Sergei Bagapsh, re-elected to Abkhazia’s presidency post

Sergei Bagapsh, re-elected to Abkhazia’s presidency post
13.12.2009 15:40 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The current president of Abkhazia Sergei Bagapsh has
won presidential elections last Saturday, head of the Central
Electoral Commission (CEC) of Abkhazia Batal Tapagua said.

According to him, 59.4% of the vote were given to Sergei Bagapsh
during elections. A repeat vote will not be held. One of presidential
candidates Raul Khajimba said that does not recognize the election
results and intends to appeal in CEC and in court. According Raul
Khajimba, the elections were flawed and the number of voters
represented in the lists in each polling station differed from the
actual situation, Newsru.com reported.

EU will lose if it leaves Turkey out

EU will lose if it leaves Turkey out
13.12.2009 18:22 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ European Union would make a mistake by rejecting
Turkey as a member, the Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan
said.

"What we are saying is regardless of whether you accept Turkey or not,
we are already in the EU. There are five million Turks in EU countries
already. You will only lose by leaving us behind," Recep Tayyip
Erdogan told Friday a televised interview on English-broadcasting news
channel, Russia Today. Erdogan said Turkey would not become an
additional burden for the EU, but it would actually lift some of the
existing burdens the EU had.

"There are countries already in the EU which cannot compete with
Turkey in terms of freedom and economy. Why do not they accept Turkey?
When you take a closer look at this, you see political reasons," he
said.

"If the European Union makes a permanent decision not to accept us,
then Turkey will make its decision based on that. But since we are
holding talks with the new EU chairman, we are about to enter a new
stage. During this new period we can take many different steps. We can
make progress on many aspects, I believe," Erdogan said.

Responding to a question on relations with Armenia, Erdogan said that
in 2005 he had sent a letter to former President Robert Kocharian,
proposing that historians should investigate the issue of the Armenian
Genocide of 1915, but did not receive reply, Anadolu Ajansi reported.

ANC head Hachikian Stresses Imperative for Unity Against Protocols

Hachikian Stresses Imperative for Unity Against Protocols at ARF Day
Celebration
Asbarez
Dec 11th, 2009

ANCA Chairman Ken Hachikian

GLENDALE-The Armenian Revolutionary Federation marked its 119th
anniversary during a celebration event organized by the Central
Committee of the ARF-Western USA. More than 1,500 community members
flocked to the Glendale High School auditorium to witness a resurgence
of the ARF’s commitment to fight for justice and the rights of the
Armenian nation.

The event’s keynote speaker, Armenian National Committee of America
Chairman Ken Hachikian, outlined the threats facing the Armenian
nation as a result of the Armenia-Turkey protocols and the imperative
for Armenian unity in opposition of these dangerous documents.

Below are his remarks:

Friends,

A few weeks ago, I spoke in Pasadena, at our Hai Tahd (Armenian Cause)
banquet, about the stakes facing our nation.

Today, once again, gathered among friends to mark a milestone in the
proud history of a great organization, I would like for us to take a
moment to step back.

– To speak less in general terms, and more about concrete challenges.

– To pause for a moment to review the truly dramatic developments of
the past year.

– To understand the dynamics that have brought us to this dangerous crossroads.

– And to draw intelligent lessons from this experience and, inspired
by our principles and our enduring faith in our cause, to chart
together the best path forward for our community and nation.

The need for a sober review – and thoughtful community dialogue – on
the issues facing our nation is certainly in keeping with the best
traditions of our organizational legacy, and reflects, in powerful
ways, the remarkable spirit of service and sacrifice embodied by all
of you.

And, so, let us turn to this examination:

Last year, toward the end of summer, Turkey’s leaders saw two
potentially game-changing developments on the horizon.

First, they saw that decades of Armenian American investments in
advocacy, elections, and education would, very likely, bear fruit in
the election of Barack Obama – a new U.S. Senator with a strong record
of support for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

They saw, as well, that he would – in his cabinet and in the
leadership of Congress – very likely be joined by others who support
our aims.

This was, it must be stressed, not due to good fortune, but rather a
generation of planned, concerted, and coordinated Hai Tahd work on
Capitol Hill, along hundreds of campaign trails, and in the political
trenches across the United States.

These friendships were forged from hard work by our activists across
the country.

Turkey and its allies here in America, seeing this, feared that
President Obama would alter – at Ankara’s expense – the sensitive
balancing act known as U.S.-Turkey relations.

