Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Serzh Sargsyan: April 24 Of 1915 Was A Turning Point In Armenia's Hi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Serzh Sargsyan: April 24 Of 1915 Was A Turning Point In Armenia's Hi

    SERZH SARGSYAN: APRIL 24 OF 1915 WAS A TURNING POINT IN ARMENIA'S HISTORY

    armradio.am
    24.04.2009 17:20

    President of the Republic of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, gave an interview
    to the Russia Today TV Channel. The full text of the interview is
    presented below:

    Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, the first question, I would like to
    address is the following: what is the meaning of the date of April
    24 for you as the President of the Republic of Armenia.

    Serzh Sargsyan: The history of the people of Armenia is calculated
    in thousands of years. Throughout that history we've had victories
    and defeats; we have had gains and losses. But throughout our history
    there is one turning point which is a dividing line. And that point
    is the April 24 of 1915. After that we deal with absolutely different
    reality. Hundreds of thousands and millions of people were living and
    creating a cultural heritage and their daily life in their homeland,
    but were made to leave those lands - part of which were massacred and
    the other part had to escape to survive. And today in the world there
    is no, almost no country where are no Armenians. The population of
    today's Armenia, almost half of it, are the heirs of the survivors of
    the genocide. And these are realities which are in our life every day.

    Today if you move from Yerevan 15-20 km towards Turkey you would see
    the last closed bord er of Europe. Armenia gained its independence
    in 1991. And for 18 years now that border is closed. I cite this
    example not to say that we are under blockade, but to make it clear
    that April 24 of 1915 is everyday present in our lives. April 24 is
    officially announced as the day of the victims of the genocide. But
    even before being officially recognized as such a date, April 24
    has always been for our people such a day of memory and remembrance,
    also for me as one of the representatives of our people.

    But for me as the President of Armenia it is my duty to take measures
    to soften the impact of that terrible tragedy and to take measures
    to make sure that such crimes will not repeat in the future. And
    the most efficient way for that is the international recognition of
    the genocide.

    Alexander Gurnov: These days many believe that the President of the
    United States Barak Obama is likely to recognize the Armenian genocide
    as he had promised during his election campaign. What is the reason
    Armenians attach such a big importance to the genocide recognition?

    Serzh Sargsyan: Firstly, the recognition of the genocide is the
    most efficient way for the prevention from such crimes in the
    future. Secondly, justice means much for the Armenian people. And
    recognition of the genocide is also affected by that belief. There
    is no single Armenian in the world that is not affected somehow by
    that genocide.

    And obviously each Armenian wants to see justice in that regard.

    The United States has been extensively present in the Ottoman
    Empire through their diplomatic corps, through their missionaries,
    businesspeople. We all know they had insurance companies functioning in
    the Ottoman Empire. And for the US there is no doubt about the historic
    nature of the genocide as it has taken place. They do not need any
    additional proves or witnesses from us. I want to remind that 42 states
    of the US have recognized the genocide. I want to remind that when the
    US Congress Foreign Affairs Committee was hearing the case and they
    do it on regular basis discussing the issue of the Armenian genocide -
    it is almost unanimous recognition that there was genocide. But some of
    the congressmen say: "Yes, there has been genocide, and the US has to
    recognize that reality". And the others say: "Yes, it has taken place,
    but now it is not in the national interests of the US to recognize it."

    Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, you described the border with Turkey
    as the last closed one in Europe. In what degree the events of 1915
    hinder your relations with Turkey nowadays, about 100 years after
    the Genocide? What are the current perspectives of normalization
    of relations?

    Serzh Sargsyan: As I have mentioned, April 24 1915 has everyday
    presence in our live. But also as you know I have invited the President
    o f Turkey Mr. Gul to come to Yerevan last year in September to jointly
    watch the football game between Armenia and Turkey and also to talk
    about our relations. And as you know Mr. Gul accepted that invitation
    and visited Yerevan. We have started an intensive negotiation stage
    with Turkey to establish diplomatic relations.

