Tweet
HRANT DINK : I AM THE ONE WHO UNDERSTANDS HIS NATION'S PAINS AND BEARS THAT BURDEN
Alin Ozinian - Hrant Dink
Turquie Européenn
http://www.turquieeuropeenne. eu/article3026.html
Jan 19 2009
France
My point of view in these bills may be considered a very romantic
one, but I have not denied it. I think also the world like Turkey
takes double-faced position in the process of accepting the Armenian
genocide. The world is aware of the reality for a long time; they
had their role and influence on those times. Nowadays France accepts
it after decades. It is not like moral attitude, because the case is
used as trump card in relations with Turkey.
Alin Ozinian : "It was in the middle of October, 2006. We arranged
to meet with Hrant Dink at his office in the "Agos" newspaper. I
have taken interviews on the theme "Mental and spiritual atmosphere
in Turkey about the Armenian Problem" with 30 Turkish academicians,
journalists, politicians and intellectuals. Hrant got me acquainted
with many of them. Now it was his turn to answer the questions.
It was warm atmosphere at the office and we easily started the
talk. Sometimes we switched off the recorder during the friendly talk
and he expressed his worries. I did not take them serious but the
stupid scenery comes true just two months later. After the interview
both of us was sure we did a real contribution for the existing
situation: Me with my questions and he with his responds. We were
quite happy.
Last time I talk to Hrant on 16 January 2007 when I was in Yerevan. I
wanted some points of view to realize the project into a book. The
talk was short. He said to me, "Come to Istanbul, we will talk face
to face". I went to Istanbul for many times after our talk but we
never talked face to face."
Will you tell me how, why and whose idea was to found the "Agos"?
The foundation of the newspaper was a difficult task as it was
decided to publish the "Agos" according to the needs of Turkey's
Armenian community. But the "Agos" was published contrary to some
negative reactions. Up to then some questions were raised: it was not
enough in the community to publish only in Armenian, as the majority
of people came from Anatolia and they were Turkish speaking. There
was a serious lack of information in the community as people can
not read the Armenian press. And then enclosed society itself causes
difficulties, it needed to get accustomed to. We had to struggle. The
Turkish society accepted the Armenian community in other way. The
word Armenian was considered to be an abuse; the Turks connected the
Armenians with the Kurdish Worker Party (PKK) or with ASALA. There
was a great anxiety and trouble in the community when the Karabagh
problem was discussed in Turkey.
We lived like a worm. We heard what was on TV but could do nothing. We
apposed, cried, told that all these were lie but could not speak
loudly. We need to break the wall, it was necessary. One day the
Patriarch Ghazanchyan invited us and told that there was a photo
of an Armenian priest and Abdullah Odjalan in the "Sabah" newspaper
and there was written under the photo "Here is the fact of Armenian
and PKK collaboration". Then His Holiness stated that it was a lie,
the priest was not an Armenian. He asked me and my friends who were
with me at that time what we thought about all that. I expressed my
point of view and suggested that it'll be meaningful if we invite
a press- conference. It was a brave action, all the local and
international press came and it was a great success. The impression
was indescribable. After the meeting I suggested that it was nonsense
to invite a conference on every occasion, we had to take definite
steps. And I suggested publishing a newspaper.
We were running it with my friends. Later they left and I was the
one to run it. By using the newspaper we also wanted to create an
intellectual cuisine youth to grow sociologists and intellectuals.
What problems did you come across during foundation and after it?
The first problem was to subdue the community conservatism. We felt
anti-sympathy by local Armenian press. There were people who thought
we would work for months or in the best case for a year but it is
10 years that we have been working. Some people thought it was a
regress to be published in Turkish. But we tried to do a good thing,
by using the Turkish language for the community. I am sure they have
already been persuaded.
When you founded the newspaper did you think it would be better for
Turks to read the press and get some news about the Armenian community?
Our main objective for this society was to be a window to a large
society. I think this is our success: the two societies started to
penetrate into each other. We managed to discuss our own problems
equal to Turkey's problems. We think that only through Turkey's
democratization it was possible to solve the problems. Soon the
community also started to show interest towards the main problems
of society. The Armenian society together with the "Agos" struggled
braver for its identity; felt the patronage started not to fear.
Will you tell about the peculiarities of being an editor, publishing
a newspaper especially for a minority in Turkey? Please introduce us
your viewpoints on freedom of the press in Turkey.
There is no special difficulty in publishing a newspaper for the
minority. If you are not an editor with principle, if you do not have
a certain political motivate, if you are interested more often in
illustrated news then you have no professional difficulties. But
if you are a journalist of certain ideas, sure you will have
difficulties. Recently we have had some common difficulties connected
with freedom of the press, in accordance with Turkey's criminal new
code and the Press law there is some control over us. We also suffered:
the newspaper was confiscated for several times. I think we get more
than we deserve and the only reason is our attitude toward the Armenian
problem. I am sure this is the reason but we have not repudiated yet,
aside we will go on.
Let's talk on European Union role for Turkey. Is it necessary for
Turkey to become a member of EU?
This is an irrevocable process for Turkey. It is necessary to
understand Turkey's reason to enter EU it is not a simple desire. The
real reason is the fear. It's the reason why this process moves so
slowly. Why Turkey fears? It is the fear of instability and fear is
mutual. Because of this fear this process is continuing and there is
no way to go back.
If military in Turkey definitely had been rejected entering EU, the
process will not come to this level. If we do not become a member of
EU, one day we will also have to leave the NATO. The process goes
so slowly because of the reason that there is no great desire to
become a member of EU. I do not think it will be possible to stop the
process. We may slow it, sometimes freeze it, but can not cancel it.
If we observe the history of the state there are three important
periods influencing into Turkey's interact process. The first was
Cold war period when the country had some problems with leftist
movements and abolished them. The second period was when clerical
forces came into office in Iran. Islamists of Turkey demanded their
participation in country's administration and today they came into
power. The third period is EU membership process and so far nothing
had influenced Turkey so much. The process left no group homogeneous
in Turkey. Today, there are powers among soldiers, bureaucrats,
academicians and media who speak against EU.
What is the greatest problem in the process of Turkey's Europeanization
and modernization?
Opposing reactions coming from the lower class by the upper class. The
laws of the upper class. Тhese are the first problems. The second
great obstacle is fear of the upper class. Turkey occupies less
area unlike the Ottoman Empire, this is the reason of not to lose
more. This can be also called "a syndrome of Sevres". Every change
causes fear and doubt in Turkey. This is the reason why the changes
in Turkey moves so slowly.
Turkey is both a crossroad and a border between West and East. I
think Malatia is the border in Turkey. East and West of Malatia are
quite different worlds.
In effect Turkey is a country of strategic importance but depends at
the same time on East and West. Depending on the situation it will be
injustice to wait quick adaptation from Turkey. One of the greatest
reasons that changes do not occur easily is the new building built
in Turkey which is the upper identity created and was obliged to
whole society. That's why they are afraid to get to know their real
history. Every other historic comment has an effect of an earthquake
for the identity. This earthquake is also a threat for Europe. The
identity may pull down but over whom this is uncertain...
May reformations take place in the sphere of democracy and human
rights in the process of corresponding EU demands?
I have no doubt but it is a difficult process. Laws may be passed but
while putting them into forces there will be opponents... Change of
thinking is necessary, democracy will sufficiently change the way
of thinking. The more the way of thinking is changed the quicker
democratization will be.
However trouble of people in some situations is observable,
For instance, freedom of thought is considered to be high treason
(Turkey's criminal code, article 301), and freedom of religion,
conscience (head scarf) may be accepted as regress. What is the
reason? In effect are people ready for those reformas?
Today people are speaking about the raise of the nationalism but I
do not believe that nationalism increases but it is being increased
by some people. It became more obvious in the last two years. Those
people do their best to model coming elections in Turkey.
They make plans to throw down the party "Justice and
Development". However they have no reason neither economic, nor
democratic. We are only to inspire nationalists and it is done
everywhere at funerals of martyrs, against EU or while welcoming
the Pope. I think the whole pain of those responses is the coming
elections. They do not want to give sits to the Islamists in the
government. We will see what will happen...
Do you agree that there are differences in Turkey based on ethnic
roots? Can you speak about reasons provoking it and consequences
following it?