They were nervous that an outside-the-beltway Chief Executive –
someone who had not been worked over or bullied for years by the
Turkish lobby – might have the audacity to reject the gag-rule they
had long imposed on American leaders.

This fear, of course, was less about one candidate – or even one
president – and more about Turkey’s concern that the Armenian American
community would finally succeed in tipping the scales in Washington in
favor of a truthful and just stand on the Armenian Genocide.

All the signs pointed in this direction: Senator Obama’s attacks on
the Bush Administration’s denials, his ardent defense of Ambassador
Evans, and his repeated campaign pledges – from before the California
primary and leading right up until days before the general election.

As was reported widely in the American and Turkish media at the time,
Turkey’s leaders were deeply worried that they might be unable to
prevent an Obama White House from recognizing the Armenian Genocide –
their #1 priority with the U.S. government.

And on this point, let there be no mistake. This is their #1 priority
in Washington, as measured by any meaningful standard:
– Their allocation of lobbying dollars and political capital
– Their meetings, public statements, publications, websites, and
diplomatic activity

By any measure, preventing the international isolation that would
start with U.S. recognition represents Turkey’s raw nerve.

This is not my view, but rather the perception of Turkey’s governing
elite – as demonstrated and reflected by its own conduct.

Why?

Why, some still ask – some even within our own community – would
Turkey, a major NATO power, care so much about Armenia – a small
republic – or, more importantly, fear her dispersed Diaspora?

Too often, these questions are posed by those among our community –
who, for lack of confidence or vision – fail to appreciate our own
power – the power of truth, the strength of our moral stand, and the
influence of our organized advocacy.

The answer, very simply, is because Turkey’s leaders know that a
truthful and just resolution of the Armenian Genocide threatens their
grip on power and the very foundations of the Turkish Republic.

Truth and justice – and our energetic and sophisticated advocacy of
these values – represent a clear and present danger for Turkey’s
leaders:

– They threaten their perceived prerogative to remain perpetually
belligerent toward Armenia and repressive toward their citizens of
Armenian heritage.

– They threaten their ability to keep what they have stolen, to
consolidate their crime, and erase forever even the memory of the
genocide.

As we all saw at the time, the threat posed by the Armenian American
community’s role in the 2008 elections came into increasingly sharp
focus for Turkey’s leaders as the prospect grew stronger of an Obama
victory.

They were faced with the possibility of a new President, who – along
with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
– could loosen or even break Turkey’s choke hold on U.S. policy on the
Armenian Genocide.

Now, let’s turn to the second danger on the horizon.

A very different kind of threat. One, in fact, of Turkey’s own making.

Over the past several years it became increasingly clear to leaders in
Ankara that their new foreign policy direction – on Iraq, Iran, Israel
and a host of other issues – would seriously limit their ability to
employ their traditional methods – basically threats and blackmail –
of coercing U.S. policymakers into silence on the Armenian Genocide.

We all have watched this pattern as it has developed:
– Warmer Turkish ties with regional U.S. rivals: Iran, Russia, and Syria.
– Increasing Turkish friction with Israel and the Jewish American community.
– Turkey’s refusal to cooperate on U.S. energy and other regional priorities.

All of these on top of the legacy of Turkey’s refusal, in 2003, to
allow the U.S. to open a northern front in the Iraq war.

Tension in each of these areas limited Ankara’s ability to rely solely
on bullying, its tactic of choice for the past several decades, in
managing the U.S. position on the Armenian Genocide.

As we approached the 2008 elections, Turkey’s leaders saw the need to
shift tactics. Not strategy and clearly not intentions, but rather
tactics.

More than ever, Turkey’s interests remain in blocking recognition of
the Armenian Genocide and preventing a truthful and just resolution of
this still unpunished crime.

Calling on their diplomatic tradition, Turkey’s leaders adapted to
changing times and responded intelligently (although certainly not
morally) to these new circumstances.

They feared that, unless they took dramatic steps, the new terms of
U.S.-Turkey ties under a President Obama might no longer allow them to
exercise a veto on their #1 Washington, DC priority: Preventing U.S.
recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

They saw that these two approaching dangers created a major window of
vulnerability for its campaign of denial in the United States.

The window would open on Inauguration day, continue through the
President’s first April 24th in office, and most likely close by April
24, 2010.