    We base ourselves on the fact that there has been genocide,
    but non-recognition of that genocide by Turkey is not watched
    by us as an insurmountable obstacle for the establishment of the
    relations. We are in favor of having relations with Turkey without
    any preconditions. As you know before Gul`s visit to Armenia Turkey
    was offering two preconditions. One of them - genocide related and
    the other - Naghorno Karabakh problem.

    In the negotiations that we have had since, we both, Armenia and
    Turkey, took stance that our negotiations shall proceed without
    any preconditions: establishment of relations without preconditions
    and then discussion of any questions that might be of interest to
    the parties.

    And as you know Mr. Gul invited me to Turkey to jointly watch the
    return football game and I will be happy to accept that invitation
    and will visit Turkey, if by that time the border is open or at least
    we are very close to that. Till recent period of time, everyone
    was convinced that we have significantly progressed and there was
    some expectation that would allow having a historic breakthroug h,
    but recently there have been statements by the Prime Minister of
    Turkey to the effect that the Armenian-Turkish relations can improve
    if Armenia compromises on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We watch this
    as a step back from the existing agreements and as a precondition
    being put forward. I believe that in our relations we have progressed
    sufficiently. And now the ball is on the Turkish side of the field. And
    if we use the football terminology (as this process has been labeled as
    "football diplomacy" by the media) then we can say that any football
    game has a certain timeframe that limits it.

    Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, you mentioned the Naghorno-Karabakh
    conflict. What are the perspectives of peaceful settlement of
    Naghorno-Karabakh conflict and normalization of relations with
    Azerbaijan - another important neighbor?

    Serzh Sargsyan: As you know, the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh is
    dealt with by the Minsk group and its co-chairs: Russia, the US and
    France. And from the beginning of the presidency, I have had three
    meetings with my Azeri counterpart Mr. Ilham Aliev. And I think
    this one year has been a sufficient period for us to understand each
    other's positions, clarify those positions, and make our judgments on
    them. I think now it is the right time to speed up the whole process
    and to move towards mutually acceptable solutions. And as you know
    the key point of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict20is the right to self
    determination of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh. If this issue is
    solved, then all the other issues of concern can be solved.

    I am happy that most recently the leadership of Azerbaijan has been
    talking about solving this conflict on the basis of all principles of
    the international law. A few days ago the President of Azerbaijan has
    met the President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev and he has talked to the
    Russian media and reiterated that this problem has to be solved on
    the basis of all principles of international law. And to remind you
    I want to tell that for a long time the leadership of Azerbaijan has
    been talking about solving this Nagorno-Karabakh conflict either by
    military means or only on the principle of the territorial integrity.

    In general when I hear people speaking about territorial integrity
    in many cases not knowing the substance of the conflict or due to
    political considerations many people prefer to say things that put
    them into a very delicate condition - in many cases I start to think
    that there are not only double, but also triple standards. Within
    the last twenty years, the membership of the United Nations has been
    increased by forty sovereign states. Forty out of 192 member states
    of the UN have joined the organization in the last twenty years. How
    could one then speak about inviolability of frontiers? Of course, I am
    in favor of, and I can never be a gainst the principle of territorial
    integrity of states and we have never had any territorial claims
    towards Azerbaijan. The problem is being deformed here.

    It is the initiative of self determination of the people of
    Nagorno-Karabakh that has been represented as a territorial
    claim of Armenia towards Azerbaijan, which is of course not
    true. Nagorno-Karabakh was merged to Azerbaijan in the Soviet period
    by the decision of the Communist Party Body and even in that case the
    Constitution of the Soviet Union was straightforwardly providing for
    the autonomous status of Nagorno-Karabakh as a district. In other
    words, it was recognized as some national state arrangement. And
    Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous district succeeded from the Soviet Union
    and Azerbaijan according to the legislation of the Soviet Union. When
    Azerbaijan today is speaking about the occupation of the part of
    its territory, to put it in a most soft way, they forget how these
    events unfolded. In 1991, along with Azerbaijan, Naghorno Karabakh
    succeeded from the Soviet Union after which it suffered an aggression
    from Azerbaijan and as the result of the military actions that were
    imposed by Azerbaijan we have what we have today.

    Indeed, today forces of self-defense of Naghorno Karabakh control
    also such territories which in the past have not been part of
    Naghorno Karabakh autonomous district, but it should be remembered,
    that people of Naghorno Karabakh call those territor ies "security
    zone". Despite the fact that the cease-fire stands for 15 years,
    the cause-consequences relationships in that conflict have not
    changed. From those territories on a daily bases thousands of shells
    were thrown on peaceful inhabitants of Naghorno Karabakh, and it is
    not right to accuse the people of Naghorno Karabakh, Armenians that
    they have been able to secure their right for life by a heavy price
    of their blood, and to call that an 'occupation.' I don't think it
    is a just approach.

    I want to repeat that I am very happy that the President of Azerbaijan,
    a few days ago, when he was speaking about international law principles
    he also spoke about the fact that this also has to be addressed on
    the basis of all founding principles of the UN and OSCE. Of course,
    this is the way to move forward. As we all know, the most recent
    ministerial summit of OSCE that took place at the end of 2008 in
    Helsinki has stated three principles: the right to self determination,
    territorial integrity and non-use of force as the guiding principles
    for the solution of this conflict. And these principles are the basis
    for the negotiations also incorporated into the framework document
    offered to us by the Minsk Group co-chairs. So, if we look from this
    perspective we have advanced significantly. There are possibilities
    and chances that situation can greatly change as well.

    Alexander Gurnov : Mr. President, there is an opinion that many
    problems in the post soviet area can be resolved through CIS
    structures. According to another opinion, CIS has already exhausted
    itself. Do you think that this is true or are there resources to
    be used?

    Serzh Sargsyan: I do not think that the CIS has exhausted its resources
    and I have to state that the cease fire that has been signed in 1994
    has been signed exactly under the auspices of the CIS. And this
    once again comes to prove that the CIS is definitely needed. Any
    organization can be only what its members want to see and make out of
    it. We have lived within one country for 70 years. And many countries
    for decades had been the part of the Russian Empire before that. And to
    immediately interrupt all those connections and ties - I do not think
    it is right or productive. If countries like Canada or Australia till
    now keep their connections and do not cut their ties with the United
    Kingdom, with the Royal dynasty of the UK - it does not mean that
    Canada or Australia are less sovereign states than we are. Within
    decades and centuries they have created ties and connections that
    can be very beneficial within the Commonwealth. Here much depends on
    Russia. If Russia believes that the CIS is an important and needed
    structure, I think that the resources of the CIS are increasing.

    Alexander Gurnov: Mr. President, Russia is actively voicing the idea
    of the need to review the existing system of European security and
    stressing the necessity to sign a new Treaty on European security. In
    what degree official Yerevan shares this approach?

    Serzh Sargsyan: I understand the motivation of my Russian colleagues. I
    understand the position of the Russian Federation. The security system
    that we see today was formed decades ago, when it was difficult to
    take into account all the realities, when the threats and challenges
    were significantly different from what we face today. And exactly
    for that reason there is need for some amendments and changes to the
    security system. Let me bring a few examples. If we speak about the
    efficiency of OSCE, as you know, there is an agreement regulating
    the conventional forces in Europe and providing for certain quotas
    for each signatory country.

    For a long period of time, Azerbaijan is significantly violating those
    quotas. It was violating these quotas by getting supplies from one or
    a few countries which are parties to the same treaty. And it seems
    that no one is ready to take necessary steps to show us mechanisms
    for those quotas.

    Security systems are usually being formed at the time of global
    shocks - and the two world wars were the shocks like that. There are
    analysts who even believe that it is a precondition for the formation
    of a new security system - there should be a global shock before a
    new int ernational security architecture can be formed. But I hope,
    that at the time of this global economic crisis the big powers of the
    world will consider this as the major international shock that would
    allow changing the security architecture as well within the European
    model of security.
Working...
X