Tweet
INTERVIEW OF ARMENIAN PRESIDENT SERGE SARGSYAN TO TURKISH DAILY "RADIKAL"
ARMENPRESS
Aug 29, 2008
YEREVAN, AUGUST 29, ARMENPRESS: Below is the interview of president
of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, to the Turkish daily Radikal.
Q: The 2010 World Cup qualifier between the national teams of Armenia
and Turkey, scheduled for September 6 in Yerevan, is probably the most
politicized sporting event in our region. In terms of politics what
were your expectations when you invited Turkish president Abdullah
Gul to Yerevan to watch the game together?
A: My number one goal was to normalize the relations between our
countries. Mr. Gul's congratulation message upon my election said
about the opportunities of normalizing the relations between Armenia
and Turkey. Later on Prime Minister Erdogan stated that Turkey is
open to a dialogue with Armenia. In return, I decided to use this
opportunity. There is a good sports event ahead. It is the first
time in the history our football teams will meet. It may become a
good opportunity for us to develop our relations. The result of the
game is not important, anyways I hope it will be a pleasure for the
fans. There excitement will be great. This will be a big and exclusive
event in our relations, and I hope it will become more special due to
the presence of the Armenian and Turkish presidents. We are neighbors
and will remains so. I am sure having normal relations will benefit
both the countries. My invitation to Mr. Gul shall be considered in
this context.
Q: There are some concerns in Ankara about this invitation. How, for
example the problem of the borders is to be solved and how president
Gul will be received in Armenia. Do you share these concerns?
A: There is nothing to worry about. If we have invited a president
of a foreign state, we are able to provide everything on a due level.
Q: I have met with some representatives of the Armenian Revolutionary
Federation (ARF) Party, who are against your invitation. They said
they will so everything to be heard in case president Gul arrives
in Yerevan.
A: I am sure their means to express themselves will remain in terms
appropriate for an official visit. Not being politically correct they
will first harm themselves, Armenia and me, then Mr. Gul.
Q: What do you think about the regional power engineering and
communication projects realized by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan,
which, in case of peace and stability in the region, might be very
profitable? Would Armenia like to join those projects? Do you think
that some day you will be received in Turkey in the same way as the
leaders of Azerbaijan and Georgia are, and the leaders of Turkey will
have doubts to accept invitations from Armenia?
A: By now I have learned two things about regional cooperation
projects. First, in case not all the countries of the region are
involved, or one of them is excluded, the projects do nothing but
create new dividing lines. Second, when political aspects of the
project outscore the economic ones, the projects usually turn out
not as successful as it they meant to be. It is something similar to
harnessing a horse from behind the cart.
Q: Which project do you mean?
A: The Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railroad, for example. Doesn't such railroad
already exist? It can be made operational again with minimum
expenses. A lot is being spent to leave Armenia out. In the past
the leaders of Armenia visited Turkey. I too, in different offices,
have been to Turkey. Reciprocal visits between neighbors are quite a
normal thing, and they should not be deemed as some kind of courtesy
to the opposite party. Our efforts are aimed at that.
Q: When the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway was
launched, president Gul in the presence of Aliyev and Saakashvili
said that Armenia could join this project in case of respecting the
international law. Do you think he hinted at the borders defined by
the 1921 agreement of Kars?
A: I think Mr. Gul would give a better answer to that question. I can
only assure that Armenia supports the regulations of the UN, as well
as other international treaties, it respects its own international
commitments.
Q: Well, I shall phrase my question more precisely. There are
some parties in Armenia that refer to a part of Turkey as Western
Armenia and, basing on the Sevres Treaty, have territorial claims
from Turkey. Do you admit that it is difficult to have full-fledged
diplomatic relations with a neighbor which argues your borders? What
is your official opinion about the legitimateness and recognition of
the agreement of Kars?
A: I can hardly remember any Armenian official to make territorial
claims on Turkey. But I can always hear that from Turkey. I don't
think it is right to base upon single statements. If so, there are
many people in Turkey who assure that in fact there is no Armenia
at all. We do not need any pre-conditions to establish relations
with Turkey. I know about the anxiety of Turkish officials regarding
the phrasings like Western and Eastern Armenia. It seems strange to
me. Western and Eastern Armenia are geographical terms used in the 19th
century. Trying to forget those expressions, coming from the past, is
equal to trying to deny the existence of Sparta, the Russian Empire,
the Ottoman Empire or other historical facts. If we had assumed that
official policy, we would have called our country Republic of Eastern
Armenia, not Republic of Armenia. None of the Armenian officials spoke
such things. Russia, for example, has territorial issues with China
and Japan, but it doesn't prevent those states from having normal
diplomatic relations.