As for ethnic roots, no doubt there are various attitudes. A simple
example, today not only Muslims but also Christians, Armenians should
have been in main headquarters, military powers, police, various
official government offices and ministries. The main reason provoking
it is security. Turkey has evaluated the contest of minorities
in conception and takes it as a matter of security. I say facts,
there are mathematical data. Out of 300000 Armenians at the Lausanne
period today 60000 is left and the Turkish population is increased
from 13 million up to 70 million. When one increases how it happens
that the other is decreased? It was necessary to decrease the number
of minorities. Some crucial points appeared, for instance the law
for property tax, September 6, 1955 but what happened is already
past. Besides, the Armenians for being safe and sound left Turkey
because of economic and moral problems.
There is one more fact as well. You will not find anything connected
with minorities especially the Armenians in any textbooks. There are
facts on minorities only in the textbook of the National Security. In
the elementary school there is not even a sentence like "Ali gives
the ball to Hakob"; Ali will always give it to Veli. When we observe
them we are nowhere. Only in the textbooks of National Security you
may find the word "Armenians" which will take place in the unit of
unprofitable groups which play bad tricks with Turkey.
How can you estimate relationship between Turkey and Armenia?
We may speak about non-existing relationships. I do not see any
relationship after Armenia gained its independence. First the USA
attempted to make some steps then EU but in vain. Desire exists but it
is very weak. Turkey has not yet got accustomed to the thought that
Armenia is an independent country in the Caucasus. There is a state,
a neighbor, Turkey should comprehend this and start relationship. When
state policy fails public policy takes its place. There are some
attempts to establish non-governmental relationship from to sides,
but they are very weak, very few.
What do you think the 1915 events should be called?
I have no doubt. It was genocide.
What do you think of diplomatic relations without preconditions
suggested by Armenia and the committee of historians proposed by
Turkey?
I do not think Turkey's attitude an honest one. The Armenian side is
more sincerely.
Why? Do you have any doubts that the committee of historians will be
of any use?
Yes, everybody thinks that the committee of historians will be of no
use. Policy like always will go on without relations and results. This
is the way which Turkey loves: no relations. I think Azerbaijan also
obliges such policy to Turkey. The Armenian side is more reasonable
and desirous.
What is your opinion about the third state to interfere the problem
and bills on genocide accepted in parliaments?
My point of view in these bills may be considered a very romantic
one, but I have not denied it. I think also the world like Turkey
takes double-faced position in the process of accepting the Armenian
genocide. The world is aware of the reality for a long time; they
had their role and influence on those times. Nowadays France accepts
it after decades. It is not like moral attitude, because the case is
used as trump card in relations with Turkey. It is very painful for
me as an Armenian when my tragedy is used as political trump card
on international arenas. I can not stand it, I oppose against it. I
am indifferent towards third states. I think the problem should
be solved between Turkey and Armenia. But it should be solved not
through punishing bills but morality. We do not need punishing bills
in morality, our conscience is enough. I believe that these two states
may overcome but I do not want to predict anything.
Do you divide Armenians between those who live in Armenia, in abroad
and in Turkey, while speaking about the Armenian question?
Not only in connection with that matter but in general I think
so. Turkey is a far and irresistible state for Diaspora but for
Armenia it is a neighboring state and keeps Armenia independence. For
the Armenians living in Turkey, Turkey is their motherland. Though I
say such things I do not want to separate Armenians and accept the
Turkish point of view. Turkey should establish good relations with
every state. But these two states should come into conclusion and
solve the problem. I do not think that Armenians living in Turkey
must be involved in the talks as they are citizens of Turkey.
As a citizen of Turkey are you worried about the Armenian-Turkish
closed border? What is your estimation on Turkey's policy towards
Armenia that accepts Azerbaijan's problems as its own, and sets
preconditions in the relations with Armenia?
During the Demirel's government good relations were established between
Turkey and Azerbaijan. Turkey attempts to make relations with Armenia
taking into account the Armenian-Azerbaijani relations. Frankly
saying Turkey does not want to annoy Azerbaijan negotiating with
Armenia. Azerbaijan does not allow Turkey to negotiate with Armenia
using the Karabagh problem.
Any nationalistic power will solve this problem in anti-Azerbaijani
way. Turkey also takes this side and does not consider Armenia as
its neighboring country. First Turkey exterminated the Armenian
question, but as Armenia gained its independence the question again
resurrected. Turkey suddenly saw a phantom and the same question
raised how to do with Armenia. Turkey was in a desperate situation
but the Karabagh problem emerged and clung to it with its four hands,
rejoiced it and ran for help. Turkey thought that it would take a
long time. This is the continuation of policy...
According to you is the Republic of Turkey the continuer of the
Ottoman Empire in the history...
I do not expect apology or responsibility from anybody. I am the one
who understands his nation's pains and bears that burden. I do not
think of financial compensation or returning of lands. For me it is
important to repair relations broken in the past, to know who and what
circumstances played role. European states may also have a positive
effect, compensate their guilt and try to soften the disagreement
founding economical and cultural advantageous platforms to make the
two states become closer.
May we state the role of the "Ittihat ve Terraki" is great in this
matter?
Not only one group is in charge, there were assistants who promoted
and closed their eyes on it. Today, also existing people who are
reluctant that reality may come into world. If you seek responsibility
there are many of them, each one has its share but I am not the one
to remind of this. Presumably it sounds very romantic but every one
should admit his guilt.
Let's try to analyze what are the main problems of the two states?
There are disappointments, unwillingness; enmity and fear... Today some
new fears exist. The Armenians also fear we need to pay attention to
them. The Armenians are subdued between Azerbaijan and Turkey. There
are two states suppressing from right and left. Fear and insecurity
is an important handicap it needs to be inoculated.
We need to explain fairly that Turkey may be a friend of Armenia. The
Armenian side should be reasonable, should see the present
situation. There is an independent Armenia with two states around
carrying out an embargo. Armenia may relax only in the south but there
is mullah administration which is not clear how long it may go on.
Diaspora should ponder on this. Armenia should settle good relations
with its neighbors and to become a member of EU. If Armenia were
a member of EU today Turkey will subject to embargo not Armenia
but Europe.
Instead of passing bill in parliaments of different states it will
be better for Diaspora to persuade those states to accept Armenia
into EU. They should be reminded of their history, responsibilities
as they have their share of guilt in today's situation. Diaspora at
least should be able to say to carry out that. This is my formula to
go ahead and we should demand from the Europeans for the steps taken
in the past.
--Boundary_(ID_5ohKX0FOeRBpCHzmoPuOMw)--
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Alin Ozinian - Hrant Dink
Turquie Européenn
http://www.turquieeuropeenne. eu/article3026.html
Jan 19 2009
France
My point of view in these bills may be considered a very romantic
one, but I have not denied it. I think also the world like Turkey
takes double-faced position in the process of accepting the Armenian
genocide. The world is aware of the reality for a long time; they
had their role and influence on those times. Nowadays France accepts
it after decades. It is not like moral attitude, because the case is
used as trump card in relations with Turkey.
Alin Ozinian : "It was in the middle of October, 2006. We arranged
to meet with Hrant Dink at his office in the "Agos" newspaper. I
have taken interviews on the theme "Mental and spiritual atmosphere
in Turkey about the Armenian Problem" with 30 Turkish academicians,
journalists, politicians and intellectuals. Hrant got me acquainted
with many of them. Now it was his turn to answer the questions.
It was warm atmosphere at the office and we easily started the
talk. Sometimes we switched off the recorder during the friendly talk
and he expressed his worries. I did not take them serious but the
stupid scenery comes true just two months later. After the interview
both of us was sure we did a real contribution for the existing
situation: Me with my questions and he with his responds. We were
quite happy.
Last time I talk to Hrant on 16 January 2007 when I was in Yerevan. I
wanted some points of view to realize the project into a book. The
talk was short. He said to me, "Come to Istanbul, we will talk face
to face". I went to Istanbul for many times after our talk but we
never talked face to face."
Will you tell me how, why and whose idea was to found the "Agos"?
The foundation of the newspaper was a difficult task as it was
decided to publish the "Agos" according to the needs of Turkey's
Armenian community. But the "Agos" was published contrary to some
negative reactions. Up to then some questions were raised: it was not
enough in the community to publish only in Armenian, as the majority
of people came from Anatolia and they were Turkish speaking. There
was a serious lack of information in the community as people can
not read the Armenian press. And then enclosed society itself causes
difficulties, it needed to get accustomed to. We had to struggle. The
Turkish society accepted the Armenian community in other way. The
word Armenian was considered to be an abuse; the Turks connected the
Armenians with the Kurdish Worker Party (PKK) or with ASALA. There
was a great anxiety and trouble in the community when the Karabagh
problem was discussed in Turkey.
We lived like a worm. We heard what was on TV but could do nothing. We
apposed, cried, told that all these were lie but could not speak
loudly. We need to break the wall, it was necessary. One day the
Patriarch Ghazanchyan invited us and told that there was a photo
of an Armenian priest and Abdullah Odjalan in the "Sabah" newspaper
and there was written under the photo "Here is the fact of Armenian
and PKK collaboration". Then His Holiness stated that it was a lie,
the priest was not an Armenian. He asked me and my friends who were
with me at that time what we thought about all that. I expressed my
point of view and suggested that it'll be meaningful if we invite
a press- conference. It was a brave action, all the local and
international press came and it was a great success. The impression
was indescribable. After the meeting I suggested that it was nonsense
to invite a conference on every occasion, we had to take definite
steps. And I suggested publishing a newspaper.
We were running it with my friends. Later they left and I was the
one to run it. By using the newspaper we also wanted to create an
intellectual cuisine youth to grow sociologists and intellectuals.
What problems did you come across during foundation and after it?
The first problem was to subdue the community conservatism. We felt
anti-sympathy by local Armenian press. There were people who thought
we would work for months or in the best case for a year but it is
10 years that we have been working. Some people thought it was a
regress to be published in Turkish. But we tried to do a good thing,
by using the Turkish language for the community. I am sure they have
already been persuaded.
When you founded the newspaper did you think it would be better for
Turks to read the press and get some news about the Armenian community?
Our main objective for this society was to be a window to a large
society. I think this is our success: the two societies started to
penetrate into each other. We managed to discuss our own problems
equal to Turkey's problems. We think that only through Turkey's
democratization it was possible to solve the problems. Soon the
community also started to show interest towards the main problems
of society. The Armenian society together with the "Agos" struggled
braver for its identity; felt the patronage started not to fear.
Will you tell about the peculiarities of being an editor, publishing
a newspaper especially for a minority in Turkey? Please introduce us
your viewpoints on freedom of the press in Turkey.
There is no special difficulty in publishing a newspaper for the
minority. If you are not an editor with principle, if you do not have
a certain political motivate, if you are interested more often in
illustrated news then you have no professional difficulties. But
if you are a journalist of certain ideas, sure you will have
difficulties. Recently we have had some common difficulties connected
with freedom of the press, in accordance with Turkey's criminal new
code and the Press law there is some control over us. We also suffered:
the newspaper was confiscated for several times. I think we get more
than we deserve and the only reason is our attitude toward the Armenian
problem. I am sure this is the reason but we have not repudiated yet,
aside we will go on.
Let's talk on European Union role for Turkey. Is it necessary for
Turkey to become a member of EU?
This is an irrevocable process for Turkey. It is necessary to
understand Turkey's reason to enter EU it is not a simple desire. The
real reason is the fear. It's the reason why this process moves so
slowly. Why Turkey fears? It is the fear of instability and fear is
mutual. Because of this fear this process is continuing and there is
no way to go back.
If military in Turkey definitely had been rejected entering EU, the
process will not come to this level. If we do not become a member of
EU, one day we will also have to leave the NATO. The process goes
so slowly because of the reason that there is no great desire to
become a member of EU. I do not think it will be possible to stop the
process. We may slow it, sometimes freeze it, but can not cancel it.
If we observe the history of the state there are three important
periods influencing into Turkey's interact process. The first was
Cold war period when the country had some problems with leftist
movements and abolished them. The second period was when clerical
forces came into office in Iran. Islamists of Turkey demanded their
participation in country's administration and today they came into
power. The third period is EU membership process and so far nothing
had influenced Turkey so much. The process left no group homogeneous
in Turkey. Today, there are powers among soldiers, bureaucrats,
academicians and media who speak against EU.
What is the greatest problem in the process of Turkey's Europeanization
and modernization?
Opposing reactions coming from the lower class by the upper class. The
laws of the upper class. Тhese are the first problems. The second
great obstacle is fear of the upper class. Turkey occupies less
area unlike the Ottoman Empire, this is the reason of not to lose
more. This can be also called "a syndrome of Sevres". Every change
causes fear and doubt in Turkey. This is the reason why the changes
in Turkey moves so slowly.
Turkey is both a crossroad and a border between West and East. I
think Malatia is the border in Turkey. East and West of Malatia are
quite different worlds.
In effect Turkey is a country of strategic importance but depends at
the same time on East and West. Depending on the situation it will be
injustice to wait quick adaptation from Turkey. One of the greatest
reasons that changes do not occur easily is the new building built
in Turkey which is the upper identity created and was obliged to
whole society. That's why they are afraid to get to know their real
history. Every other historic comment has an effect of an earthquake
for the identity. This earthquake is also a threat for Europe. The
identity may pull down but over whom this is uncertain...
May reformations take place in the sphere of democracy and human
rights in the process of corresponding EU demands?
I have no doubt but it is a difficult process. Laws may be passed but
while putting them into forces there will be opponents... Change of
thinking is necessary, democracy will sufficiently change the way
of thinking. The more the way of thinking is changed the quicker
democratization will be.
However trouble of people in some situations is observable,
For instance, freedom of thought is considered to be high treason
(Turkey's criminal code, article 301), and freedom of religion,
conscience (head scarf) may be accepted as regress. What is the
reason? In effect are people ready for those reformas?
Today people are speaking about the raise of the nationalism but I
do not believe that nationalism increases but it is being increased
by some people. It became more obvious in the last two years. Those
people do their best to model coming elections in Turkey.
They make plans to throw down the party "Justice and
Development". However they have no reason neither economic, nor
democratic. We are only to inspire nationalists and it is done
everywhere at funerals of martyrs, against EU or while welcoming
the Pope. I think the whole pain of those responses is the coming
elections. They do not want to give sits to the Islamists in the
government. We will see what will happen...
Do you agree that there are differences in Turkey based on ethnic
roots? Can you speak about reasons provoking it and consequences
following it?
As for ethnic roots, no doubt there are various attitudes. A simple
example, today not only Muslims but also Christians, Armenians should
have been in main headquarters, military powers, police, various
official government offices and ministries. The main reason provoking
it is security. Turkey has evaluated the contest of minorities
in conception and takes it as a matter of security. I say facts,
there are mathematical data. Out of 300000 Armenians at the Lausanne
period today 60000 is left and the Turkish population is increased
from 13 million up to 70 million. When one increases how it happens
that the other is decreased? It was necessary to decrease the number
of minorities. Some crucial points appeared, for instance the law
for property tax, September 6, 1955 but what happened is already
past. Besides, the Armenians for being safe and sound left Turkey
because of economic and moral problems.
There is one more fact as well. You will not find anything connected
with minorities especially the Armenians in any textbooks. There are
facts on minorities only in the textbook of the National Security. In
the elementary school there is not even a sentence like "Ali gives
the ball to Hakob"; Ali will always give it to Veli. When we observe
them we are nowhere. Only in the textbooks of National Security you
may find the word "Armenians" which will take place in the unit of
unprofitable groups which play bad tricks with Turkey.
How can you estimate relationship between Turkey and Armenia?
We may speak about non-existing relationships. I do not see any
relationship after Armenia gained its independence. First the USA
attempted to make some steps then EU but in vain. Desire exists but it
is very weak. Turkey has not yet got accustomed to the thought that
Armenia is an independent country in the Caucasus. There is a state,
a neighbor, Turkey should comprehend this and start relationship. When
state policy fails public policy takes its place. There are some
attempts to establish non-governmental relationship from to sides,
but they are very weak, very few.
What do you think the 1915 events should be called?
I have no doubt. It was genocide.
What do you think of diplomatic relations without preconditions
suggested by Armenia and the committee of historians proposed by
Turkey?
I do not think Turkey's attitude an honest one. The Armenian side is
more sincerely.
Why? Do you have any doubts that the committee of historians will be
of any use?
Yes, everybody thinks that the committee of historians will be of no
use. Policy like always will go on without relations and results. This
is the way which Turkey loves: no relations. I think Azerbaijan also
obliges such policy to Turkey. The Armenian side is more reasonable
and desirous.
What is your opinion about the third state to interfere the problem
and bills on genocide accepted in parliaments?
