Author: Kafian Jirair

FROM THE BOSPHORUS: STRAIGHT – DISINGENUOUS DIPLOMACY IN TURKEY, ARMENIA

Hurriyet
Jan 21 2010
Turkey

The diplomatic effort to "normalize" Turkish-Armenian relations, the
long set of incomplete steps that began with a football match played
in Yerevan last year, would appear all but lost. The political straw
set to break the back of this diplomatic camel: language in a brief
by the Armenian constitutional court that salutes the ever-problematic
word "genocide."

As readers know, this is a description of the death and destruction
attending the collapse of the Ottoman Empire that we do not accept.

The reasons for our rejection of the term are many, and well known.

But we also realize and respect the historical weight of the
asymmetrical trauma experienced by the Armenian people and understand
why the symbolism of this word is at the core of Armenian identity.

So despite the convergence of opinion by historians, we know a
consensus on the lexicon to describe this history will remain elusive.

This is precisely why we so strongly favor the interaction, exchange
and communication that opening the border and establishing basic
diplomatic relations would promise.

We also are well aware of the formidable pressures that come to
bear on Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Armenian
President Serge Sarkisian. The Armenian diaspora that basically
funds the day-to-day operation of Armenia (through, for example, a
$100 million infrastructure check from U.S. financier Kirk Kerkorian)
is for the most part passionately opposed to this accord. Similarly,
nationalist settlement in Turkey has fused with the extreme opposition
of Azerbaijan, which has many points on which it can apply pressure
in Turkey – chief among them energy.

Politicians from both sides are all over the map on this issue, often
disingenuously so. For example, the Armenian side is correct when it
argues that the language of the constitutional court brief – which
approved the forwarding of the now-famous protocols for parliamentary
ratification – is extraneous to the binding legal process. It is,
but it is also a sop to the opposition in the Armenian parliament
who will exploit it in ways easy to imagine.

Erdogan is right when he argues that Armenia imposed an intermediary
stop in the approval process, namely the court’s review. That Turkey
did not require similar judicial review is evidence of our sincerity,
Erdogan says. But this intermediate step, a relic in Armenian law
carried over from its Soviet-era constitution, is a requirement in the
ratification process of all international treaties and accords. More
disingenuousness.

These protocols are in the deep interests of both Armenia and Turkey.

Failure at this point would have recriminations we do not want to
even ponder, particularly as it would relate to an American president
spiraling downward in the polls as we approach that nettlesome date
of April 24.

What to do? Let’s at least suspend the disingenuousness.

KARABAKH PROGRESS POSSIBLE ONLY WITH RUSSIA AS SOLE MEDIATORS – EXPERT
Aliyah Fridman

news.az
Jan 22 2010
Azerbaijan

Pavel Salin News.Az interviews Pavel Salin, a leading expert at the
thinktank the Russian Centre of Political Conjuncture.

Russia has intensified its peacekeeping efforts in an attempt to
settle the Karabakh conflict and the next round of negotiations
between presidents Aliyev and Sargsyan will be held in Sochi on 25
January. What do you expect from the meeting?

I don’t have great hopes for this meeting. There have been many
rounds. On the other hand, the "football diplomacy" prepared the ground
well for negotiations between the presidents of the two countries. But
on the other hand, Azerbaijan’s view has not changed and without
Armenia’s readiness to discuss the status of Nagorno-Karabakh within
Azerbaijan, the negotiation process will not be helped. This will
happen only if Russia alone is mediating because Turkey has recently
declared its mediatory ambitions. Turkey has recently been claiming
for the role of a strong regional center. It has its own interest and
it will declare its influence through settling the Karabakh conflict
or at least through taking some steps on this settlement. Therefore,
I think both Russia and Turkey would benefit from this. I think some
progress can be gained when the conflict settlement is sponsored not
only by Russia but also by Turkey. As far as I understand Russia does
not mind this. It does not want to be a monopolist because in this
case the conflict will not be settled at all.

The prospect of Armenia’s withdrawal from the occupied regions of
Nagorno Karabakh which is painful for Yerevan is currently being
discussed as a component of settlement. What is the possibility
of such a partial liberation of lands for improvement of the
Armenian-Azerbaijani relations?

In fact, this step to normalization for Armenia will mean a step to
return Nagorno Karabakh under Azerbaijan’s control as Armenians call
these lands that were inhabited by Azerbaijanis "a corridor of life"
because provisions to Nagorno Karabakh are supplied through it. If this
corridor disappears, the only way to maintain Nagorno Karabakh will
be by air. This is very expensive and on the other hand Azerbaijani
side may prohibit the flight of Armenian planes over its territory.

I would like to clarify an important moment. First of all, the
discussed is the liberation of seven Azerbaijani regions, while a
single road via one of the regions would be enough for communication
between Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. In addition, Baku has always
demonstrated readiness to present a land communication between Karabakh
and Armenia.

If so, this means that the very fact of the transfer of any regions
to Azerbaijan is inadmissible for the Armenian side as it would be
interpreted in the press of Azerbaijan, as well as Turkey and other
countries sympathizing Azerbaijani side as a start to return Nagorno
Karabakh to Azerbaijan.

If Azerbaijan agreed on return of these lands in exchange for
recognition of Nagorno Karabakh, Armenia would have agreed on it. But
as far as I understand, Azerbaijan insists on return of these regions
but independence is out of the question.

Yes, this issue is not set at all.

Well, I would like to note that the positions of Nagorno Karabakh and
Armenia are absolutely not identical. The situation is complicated
there. On the one hand, the Karabakh elite plays a great role in
Armenia, the former and current presidents are its representatives. On
the other hand, Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia are the same as Russia
and Abkhazia that is the positions are mostly identical but not by 100%
and Karabakh may play its own game.

I would argue the appropriateness of drawing analogies since
Azerbaijan held war with Armenia rather than Karabakh. But I would
like to return to Armenia’s motivation for liberation of lands around
Nagorno Karabakh. Is it possible that such a motivation is Turkey’s
statement that normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations is
possible only if Armenia liberates these regions?

Armenia is currently attempting to broaden the space for maneuvers.

But, again, the nationalistic part of the establishment is too
strong in Armenia. The positions of the Armenian state are not so
powerful in this country. If you remember, the things were near the
color revolution that could mostly have been held under nationalistic
slogans. Therefore, the reaction not only in Azerbaijan and Turkey but
also inside Armenia to some steps is important for the authorities
of this country. If today Armenian authorities make any concessions
(proposed by either Azerbaijan or Turkey) it will be criticized in
the local mass media and politicians. In this case, the shaky seat
of the Armenian authorities may fall in the result (a year ago it
was too shaky, now it is less shaky but the situation there is still
unstable). Therefore, I would view the internal situation in Armenia
as one of the factors influencing the settlement process.

TURKISH DEPUTY CALLED ON THE GOVERNMENT TO WITHDRAW THE PROTOCOLS

News.az
Jan 20 2010
Azerbaijan

Devlet Bahceli Bahceli called on the government to withdraw the
protocols.

Leader of the National Movement Party (MHP) of Turkey Devlet Bahceli
called on the government to withdraw the protocols signed with Armenia
from the parliament.

MHP leader issued a written statement concerning the decision of
Armenian Constitutional Court. According to him, with this decision
Armenia will not change the appropriate paragraph of the Declaration
of Independence where the eastern Anatolian provinces of Turkey are
presented as Western Armenia, will not recognize the Kars treaty
determining the borders of the two countries or give up its policy
on the international recognition of the so-called genocide.

Bahceli said according to the decision, Nagorno Karabakh problem
and the occupied Azerbaijani territories have nothing to do with the
protocols, this problem will not be taken into consideration during
the implantation of the protocols.

"This decision showed once more that Armenia had not changed its
position contradicting the international law and the hostile attitude
towards Turkey. This situation is a fiasco for the AKP government
and the Foreign Minister who signed the protocols. The government
should withdraw the protocols from the Turkish parliament, announce
invalidity of the protocols and apologize to the Turkish nation.

Otherwise, AKP government will go down in history as the government
abasing its pride, confidence, self-respect and national interests,"
he said.

According to the decision of Armenian Constitutional Court, the
protocols can not be commented on contradicting to the preamble
of Armenian Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Armenian
Declaration of Independence contains territorial claims against Turkey
and calls this country’s eastern provinces "Western Armenia".

Moreover, the declaration says that the international recognition of
"Armenian genocide" is the duty of Armenian state.

ARMENIAN POLITICAL EXPERT: IT IS NOT RULED THAT THAT FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON SETTLEMENT OF KARABAKH CONFLICT HAS ALREADY BEEN SIGNED WITH AZERBAIJAN

ArmInfo
2010-01-19 15:04:00

ArmInfo. "The Armenian authorities have been recently "gladdening" the
public by their unpredictable actions i.e. by signing the road-map,
Madrid principles," Aleksander Kananyan, political expert, said at
Armat Club in Yerevan on Tuesday.

In the meanwhile, he said, the problem is very serious and the public
must be informed of any changes in the country. For instance, he
said, the public learnt about the road-map on the eve of April 24 –
Armenian Genocide Commemoration Day. Afterwards on August 31 the
people became witness to signing of the texts of the protocols and
later Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said that the text with all
its details was coordinated yet in February 2009, the expert said. In
this context, he supposes that the framework agreement on settlement
of the Karabakh conflict has already been signed with Azerbaijan and
the Armenian party has informed Turkey about that. All this allowed
Turkey linking the Armenian-Turkish normalization and the Karabakh
process. "We should not pin hopes with the meetings of Armenian and
Azerbaijani presidents," he said.

The incumbent administration of Armenia has neither desire not
possibility to influence the negotiation process, he said. The expert
believes that any decision suggesting return of even part of the
territories to Azerbaijan will inevitably result in collapse of the
entire defense system of Armenia.

‘PROCESS OF KARABAKH SETTLEMENT HAS A LONG WAY TO GO’

Aysor
Jan 18 2010
Armenia

"Process of settlement of the Karabakh conflict has a long way to
go to reconcile sides’ positions and to provide basis for designing
an agreement," said Standing Parliamentary Committee chairman and
Republican Party of Armenia member Gagik Minasian at today’s press
conference.

He said it’s wrong to expect fast decisions in this process. "We have a
frozen conflict of Karabakh, which can erupt any moment, on one hand,
and martial statements by Azerbaijan’s government, which nullify any
hoping to meet compromise Azerbaijani society in the near future,
on the other hand," said politician.

Any peace talk on the frozen conflict is better, than to go in war,
according to Gagik Minasian. "Armenia has to negotiate with Azerbaijan
bringing it to civilized ways of solutions, receivable in evidence
of the world: refraining from the threat or use of force.

"The Karabakh settlement must go with three key principles: land border
with Armenia, status of independence of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic,
and finally, guarantee of safety."

Life & Style – Metroplus January 17, 2010

The peregrinating cemetery

The Hindu Hynmer’s Obelisk

It was 250 years ago this year that the British decided to raze the
Indian settlement, Black Town, that they had encouraged to develop
just north of the Fort’s walls on what is today the High Court
campus. And, as the settlement was cleared, the New Black Town,
today’s George Town, began to develop beyond the boundary of the
Esplanade that replaced the levelled old town to provide the Fort’s
guns a clear field of fire.

To the northwest of Old Black Town, in what is now the Law College
campus, was the first British cemetery in South India. Lockyer, who
c. l703 saw the old burial ground, wrote, `(It is) adorn’d with many
stately Tombs… Some with lofty Spires carved with different Fancies,
after the Indian manner; others in a lower Sphere gravely express the
Merits of the Person for whose sake they were erected; and all in
general have the most curious Workmanship in India bestow’d on them.’
When the creation of the Esplanade started in 1760, the cemetery too
was flattened. Only two monuments, considered non-threatening, were
spared and they still survive behind the Law College hostel, the
Hynmer’s Obelisk, where the child David Yale is also interred, and the
Powney vault. The two monuments had, in the 19th Century, been
considered isolated memorials. It was only in the 1890s that it was
discovered that they were part of a burial ground; when excavation
work began for the Henry Irwin-designed, Namberumal Chetty-built Law
College, and large quantities of bones were unearthed!

The tombstones that survived the clearing operation were moved in 1763
to St. Mary’s Church in the Fort, where they were used to pave the
courtyard. But even these suffered further damage when they were dug
out and used to serve as gun-platforms on the ramparts when Hyder Ali
threatened the Fort. Today, after having been replaced in the yard
haphazardly, only 104 survive.

The oldest British tombstone in South India, perhaps even in India…

I don’t know whether Surat or Machilipatnam have anything to say
about that. It is now part of the St. Mary’s courtyard, pieced
together after fragments of it – collaterally damaged during the
French 1758-59 siege – were found in the old burial ground. The
inscription identifies it as the tombstone of Elizabeth Baker, wife of
President Aaron Baker. She died at sea on their voyage from the Bantam
settlement in Java, from where Baker was coming to Madras in 1752 to
take charge of what had been named as the chief settlement of the
British in the East. It was a position Madras was to enjoy till it was
decided to transfer power to Calcutta in 1774. Elizabeth Baker died
during childbirth shortly after leaving Bantam, and it was three weeks
later than she was buried in Madras.

A new St. Mary’s cemetery was established on The Island c.1761, next
to what is now the Metropolitan Transport’s headquarters.

When the postman knocked…

* My reference to Blackbird fountain pens made in India by P. Orr’s
(Miscellany, December 21) has had V. Theetharappan recalling that
P.A. Sanjeevi started the Pilot Pen Company sometime before World War
II with Japanese inputs. When the Pilot Pen Company closed, Sanjeevi
opened the Pilot Theatre in Royapettah.
* Say something about the demolishing of the Binny’s headquarters
building on Armenian Street, `a beautiful heritage building,’ says
reader Rajesh Malhotra. What more can I say than what I said in July
2005, and I quote: `A landmark in George Town, the headquarters of
Binny’s, has passed into the hands of the Indian Bank-I only hope the
37,000 grounds-will not meet the same fate as so many other heritage
properties owned by Government and units in the public sector. Most of
these owners have the wherewithal to restore these properties,
preserve a bit of our heritage and still earn something from
them. But, the tendency has long been to pull down such properties and
replace them with high-rises that earn already rich organisations
substantially more. I hope that the Indian Bank will ensure that does
not happen to a significant bit of Madras commercial history that it
now owns-I hope-it will take its cue from Parry’s where restoration
has made an old landmark a striking monument to heritage.’

Lavrov, Davutoglu speak on phone
16.01.2010 12:22 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had a phone
conversation with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on January 15,
2010.

The Ministers discussed the Russian-Turkish relations and exchanged
views on a number of international and regional problems, including
Iran’s nuclear program, Cyprus issue and the situation in Bosnia &
Herzegovina.

Istanbul celebrates European Capital of Culture status
16.01.2010 15:33 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Istanbul will transform into a huge party today with
celebrations marking the city’s European Capital of Culture status
taking place simultaneously in seven spots throughout the city, on
both the European and Asian sides.

The main stage of the celebrations will be Halic, or the Golden Horn,
where events will kick off at 5:30 p.m. with a ceremony at the Halic
Congress Center, during which President Abdullah Gul and Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÑan will deliver opening speeches.

Istanbul – which shares its status as a 2010 European Capital of
Culture with Hungary’s Pecs and Germany’s Essen – will host over 400
events this year. The opening night program, with a wide focus that
spans from dance shows to pop concerts and art exhibitions, is a
sample of the sundry lineup of events to be offered in the coming
months, Today’s Zaman reported.

Istanbul (historically also known as Byzantium and Constantinople) is
the largest city in Turkey and fifth largest city proper in the world
with a population of 12.6 million. Istanbul is also a megacity, as
well as the cultural and financial centre of Turkey. The city covers
39 districts of the Istanbul province. It is located on the Bosphorus
Strait and encompasses the natural harbor known as the Golden Horn, in
the northwest of the country. It extends both on the European (Thrace)
and on the Asian(Anatolia) sides of the Bosphorus, and is thereby the
only metropolis in the world that is situated on two continents.

In its long history, Istanbul has served as the capital city of the
Roman Empire (330`395), the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire (395`1204
and 1261`1453), the Latin Empire (1204`1261), and the Ottoman Empire
(1453`1922). The city was chosen as joint European Capital of Culture
for 2010. The historic areas of Istanbul were added to the UNESCO
World Heritage List in 1985.

WAR OVER KARABAKH WOULD LEAD TO GREAT LOSSES ON BOTH SIDES

News.az, Azerbaijan
Jan 15 2010

The International Crisis Group The International Crisis Group hopes
that regional countries and OSCE mediators will step up efforts to
resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in 2010.

Adoption of the main basic principles by the conflicting parties
will promote the conflict settlement, Sabina Freizer, director of
the European programs of the International Crisis Group, told.

Freizer said that the conflict settlement involves not only the
return of the occupied lands but also other issues fixed in the
basic principles.

"I hope there will not be a war between Azerbaijan and Armenia,
because if there is war, it will lead to great losses on both sides,"
Freizer said.

1 news.az

EURONEWS REMOVES BIASED VIDEO REPORT ON NAGORNO-KARABAKH FROM ITS WEB SITE – PHOTO

Today, Azerbaijan
Jan 15 2010

European TV giant Euronews has removed the scandalous video report
on Nagorno-Karabakh from its Web site following strong protests
from Azerbaijan.

Earlier, the TV channel Web site had a video report prepared by the
Euronews staff after a trip to Azerbaijan’s occupied lands.

The highly biased report distorted history of the Armenian-Azerbaijani
conflict. Authors of the report ignored a fair view of the Azerbaijani
side in it. They did not bother to learn opinion of each of the parties
to the conflict. The report included comments of only Armenian side.

Such an unprofessional approach to the work caused well-founded
discontent in Azerbaijan. Press Service of the Azerbaijan Foreign
Ministry sent a letter of protest to Euronews to protest the unilateral
and biased story.

Members of Azerbaijani public also voiced their dissatisfaction with
the channel’s policy.

As a result, the TV channel seems to acknowledge its
mistake and agree with the public in Azerbaijan removing
video story about the Nagorno-Karabakh from its Web site:
change-in-nagorno-karabakh/

Day.Az

URL: