Month: September 2006

BAKU LOST MORAL RIGHT TO CUSTODY OF KARABAKH PEOPLE

PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2006 14:10 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "We follow the Kosovo self-determination process
very closely," Armenian FM Vartan Oskanian stated at the 61st session
of the UN GA, reports the Press Office of the MFA of Armenia.

"We ourselves strongly support the process of self-determination for
the population of Nagorno Karabakh. Yet, we do not draw parallels
between these two or any other conflicts. We believe that conflicts
are all different and each must be decided on its own merits. While
we do not look at the outcome of Kosovo as a precedent, on the other
hand, a Kosovo decision cannot and should not result in the creation
of obstacles to self-determination for others in order to pre-empt
the accusation of precedence. Such a reverse reaction – to prevent
or pre-empt others from achieving well-earned self-determination –
is unacceptable," the Minister said. In his words, efforts to do just
that – by elevating territorial integrity above all other principles –
are already underway, especially in the chamber, where the session took
place. "But this contradicts the lessons of history. There is a reason
that the Helsinki Final Act enshrines self-determination as an equal
principle. In international relations, just as in human relations,
there are no absolute rights. There are also responsibilities. A state
must earn the right to lead and govern. States have the responsibility
to protect their citizens. A people choose the government, which
represents them," Oskanian said.

"The people of Nagorno Karabakh chose long ago not to be represented
by the government of Azerbaijan. They were the victims of state
violence, they defended themselves, and succeeded against great odds,
only to hear the state cry foul and claim sovereignty and territorial
integrity. But the government of Azerbaijan has lost the moral right
to even suggest providing for their security and their future, let
alone to talk of custody of the people of Nagorno Karabakh. Azerbaijan
did not behave responsibly or morally with the people of Nagorno
Karabakh, who it considered to be its own citizens. They sanctioned
massacres in urban areas, far from Nagorno Karabakh; they bombed and
displaced more than 300,000 Armenians; they unleashed the military;
and after they lost the war and accepted a cease-fire, they proceeded
to destroy all traces of Armenians on their territories.

In the most cynical expression of such irresponsibility, this last
December, a decade after the fighting had stopped, they completed the
final destruction and removal of thousands of massive hand-sculpted
cross-stones – medieval Armenian tombstones elaborately carved
and decorated. Such destruction, in an area with no Armenians,
at a distance from Nagorno Karabakh and any conflict areas, is a
callous demonstration that Azerbaijan’s attitude toward tolerance,
human values, cultural treasures, cooperation or even peace, has not
changed," V. Oskanian underscored.

COMPROMISE AND REALISM ONLY OPTIONS FOR KARABAKH SETTLEMENT

PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2006 14:34 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ One cannot blame Armenia for thinking that Azerbaijan
is not ready or interested in a negotiated peace, Armenian FM Vartan
Oskanian stated at the 61st session of the UN GA, reports the Press
Office of the MFA of Armenia. "Yet, having rejected the other two
compromise solutions that have been proposed over the last 8 years,
they do not want to be accused of rejecting the peace plan on the table
today. Therefore, they are using every means available – from state
violence to international maneuvers – to try to bring the Armenians to
do the rejecting. But Armenia is on record: we have agreed to each of
the basic principles in the document that’s on the table today. Yet, in
order to give this or any document a chance, Azerbaijan can’t think, or
pretend to think, that there is still a military option. There isn’t.

The military option is a tried and failed option.

Compromise and realism are the only real options. The path that
Nagorno Karabakh has chosen for itself over these two decades is
irreversible. Karabakh succeeded in ensuring its self-defense, it
proceeded to set up self-governance mechanisms, and it controls its
borders and its economy. Formalizing this process is a necessary step
toward stability in our region.

Dismissing, as Azerbaijan does, all that has happened in the last 20
years and petulantly insisting that things must return to the way they
were, is not just unrealistic, but disingenuous. Nagorno Karabakh is
not a cause. It is a place, an ancient place, a beautiful garden, with
people who have earned the right to live in peace and without fear. We
ask for nothing more. We expect nothing less," Oskanian summed up.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TURKEY’S INSISTENCE ON KEEPING ARMENIAN BORDER IS REALLY NOT A POLICY

PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2006 14:55 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "Unlike other countries, where borders are points of
interaction and activity, Armenia’s borders to the east and the west
remain closed. As a result, regional economic development suffers,
Armenian FM Vartan Oskanian stated at the 61st session of the UN GA,
reports the Press Office of the MFA of Armenia. "However, with Turkey,
it is more than our economies that suffer. It is the dialogue between
our two peoples that suffers. Turkey’s insistence on keeping the border
closed, on continuing to prevent direct contact and communication,
freezes the memories of yesterday instead of creating new experiences
to forge the memories of tomorrow. We continue to remain hopeful that
Turkey will see that blocking relations until there is harmony and
reciprocal understanding is really not a policy. On the contrary,
it’s an avoidance of a responsible policy to forge forward with
regional cooperation at a time and in a region with growing global
significance," he said.

SCHWARZENEGGER SIGNED LAW TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO ARMENIAN GENOCIDE VICTIMS AND THEIR HEIRS

PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2006 15:13 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed
SB 1524, legislation that provides relief to California Armenian
Genocide victims, and their families, who are seeking legal action to
recover assets that were lost or stolen during the atrocities against
the Armenian people.

Under this law, any Armenian Genocide victim, heir or beneficiary,
who resides in California may bring or continue a court action for
a financial institution’s failure to pay or turn over deposited or
looted assets. This bill also extends the statute of limitation for
filing a claim to December 31, 2016.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

CILICIA CREW AWARDED STATE MEDALS

PanARMENIAN.Net
26.09.2006 15:45 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Today Armenian President Robert Kocharian awarded
medals of the Republic of Armenia to the crew of Cilicia vessel,
reports the Press Office of the state leader. Kocharian thanked the
crew for brilliant realization of the brave idea of the three-year
voyage. Crewmembers handed the flag, which was on the mast during the
third phase of the voyage, and presented a souvenir model of the vessel
to the President. The sailors told Kocharian about their voyage, noting
they were impressed by reception of Diaspora Armenians. Kocharian said
everything will be done to provide for a deserving haven for Cilicia.

By a decree of the President expedition leader Zory Balayan, ship
captain Karen Balayan, mate Samvel Karapetyan are awarded medal for
Merit to the Fatherland of 1st degree. Navigator Sambel Babasyan and
boatswain Hayk Badalyan, mate Areg Nazaryan, boatswain Armen Nazaryan,
cook Samvel Sargsyan are awarded Medal for Courage.

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION HAS NO BOUNDERIES

A1+
[12:00 pm] 26 September, 2006

A number of Armenian, Azeri and Georgian journalists met in the
Georgian city of Shindis to discuss the issues of environment
protection and to find common ways of cooperation.

The Armenian and Azeri journalists focused on the issue of
mingling environment problems with political ones. They debated
on the rivers bordering the two countries. As we know the Azeri
side is constantly complaining that Armenia deliberately pollutes
the rivers flowing through Azerbaijan, whereas Armenia claims that
there is no evidence to prove it. The point is that the monitoring
is not perfect in either country, and the water quality of the
neighboring country is unknown. "Environment issues are often made
political. These issues often become the theme of such seminars but
they always remain insolvable," noted Arevhat Grigoryan, an Armenian
specialist. Lilit Haroutyunyan, program coordinator of the environment
issues of the Caucasian region, added that the matter will find its
practical solution lest the countries shift the matter to political
sphere. "There is no political dialogue between the two countries,
and environment is beyond politics," she said.

The Caucasian countries have got similar environmental problems –
the main concerns in Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan are wood cutting,
wastes, and common utilization of the water pool.

The two-day seminar entitled "Assistance of political community,
state and mass media into the ecologic dialogue" and initiated by the
environmental protection centre of the Caucasian region was aimed at
revealing the common problems of the countries under question as well
as at finding ways for journalists to render assistance to countries,
NGOs and business sector. The journalists came to the conclusion
that the faults and shortcomings of the sphere are the same in the
three countries; the state bodies violate the laws regulating the
environment sphere, there are not willing to provide information and
sometimes we come across people in the sphere who are unaware of the
environment sphere and its problems.

"The state bodies, mass media and NGOs are on the way of development
and such debates will contribute to all sides," noted Souren Deheyan,
representative of "Armenian Now" electoral weekly. By the way, the
journalists confessed that sometimes the journalist turns out to be
unaware of the problems of the sphere himself; he doesn’t understand
the information of the source properly or delivers it to the audience
in wrong way. "Eco-journalism is not so authoritative. In fact there
is an urgent need of serious and literate journalists. Journalists
can prevent new ecological calamities," said manager of the program
Lela Janashia.

MAMMADYAROV USES THE UNO TRIBUNE

A1+
[04:19 pm] 26 September, 2006

Yesterday Elmar Mammadyarov, Azeri Foreign Minister, used the tribune
of the United Nations General Assembly to present the international
community Azeri stance on the Karabakh issue once more.

According to the data of Day-az electronic site, Elmar Mammadyarov said
the following words during the 61st of the United Nations General
Assembly, "We can hardly speak of any progress in the conflict
regulation procedure if Armenia refuses direct negotiations with
Azerbaijan and displays non-constructive position."

The Azeri Foreign Minister called on Armenian authorities to realise
the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and OSCE which
demand to vacate the "occupied lands" and to provide the return of the
refugees to these territories. This admissible approach will allow
the two sides to participate in the conflict regulation. Only in
that case Armenia will have a chance to participate in the regional
economic programs, to contribute to the regional development thus
strengthening mutual trust.

VARTAN OSKANIAN’S STATEMENT AT UN GA SESSION

Armenpress
Sept 25 2006

NEW YORK, SEPTEMBER 25, ARMENPRESS: ‘Madame President, It is a pleasure
to congratulate you and to wish you a year that is relatively free
of crises and catastrophes. In other words, a year not like the one
we’ve just had during which my good friend Ian Eliasson successfully
navigated through troubled waters.

The year of turmoil, as he called it, included conflicts, as well
as man-made and natural disasters that required our collective
response. These challenges to our united will are becoming more
numerous, more dangerous and more complex.

Of all the events last year, the one which stood out most tragically
was the war in Lebanon. There I believe we lost a great deal of
credibility in the eyes of the peoples of the world who had a right
to expect that political expediency would not prevail. We watched
with great disappointment and dismay the political bickering within
the Security Council and the reluctance to bring about an immediate
ceasefire, even as the bombs were being dropped indiscriminately.

When any world body or power loses moral authority, the effectiveness
to undertake challenges which require collective response is
undermined.

In other areas, a united international community has succeeded. It
has played a supportive role in the civilized process which brought
Montenegro to this day and this body. Together, we created and
empowered the Peace building Commission and the Human Rights Council
– two bodies which hold great promise in delivering deeper and more
purposeful engagement by a world community committed to building
peace and protecting human rights.

The most insipid and threatening challenges in the world remain those
of poverty and hopelessness. When the world’s leaders met six years
ago, they decided that the UN was the ideal mechanism to confront
the social ills facing our societies, they publicly accepted their
combined responsibility in achieving accelerated and more even social
and economic development. They said to the world that, together, we
will channel international processes and multinational resources to
tackle the most basic human needs. Thus, they placed the principle and
potential of united action on the judgment block. Six years later,
the world continues to watch in earnest to see if individual and
regional interests can be rallied in striving for the common good.

Madame President, We are faced with the same challenges, locally. In
Armenia, we are encouraged and rewarded by our extensive reforms. These
reforms are irreversible and already showing remarkable results.

We are going to move now to second generation reforms in order
to continue to register the successes of the last half decade:
legislative and administrative strides forward, an open, liberal
economy, double-digit growth.

Encouraged by our own successes, this year we have determined to
build on our course of economic recovery and target rural poverty. We
are reminded of the remarkable promise made to the victims of global
poverty in 2000: "To free our fellow men, women and children from the
abject and dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty." To do this at
home, we will leverage the philanthropy of international organizations
and friendly governments with the traditional generosity of our
Diaspora to build and repair infrastructure, which is essential to
facilitate and enable economic development. But infrastructure alone
does not reduce poverty and remove unjust inequalities. Creating
economic opportunities, teaching the necessary skills – these are
essential to erase the deep development disparities that exist today
between cities and rural areas.

Madame President, we will begin in our border communities, because
unlike other countries, where borders are points of interaction and
activity, Armenia’s borders to the east and the west remain closed. As
a result, regional economic development suffers. But with Turkey, it
is more than our economies that suffer. It is the dialogue between our
two peoples that suffers. Turkey’s insistence on keeping the border
closed, on continuing to prevent direct contact and communication,
freezes the memories of yesterday instead of creating new experiences
to forge the memories of tomorrow. We continue to remain hopeful that
Turkey will see that blocking relations until there is harmony and
reciprocal understanding is really not a policy. On the contrary, it’s
an avoidance of a responsible policy to forge forward with regional
cooperation at a time and in a region with growing global significance.

Madame President, let me take a minute to reflect on Kosovo,
as so many have done. We follow the Kosovo self-determination
process very closely. We ourselves strongly support the process of
self-determination for the population of Nagorno Karabakh. Yet, we
don’t draw parallels between these two or with any other conflicts. We
believe that conflicts are all different and each must be decided on
its own merits. While we do not look at the outcome of Kosovo as a
precedent, on the other hand, a Kosovo decision cannot and should not
result in the creation of obstacles to self-determination for others
in order to pre-empt the accusation of precedence. Such a reverse
reaction – to prevent or pre-empt others from achieving well-earned
self-determination – is unacceptable.

Efforts to do just that – by elevating territorial integrity above
all other principles – are already underway, especially in this
chamber. But this contradicts the lessons of history. There is a reason
that the Helsinki Final Act enshrines self-determination as an equal
principle. In international relations, just as in human relations,
there are no absolute rights. There are also responsibilities. A state
must earn the right to lead and govern. States have the responsibility
to protect their citizens. A people choose the government which
represents them. The people of Nagorno Karabakh chose long ago not to
be represented by the government of Azerbaijan. They were the victims
of state violence, they defended themselves, and succeeded against
great odds, only to hear the state cry foul and claim sovereignty and
territorial integrity. But the government of Azerbaijan has lost the
moral right to even suggest providing for their security and their
future, let alone to talk of custody of the people of Nagorno Karabakh.

Azerbaijan did not behave responsibly or morally with the people
of Nagorno Karabakh, who it considered to be its own citizens. They
sanctioned massacres in urban areas, far from Nagorno Karabakh; they
bombed and displaced more than 300,000 Armenians; they unleashed the
military; and after they lost the war and accepted a ceasefire, they
proceeded to destroy all traces of Armenians on their territories. In
the most cynical expression of such irresponsibility, this last
December, a decade after the fighting had stopped, they completed the
final destruction and removal of thousands of massive hand-sculpted
cross-stones – medieval Armenian tombstones elaborately carved and
decorated.

Such destruction, in an area with no Armenians, at a distance from
Nagorno Karabakh and any conflict areas, is a callous demonstration
that Azerbaijan’s attitude toward tolerance, human values, cultural
treasures, cooperation or even peace, has not changed.

One cannot blame us for thinking that Azerbaijan is not ready or
interested in a negotiated peace. Yet, having rejected the other
two compromise solutions that have been proposed over the last 8
years, they do not want to be accused of rejecting the peace plan on
the table today. Therefore, they are using every means available –
from state violence to international maneuvers – to try to bring the
Armenians to do the rejecting.

But Armenia is on record: we have agreed to each of the basic
principles in the document that’s on the table today. Yet, in order to
give this or any document a chance, Azerbaijan can’t think, or pretend
to think, that there is still a military option. There isn’t. The
military option is a tried and failed option. Compromise and realism
are the only real options. The path that Nagorno Karabakh has chosen
for itself over these two decades is irreversible. It succeeded in
ensuring its self-defense, it proceeded to set up self-governance
mechanisms, and it controls its borders and its economy. Formalizing
this process is a necessary step toward stability in our region.

Dismissing, as Azerbaijan does, all that’s happened in the last 20
years and petulantly insisting that things must return to the way
they were, is not just unrealistic, but disingenuous.

Madame president, Nagorno Karabakh is not a cause.

It is a place, an ancient place, a beautiful garden, with people who
have earned the right to live in peace and without fear. We ask for
nothing more. We expect nothing less.’

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PARLIAMENTARY LABYRINTHS
By Nazlan Ertan

The New Anatolian, Turkey
Sept 26 2006

Opinions

Relations between Turkey and the European Parliament have always been,
to say the least, bombastic, although, admittedly, Turkey has never
gone as far as member state France, whose onetime Foreign Minister
Herve de Charette called the European Parliament "a parliament not
worthy of that name," when the latter criticized a French bill to
crack down on illegal immigration and toughen conditions for residence
permits. Yet, the tone between Ankara and the only directly elected
body of the European Union has remained cold, hostile and laden with
mutual name-calling.

Part of the reason for this has been the European Parliament
itself. Many would refer to the Parliament as the "conscience of the
EU" — based on its focus on human rights, individual liberties and
freedom of expression. Others would refer to it as the cacophony of
Europe, where any idea, any national interest or even cliche will
find at least one supporter.

For some time, European Parliament deputies have come under strong
pressure for mismanagement, misconduct, even corruption, that ranged
from employing their own family members as staff to acceptance of
gifts, trips and even cash from lobby groups. The deputies have also
been accused of ignorance, lack of research and having no idea of
what they were voting on, or, indeed, what they are proposing. They
have also been accused of carrying their national agenda to that of
Europe and prioritizing their national interest over the collective
one of the Union.

In my years as Brussels correspondent, I have come across both
excellently formed, independent minded and knowledgeable deputies who
looked for innovative ideas and, alternatively, backbenchers who were
at the mercy of their assistants, lobbies or national interests.

Among the many rapporteurs of the past decade, there were those
who carried great weight in their party group, such as Austrian
Socialist Hannes Swoboda, or French Conservative Alain Lamassoure;
or those who were selected because of a certain vision toward the
Eastern Mediterranean and Turkey, such as French Gen.

Philippe Morillion. There was also the problematic Arie Oostlander,
who looked and acted as if he paid his first-ever visit to Turkey
only after he was appointed to the post.

Then came Camiel Eurlings, an excellent representative of the young
generation of politicians in the European Parliament, open, photogenic
and plainly devoid of political weight in his party group, Foreign
Affairs Committee and Parliament.

Then the result: a European Parliament report that establishes,
for the first time, the recognition of the Armenian genocide as a
precondition to Turkish accession to the European Union. It adds two
other "genocides" — that of Pontic Greeks and Syriacs to the bill.

Because we journalists have the memory of elephants, we know that
this is hardly the first time that certain groups in the European
Parliament wanted this done. In the late 1990s, there were efforts to
attach a similar amendment to the report of Swoboda, who rejected it
and announced, if this was ever done, he would remove his name from
the report — a major scandal, had it happened.

Turkish diplomacy has certainly come a good way in playing the game in
the labyrinths of the European Parliament. Through laborious attempts
at all levels, it has established relations with different committees,
Parliament civil servants and leaned heavily upon certain key members
of important parliamentary groups. Experienced ambassadors who made a
lifetime career of the European file, as well as bright young diplomats
continue to pass through the Turkish Representation to the European
Union in Brussels.

So what happened?

Before the EP’s key vote this week on the Eurlings report, where
the young MEP is certain there will be improvement, let us ask the
following questions: At what stage did Turkey become aware of those
amendments? Does it have the necessary links with Parliament and key
party groups to be told about such amendments in time? What did Turkish
diplomats and politicians do when they learned about it? Does Turkey
have the necessary network in Parliament to counter the anti-Turkish
lobbies, from Armenians to Greek Cypriots to pro-Kurdish groups? Are
we benefiting from the parliamentary dimension of the Civil Society
Dialogue with the European Union?

Or do we think that sending Parliament delegations to the EPA so that
they can fight among themselves is effective diplomacy?

MY JOURNEY FROM HATE TO HOPE
By Line Abrahamian

Reader’s Digest, Canada Edition
October 2006

The Armenian Genocide almost annihilated my ancestors. How could I
not hate Turks?

When I heard in April that Turkey threatened economic sanctions against
Canada and recalled its ambassador because Prime Minister Stephen
Harper publicly recognized the Armenian Genocide, all the anger I’ve
felt towards Turks came rushing back. Why do they use scare tactics
on anyone who acknowledges that, between 1915 and 1923, the Ottoman
Turks killed 1.5 million Armenians in the first genocide of the 20th
century? Twenty-one countries have recognized it, and the European
Union has been urging Turkey to face up to its past if it wants to
join. I know you should never hate, but how else am I supposed to
feel about a nation that tried to annihilate my ancestors-and is
still denying it?

Instinctively I cringed when a co-worker first told me his wife was
Turkish. As an Armenian-Canadian, I’d been raised with stories of the
Genocide. I was five when I first saw a black-and white photo from the
massacre, of a crying Armenian boy so emaciated his ribs were sticking
out. That kid could’ve been me. So at age five, I decided to hate all
Turks. At my Armenian school in Montreal, the worst insult you could
hurl at another kid wasn’t a four-letter word, it was "Turk lover."

Three years ago, at 28, I met my co-worker’s wife. She was the first
Turkish person I had ever met. I shook her hand and smiled. She was
lovely, but when we sat down and talked, it was not about the past.

And that bothered me. I think I expected her to apologize profusely
for what her ancestors did in 1915 or to slam her government for
nearly a century of denial. She didn’t. So I decided to hate her, too.

It might have been irrational, but I wasn’t alone in feeling this
way. When I asked an educated Jewish woman how she felt whenever
she met a German, she offered up a guilty smile. "Whenever I meet
an older German, I wonder, Were you the one who pushed my aunt into
the oven? And if it’s a young German, I can’t help but think, Did
your grandparents kill any Jews during the Holocaust? In my mind,
I know I shouldn’t feel this anger. But my heart won’t let me forgive."

This, even after Germany apologized and made restitutions. All over
the world, Holocaust deniers are shunned and put on trial. Yet Turkey
has gotten away with denying the Genocide for 91 years because most of
the world doesn’t know that before Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia and Nazi
Germany, the Ottoman Turks killed 1.5 million Armenians in massacres
and deportation marches through the deserts of Mesopotamia (parts of
today’s Turkey, Syria and Iraq). Many people don’t even know what an
Armenian is-"So you speak Arabic?" "No, I speak Armenian." "Right. Your
country is Russia." "No, my country is Armenia." The victims are
largely unmourned. And last year Turkey dragged its most renowned
novelist, Orhan Pamuk, to court for "insulting Turkishness" after he
was quoted as saying a million Armenians were killed in his country.

Can you blame me for holding a grudge?

I walk into Manoug Khatchadourian’s apartment and hug him. We’ve
never met, yet I feel an instant connection. Manoug, 104, is a
Genocide survivor.

He asks me to make Armenian coffee, expecting that since I’m Armenian,
I must know how to brew it-like baking choereg (Armenian bread)
or cooking dolma (stuffed vegetables). I don’t. Still, I have a go,
but it turns out thick and gloppy. Manoug takes a sip and cringes,
not subtly. I smile apologetically. But he has survived far worse
than bad coffee.

My eyes fix on a painting above Manoug’s head. A Turkish soldier is
stabbing an Armenian woman. Another is ripping a baby from his pleading
mother’s arms. An Armenian mother is cradling her dead daughter.

"How could I not hate them?" says Manoug, his body trembling. "They
killed our mothers, fathers, children! No, I can’t forgive them. I
still live it today." His mind races back to a day in his childhood,
on the deportation march in Mesopotamia, in July 1915.

"Have you seen Mama?" 13-year-old Manoug asked pleadingly, but the
haggard Armenians mutely trudged past him, their tongues lolling,
and threw themselves into a puddle of rain mingled with animal urine.

They hadn’t had a drop for two days. Manoug had wriggled through the
throng to fetch water for his family but had now lost them. "Have
you seen Mama?" he asked anyone who would listen. But no one had.

The caravan set off once more. It had been four weeks since they’d
been dragged from their homes in Kharpert, and every day marchers died
of hunger, thirst, heat-or the dagger of a guard. Now Manoug was alone.

Suddenly a band of Turkish and Kurdish marauders came riding down with
a roar. The frightened marchers scattered, but many were trampled
under crushing hooves. Horsemen snatched up pretty girls and looted
marchers; a few fell on a woman and began breaking out her gold teeth
with a hammer.

Then a Turk started chasing Manoug. The boy ran, but his legs were
weak. His assailant caught up, throwing Manoug to the ground, beating
him fiercely with his bayonet, then stripping off his clothes.

Bloody and naked, Manoug staggered behind a boulder and collapsed.

Some Armenian boys rushed to help him. "Leave me," Manoug breathed.

"I’ve lost my family. This is where I want to die."

The phone rings in Manoug’s apartment. As he answers it, I think,
How could he not hate the Turks? My eyes stray back to the painting. I
hate them all over again.

As I enter the Ararat carpet store in Montreal, I can almost hear
the giggle of my six-year-old self, climbing up carpet mountains and
through carpet tunnels with store owner Kerop Bedoukian while Dad
was with clients.

"This place hasn’t changed much since you were last here, has it?"

asks Kerop’s son, Harold, who inherited Ararat when Kerop died in
1981. But it has. The carpets are neatly displayed on the floor
instead of rolled into fun tunnels for the pint-sized and pigtailed.

Kerop’s office looks different, but his original desk is still there.

And tucked in a bookshelf is The Urchin, the book he wrote about his
experiences on the deportation march. When I was a girl, I had no
idea the man who playfully scaled carpet hills with me had climbed
different kinds of mountains in the summer of 1915.

Nine-year-old Kerop couldn’t remember the last time they were allowed
to rest. They clambered up yet another mountain, flanked by a steep
drop. His eyes were fixed on a donkey swaying dangerously under its
load. It lost its footing and toppled over the edge. The boy peeked
down to see if donkeys land like cats do. They don’t. But he wondered
why the lady who’d been leading it hadn’t let go of its halter when
it fell. So many marchers tripped and toppled, reminding Kerop of
shooting stars.

It was almost dusk. Still they ploughed on. Kerop noticed a Turkish
guard creep over. He seemed intensely interested in someone in the
caravan. The guard quickened his pace, slunk deep into the crowd-and
pounced on a girl, drag-ging her behind a boulder as she kicked and
screamed. Soon, the guard reappeared, pulling up his pants, and strode
away. Kerop waited for the girl to emerge, too. But she didn’t. She
must have been 15.

"I hated them for destroying an innocent and beautiful girl," Kerop
later wrote in The Urchin.

Harold tells me now, "That was the first time my dad said he felt
hatred for Turks. But he didn’t hate all Turks." His family had
Turkish friends who trudged with them as far as they could on the
deportation road, Harold explains. "I’m less generous in my anger than
he was. Still, your generation seems to feel the strongest. When my
son was ten, he came home one day with ‘Death to all Turks’ written
on his arm. We were stunned. We’d told him about the Genocide but
hadn’t taught him to hate."

Every April 24-Genocide commemoration day-thousands of Armenians
converge in front of the Turkish Embassy in Ottawa and chant,
"Recognize the Genocide!"

I was there as a five-year-old. At that age, do we even know what
we’re fighting for? We do. Every one of the 27 years she has been a
teacher at an Armenian kindergarten, my mom has taught children about
the Genocide.

I ask her if she thinks five is too young to hear about this. "You
have to put it in their blood early on," she says, "otherwise they
won’t grow up with that fire in their belly to fight for our cause.

That’s what we did with you."

"So would I be less loyal to my heritage if I didn’t hate Turks?" I
ask her.

"Yes," my mom replies unflinchingly.

"So it’s okay for me to hate another human being?"

"No, not just anyone," she says. "But after what they did, how could
you not hate a Turk?"

"But is it fair not to distinguish between the generations?" I venture.

"Fair?" she snaps. "When they were massacring the Armenians, did they
distinguish between the women, the children, the elderly? And today’s
Turk is just as bad, for denying it happened."

I’m watching the documentary The Genocide in Me, in which 32-year-old
Armenian-Canadian filmmaker Araz Artinian tries to understand her
father’s obsession with his heritage through a personal journey that
leads her back to the roots of it all.

Five-year-old Vartan Hartunian clutched his father’s hand as Turkish
soldiers herded hundreds of Armenians into a church in Marash,
in the southern Ottoman Empire. Suddenly, horrifying shouts issued
from nearby. Vartan peered outside and saw Turkish soldiers pouring
kerosene on a neighbouring church and setting it on fire, ignoring
the cries of the men, women and children inside.

A woman emerged from the flames. A soldier shot her down. The fire
soon silenced the voices within the church.

Now, inside Vartan’s church, thick smoke was filling the air. The
men madly tried to contain the blaze, but it was too wild. Suddenly,
bullets whizzed overhead-Turkish soldiers had opened fire. The
Armenians flung themselves to the floor, but the gunfire intensified.

There was no escape. Tears streaming down his face, Vartan’s father
huddled with his family and cried, "My dear ones, don’t be frightened,
soon all of us will be in heaven together."

"I’ll never forget that," Vartan, 86, recalls. His voice trails off.

The camera keeps rolling. A moment later Artinian asks, "Do you hate
the Turks?"

I listen closely, expecting to hear "Of course! They tried to burn
us alive!"

"No," he says. "I don’t hate the Turks. Hatred is like putting poison
in your own psyche. If you hate a Turk, you don’t hurt a Turk; you
hurt yourself. My criticism of the Turks is in their [government’s]
official denial of the Armenian Genocide. I think this hurts the Turks
because it prevents them from coming up into the class of civilized
nations who are admitting past errors. I don’t feel angry.

I feel sorry for them.

"Armenians must learn that there are good Turks, and many Armenians
will testify that Turks helped them survive. Unless we break through
the walls of hatred, the question of Genocide is never going to
be resolved."

I couldn’t believe it. How could this survivor feel no hatred, yet
I do?

Since my first meeting with his wife had soured, my co-worker found
me a new Turkish friend. Born in Istanbul, she moved to Canada three
years ago. "You’re going to love her!" he said. I doubted it.

I call her, and she immediately invites me to her apartment. Walk
into the enemy’s turf? "Sure, I’ll see you soon," I say hesitantly.

I knock on her door, and a short brunette with a warm smile opens it.

"Come in," she stretches out an enthusiastic hand. The apartment
is Bohemian and homey-save for a mannequin in her living room. She
chuckles, saying she often dresses it and it has become part of
the family.

I laugh-I never imagined a Turk could have a sense of humour. My
anxiety melts. I tell her of my reservations about coming over and
ask if she feels any animosity towards Armenians.

The woman (who agreed to use her name but later changed her mind) tells
me her parents never brought her up to hate, but in school there was
an implicit hatred. She hadn’t even heard about the Genocide there;
no teacher dared talk about it, and history books taught them that
during World War I, the Armenians were stirring for independence,
revolting against an already crumbling Ottoman Empire by joining forces
with the Russians. So in self-defence the Ottoman Turks "relocated"
these rebellious Armenians.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. If they were deporting the
"rebellious" Armenians, why deport women and children? Why were
Armenians deprived of food and water? Why were girls raped and babies
killed? If they were being "relocated," why had most Armenians in
the Ottoman Empire disappeared?

I finally find my voice. "How did they justify what happened on the
deportation marches?"

"They say, ‘It was wartime, you have to accept that.’ But," she
presses on, "I found myself questioning, Why are we supposed to hate
Armenians? If [their deaths] were a terrible consequence of a terrible
war, why cover it up?"

She found the answers in university, during the classes taught by
influential Turkish historian, Halil Berktay.

"Then it started to dawn on me that it really was genocide," she
reveals. "I realized there wasn’t one single interpretation of
history, as the nationalist ideology claimed. What do nationalist
leaders do? They choose a scapegoat. In this case, the Armenians. The
other side is, the Ottomans were responsible for what went wrong,
which is true, but the government is having a hard time saying that
because the Ottomans are where we come from; how can we be associated
with murderers?"

"Has any Armenian told you, ‘Your ancestors killed my ancestors’?" I
ask.

"No. And if they did, I don’t know how I’d react. If you dismiss me
like that, you’re closing dialogue forever."

The problem, she says, is the majority thinks the Ottomans back then
are the same as Turks today. "Now when I meet an Armenian, I feel like
making an explanation that I’m not associated with Ottoman Turks or
people who deny the Genocide."

I must have a look on my face somewhere between admiration and
confusion that Turks like her exist: She asks, "Hasn’t it occurred
to you that not all Turks are bad? That there might be Turks who
recognize the Genocide?"

"Honestly…no," I reply.

She tells me there are more of them than I think. "Then, why don’t
we hear more from you guys?" I ask heatedly.

"When you talk about this in Turkey, there’s the danger of going
to prison or being persecuted. But I do feel responsible for doing
something in Turkey to open up discussion."

Still, many Turkish youth know nothing about the Genocide, "because the
only side they’ve been exposed to is what’s in their history books,"
she says. "Should they be blamed? Perhaps, for not being curious about
all sides, for blindly accepting as truth what they’re being told."

We talk for hours, about everything from the Genocide to our careers
to relationships. As I leave, she asks, "It was strange to hear
that you hated all Turks. So when you meet a Turk you actually like,
do you start questioning hating all of them?"

The word Turk still sends chills up my spine. But when I left the
young Turkish woman’s apartment, I didn’t hate her.

In her I no longer saw that soldier in Manoug’s painting, ripping
the baby from his mother’s arms; I saw a friend.

But later, when she told me she couldn’t be part of this article, my
heart sank. My first instinct was to dismiss her as being "like every
other Turk." But then I read that another Turkish scholar is facing
trial for referring to the Genocide in her book. How can I dismiss
an entire nation when there are some fighting for us? How can I hate
a Turk who tells me she’s striving for Genocide recognition-even if
it’s in the privacy of her living room?

I’m not ready to say I don’t hate Turks in general. But I don’t want
to hate. I don’t want to teach my kids to hate. In this violent world,
I don’t want to believe blind hatred is the solution.

Hopefully that makes me no less of an Armenian-but more human.

te_to_hope.php