Tweet
PRESS RELEASE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
Contact: Information Desk
Tel: (374-1) 52-35-31
Email: [email protected]
Web: http://www.ArmeniaForeignMinistry.am
Minister Oskanian Addresses Armenia-Turkey Relations at House of Lords
Armenian's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Vartan Oskanian, addressed a group
of journalists, parliamentarians and other officials at a 90th Anniversary
Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide organized by the British Armenia All
Party Parliamentary Group, in the House of Lords Moses Room. The program was
opened by Armenia's Ambassador to the UK, Vahe Gabrielyan. The moderator was
Baroness Caroline Cox, chair of the Parliamentary Group, and active
supporter of Armenian issues. The guests included former member of the
Canadian Parliament Sarkis Assadourian, head of the French-Armenian
Friendship Group of the French National Assembly, Francois Rochebloine, and
James Smith, of the Beth Shalom Holocaust Foundation. Below is the full text
of the Minister's address.
The program was preceded by an ecumenical service at St. Margaret's Church.
Address by
H. E. Vartan Oskanian
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Republic of Armenia
At
The Commemoration of the 90th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide
By
The British Armenia All Party Parliamentary Group
At
The House of Lords, Moses Room
London
June 15, 2005
I am pleased to join you in this remembrance of the first genocide of the
last century. Since then, the millennium has changed, but man has not. That
tragedy, that crime against humanity, was followed by a dozen more such
politically motivated murders of entire nations. Today, at the beginning of
the 21st century, in Darfur, we are again witnessing a world caught up in
condemnation, but lacking the political will to name and stop the
perpetrators of genocide. It is history repeating itself.
This year, on and around April 24, we marked the 90th anniversary of the
Genocide of Armenians. British political life kept you from doing so here,
and so today in June, this conference reminds us that remembering and
condemning are not limited to anniversaries.
I appreciate that this commemoration is taking place in Great Britain, the
home of Arnold Toynbee and James Bryce a historian and a diplomat who were
charged with examining documents about the treatment of the Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire. Todayıs Turkish government wants to review and rewrite their
work.
That is what Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan said in a letter addressed to
the British Parliament earlier this year. Itıs not enough that they have
spent a good part of this century rewriting their own history, now they want
to rewrite yours. In the year 2005, in a world that no longer has empires
and colonies, in a world where it is lofty ideals which unite countries and
nations in alliances and guide their policies and engagements, it is at the
very least disheartening that a modern Turkish government hailed by some
as a democratic beacon, an example of the victory of universal ideals over
sectarian beliefs can continue to cynically deny their history, and ours.
When a government plans to do away with its own population to solve a
political problem thatıs genocide. At the turn of the 20th century, the
Ottoman Empire was shrinking, it was losing its hold over its subjects along
the periphery of the empire. For fear that in Anatolia, too, the Armenian
minority would agitate for greater rights and invite foreign powers to exert
pressure, the Ottoman leadership used the cover of World War I to attempt to
wipe out the Armenians.
US Ambassador Henry Morgenthau called what he witnessed, the Murder of a
Nation. Others called it ~Lrace murderı. They did so because there was no
term Genocide yet. When the word was finally coined in 1944 by Raphael
Lemkin, it was done with clear reference to genocidal acts prior to that
date, the Armenian Genocide included. There is no doubt that if the word
genocide had existed in 1915, every one of the hundreds of articles would
have used the term.
In the face of this, Turkeyıs continued insistence on rejecting and
rewriting history costs them credibility and time. Two months ago, Prime
Minister Erdogan wrote a second letter. It was addressed to my President --
although they gave it to the press before they gave it to us. The letter
said letıs set up a joint historical commission and let them study what he
called this ~Ldisputed period in historyı. He said it would constitute a
step towards contributing to the normalization of relations between our
countries.
We would like nothing more than normalization between our countries. But we
think he has it backwards. We need some normalization between our countries
in order for a joint commission to be able to work on this or any other
dispute. There is nothing normal about our relationship today. Within
Turkey, there is not a normal environment in which to discuss these issues.
In the two months since this letter was issued, Turkey has ratified a penal
code which makes use of the word genocide a punishable crime. In the two
months since this letter, Turkey has put on trial several writers and
historians for use of the word genocide, and most recently even for use of
the term ~Lmassacreı. In the two months since this letter, Turkish
authorities forced the cancellation of an academic conference co-sponsored
by three Turkish universities, with the very politically correct title:
Ottoman Armenians During the Decline of the Empire.
One does not knock on Europeıs door by blindfolding historians and gagging
writers. In this kind of environment, what are the members of the commission
supposed to discuss? In the absence of relations between the two
governments, who is to appoint them and who are they to report to?
Denial and rejection have taken deep root in Turkish society. Theyıve been
justified by a rhetoric of Armenian treachery, aggression, criminality and
territorial ambition.
The political consequence of this rationale has been a unilateral closing of
the Armenian-Turkish border. There have been no normal exchanges,
interactions or relations across our borders not in Soviet times, and not
since our independence. Does Turkey wish to spend the whole of the next
century obstinately cementing the memories and reproaches of the past? When
will we move on to creating a new context within which these two neighbors
will be able to share a common space, create new experiences and grow to
live together without acrimony or hostility? Armenians need recognition for
very tangible security reasons, as well, and not just in the interests of
historical justice.
Consigning these difficult issues to a few academics and experts, in such a
vacuum, is not a genuine attempt at creating a dialog.
The massive resources and reputation of the Turkish state have been invested
in evading history and avoiding the term genocide. It will take the
engagement of that same Turkish state to begin a dialog. We are not the only
neighbors in the world who have had, and who continue to have, a troubled
relationship.
That is what President Kocharian said to Prime Minister Erdogan in his
response. He also said that Armenia is ready for a political dialog. Under
the rubric of a political dialog, all other kinds of discussions about
todayıs borders and yesterdayıs history can take place. Under the rubric
of a political dialog, those responsible, committed and empowered to act can
be engaged in the healing.
Todayıs Turks do not bear the guilt of the perpetrators, unless they choose
to defend and identify with them. Armenians and Turks, together with the
rest of the modern world, can reject the actions and denounce the crimes of
the Ottoman Empire.
Some Turkish writers and academics have begun down that difficult road to
introspection and study. Some are doing so publicly and with great
transparency. In this context, it is essential that the international
community doesnıt turn a blind eye, but instead consistently extends its
hand, its example, its own history of transcending.
Every nation edits its own past just as it edits visions of its future. It
has been the selective amnesia of the Turkish establishment which is the
stumbling block to efforts to reckon with our common past. We continue to
hope that Turkeyıs 21st century vision of a future in Europe, and Europeıs
vision of a Europe with Turkey, will overtake 19th century politics.
Thank you.
--Boundary_(ID_f2kow6G/HswD+ax9x8t3TQ)--
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia
Contact: Information Desk
Tel: (374-1) 52-35-31
Email: [email protected]
Web: http://www.ArmeniaForeignMinistry.am
Minister Oskanian Addresses Armenia-Turkey Relations at House of Lords
Armenian's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Vartan Oskanian, addressed a group
of journalists, parliamentarians and other officials at a 90th Anniversary
Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide organized by the British Armenia All
Party Parliamentary Group, in the House of Lords Moses Room. The program was
opened by Armenia's Ambassador to the UK, Vahe Gabrielyan. The moderator was
Baroness Caroline Cox, chair of the Parliamentary Group, and active
supporter of Armenian issues. The guests included former member of the
Canadian Parliament Sarkis Assadourian, head of the French-Armenian
Friendship Group of the French National Assembly, Francois Rochebloine, and
James Smith, of the Beth Shalom Holocaust Foundation. Below is the full text
of the Minister's address.
The program was preceded by an ecumenical service at St. Margaret's Church.
Address by
H. E. Vartan Oskanian
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Republic of Armenia
At
The Commemoration of the 90th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide
By
The British Armenia All Party Parliamentary Group
At
The House of Lords, Moses Room
London
June 15, 2005
I am pleased to join you in this remembrance of the first genocide of the
last century. Since then, the millennium has changed, but man has not. That
tragedy, that crime against humanity, was followed by a dozen more such
politically motivated murders of entire nations. Today, at the beginning of
the 21st century, in Darfur, we are again witnessing a world caught up in
condemnation, but lacking the political will to name and stop the
perpetrators of genocide. It is history repeating itself.
This year, on and around April 24, we marked the 90th anniversary of the
Genocide of Armenians. British political life kept you from doing so here,
and so today in June, this conference reminds us that remembering and
condemning are not limited to anniversaries.
I appreciate that this commemoration is taking place in Great Britain, the
home of Arnold Toynbee and James Bryce a historian and a diplomat who were
charged with examining documents about the treatment of the Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire. Todayıs Turkish government wants to review and rewrite their
work.
That is what Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan said in a letter addressed to
the British Parliament earlier this year. Itıs not enough that they have
spent a good part of this century rewriting their own history, now they want
to rewrite yours. In the year 2005, in a world that no longer has empires
and colonies, in a world where it is lofty ideals which unite countries and
nations in alliances and guide their policies and engagements, it is at the
very least disheartening that a modern Turkish government hailed by some
as a democratic beacon, an example of the victory of universal ideals over
sectarian beliefs can continue to cynically deny their history, and ours.
When a government plans to do away with its own population to solve a
political problem thatıs genocide. At the turn of the 20th century, the
Ottoman Empire was shrinking, it was losing its hold over its subjects along
the periphery of the empire. For fear that in Anatolia, too, the Armenian
minority would agitate for greater rights and invite foreign powers to exert
pressure, the Ottoman leadership used the cover of World War I to attempt to
wipe out the Armenians.
US Ambassador Henry Morgenthau called what he witnessed, the Murder of a
Nation. Others called it ~Lrace murderı. They did so because there was no
term Genocide yet. When the word was finally coined in 1944 by Raphael
Lemkin, it was done with clear reference to genocidal acts prior to that
date, the Armenian Genocide included. There is no doubt that if the word
genocide had existed in 1915, every one of the hundreds of articles would
have used the term.
In the face of this, Turkeyıs continued insistence on rejecting and
rewriting history costs them credibility and time. Two months ago, Prime
Minister Erdogan wrote a second letter. It was addressed to my President --
although they gave it to the press before they gave it to us. The letter
said letıs set up a joint historical commission and let them study what he
called this ~Ldisputed period in historyı. He said it would constitute a
step towards contributing to the normalization of relations between our
countries.
We would like nothing more than normalization between our countries. But we
think he has it backwards. We need some normalization between our countries
in order for a joint commission to be able to work on this or any other
dispute. There is nothing normal about our relationship today. Within
Turkey, there is not a normal environment in which to discuss these issues.
In the two months since this letter was issued, Turkey has ratified a penal
code which makes use of the word genocide a punishable crime. In the two
months since this letter, Turkey has put on trial several writers and
historians for use of the word genocide, and most recently even for use of
the term ~Lmassacreı. In the two months since this letter, Turkish
authorities forced the cancellation of an academic conference co-sponsored
by three Turkish universities, with the very politically correct title:
Ottoman Armenians During the Decline of the Empire.
One does not knock on Europeıs door by blindfolding historians and gagging
writers. In this kind of environment, what are the members of the commission
supposed to discuss? In the absence of relations between the two
governments, who is to appoint them and who are they to report to?
Denial and rejection have taken deep root in Turkish society. Theyıve been
justified by a rhetoric of Armenian treachery, aggression, criminality and
territorial ambition.
The political consequence of this rationale has been a unilateral closing of
the Armenian-Turkish border. There have been no normal exchanges,
interactions or relations across our borders not in Soviet times, and not
since our independence. Does Turkey wish to spend the whole of the next
century obstinately cementing the memories and reproaches of the past? When
will we move on to creating a new context within which these two neighbors
will be able to share a common space, create new experiences and grow to
live together without acrimony or hostility? Armenians need recognition for
very tangible security reasons, as well, and not just in the interests of
historical justice.
Consigning these difficult issues to a few academics and experts, in such a
vacuum, is not a genuine attempt at creating a dialog.
The massive resources and reputation of the Turkish state have been invested
in evading history and avoiding the term genocide. It will take the
engagement of that same Turkish state to begin a dialog. We are not the only
neighbors in the world who have had, and who continue to have, a troubled
relationship.
That is what President Kocharian said to Prime Minister Erdogan in his
response. He also said that Armenia is ready for a political dialog. Under
the rubric of a political dialog, all other kinds of discussions about
todayıs borders and yesterdayıs history can take place. Under the rubric
of a political dialog, those responsible, committed and empowered to act can
be engaged in the healing.
Todayıs Turks do not bear the guilt of the perpetrators, unless they choose
to defend and identify with them. Armenians and Turks, together with the
rest of the modern world, can reject the actions and denounce the crimes of
the Ottoman Empire.
Some Turkish writers and academics have begun down that difficult road to
introspection and study. Some are doing so publicly and with great
transparency. In this context, it is essential that the international
community doesnıt turn a blind eye, but instead consistently extends its
hand, its example, its own history of transcending.
Every nation edits its own past just as it edits visions of its future. It
has been the selective amnesia of the Turkish establishment which is the
stumbling block to efforts to reckon with our common past. We continue to
hope that Turkeyıs 21st century vision of a future in Europe, and Europeıs
vision of a Europe with Turkey, will overtake 19th century politics.
Thank you.
--Boundary_(ID_f2kow6G/HswD+ax9x8t3TQ)--