relations Between Armenia and Turkey
On Friday, October 16, 2009, AGBU President Berge Setrakian and members
of the AGBU Central Board of Directors attended a special forum at the
AGBU Center in Pasadena, California. The event was attended by leaders
of AGBU’s chapters and committees in Southern California and it provided
local Armenian Americans the opportunity to ask about AGBU’s position in
support of the Protocols for the Process of Normalization of Relations
between Armenia and Turkey.
The following are the key issues discussed during the event and
President Setrakian’s responses to the questions.
Q: AGBU was one of the first organizations that took a stand in support
of the Armenia-Turkey normalization process, and it was also one of the
five signatories of a joint statement in support of the process. Why did
AGBU extend its support to the initiative of the Armenian government?
Berge Setrakian: In connection with the normalization process of
relations between Armenia and Turkey and the opening of the borders, we
believe that the President of the Republic of Armenia has exercised
strong leadership and a realistic understanding of the state of affairs
of regional and international diplomacy. He has acted as a responsible
leader taking a bold and somewhat difficult step forward.
We know that this process was not easy to engage, as it represents
significant challenges for the President and for all Armenians. We
believe it is important for the Armenian authorities to have the trust,
support, and feedback of the people in order to be able to negotiate
from a position of strength, and face any difficulties ahead. We all
know that this will be a long and arduous exercise, which will involve
hard choices and diplomatic maneuvers that Armenians will have to
understand in order to navigate. Though the end result is still unknown,
the initiative and the attempt to resolve our issues at hand are worth a
genuine effort. We must remember the past and fight realistically for
our rights, while looking forward to build a strong future.
Q: How do you evaluate the RA President’s visit to the diasporan
communities and don’t you think that this issue has caused division
among our people and threatens to disconnect Armenia from the diaspora.
Setrakian: The recent visit of the president of Armenia to the main
communities and organizations of the diaspora presented an opportunity
for sincere and sometimes heated exchange of viewpoints by various
sectors of the Armenian Diaspora. In the final analysis, we believe that
President Sargsian will weigh all the various arguments and concerns and
decide a course of action that reflects the best interests of Armenia
and Armenians.
It became apparent from the perspectives conveyed about the initiative
for the normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey that the
Armenian diaspora, insofar as its notion of the status quo is concerned,
is not a monolithic society and it is not possible to force it to act
like one. However, it is necessary to distinguish between diversity
regarding procedural issues and positions on matters of principle.
Differences in approach to the issues at hand should all be respected,
and do not necessarily mean a split when there is unanimity concerning
the ultimate outcome. We, for instance, take a pragmatic stand and
believe that in this era of global geopolitics it is more realistic for
us to try to pursue our rightful demands through diplomacy and direct
negotiations with neighboring states, rather than through other means,
which, so far, for almost a century, have not yielded any concrete
positive results.
Q: You mentioned that the protocols do not constitute preconditions yet
they set predetermined steps charting the process of opening the borders
and normalization of bilateral relations. Don’t you feel that at least
three items of the protocols imply potential concessions regarding the
issue of the Genocide, Armenia’s territorial demands of Turkey and the
ongoing negotiations regarding the status of Karabakh.
Setrakian: We all understand that the protocols regulating the process
of normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey are the result
of lengthy negotiations involving Armenia, Turkey, and other states that
have a stake in the geopolitical developments of the region. The current
documents are not perfect and should be viewed as a possible compromise
reached between the parties involved. However, what they primarily
signify today is the fact that they put Turkey under the obligation to
open the borders and pursue the development of normal diplomatic
relations between the two countries prior to any further steps.
We are well cognizant of the fact that Turkey is a state that committed
genocide against the Armenian people and has consistently and
systematically denied it for the past hundred years. It has conducted a
hostile policy with regard to the Armenian people and Armenia. Over the
past 15 years, through the closing of the borders, it has exerted
pressure on the Republic of Armenia to force it to relinquish the
pursuit of the issue of Genocide recognition, as well as the
independence and self-determination of Karabakh. We have no doubt that
when the development of relations takes course, according to the
dispositions of the protocols, Turkey will continuously try to push its
own agenda in connection with the issues at hand. However, faced with
that possibility, the solution is not the refusal to negotiate and the
isolation of Armenia; rather, it is the promotion of dialogue, as a
modern civilized nation exercising diplomatic expertise and using the
leverage of the international powers that have a stake in the outcome.
It has been repeatedly confirmed by the President of Armenia and the
major mediating nations that the process of normalization of relations
between Armenia and Turkey are not conditioned by the process of
determining the status of Karabakh. This process has no negative bearing
on its independence, security, and right of self-determination. The
people of Karabakh and Armenia have fought hard and their leaders will
under no circumstance forfeit their territorial rights and their claim
for self-determination.
As far as the matter of Genocide recognition is concerned, if the
Turkish parliament ratifies the protocols, Turkey will be forced to
realistically face the existence of the Genocide issue after ignoring it
and attempting to distort it over the past hundred years. In the final
analysis, in connection with the Genocide issue, the process that may
drive the Turkish people to become aware of, explore, and acknowledge
the historical reality of the Genocide and consequent reparations, is
equally, if not more important than the recognition by other countries.
The commission referred to will constitute a forum where both sides can
share, and either party will be able to walk away if a fair and just
solution to the recognition of the genocide is not reached.
The issue of the existing borders is determined by the international
community of nations and Armenia faces the reality of having inherently
accepted these borders through its membership in the UN or the CIS.
Again, Armenia will not be able to affect the resolution of the issue of
territorial demands and legal borders by isolating itself from the
international diplomatic stage. As a full-fledged legitimate state, it
is by participating in negotiations and promoting dialogue in defense of
its demands that Armenia will pursue its historical rights. The pulling
together of the energies of all Armenians towards such a process will be
more productive than a dismissive stance.
A contract is never a perfect document. It is the result of negotiations
between parties pursuing their respective interests. I would like to
reiterate, that in this era of globalization, Armenia cannot isolate
itself. That would lead to eventual disintegration. It is through
self-confidence, the creation of stable legal and economic structures
for an independent and democratic statehood, and opening additional
paths in a free-market economy that Armenia will be able to face the
challenges of our times.
Armenia cannot ignore the importance of the involvement of Russia, the
USA, France and other powers in this process – powers that have long
supported Armenia and its interests. This is a negotiation those parties
endorse, making it highly imprudent for Armenia not to engage and refuse
to be part of the process.
Q: Why did AGBU, a non-political organization, choose to be involved in
this matter, which is perceived as political in nature.
Setrakian: The Armenian General Benevolent Union is a non-political
all-Armenian organization. By its very nature, issues of Armenian
national interest such as the survival and security of our people,
development and prosperity of Armenia, and the preservation of our
heritage and identity with all that it entails, have been at the core of
its existence and mission.
All along its history, AGBU’s policies and activities have necessarily
involved civil political involvement. The Armenian General Benevolent
Union was instrumental in pressing for a number of Armenian claims
during the international political negotiations in the aftermath of
World War I and during the tenure of the first Armenian Republic. Boghos
Nubar Pasha headed the Armenian National Delegation at the Paris Peace
Conference in 1919. Later, during the Soviet period, AGBU maintained, as
a Diasporan Armenian organization, a representation office in Armenia
and its representative was victimized by the regime; nevertheless,
Boghos Nubar undertook major projects in Armenia, including the
establishment of major medical and educational facilities in Yerevan,
and developing the ambitious plan of the town of Nubarashen, tirelessly
working through the operational and political challenges for its
construction.
Years later, Calouste Gulbenkian, then President of AGBU, was
instrumental in negotiating with representatives of the French Mandate
in Lebanon and Syria, the establishment on a permanent basis of Armenian
refugees, including the creation of Bourdj Hammoud, Ainjar, and numerous
other Armenian quarters.
During the presidency of Arshag Karageozian, in 1946 the AGBU financed
under difficult political circumstances the repatriation of more than
100,000 Armenians to Armenia. It was a major political effort with a
historical impact for the future of our nation. It was later the
foresight of Alex Manoogian to continue AGBU’s support of the motherland
through the treacherous years of the Cold War, creating infrastructure
would strengthen Armenia through its independence while preserving and
promoting the Armenian identity and heritage in the diaspora.
During the presidency of Louise Manoogian Simone, AGBU was one of the
first organizations to come to the aid of Armenia after the catastrophic
earthquake of 1988. Those efforts helped to maintain our cultural and
religious infrastructures and strengthen the newly-independent Republic
of Armenia. The organization further extended its support to Karabakh in
its struggle for independence and self-determination.
AGBU continues to play a critical role in Europe by developing awareness
about the historical rights of Armenians in the Republic of Nagorno
Karabakh, through collaboration with scientific research organizations
and international political forums.
At this juncture, it is not unusual but, in fact it is AGBU’s duty to
speak up and express its viewpoint on the Armenia-Turkey Protocols.
Established in 1906, AGBU () is the world’s largest Armenian
non-profit organization. Headquartered in New York, AGBU preserves and
promotes the Armenian identity and heritage through educational,
cultural, and humanitarian programs, annually touching the lives of some
400,000 Armenians on six continents.
************************************* ************
PHOTO AVAILABLE ONLINE:
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress