EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OF NEW YORK BASED NEWSPAPER SPEAKS ABOUT WHAT OBAMA, ERDOGAN AND SARGSYAN DISCUSSED IN WASHINGTON
Today
s/66018.html
April 13 2010
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with editor-in-chief of the New York-based
Russian-language "Noviy Rubezh" ("New Frontier") newspaper Nobert
Yevdayev.
Armenian President and Turkish Prime Minister and later Armenian and
U.S. Presidents met in Washington yesterday as part of the Nuclear
Security Summit. However, no significant statements followed…
First and foremost, I note that Barack Obama has no task to spoil
relations with Turkey and he may have a in a private conversation made
it possible for Erdogan to change attitude towards Iran’s nuclear
program, which is no less important in the relations between the
two countries.
Of course, all three parties discussed the state of the
Armenian-Turkish relations, but as far as we know, there were only
discussions.
As a person, being directly in the epicenter of events, in your
opinion, why did the U.S. Congress committee adopt the "Armenian
genocide" resolution?
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the U.S. House of Representatives
adopted resolution 23 to 22 votes labelling events in the Ottoman
Empire in 1915-1917 as "genocide". It was passed with a minimum margin
of votes. Adoption of a resolution is only personal opinion of a group
of congressmen, who produce expert doctrine of recommendatory nature
for the whole of the lower house of Congress.
One reason for adopting such a resolution was that some of these
members, being strongly politicized, listen to the voice of Armenian
lobbyists. Sponsors of the resolution Congressmen Adam Schiff and
George Radanovich represent the California State and, to some extent,
depend on the votes of the Armenians, constituting the Armenian
National Committee of America (ANCA), a large diaspora community
in California.
Another no less important reason is that the latest statements voiced
by Turkish PM Erdogan against Israel sparked a negative attitude of
some undecided congressmen who supported Israel, which outweighed the
bowl in favor of the resolution. In this case, the history was turned
into an instrument of policy blocking an opportunity to reveal truth.
The ideal way to disclose the truth is to be guided by impartial
research. For this purpose a commission consisting of independent
scientists should be set up, it should be provided with all the
archival materials by the both sides. Their authoritative scientific
opinion could be included in resolution of any country that is
interested in solving this problem.
How did the Azerbaijani and Turkish Diaspora act immediately after
the decision of the congressional committee? Were there any protests,
events, actions, etc.?
The Azerbaijani Diaspora organizations, together with their Turkish
counterparts, sent letters of protest to U.S. President Barack Obama,
State Department, personally senators and members of the House of
Representatives immediately after the resolution was adopted.
On April 15, 16, 17 Azerbaijan Association together with the Turkish
community will hold a joint conference on topical problems of the
South Caucasus and Turkey in New York, Columbia University. One of
the panels will be devoted to decision of the U.S. Congress Committee
to recognize the "Armenian genocide".
They also plan to hold the largest protest against the Congress
committee resolution at Times Square in the heart of New York on
April 24. President of the Azerbaijan Association of the USA (ASA)
Tomris Azeri will deliver a long speech on this issue. Posters will
be installed and film on the events of 1915 will be displayed in
large screens.
Do you share the opinion that Armenia lost from the spoiled relation
with Turkey most of all?
I think that opening the border with Turkey should not be linked with
the decision of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the U.S. Congress
recommending to recognize the "Armenian genocide".
Regarding resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, Turkey’s
solidarity with Azerbaijan in liberation of Armenian-occupied lands
is linked to the free movement of citizens, not only between countries
but also within one country.
What is Russia’s stance on this issue?
Russia is looking for points of convergence with Turkey, but does not
want to force things to the detriment of relations with Armenia. It
will be rather cautious and neutral.
How do you see resolution to the Karabakh conflict in a short-term
period?
Unfortunately, each new elected president of Armenia does not want to
be first who would make concessions in the Karabakh conflict. In this
case we can only hope to enhance and strengthen the work to attract
sympathy from other countries, including public diplomacy in this
matter in favor of Azerbaijan, as well as wisdom of the negotiators,
who must find a solution that would satisfy both countries.