Tweet
TURKISH-ARMENIAN RELATIONS
Vahe Gabrielyan
Economist
June 17 th
UK
Sir-Norman Stone's letter has several points that are simply untrue.
"The great bulk of specialists in the time and region" who refuse to
acknowledge the Armenian genocide, the peak of which was in 1915,
are in fact a handful of people of which almost all names he has
enumerated. Among those who call the things by their names are the
respected International Association of Genocide Scholars (1997 and
2005), 126 scholars of Holocaust (2001), the Nobel Prize laureate
Elie Wiesel and numerous others.
It is erroneous to believe that the Armenians in the diaspora-
primarily a consequence of the genocide- are the only ones who
pursue international recognition. The Republic of Armenia aims at its
recognition, and in the first place by Turkey, not only because it is
our moral responsibility, but also for the very sake of normalization
of relations and reasons of security. Nevertheless, the Armenian
Government does not demand that the recognition be a precondition
for opening the border and establishing bilateral ties.
It is true that a considerable number of Armenians have left the
country, partially because of the ground communications blockade
imposed by Turkey.
However, "precipitous decline in population" does not reflect the
precise picture: there are now more Armenians coming into the country
than leaving it. And the GDP growth has been steadily two-digit over
the recent 6 years, without any oil or gas.
It is also true that Armenian businessmen would benefit from
open borders and cooperation, as would their Turkish counterparts
benefit. However, it would be hard for them to do that at the expense
of history: almost every family in Armenia has some kin who were killed
in or banished from Western Armenia. Therefore, we believe the border
should be opened and trade should start while problems can be settled
in a following intergovernmental and public discourse.
As your readers will certainly know well, today in most places debating
the 1915 Genocide the question is no more whether it happened - there
is ample evidence - it is rather how much the recognition affects their
relations with Turkey, a convenient ally of the West in various anti-
or pro- campaigns in time and space.
Vahe Gabrielyan
Economist
June 17 th
UK
Sir-Norman Stone's letter has several points that are simply untrue.
"The great bulk of specialists in the time and region" who refuse to
acknowledge the Armenian genocide, the peak of which was in 1915,
are in fact a handful of people of which almost all names he has
enumerated. Among those who call the things by their names are the
respected International Association of Genocide Scholars (1997 and
2005), 126 scholars of Holocaust (2001), the Nobel Prize laureate
Elie Wiesel and numerous others.
It is erroneous to believe that the Armenians in the diaspora-
primarily a consequence of the genocide- are the only ones who
pursue international recognition. The Republic of Armenia aims at its
recognition, and in the first place by Turkey, not only because it is
our moral responsibility, but also for the very sake of normalization
of relations and reasons of security. Nevertheless, the Armenian
Government does not demand that the recognition be a precondition
for opening the border and establishing bilateral ties.
It is true that a considerable number of Armenians have left the
country, partially because of the ground communications blockade
imposed by Turkey.
However, "precipitous decline in population" does not reflect the
precise picture: there are now more Armenians coming into the country
than leaving it. And the GDP growth has been steadily two-digit over
the recent 6 years, without any oil or gas.
It is also true that Armenian businessmen would benefit from
open borders and cooperation, as would their Turkish counterparts
benefit. However, it would be hard for them to do that at the expense
of history: almost every family in Armenia has some kin who were killed
in or banished from Western Armenia. Therefore, we believe the border
should be opened and trade should start while problems can be settled
in a following intergovernmental and public discourse.
As your readers will certainly know well, today in most places debating
the 1915 Genocide the question is no more whether it happened - there
is ample evidence - it is rather how much the recognition affects their
relations with Turkey, a convenient ally of the West in various anti-
or pro- campaigns in time and space.