To compensate for this weakness, Turkey shifted, in late 2008, away
from a strategy of outright threats toward one that relied upon
creating the pretense of Turkish dialogue with Armenia.
– One that did not pressure the U.S. to avoid recognition with threats
– But rather one that counseled non-recognition in the name of `peace’

Which brings us to the key moment in this process.

The turning point that defines both the challenges we face and the
opportunities we have missed.

Very simply, Turkey could not make this shift on its own.

Our advocacy and Turkey’s own actions had sufficiently undermined
Ankara’s credibility on Armenian issues such that a unilateral
declaration of dialogue on its part would appear like another cynical
ploy.

To create their illusion, Turkey needed Armenia’s cooperation.

More specifically: In order to dodge the greatest threat of U.S.
recognition in more than a generation in the months following
President Obama’s inauguration, Ankara needed the public buy-in of
Yerevan.

Yerevan’s assent represented a necessary ingredient of the illusion
Turkey needed to create for the U.S., Europe, and the rest of the
international community.

They needed Armenia essentially as little more than a `prop’ in their play.

And this, sadly, is exactly what they got.

The Armenian government – on Turkey’s timeline and in accord with
Ankara’s interests – went right along.

Rather than standing strong and, in so doing, standing to harvest the
fruits of Diasporan efforts spanning generations, Armenia simply took
Turkey’s bait.

They bought into soccer diplomacy, into the Roadmap signed in the dark
of night, and the one-sided Turkey-Armenia Protocols, that are today
before the Armenian and Turkish parliaments.

They jumped at Turkey’s first offer

An offer with the obvious aim of ensuring the continued success of
Turkey’s campaign of Armenian Genocide denial in Washington, despite
the serious vulnerabilities presented by the election of Barack Obama
and Ankara’s increasing tension with the U.S. over foreign policy
priorities.

This was – as we warned at the time and as is painfully obvious today
– a major error by Armenia.

The results are as clear as they are dangerous:

Ankara is using the Protocols’ `process’ to manage the new Obama
Administration and the growing tensions caused by its increasing
independence from Washington in a way that both preserves its
prerogatives to act against U.S. interests on Iran, Israel, Russia,
and other issues while, at the same time, preventing the U.S. from
recognizing the Armenian Genocide.

Turkey emerges as a clear winner.

It’s a win-win for Ankara and a lose-lose proposition for all Armenians.

Turkey dodges U.S. recognition, secures commitments from Armenia for a
commission of historians and the confirmation of false borders, and,
at the same time, generates new and powerful pressure on Armenia and
Nagorno Karabakh for a pro-Azerbaijani settlement that threatens the
security of all the Armenians of the region.

Armenia – a year into Soccer Diplomacy – has truly received nothing in return.

Nothing except a set of Protocols and a proposed Madrid settlement that would:
– Surrender the rights of the Armenian nation
– Silence the voice of Armenians worldwide
– Sacrifice the security of the Armenian state
– Cede vast areas of Nagorno Karabakh for empty Azeri promises

The lessons of this experience are twofold.

The first is that Armenia must develop a foreign policy that, rather
then advancing the interests of elites and oligarchs, reflects the
true interests of Armenia and embraces the national democratic
aspirations of the Armenian people. Sadly, the current Foreign
Ministry of Armenia has not demonstrated the ability to do so.

The second is that – in the international arena – the force of our
advocacy has been the single greatest driver of the rights, interests,
security, and future of the Armenian people.

Our advocacy effort – built over the course of generations – today
empowers us to stand strong on the world stage.

– To stand up for truth and justice, and against Turkey’s `historical
commission.’
– To stand up for freedom and liberty, and against the surrender of
Nagorno Karabakh.
– To stand up for real peace, and against surrender to foreign pressure.

Our Hai Tahd movement engages and unifies our community around these
shared values and the commonly held goals of the Armenian nation:

– A just resolution of the Armenian Genocide
– A strong, secure, democratic, and prosperous Armenia
– A free and independent Nagorno Karabakh

We are devoted to broadening our consensus around each of these issues
and remain deeply devoted – as we have always been – to the cause of
unity in the pursuit of our aims.

We recall – with a profound awareness of our generation’s historical
mission – the powerful words of our great poet Yegishe Charents, who
wrote that the true salvation of the Armenian people lies in our
collective power – in our collective unity.

Charents wrote these words – at the cost of his own freedom – more
than seven decades ago, but they ring just as true today as ever. His
wisdom is reconfirmed by each trial and every challenge we face as a
nation.

We must, in the weeks and months ahead, grow larger and stronger –
bringing an ever-increasing circle of Armenians into our work and the
sacred cause of our proud and ancient nation.

In our unity we will find strength.

We’ve seen this in our community’s broad rejection of the Protocols.

Just as we have, for so many years, seen the value of unity in our
work in defense of Armenia’s rights and Nagorno Karabakh’s freedom.

For, let there be no mistake, we are, as a community and a nation,
unified on the core issues facing our nation.

We have – despite the manipulations of foreign powers, or even the
obstructionism that sadly still persists among a handful of misguided
self-seekers within our community – a powerful consensus on our main
challenges.

We seen this time and again – our community united behind a common
purpose, yet still subject to foreign attacks – typically through
proxies – aimed at undermining our unity and playing divide and
conquer games at our expense.

We saw this in:
– Our defense of Section 907
– Our attack on the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission
– Our opposition to the Hoagland nomination

And, once again, today on the Protocols and the Madrid Principles.

It is our nation’s true unity that we must both strengthen and serve.

We must, with our full resolve, reject the forces that would divide us
and – with equal vigor – resist the temptation to endlessly chase the
false unity that would require us to seek the consent of every
opportunist or that would provide the lapdogs of foreign interests
veto power over Armenian interests.

We must, rather, seek the true unity of common purpose, of collective
values, and of a common vision of our Armenian future.

It is into this unified effort that I invite you.

To join in our work – our struggle – as a unified nation. Only by
working together, will we persevere and prevail. And make no mistake,
we will do so.

Thank you.

Turkey’s Statements To Protract Protocol Ratification Surpass All Li

TURKEY’S STATEMENTS TO PROTRACT PROTOCOL RATIFICATION SURPASS ALL LIMITS

PanARMENIAN.Net
11.12.2009 20:55 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ President Serzh Sargsyan’s yesterday’s statement
on amending the RA law "On International Treaties" was a response to
Turkey’s intention to protract protocol ratification, according to
Prosperous Armenia MP Naira Zohrabyan.

"Turkish senior officials’ statements to delay ratification of
RA-Turkish Protocols surpass all limits," she said.

According to MP Aram Safaryan, there’ll be certain progress within
the upcoming months. "I hope Turkish Parliament will ratify Protocols
without preconditions and reservations. Otherwise, Armenia leadership
will take relevant measures," he noted.

ARFD To Continue Anti-Protocol Ratification Campaign

ARFD TO CONTINUE ANTI-PROTOCOL RATIFICATION CAMPAIGN

/PanARMENIAN.Net/
10.12.2009 19:53 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Despite ARFD’s being a minority party in {arliament,
we’ll continue the anti-protocol ratification campaign to make
society’s voice heard by MPs, says ARFD Hay Dat Bureau Director
Giro Manoyan.

"Reasonable timeframe for Armenia is February-March 2010, prior to
the 95th anniversary of Genocide. But Turkey will find some reason,
proposing Armenians to continue negotiations," he told today a news
conference in Yerevan. All Turkey needs is to demonstrate the world
a normalization process to avoid superpowers’ possible pressures,
Manoyan finds.

"By saying reasonable timeframes, Turkey means Azerbaijan’s benefits
from Karabakh peace talks," he said, ruling out the possibility of
any progress unless Baku declares Nagorno Karabakh a separate state.

Application Deadline For Terjenian-Thomas 2010 Program Extended

APPLICATION DEADLINE FOR TERJENIAN-THOMAS 2010 PROGRAM EXTENDED

Noyan Tapan
Dec 9, 2009

WASHINGTON, DECEMBER 9, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. The Armenian
Assembly of America (Assembly) announced that the application deadline
for the 2010 Terjenian-Thomas Assembly Internship Program in Washington
has been extended to January 10, 2010. The eight-week summer program,
now entering its 33rd year, is designed to provide college students of
Armenian descent the opportunity to intern in the nation’s capital,
while taking part in a full schedule of educational, social and
cultural activities. Interns will have the opportunity to discuss
Armenian-American issues during meetings with Members of Congress and
other government officials. Partial and full housing scholarships
for the Terjenian-Thomas Assembly Internship Program in Washington
are available to eligible students on a competitive basis.

Applications are available on the Assembly’s web site at aaainc.org.

According to the above mentioned web site, the Assembly also offers
a similar internship program in Yerevan, Armenia. The Yerevan program
provides students the opportunity to live and work in Yerevan.

Students will work at Armenian government agencies, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), medical centers, as well as meet with Armenia
and Nagorno Karabakh officials and tour historical sites in and around
the country. The application deadline for this internship program is
February 15, 2010.

Former Diplomat Reveals Secret State Dept. Attacks On 1980’s Genocid

FORMER DIPLOMAT REVEALS SECRET STATE DEPT. ATTACKS ON 1980’S GENOCIDE RESOLUTIONS

Armenian Weekly
December 9, 2009

WASHINGTON-A retired Foreign Service officer, U.S. Ambassador Arma
Jane Karaer, recently revealed a series of shocking revelations about
the State Department’s behind-the-scenes efforts on behalf of Turkey
during the 1980’s to kill congressional initiatives commemorating
the Armenian Genocide, according to now-public documents circulated
today by the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

The revelations are part of an oral history interview with Karaer,
a foreign service officer who served, among other postings during
her long diplomatic career, as a commercial officer in Ankara and
as the State Department’s senior Turkish desk officer. Excerpts from
her lengthy interview concerning Armenian issues, including Armenian
Genocide legislation before the U.S. Congress, are provided below.

"We’re circulating Ambassador Karaer’s interview-a truly stunning
example of undisguised cynicism in the face of genocide and denial-as
a public service," said Aram Hamparian, the executive director of
the ANCA. "As painful as her callous remarks are to read, they do, in
their candor, provide powerful insights into the depths to which U.S.

officials have sunk in enforcing Turkey’s genocide denial dictates.

Sadly, it would seem the pervasive attitude of expediency over morality
characterized by her words remains, even today, much more the rule
rather than the exception among the senior ranks of our nation’s
Foreign Service."

***

>>From the Library of Congress, Historical Collections (American
Memory) Manuscript Division, the Foreign Affairs Oral History
Collection of the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training.

An interview with Ambassador Arma Jane Karaer by Charles Stuart
Kennedy, April 19, 2004.

[EXCERPTED]

Q: Yes, absolutely. Anyway, I think we were all over the place, kind
of rewriting the book on this and I had served in Yugoslavia for five
years running the consular section and we’d had the same thing. I
mean you learn to discriminate between the real communists and the
ones who were kind of nominal or belong to the labor movement. If
you’ve got a job you belong to a labor movement. Anyway, I mean it
was a period of sort of revamping the rules.

KARAER: One of the things that we were doing in that office was trying
to wipe out the ineligibilities of cases that came to our attention
for which there was no fundamental proof that the person was ever a
communist or was, in any sense, dangerous to the United States.

Another thing that made me sensitive to this problem was a task
that I undertook when I was in Istanbul. In my office there were two
three-drawer filing cabinets with big bars and padlocks on them. Upon
inquiring I found out that they contained files of refugees from
Eastern Europe who had been processed in Istanbul through the Refugee
Relief Program. INS had taken whatever they wanted from those files and
left years before, but my immigrant visa clerk, who was the world’s
greatest pack rat, didn’t want to destroy them because she thought
they might contain some original documents, like birth certificates.

Of course this is now 20 years later. If they haven’t missed their
birth certificate by now, they’re probably not going to need them,
but I’m conscientious too. I went through every one of those doggone
files, six drawers full, not a single original document in any of it,
number one. Number two, I learned a lesson about refugees trying to
get to the United States. Most of them claimed to have left their
home countries because they were anti-communist.

Anti-communist? These guys were taxi drivers. What did you do that was
so anti-communist? Well, I just am, and that’s why I left and that’s
why I have to go to the United States, to fight the communists. So
much of it was so fluffy, but that’s what they needed to say to get
their visas for the U.S., so they said it. Of course we’ve got that
still. When I was on the Turkish desk I was got routine inquiries sent
to me by immigration courts about people who were Turks of Kurdish
background who were illegal aliens here.

They were being tried by the immigration court. Do they go back
or do they stay? Every single one of them said they had to stay
in the United States because their life would be in jeopardy if
they returned to Turkey. Not true. They were economic refugees, not
political refugees. There were even some Armenian Turks who had left
Turkey just in the previous few years who were claiming that as an
Armenian if they went back to Turkey they were in fear of their live,
which was all a bunch of bunk.

[ . . . ]

Q: You were on the Turkish desk from ’84 to?

KARAER: ’84 to ’86, yes.

Q: At the time you went there, in the first place, did you, was the
southeast Europe thing, did it fall along the lines that happened
between the Greeks and the Turks? I mean I’m talking about the American
personnel there. Was there, did you find it a pretty objective bunch
or did you see kind of that division within people who are looking
at that area off of our side?

KARAER: No, I think that they were objective. The Greek government
truly was being difficult. At the time we had a real terrorism threat
against our people.

Q: November 17th group, but anyhow.

KARAER: Yes. So, that was their main focus as I recall. Turkey was
the big, big issue, almost the whole time that I was there. About the
time I arrived, then California Congressman Tony Coelho had introduced
a bill in the Post Office Committee of the House of Representatives
to declare April 25th or April something Genocide Day. The purpose,
ostensibly, was to help the American people recall the people who
were lost in the so-called Armenian genocide.

Why the post office committee? Of course this is a foreign policy
thing. If the U.S. Congress says that their government committed
a genocide, it would enrage the Turks. However, there were a lot
of Armenian Americans in Mr. Coelho’s congressional district, and
apparently whatever makes the Turks unhappy, makes them happy. He
probably couldn’t have even got it onto the schedule of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee, but he thought he could slip this through
the Post Office Committee, which is in charge of declaring national
pickle day, national rose day, and things like that.

Mr. Coelho is famous now, infamous, for his money raising abilities,
so he had a lot of friends on the Hill. This thing had just popped
up on the Department’s screen when I arrived. The Turks had informed
the secretary of state that if that bill got passed, something awful
was going to happen in the bi-lateral relationship.

They didn’t know what, but something awful was going to happen. the
secretary had told the assistant secretary who told my boss, "Stop
it." Well, fortunately, we were able to find some members of the House
who, although they didn’t know very much about this piece of history,
were peeved with Coelho for trying this end-run around the Foreign
Affairs Committee. Whatever the justice of his claim it didn’t belong
in the Post Office Committee.

I worked very closely with one of the senior aides to one of those
congressmen. This man was a master of House procedure. This was my
next great learning experience-how much of what happens or doesn’t
happen on the Hill depends on finessing procedure. What they wanted
from us primarily were lots of short speeches. Three minute speeches,
two minute speeches, that they could pass out on the subject on why
this was a bad idea. Why this could not or should not be done. We,
mostly me, spent hours writing these little speeches that could be
given to members to use from the floor to speak against this proposal.

The Turks had belatedly learned that they had to lobby Congress. They
had for many years just sort of sat back with their typical chip on
the shoulder attitude. "We know that we’re great. We know that you
need us. That should be good enough for everybody. Why should we go
around hat in hand to your legislators?"

It took them a long time to understand the power of members of Congress
in this country. I think that they looked on our members of congress
as equivalent to their members of parliament which is not the same
thing. They thought that if they dealt with the administration that
was all that should be necessary. By the time the Coelho bill came up,
they had already been convinced that this wasn’t the case.

They had hired a lobbyist that was giving them advice on things that
they could do-primarily not stick their feet in their mouths too
often. There was an American professor who was a specialist in Turkish
and Ottoman history who got together a bunch of other academics in
the same line. They too were putting out public statements that the
version of history supported by the Coelho bill was not as clear cut
as it implied. One of the big problems with this issue is that so much
of what has been written in English about the Armenian massacres in
Turkey in the early 20th century was written by Armenians or Armenian
Americans. Our main line of attack on this whole thing was that yes,
something really horrible happened in Turkey in what was then the
Ottoman Empire during the First World War, but whatever happened
there was not a genocide.

We did get a certain amount of support from the Jewish lobby. They
don’t particularly want to share the genocide label with other groups.

The gratuitous killing of a lot of people is an ugly thing.

You don’t like to be picking nits over language. But the word genocide
means a particular thing, and the history does not support the charge
that the Turks were trying to wipe an ethnic group. From their point
of view, they were trying to stop a minority group from breaking off
another part of the country. While many people died in eastern Turkey,
the Armenian communities in western Turkey, who were not engaged in
rebellion, were not touched. The Turks had already lost a large portion
of their empire to rebellion by the Greeks and the Bulgarians who had
won their independence with the help of the Russians. The Armenians
in northeastern Turkey, in their old homeland contiguous with Russia,
tried the same thing.

They formed militias and, with Russian help, attacked Turkish
villages in the same area. This was all happening about the time that
Turkey entered the First World War on the side of the Germans and
Austro-Hungarian Empire. Russia, of course, was on the other side of
the conflict. From the Ottoman government’s point of view, not only
were those Armenian groups rebelling, they were making common cause
with the enemy. The army put down the rebellion and then rounded up
all of the Armenian villagers, pointed them towards Syria and said,
"Start walking." There was no attempt to provide any sort of food or
even any real protection. There were Kurds and bandits who had preyed
on these villages for centuries, just waiting in the hills. When
these unprotected convoys came along, they did what they always did,
they attacked these people and killed them and raped the women.

What we know about what actually happened comes a great deal from the
oral histories that were collected of people who lived through that
period and ended up in the United States. A lot of them were young
children at the time that this happened and some of them were still
alive at the time that I was the desk officer. There are at least
three Armenian newspapers in the United States. I think two of them
in English and one of them in Armenian. We used to get all of these
papers and read this stuff. Every issue would have an interview with
some grandmother or grandfather who remembered what happened to them
when they were a child. Now, how did they survive?

Almost all of them survived because a Turkish family had taken them
in and taken care of them until Christian missionaries arrived looking
for these kids and then they gave them to the missionaries.

A lot of the information that was published in the United States at
the time of this event was provided by American missionaries who were
working in that area. The history of Christian missions in Turkey is
rather a strange one in my view, because while everybody was out there
to try to convert someone to their particular brand of Christianity,
they had very little luck with the Muslims. Almost none whatsoever.

So, then what did they do? They proceeded to try to convert the
Armenian Catholics to their particular Protestant denomination. Of
course many missionaries had a very biased view of who was right, who
was worthy of saving, who was worthy of having their freedom and so on.

I found some books in the Department library written by a man who
was our consul in Izmir. He was there at the end of the Turkish
independence war where Izmir is burned. Reading what he wrote in the
mid-1980s was shocking. According to him whatever the Muslims said
or did was wrong and they were all liars, and whatever a Christian
said was good and whatever they said was the absolute truth. This
was the kind of stuff that was being fed to the U.S. public.

Q: In a certain respect, I’ve looked into this a little bit, only from
a consular point of view, I think this was the consul I can’t think
of his name, did quite a heroic deed when the Greeks were pushed out
and he saved a lot of lives.

KARAER: Well, there’s no question that these people did the job that
they were sent to do, but the fact is that he and others like him
were so incredibly partial to one religion and so anti-Turk.

This is one of the reasons why the Turks, Ataturk and others, felt
that the whole world was against them, and this remained the theme in
Turkish diplomacy right up until the time that I was working there…

Our issue with the Coelho gambit was not to try to say that the
Ottoman government hadn’t done something awful. They had. What we were
focusing on was the genocide language. I remember once my boss and I
went to call on the man who was the vice president’s chief political
advisor. They didn’t want to get in trouble with Coelho, but they
didn’t want to rock the boat with the Turks either. He said, "Now,
why is this so important?" I said, "It’s the genocide thing. These
people want their own state. Armenian territory right now is a part
of the Soviet Union. The rest of what the Armenians claim as their
homeland would have to come from Turkey, and they will never ever
agree to that. We need their cooperation in NATO and elsewhere and
that’s why we’re siding with them. If the Armenian group can get
respectable organizations like the Congress of the United States to
say, in effect, that the Turks committed a genocide, then they can
get others in Europe and so on to do the same thing and their next
step is going to be pressure to compensate. See that’s territory
so we can have our own homeland and this will never happen to us
again." The man we were talking to said, "Oh, that’s ridiculous." I
said, "Why? It happened before, didn’t it?"

Q: Well, you know, speaking about the word genocide, I was watching
public broadcasting yesterday, last evening, the Lehrer Report,
which is the sort of the preeminent public broadcast in TV. They were
talking about problems in the western province of the Sudan called
Darfur and there was a discussion of "I know that you’re not using the
word genocide." I can’t remember what, it got sort of esoteric about
why they weren’t using genocide, but were using ethnic cleansing and
I think it’s the same thing. Genocide is a term that everybody is
very careful about because all sorts of things get kicked in if you
use genocide.

KARAER: Yes, that’s right.

Q: You know, it strikes me that one of the problems in Congress
has happened in the last 30 or 40 years or so, is there’s no adult
minding the store there anymore. It used to be that you’d have the
speaker of the house or something to take a look and say, look this
is affecting our military ability to resist the Soviet Union. It
doesn’t get anywhere. Kids knock it off. But there’s nobody to do
that at this point I take it.

KARAER: In fact it came to the floor of the House for a vote, and I’m
telling you this was one of the most exciting days of my life. We were
sitting in the Department in somebody’s office who had a nice big
television watching CSPAN and our guys stood up and said what they
had to say and they did, and we got Steven Solarz to speak against
the bill. He was great because he got up and said, speaking as a Jew,
that he had great sympathy for peoples who had suffered in this way,
but there was a serious question as to whether this could accurately
a) be called a genocide and b) about the effect such an action would
have on our foreign policy. Anyway, they took a vote on an amendment
to the bill, which was a stalking horse to see how many votes they
had that might be for or against this resolution. When they saw how
it was going, the person in charge of the floor called it off and
removed it from consideration. There never was an up and down vote
on that resolution, but we did manage to stop it for the time being.

They got another one through a few years later.

Procession Organized By Armenian National Congress In Yerevan Comple

PROCESSION ORGANIZED BY ARMENIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS IN YEREVAN COMPLETED

ArmInfo
2009-12-10 16:12:00

ArmInfo. On December 10 the Armenian National Congress held a
procession in the center of Yerevan with a demand to release all the
political prisoners in Armenia.

ArmInfo correspondent reported that several thousands of people took
part in the procession, including all leaders of the Congress, except
Levon Ter-Petrossyan. The procession was dedicated to international
Day of Human Rights Protection. At Myasnikyan Square the procession
participants observed a minute of silence for the memory of the
10 victims of 1 March 2008. The Armenian National Congress handed
letters to the representative of UN Commission on Human Rights and
representative of OSCE.

The procession was completed in Northern Avenue. "The procession was
organized jointly with a number of public organizations with the only
demand to release all the political prisoners in Armenia who are still
in custody. The country that has political prisoners is unable to
take any effective steps in foreign policy, steps protecting Armenian
citizens’ interests, or steps protecting interests in such problematic
issues as Karabakh peace process and Armenian-Turkish relations",-
said Levon Zurabyan, Coordinator of Armenian National Congress.

EU To Allocate 100mln. Macroeconomic Assistance To Armenia

EU TO ALLOCATE 100MLN. MACROECONOMIC ASSISTANCE TO ARMENIA

Panorama.am
18:50 10/12/2009

EU decided to allocate ~@100mln. macroeconomic assistance (~@35mln. –
grant, ~@65mln. – loan) to Armenia, this was stated at Armenia-EU
political consultations of the EU Political and Security Committee,
held in Brussels Wednesday, MFA reported.

EU delegation will visit Armenia in February, 2010 to discuss signing
of the memorandum of understanding.

Armenian delegation was chaired by the Head of Armenian Mission to the
EU, Ambassador Avet Adonts, the EU delegation was headed by Swedish
Ambassador to Political and Security Committee Olof Skoog.

In the course of consultations, the sides discussed issues on
Armenia-EU political cooperation. The delegations also touched upon
Armenia’s domestic political situation, global crisis impact on
country’s economy and government’s efforts to overcome its impacts.

Armenia, St. Petersburg To Deepen Cooperation In Innovation Projects

ARMENIA, ST. PETERSBURG TO DEEPEN COOPERATION IN INNOVATION PROJECTS

PanARMENIAN.Net
08.12.2009 13:41 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian-Russian business forum kicked off in
Yerevan on December 8.

"I wanted to bring our cooperation to a new level – scientific,
technical and actively cooperate in the field of innovation," Natalya
Lukicheva deputy head of St. Petersburg administration committee on
external affairs.

She informed, that St. Petersburg adopted a program to support small
and medium-sized businesses, the city will be creating free economic
zones in Russia. "Now the policy of establishing technoparks and
clusters is forming, when smaller companies are grouped around one
major business," she added.

Natalya Lukicheva also told about interest on the part of a newly
forming technopark to find partners in Armenia among the Association
of Armenian women involved in garment industry.

Large industrial parks will also be created in medical equipment,
pharmaceutical, information technology industries, which have broad
potential for cooperation.

Natalya Lukicheva invited representatives of Armenia to participate
in the innovation week in Saint Petersburg next year and promised
favorable conditions for the exhibition displays. The Russian
delegation is represented by Union of Garment Workers, Pharmacists,
scientific and technical workers, etc.