Q: After your invitation to Gul, very serious things as the
Russia-Georgia conflict happened in Caucasus. What do you think about
Russia's assistance to South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which separated
from Georgia?
A: In fact tragic events happened. People were killed. It showed what
can arms race result in such cases. We advocate settling such issues
through peace negotiations. We also advocate respecting peoples'
right to self-expression and self-determination. It s regretful that
things take such a turn and of course we do not like it. We believe
that the joint plan of the Presidents of Russia and France, Medvedev
and Sarkozy, will bring peace and stability. Peace and stability are
very important to us. Putting everything aside, 70% of Armenian trade
is made through Georgia.
Q: Yerevan experienced problems with fuel because of the railway
bridge in Georgia blown up by the Russians, is that so?
A: Yes, it is. We hope the problem will be solved in two days. The
instability in the region is against Armenia. It displays very well
how we need stability. Prolonging the instable situation for three
more months or years would multiply our problems.
Q: Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian already approved
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan's initiative on Caucasian Stability
and Partnership Platform. Can you give any details on Armenia's policy
in this question?
A: Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian expressed positive
attitude to Erdogan's initiative on regional stability, security
and dialogue. I think the Foreign Minister took right actions. After
we receive the proposal we will discuss it in details and announce
our opinion.
Q: Do you think that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which is a very
important issue in your relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey, may soon
be settled? Do you think that making a peace agreement with Azerbaijan
will raise political and economic cooperation in the region onto a
new level?
A: We had a productive meeting with President Aliyev in Saint
Petersburg on June 6. Both of us ordered our Foreign Ministers to
proceed the work in accord with the principles adopted in Madrid. There
have been three meetings since then. I hope we'll find a solution soon.
Q: Can you suggest an approximate date?
A: It would be wrong to predict anything before the presidential
elections in Azerbaijan. We shall see what happens after the elections.
Q: Do you draw parallels between Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia
and Abkhazia? I ask this because you said that people's right for
self-determination should be always respected.
A: All the conflicts have something in common and something
different. I prefer making ourselves lessons out of them instead
of focusing on similarities and differences. I can clearly see
that efforts to solve such issues with military force result in
unpredictable and complicated consequences. I would like to know how
many people knew the results of the conflict before starting it. We
have to be very cautious.
Q: From outside it seems that the Turkish-Armenian relations are
in stalemate because of the Genocide issue. Do you think it is
right? Do you think Armenia-Turkey relations cannot progress until
Turkey recognizes the tragic events of 1915 as genocide? Is it a
pre-condition?
A: You can hardly find an Armenian in the world who does not believe
the Genocide took place. But the recognition of the Genocide is not a
pre-condition for establishing dialogue with Turkey. That is why we
say that we are ready to establish diplomatic relations with Turkey
without any pre-condition.
Q: What is your opinion about making a historians' commission to study
the 1915 events? Do you think it is possible to have two commissions,
one for normalizing the relations and another for studying the 1915
events? Do you think they can work at the same time?
A: I think we need to elaborate new approaches to this issue. For I
cannot remember a non-governmental commission to be ever established to
settle an intergovernmental issue. The best way is to start diplomatic
relations. In that case numbers of substructures and groups may be
established in the frameworks of the Armenian-Turkish intergovernmental
commission. Earlier a similar commission was found in the USA. Did it
work? Its necessary to create a proper environment for the functioning
of the scientific commission you suggested. Therefore normal diplomatic
relations are bare necessity.
Q. Do you believe that the ongoing confidential meetings of Armenian
and Turkish diplomats will yield any outcome?
A. I would never support them if I believed they would not. But on
the other hand I believe that the course of relations shows that we,
the leaders of the two countries, have reached the decision-making
point. They are not going to be easy ones. Not all Armenians or Turks
will like them. But I am sure that the overwhelming part of both
societies will support those decisions. I do not mean the diplomats'
efforts, by the overall atmosphere. Abdullah Gul's congratulatory
message, Erdogan's words, my invitation to Gul, even the interview
with you are parts of this atmosphere. In this sense I believe that
we have reached the decision-making stage.
Q. Will Gul's decision to come or not to Yerevan effect that situation?
A. I think his visit will be important. Because it is not easy to
make important decisions. Addressing an audience and looking in the
eyes of the one before you are different things. If I did not believe
it was important I would not send the invitation. We had difficult
times in our history, however Armenia is ready for development of
relations and expects the same from Turkey.
ARMENPRESS
Aug 29, 2008
YEREVAN, AUGUST 29, ARMENPRESS: Below is the interview of president
of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, to the Turkish daily Radikal.
Q: The 2010 World Cup qualifier between the national teams of Armenia
and Turkey, scheduled for September 6 in Yerevan, is probably the most
politicized sporting event in our region. In terms of politics what
were your expectations when you invited Turkish president Abdullah
Gul to Yerevan to watch the game together?
A: My number one goal was to normalize the relations between our
countries. Mr. Gul's congratulation message upon my election said
about the opportunities of normalizing the relations between Armenia
and Turkey. Later on Prime Minister Erdogan stated that Turkey is
open to a dialogue with Armenia. In return, I decided to use this
opportunity. There is a good sports event ahead. It is the first
time in the history our football teams will meet. It may become a
good opportunity for us to develop our relations. The result of the
game is not important, anyways I hope it will be a pleasure for the
fans. There excitement will be great. This will be a big and exclusive
event in our relations, and I hope it will become more special due to
the presence of the Armenian and Turkish presidents. We are neighbors
and will remains so. I am sure having normal relations will benefit
both the countries. My invitation to Mr. Gul shall be considered in
this context.
Q: There are some concerns in Ankara about this invitation. How, for
example the problem of the borders is to be solved and how president
Gul will be received in Armenia. Do you share these concerns?
A: There is nothing to worry about. If we have invited a president
of a foreign state, we are able to provide everything on a due level.
Q: I have met with some representatives of the Armenian Revolutionary
Federation (ARF) Party, who are against your invitation. They said
they will so everything to be heard in case president Gul arrives
in Yerevan.
A: I am sure their means to express themselves will remain in terms
appropriate for an official visit. Not being politically correct they
will first harm themselves, Armenia and me, then Mr. Gul.
Q: What do you think about the regional power engineering and
communication projects realized by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan,
which, in case of peace and stability in the region, might be very
profitable? Would Armenia like to join those projects? Do you think
that some day you will be received in Turkey in the same way as the
leaders of Azerbaijan and Georgia are, and the leaders of Turkey will
have doubts to accept invitations from Armenia?
A: By now I have learned two things about regional cooperation
projects. First, in case not all the countries of the region are
involved, or one of them is excluded, the projects do nothing but
create new dividing lines. Second, when political aspects of the
project outscore the economic ones, the projects usually turn out
not as successful as it they meant to be. It is something similar to
harnessing a horse from behind the cart.
Q: Which project do you mean?
A: The Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railroad, for example. Doesn't such railroad
already exist? It can be made operational again with minimum
expenses. A lot is being spent to leave Armenia out. In the past
the leaders of Armenia visited Turkey. I too, in different offices,
have been to Turkey. Reciprocal visits between neighbors are quite a
normal thing, and they should not be deemed as some kind of courtesy
to the opposite party. Our efforts are aimed at that.
Q: When the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway was
launched, president Gul in the presence of Aliyev and Saakashvili
said that Armenia could join this project in case of respecting the
international law. Do you think he hinted at the borders defined by
the 1921 agreement of Kars?
A: I think Mr. Gul would give a better answer to that question. I can
only assure that Armenia supports the regulations of the UN, as well
as other international treaties, it respects its own international
commitments.
Q: Well, I shall phrase my question more precisely. There are
some parties in Armenia that refer to a part of Turkey as Western
Armenia and, basing on the Sevres Treaty, have territorial claims
from Turkey. Do you admit that it is difficult to have full-fledged
diplomatic relations with a neighbor which argues your borders? What
is your official opinion about the legitimateness and recognition of
the agreement of Kars?
A: I can hardly remember any Armenian official to make territorial
claims on Turkey. But I can always hear that from Turkey. I don't
think it is right to base upon single statements. If so, there are
many people in Turkey who assure that in fact there is no Armenia
at all. We do not need any pre-conditions to establish relations
with Turkey. I know about the anxiety of Turkish officials regarding
the phrasings like Western and Eastern Armenia. It seems strange to
me. Western and Eastern Armenia are geographical terms used in the 19th
century. Trying to forget those expressions, coming from the past, is
equal to trying to deny the existence of Sparta, the Russian Empire,
the Ottoman Empire or other historical facts. If we had assumed that
official policy, we would have called our country Republic of Eastern
Armenia, not Republic of Armenia. None of the Armenian officials spoke
such things. Russia, for example, has territorial issues with China
and Japan, but it doesn't prevent those states from having normal
diplomatic relations.
Q: After your invitation to Gul, very serious things as the
Russia-Georgia conflict happened in Caucasus. What do you think about
Russia's assistance to South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which separated
from Georgia?
A: In fact tragic events happened. People were killed. It showed what
can arms race result in such cases. We advocate settling such issues
through peace negotiations. We also advocate respecting peoples'
right to self-expression and self-determination. It s regretful that
things take such a turn and of course we do not like it. We believe
that the joint plan of the Presidents of Russia and France, Medvedev
and Sarkozy, will bring peace and stability. Peace and stability are
very important to us. Putting everything aside, 70% of Armenian trade
is made through Georgia.
Q: Yerevan experienced problems with fuel because of the railway
bridge in Georgia blown up by the Russians, is that so?
A: Yes, it is. We hope the problem will be solved in two days. The
instability in the region is against Armenia. It displays very well
how we need stability. Prolonging the instable situation for three
more months or years would multiply our problems.
Q: Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian already approved
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan's initiative on Caucasian Stability
and Partnership Platform. Can you give any details on Armenia's policy
in this question?
A: Foreign Minister of Armenia Edward Nalbandian expressed positive
attitude to Erdogan's initiative on regional stability, security
and dialogue. I think the Foreign Minister took right actions. After
we receive the proposal we will discuss it in details and announce
our opinion.
Q: Do you think that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which is a very
important issue in your relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey, may soon
be settled? Do you think that making a peace agreement with Azerbaijan
will raise political and economic cooperation in the region onto a
new level?
A: We had a productive meeting with President Aliyev in Saint
Petersburg on June 6. Both of us ordered our Foreign Ministers to
proceed the work in accord with the principles adopted in Madrid. There
have been three meetings since then. I hope we'll find a solution soon.
Q: Can you suggest an approximate date?
A: It would be wrong to predict anything before the presidential
elections in Azerbaijan. We shall see what happens after the elections.
Q: Do you draw parallels between Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia
and Abkhazia? I ask this because you said that people's right for
self-determination should be always respected.
A: All the conflicts have something in common and something
different. I prefer making ourselves lessons out of them instead
of focusing on similarities and differences. I can clearly see
that efforts to solve such issues with military force result in
unpredictable and complicated consequences. I would like to know how
many people knew the results of the conflict before starting it. We
have to be very cautious.
Q: From outside it seems that the Turkish-Armenian relations are
in stalemate because of the Genocide issue. Do you think it is
right? Do you think Armenia-Turkey relations cannot progress until
Turkey recognizes the tragic events of 1915 as genocide? Is it a
pre-condition?
A: You can hardly find an Armenian in the world who does not believe
the Genocide took place. But the recognition of the Genocide is not a
pre-condition for establishing dialogue with Turkey. That is why we
say that we are ready to establish diplomatic relations with Turkey
without any pre-condition.
Q: What is your opinion about making a historians' commission to study
the 1915 events? Do you think it is possible to have two commissions,
one for normalizing the relations and another for studying the 1915
events? Do you think they can work at the same time?
A: I think we need to elaborate new approaches to this issue. For I
cannot remember a non-governmental commission to be ever established to
settle an intergovernmental issue. The best way is to start diplomatic
relations. In that case numbers of substructures and groups may be
established in the frameworks of the Armenian-Turkish intergovernmental
commission. Earlier a similar commission was found in the USA. Did it
work? Its necessary to create a proper environment for the functioning
of the scientific commission you suggested. Therefore normal diplomatic
relations are bare necessity.
Q. Do you believe that the ongoing confidential meetings of Armenian
and Turkish diplomats will yield any outcome?
A. I would never support them if I believed they would not. But on
the other hand I believe that the course of relations shows that we,
the leaders of the two countries, have reached the decision-making
point. They are not going to be easy ones. Not all Armenians or Turks
will like them. But I am sure that the overwhelming part of both
societies will support those decisions. I do not mean the diplomats'
efforts, by the overall atmosphere. Abdullah Gul's congratulatory
message, Erdogan's words, my invitation to Gul, even the interview
with you are parts of this atmosphere. In this sense I believe that
we have reached the decision-making stage.
Q. Will Gul's decision to come or not to Yerevan effect that situation?
A. I think his visit will be important. Because it is not easy to
make important decisions. Addressing an audience and looking in the
eyes of the one before you are different things. If I did not believe
it was important I would not send the invitation. We had difficult
times in our history, however Armenia is ready for development of
relations and expects the same from Turkey.