Armenia Conducts Dynamic Foreign Policy and Is a Success


16 July 2004

The Employee of the Eurasian Center for Strategic Researches Testifies
to That

Azg informed in its previous issue under the title “Turkey Doesn’t
Intend to Reconsider Its Hostile Policy Towards Armenia” that the
Turkish government refused to be a presiding country at PACE in
2007. the information was based on the massage send by Harut
Sassounian, publisher of the Californian Currier that was published in
our newspaper.

Sasunian, considering the abovementioned decision of the Turkish
governmenta victory of the Armenian diplomats, conditions it by the
statement made by RA Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian on June 14 in
Washington, saying that Armenia will exercise its right for veto
against Turkey’s candidacy. He comes to the conclusion that “This
unexpected step means that the U.S. and Turkey have failed in their
attempts to exert pressure on Armenia.”

Let’s remind that Oskanian explained his statement saying that “We
can’t allow the chairmanship of a country at PACE that is a mediator
in the Nagorno Karabagh conflict settlement, as the Chair has certain
rights and privileges that can be used against Armenia.” He not only
repeated this explanation but also added that “The country presiding
at PACE should have diplomatic relations with all the member-
countries,” on June 8 during the meeting with Yanesh Potochnik, EU
representative in Armenia.

It’s worth mentioning that these conclusions are affirmed in the
article by Hatem Jabbarlu, employee of Eurasian Center for Strategic
Researches, issued in Haberanaliz Internet newspaper on July 13
entitled “Armenian Obstacle for Turkey’s Presiding at PACE”. As the
Turkish leading newspapers didn’t comment on Oskanian’s statement, and
the center represented by Jabbarlu is a state structure, we want to
introduce the short variant of the article to your attention.

By Hakob Chaqrian

“Turkey was a candidate for chairmanship at PACE in 2007. The positive
changes made in the Turkish foreign police in the early 2000
contributed tothe creation of all the preconditions for that. But in
2004 articles on Armenia’s right for exercising veto against Turkey’s
candidacy appeared in the Armenian and Diaspora Press in the early
2004. RA Government and the state press didnâ=80=99t comment on that
issue, that is why the government tool advantage of the possibilities
of the independent press, being well aware that the comments of the
state bodies on the “veto” will cause a number of complications in the
foreign policy.

But on June 28-29 in the course of NATO Istanbul Summit Foreign
Minister Vartan Oskanian, meeting with the U.S. representatives, had
found the intention to exercise veto against Turkey’s candidacy for
PACE Chairmanship quite possible and conditioned that by the Turkish
policy conducted against Armenia.

This shows that besides the short-term and mid-term projects in the
foreign policy Armenia has elaborated long-term projects as well
against Turkey. The time showed that the people who in the 80-ies when
ASALA began acting spokeof the failure of this terrorist
structure. The main goal of ASALA was to state “Armenian Genocide” in
the agenda of the international publicity that was achieved, as a

Moreover, when in 1987, when the issue of Turkey’s membership to
EUwasn’t even considered, the Armenian Diaspora managed to make the
European Parliament adopt a decision on the Armenian Genocide in
Turkey. At present, RA Government and the Armenian Diaspora,
cooperation, particularly with the French Socialistic Party, will
spare no efforts to prevent Turkey’s membership to EU, putting forward
the issue of the so-called genocide as a precondition for that.
Notwithstanding the fact that the population and the area of Armenia
is small in the South Caucasus, its serious economic problems, it
condacts more dynamic policy and acheives success against Turkey and
Azerbaijan, in particular. Armenia is capable of unfolding propaganda
against Turkey and Azerbaijan.”