My point of view in these bills may be considered a very romantic
one, but I have not denied it. I think also the world like Turkey
takes double-faced position in the process of accepting the Armenian
genocide. The world is aware of the reality for a long time; they
had their role and influence on those times. Nowadays France accepts
it after decades. It is not like moral attitude, because the case is
used as trump card in relations with Turkey. It is very painful for
me as an Armenian when my tragedy is used as political trump card
on international arenas. I can not stand it, I oppose against it. I
am indifferent towards third states. I think the problem should
be solved between Turkey and Armenia. But it should be solved not
through punishing bills but morality. We do not need punishing bills
in morality, our conscience is enough. I believe that these two states
may overcome but I do not want to predict anything.
Do you divide Armenians between those who live in Armenia, in abroad
and in Turkey, while speaking about the Armenian question?
Not only in connection with that matter but in general I think
so. Turkey is a far and irresistible state for Diaspora but for
Armenia it is a neighboring state and keeps Armenia independence. For
the Armenians living in Turkey, Turkey is their motherland. Though I
say such things I do not want to separate Armenians and accept the
Turkish point of view. Turkey should establish good relations with
every state. But these two states should come into conclusion and
solve the problem. I do not think that Armenians living in Turkey
must be involved in the talks as they are citizens of Turkey.
As a citizen of Turkey are you worried about the Armenian-Turkish
closed border? What is your estimation on Turkey's policy towards
Armenia that accepts Azerbaijan's problems as its own, and sets
preconditions in the relations with Armenia?
During the Demirel's government good relations were established between
Turkey and Azerbaijan. Turkey attempts to make relations with Armenia
taking into account the Armenian-Azerbaijani relations. Frankly
saying Turkey does not want to annoy Azerbaijan negotiating with
Armenia. Azerbaijan does not allow Turkey to negotiate with Armenia
using the Karabagh problem.
Any nationalistic power will solve this problem in anti-Azerbaijani
way. Turkey also takes this side and does not consider Armenia as
its neighboring country. First Turkey exterminated the Armenian
question, but as Armenia gained its independence the question again
resurrected. Turkey suddenly saw a phantom and the same question
raised how to do with Armenia. Turkey was in a desperate situation
but the Karabagh problem emerged and clung to it with its four hands,
rejoiced it and ran for help. Turkey thought that it would take a
long time. This is the continuation of policy...
According to you is the Republic of Turkey the continuer of the
Ottoman Empire in the history...
I do not expect apology or responsibility from anybody. I am the one
who understands his nation's pains and bears that burden. I do not
think of financial compensation or returning of lands. For me it is
important to repair relations broken in the past, to know who and what
circumstances played role. European states may also have a positive
effect, compensate their guilt and try to soften the disagreement
founding economical and cultural advantageous platforms to make the
two states become closer.
May we state the role of the "Ittihat ve Terraki" is great in this
matter?
Not only one group is in charge, there were assistants who promoted
and closed their eyes on it. Today, also existing people who are
reluctant that reality may come into world. If you seek responsibility
there are many of them, each one has its share but I am not the one
to remind of this. Presumably it sounds very romantic but every one
should admit his guilt.
Let's try to analyze what are the main problems of the two states?
There are disappointments, unwillingness; enmity and fear... Today some
new fears exist. The Armenians also fear we need to pay attention to
them. The Armenians are subdued between Azerbaijan and Turkey. There
are two states suppressing from right and left. Fear and insecurity
is an important handicap it needs to be inoculated.
We need to explain fairly that Turkey may be a friend of Armenia. The
Armenian side should be reasonable, should see the present
situation. There is an independent Armenia with two states around
carrying out an embargo. Armenia may relax only in the south but there
is mullah administration which is not clear how long it may go on.
Diaspora should ponder on this. Armenia should settle good relations
with its neighbors and to become a member of EU. If Armenia were
a member of EU today Turkey will subject to embargo not Armenia
but Europe.
Instead of passing bill in parliaments of different states it will
be better for Diaspora to persuade those states to accept Armenia
into EU. They should be reminded of their history, responsibilities
as they have their share of guilt in today's situation. Diaspora at
least should be able to say to carry out that. This is my formula to
go ahead and we should demand from the Europeans for the steps taken
in the past.
--Boundary_(ID_5ohKX0FOeRBpCHzmoPuOMw)--
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress