Month: February 2015

EPHEMERAL POWER OF BAKU, OR ANOTHER HOPELESS VISIT

Friday, 06 February 2015 20:09

The OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen are going to visit our region in the
nearest future. This has been recently stated by the U.S. Co-Chairman,
James Warlick, in an interview to the Armenian Service the Voice of
America Radio Station. According to him, the mediators are deeply
concerned about the serious violations and incidents in the Karabakh
conflict zone, which directly harm all the countries in the region.

, Warlick noted.

As we know, in late January, the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen issued
a joint statement, in particular, emphasizing that . There
is no doubt that the upcoming visit of the international moderators,
who have repeatedly noted the inadmissibility of a military solution
to the issue, is aimed at the realization of the declared goals. This
move by the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen can be only welcomed, but
we would also like to hope for their consistency, which has lacked
so far. And only in their recent joint statement, the OSCE Minsk
Group Co-Chairmen dared to make a targeted appeal to Azerbaijan –
the true culprit of the escalation of the situation in the conflict
zone and of the deaths on both sides of the line of contact.

All this, again, deserves only approval. However, it is difficult
to get rid of certain skepticism, which does not allow to hope for
the success of the upcoming mission of the mediators. The matter,
of course, is not the lack of their peacekeeping potential. Not at all.

The stumbling block is the Azerbaijani party’s disability for
negotiations. Azerbaijan has long lost the ability to perceive
adequately both the existing objective realities and reputable
international institutions’ appeals to official Baku to adhere to the
basic norms and rules of a civilized society. The recent statement of
the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairmen, in which they directly recommended
Azerbaijan “to observe its commitments to a peaceful resolution of the
conflict”, has undergone fierce obstruction by the power and public
structures. This totalitarian state displays a hostile attitude to
any fair criticism, attacking the opponents with tubs of dirty insults.

The recent examples are the aggressive, far from the norms of
human morality attacks of representatives of the official and
pro-governmentstructures of Azerbaijan against international
organizations, in particular, the PACE, Freedom House, Human Rights
Watch, as well as the U.S. State Department, which criticized the
ruling regime in Baku for mass gross violations of human rights.

Surely, this frenzied and unbridled reaction of the Azerbaijani
party has its explanation. And it is that the frantic tone towards
the critics of Azerbaijan is defined by its President, playingthe
first violin in this wickedly-brained orchestra. As the saying goes,
the parish is like its priest. In mid-January, speaking at a conference
summarising the passed year, the “priest”, in response to the criticism
towards Azerbaijan, confidently stated, “Nobody can talk to us in the
language of diktat. Some wish to do so, but they can’t and will never
be able to do”. The roots of this megalomania lie inthe overestimation
of self-worth and exaggeration of self-estimation.

Aliyev, intoxicated by thepetrodollars, seems to seriously believe
that he is an independent political player, not even regional,but
global, and therefore can afford much and even all. “Surely, the
economic power allows us, without fearing of anyone, to state our
view on the political scene”, he stated presumptuously.

Frankly, this is a topic for another conversation, but it is impossible
to be silent. According to Western experts, Azerbaijan, as an energy
supplier to Europe, should not rely too much on the European Union,
which is trying to diversify its energy sources and to rely on the
renewable energy, in order to be less dependent on oil and gas. In
this context, the importance of Azerbaijan as an energy supplier to
European countries is gradually reducing. In addition, again according
to international experts, the sharp fall in oil prices has seriously
downgraded the financial opportunities of Azerbaijan, 70% of the budget
of which is formed thanks to the oil revenues. This is what relates to
the economic component of the “power” of Azerbaijan. But, there is also
a moral component, which was described by the Azerbaijani political
scientist, Zardusht Alizadeh: “For Washington, Azerbaijan is such an
unimportant country that nobody will soil himself with it. Today,
we are dependent on Moscow more than in the Soviet period. We are
dependent on Moscow, on London, on Paris, on Tehran, and on Ankara,
because we are a weak state. And we are weak not because we have
little money, but because people do not believe in their Government”.

Perhaps Aliyev’s realization of these obvious truths and objective
realities would allow him to get rid of the arrogance and to
become more compliant. Unfortunately, this does not happen yet,
and Azerbaijan, still relying on the military force, rejects any
recommendations of international structures to normalize the situation
and to find a purely diplomatic way of the conflict settlement. So,
there is no doubt that the forthcoming negotiations of the OSCE
Minsk Group Co-Chairmen with the Azerbaijani President will once
again prove fruitless.

Leonid MARTIROSSIAN

Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper

OEK CONDEMNS HARASSMENT AGAINST POLITICIANS AND PUBLIC FIGURES

19:53 | February 9,2015 | Politics

The political council of the Country of Law Party (OEK) today convened
a sitting which was chaired by OEK Leader Arthur Baghdasaryan.

The participants of the sitting condemned the recent attacks and
violence against citizens, civil activists and political figures,
including the kidnapping of BHK member Artak Khachatryan.

The party condemns any encroachment upon RA citizens, especially
public and political figures. OEK finds it unacceptable that certain
forces are attempting to silence people’s voice of protest through
violence and intimidation.

“The frequent attacks on political and civil figures as well as
activists can have dangerous consequences for Armenia in view of
ensuring an atmosphere of social solidarity, democracy and human
rights protection in the country. Law enforcement agencies should
take the necessary measures to completely disclose the incident,
identify those guilty and make them accountable for the attack,
thereby excluding a repeat of similar attacks in the future. Otherwise,
an atmosphere of impunity and violence will be formed in the country.

Any attempt to seed hostility and hatred inside the country is a
serious threat to our national security, given the external challenges
and the deepening social and economic conditions,” said the party.

Hundreds of citizens today gathered outside the government building in
Yerevan to protest the kidnapping and beating of Artak Khachatryan, a
member of the Prosperous Armenia Party (BHK). Khachatryan was attacked
on Saturday afternoon in Yerevan by masked men who forced him into
a car and took him to an unknown direction. He was later found near
his home in an unconscious state and brutally beaten up. Many believe
that Khachatryan was attacked because of his participation in protests
against the government-submitted law on the sales tax.

From: Baghdasarian

ALIYEV CONFIRMED HE HAS DECLARED WAR

Naira Hayrumyan, Political Commentator
Comments – 09 February 2015, 21:12

At Beyond Ukraine: Unresolved Conflicts in Europe session of Munich
Security Conference 2015 the Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev made
several confessions.

First, he confessed that Azerbaijan creates tension at the border
of Armenia. As a premise for ceasing military actions, he pointed
out handing of “territories surrounding Karabakh” after which,
according to him, there will be a ceasefire. This indicates that
Azerbaijan is causing escalation at the border to achieve return
of at least one territory. However, this approach is acceptable to
nobody except Turkey.

Aliyev also said that he is ready to open its territory for the
Armenia-Russia railway in response to “handing” and “allow” Turkey to
lift the blockade on the Armenian-Turkish border. And he offered only
autonomy for Karabakh (within the borders of the Autonomous District
of Nagorno-Karabakh).

In his speech at Munich Conference Aliyev actually refused the
principles of settlement of Karabakh proposed by the co-chairs
which envisage recognition of the right of the people of Karabakh
to self-determination.

However, what should be the settlement be based on? Change of the
balance of forces, Aliyev thinks. Applying the “drip” tactics of
striking the borders Azerbaijan is trying to force Armenia to make
concessions. Or rather not Armenia but the countries which benefit
from the status quo. It is not ruled out that Azerbaijan is trying
to force Armenia to seek defense assistance from the countries which
Baku would like to appear in Karabakh.

However, Azerbaijan does not have allies. At least, there were no such
in Munich, especially that the Turkish minister of foreign affairs
has left Munich because the Israeli delegation was there. Aliyev
in Munich tried to persuade other countries to support Azerbaijan’s
territorial integrity but Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity has not
been perceived within the borders Aliyev implies.

How about Armenia? While the representatives of the Armenian delegation
to Munich were fighting off Aliyev’s strikes, Nalbandyan was having
interesting meetings. He met with the president of Iraqi Kurdistan
Masoud Barzani and agreed on strengthening relations between Armenia
and Iraqi Kurdistan.

Armenia may act as detonator of change of the state of affairs relating
to future Kurdistan and not only in the Near East. As to what place
will be foreseen for Azerbaijan in the future world order is inferred
from the reaction to Aliyev’s speech in Munich Conference.

Azerbaijan has lost its role and importance in global politics.

ROMANIAN AMBASSADOR TO ARMENIA BACK TO OFFICE AFTER RECALL PERIOD

18:15 * 09.02.15

Romania’s ambassador to Armenia is back to his duties in office after
a short recall that followed a controversial statement made during
a lecture in Yerevan, Tert.am has learned from an Embassy source.

As to when Mr. Sorin Vasile returned and with what tasks, the source
refrained from giving any comments, asking our correspondent to
contact the Foreign Ministry for further details.

The ambassador was recalled to Romania for working discussions after
making remarks on religious and sexual minorities in the context of
the Armenian Genocide recognition. After the news about the statement
was made public, Mr Vasile sent a letter to Civil.net (which published
the article), offering his apologies to the Armenians.

“I deeply regret for the unfortunate misunderstanding which could
have produced its possible influence on the traditionally strong ties
between the Armenian and Romanian peoples. Maybe my judgments were cut
from the context, and if that is the case I feel deeply sorry for it,”
he said.

The ambassador statement, which produced a shocking effect in Armenia,
was made in response to a student’s question as to whether Romania
prioritizes its economic and political ties with Turkey or the moral
imperative of recognizing the Armenian Genocide.”It is very difficult
to speak of last century’s events … What is morality for us to state
that this particular thing is moral? What’s the morality between a
normal couple? What about a bisexual couple? And then how about the
homosexual one? Are homosexuals normal or not? … Thus it is the same
as … Everything is relative. This is the reply to your question. For
a same-sex couple, this is perfect; it is the family model,” he said.

From: A. Papazian

INVISIBLE NATION

Editorial, 9 February 2015

“No other nation and ethnic group seems to see such a degree of
antagonism, misinformation, misappropriation and distortion against
their own history more than the Armenians.”–Vahan A. Setyan

“Language as a Fingerprint” (page 72, The Armenian LLC, 2014).

Mr. Setyan’s overstatement is understandable considering the centuries
of unfair and unjust treatment Armenians and Armenia have been dished
by Western historians. The ugly tradition continues today not only
in history books but also in the general mass media.

How many times have you looked into the index of history books to
check whether Armenia/Armenians are mentioned and then shut the book
in frustration because we don’t exist in the book? And sometimes,
when we are mentioned, it’s in a repetitive boiler-plate format:
“Alexander the Great/Romans/Persians/Arabs/Turks (take your pick)
conquered Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor, Armenia…” Always conquered,
always occupied.

Never making a difference; never contributing to civilization. About
4,300-year history and not a single significant person or achievement
to show for it, if one is to believe these “scholars”. We are the
Invisible Nation.

In 19th century history books we play two roles: agitator; victim of
massacre. We also couldn’t please the Westerner chronicling his/her
trip through the Ottoman Empire. If the Armenian was poor or dressed in
traditional costume, he was mocked or vilified for his backwardness
while his clergy was branded obscurantist, superstitious. The
churches were decorated in bad taste. If the Armenian was educated
and had adopted some Western ways, he was dismissed for his ‘airs and
pretensions’ while the brigand Turk or Kurd was hailed as a natural
or heroic-looking man in colorful traditional costume.

In history books of the early 20th century we were given a “half a
pass” by these writers because the West was fighting the Ottomans,
our executioners. When Armenia became part of the “godless” Soviets,
we vanished for 70 years. Western historians, who mentioned Armenians
and the First World War, also made the point that we had egged the
Ottoman Turks by aiding its enemy Russia…and thus, sort of, got
what was coming to us. This narrative persists today.

After independence we had some lukewarm attention (hopes for a staged
‘Pomegranate Revolution’?), but since then because of Azerbaijan’s
petrol, caviar diplomacy and junketeering ethos, we have been pushed
in the background or accused of being the offending party in the war
with Alievstan.

The denial, the hiding of the Genocide is also widespread among
Western “scholars”. To commemorate the First World War, leading German
magazines recently published special issues about the war. Not one
of them, except “Die Zeit” mentioned the Genocide. Meanwhile at the
Berlin German Historical Museum, a small section was dedicated to
Genocide documentarian Armin Wagner but “genocide” was again absent
from the display. Earlier this month, MSNBC featured “10 Special
Anniversaries Across the Globe”. The Genocide was, of course, not
among them, although “80 Years Since Aya Sofia Became a Mosque” was.

As if the standard anti-Armenian narrative or dismissal of
the Armenians were not enough, in the past few months a group of
mercenary writers (Ilan Aran, Tal Buenos, Ariel Cohen, Amanda Paul,
Brenda Schaffer, Thomas de Waal, etc.) have made a brand-new concerted
attempt to attack Armenians so as to strengthen relations between
Azerbaijan and Israel. Dragging that 100% fail-proof “anti-Semitism”
tag, they have accused Armenians of hating Jews. The root of the
falsehood is the notorious Anti-Defamation League’s “survey” (See
Keghart.com June 1, 2014). The “facts” revealed by that unscientific
survey is parroted as God’s truth by these dubious journalists.

There’s, of course, no mention in any of their articles that many
Armenians are disappointed by Israel’s refusal to recognize the
Genocide and thus may bear negative feelings towards Israel but not
against Jews. Israel not only denies the undeniable but its US lobby
has been Turkey’s most effective anti-Armenian weapon in the US. It’s
that lobby which has made sure the US will not recognize the Genocide.

So why shouldn’t some Armenians be unhappy with Israel? Armenia
recognizes the Holocaust and has a monument dedicated to it. Jews in
Armenia have never complained about discrimination. Armenians have
also preserved ancient Jewish cemeteries.

Countless acres of forests have been felled in the past year to meet
Western publisher demand for fat history books on the occasion of the
centenary of the First World War: “World War I” by Jennifer D. Keene,
“Gardens of Hell” by Patrick Gariepy, “The Month That Changed the
World” by Gordon Martel, “A Mad Catastrophe” by Geoffrey Wawro, “War
of Attrition” William Philpott, “The Sleepwalkers” by Christopher
Clarke, “Catastrophe” by Max Hastings, “The Great and Holy War” by
Philip Jenkins…With rare exceptions these tomes (average page count
600) do not mention Armenians, let alone the Genocide. In Margaret
MacMillan’s 739-page “The War That Ended Peace”, Armenia is mentioned
once and in passing, along with Georgia and Azerbaijan.

The First World War was the result of European colonial greed and
rivalry for dominance. Although Armenians had no say in the war, they
were among its primary victims: the European conflagration gave the
opportunity to Ottoman Turkey to slay 1.5-million Armenians and drive
the rest from their 4,000-year-old homeland into the four corners of
the world. Yet, to this day, no European historian has come forth and
acknowledged that the Genocide couldn’t have occurred had it not been
for the European martial madness. We were just collateral damage. What
counts are the bravery and casualties at Mons, Dieppe, Somme, Ypres,
Marne… their sons who were victims of their rulers’ greed and folly.

And when these same Western historians accuse Armenians of siding with
Tsarist Russia, they neglect to mention that IF the Armenians sided
with Russia, they had every reason to do so: they had been subjected
to centuries of persecution, pogroms, and massacres (as late as in the
mid-1890s and in 1909) by the Ottomans. Besides, it was the Ottomans
who attacked Russia first and the Armenians who fought on the Russian
side had no option: they were conscripted as they were citizens
of Russia. Finally, these same Western writers who cast aspersions
against the Armenians, shy away from mentioning that the West made
promises before, during, after the Genocide that were not kept.

Why the hostility towards Armenians? Why do we continue to get short
shrift in the Western media?

Did it start in the Middle Ages with our refusal to recognize the Pope
as the head of our Church or because Cilicia Armenians became hostile
to the Crusaders when they discovered their so-called Christian
saviors were colonialists? Was it because we–as “Levantines”–we
were not sufficiently humble towards Western travelers in the Ottoman
Empire or that our merchants posed serious competition to Western
carpetbagging merchants? Was it because the Ottomans had to be courted
for commercial, military, political reasons? Was it because Armenia
was part of the Soviet Union? Consider that soon after the Genocide,
when America decided it was more advantageous to come to terms with
Turkey, its high commissioner in Istanbul said Armenians as “…have
little or no national spirit and have poor moral character.”

What can we do to change the false perception?

Petroleum is thicker than blood. ‘Turkbeijan’ has the money; but we
have the truth. We can’t change the posture of vile “think tanks”
(the petrie dish of some of these ‘writers’) that are the strategic
instruments of their pro-Turkey governments. We can’t change the
policies of media outlets which are mostly owned by multinationals
whose heart belongs to the Wall Street or London’s City. Consider that
before being a media outlet, a publication, TV or radio is first of all
a profit-making business. Most of their employees, aware of corporate
interests and prejudices, practice self-censorship. They claim to be
independent but in fact they have internalized the basic assumptions
of the corporations which employ them. Thus, no mainstream publication
has dared declare George W. Bush and Tony Blair war criminals. They
know not to cross the red line.

We should build bridges with independent and progressive publishers,
authors, editors, writers willing to tell the truth. People like
Robert Fisk, Jeremy Scahill, Laura Flanders, and outlets such as The
Huffington Post, the Daily Beast, Salon, Al-Monitor, Harper’s, Nation,
AlterNet, Democracy Now, Mother Jones, Canadian Dimension and Tomorrow
Magazine. Let’s arm them with the facts so they can tell the truth
about Armenians with a louder voice. 1915 is crucial. Let’s try to
change the perceptions of, at least, some of the global public. Let’s
find sympathetic ears and hearts.

HOLOCAUST DENIAL PUNISHED, NOT ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?

IAGS (International Association of Genocide Scholars) considers
denial of Genocide perpetuation of it. On 23rd of January Human
Rights Association, Turkey, and the Center for Truth Justice Memory
held a press conference and issued a press release, announcing that
as an intervening party they will take part in the Perincek case of
Genocide denial. It is posted in Keghart.com for the record along
with Kamo Mayilian’s and Nora Koloyan-Keuhnelian’s articles. The
trial took place on January 28, 2015 as scheduled and it may take up
to six months for the release of the verdict.-Ed.

Press Release

On January 28, 2015, the lawsuit Dogu Perincek v. Switzerland will
begin retrial in the Grand Chamber, which acts in the capacity of
court of appeals for the European Court of Human Rights.

It is now common knowledge that in 2005, Dogu Perincek traveled to
Switzerland, which has officially recognized the Armenian Genocide and
passed a law criminalizing its denial, in order to issue declarations
in Bern and Lausanne where he impugned the Armenian Genocide as
a fabrication. In 2007, Perincek was found guilty of deliberately
violating national law and convicted by the court of Lausanne. Upon
Perincek’s appeal, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in his
favor in 2008 and found that the court of Lausanne had violated the
freedom of expression principle enshrined in the European Convention
of Human Rights, article 10.

The Human Rights Association sent a letter to the Swiss Federal Office
of Justice in 2014, demonstrating in detail how the denial of the
Armenian Genocide incites hostility toward Armenians and imploring
Switzerland to appeal the ECHR decision. Switzerland’s subsequent
appeal and request for retrial were accepted in June 2014.

The first hearing of the said retrial will take place on January
28, 2015.

The Human Rights Association from Turkey joined The Center for
Truth Justice Memory and the Toronto-based International Institute
for Genocide & Human Rights Studies to appeal to the ECHR in July
to present a Third Party Opinion File, i.e., to be accepted as
intervening party. The ECHR approved this request by the three human
rights organizations.

We have explained in this file that the denial of the Armenian
Genocide provokes ethnic hatred in Turkey and encourages anti-Armenian
elements. Neither the ECHR ruling and nor the file we have presented
as third party concerns itself with the historical reality of the
1915-1917 massacres or their precise legal definition. The crux of the
issue lies in the fact that Perincek’s declarations are conducive to
racism and discrimination. In this sense, the retrial in the Grand
Chamber carries special significance as a precedent in addressing
denial, minimization, and justification in a context outside of
the Holocaust.

The ECHR decision had restricted denialism and discrimination to their
effect on Swiss Armenians and disregarded Perincek’s leadership of
the Talat Pasha Committee, as well as the fact that his refutations
of the genocide as an international lie have direct bearing on the
Armenians of Turkey even if they were pronounced in Lausanne. We
have therefore argued in our file that Perincek’s declarations do
not only concern the definition of events, but also commit the crime
of discrimination; that the ruling must take into account Perincek’s
position as a prominent politician from Turkey, the head of the Labor
Party, and the leader of the Talat Pasha Committee–as well as that
Committee’s objectives and operations.

Yes, the act that was found criminal according to the Swiss law
was committed on Swiss soil, but the Talat Pasha Committee and its
leaders, including Perincek, have been conducting operations in Turkey
and targeting Turkish society. The recipient of their message–that
those who listen to Armenians will be subject to intervention and
retribution, even if they are at the other ends of the world–was
Turkish society. The same Turkish society that is being targeted
by this message has been fueled by hostility toward Armenians and
other non-Muslim peoples for generations. Anti-Armenian sentiments
and thoughts have been exacerbated throughout Republican history
by the constant dogma, mass media dissemination and educational
indoctrination of the notion that the eradication of the Ottoman
Armenian population and civilization is a lie.

Denialism does not simply consist of declarations along the lines of
“no genocide has taken place.” Denialism requires the justification of
the irreversible and inexpiable eradication of a people: The notion
that “it is Armenians who are responsible for the events,” namely
that Armenians had deserved eradication, that they had “stabbed Turks
in the back” and collaborated with the enemy, has always been and is
still perpetually reiterated in classrooms, university conferences,
TV series and programs, and books.

Hostility toward Armenians is not confined to mere words but also
takes lives. In this context of discrimination and ethnic hatred,
Armenians were attacked and Hrant Dink, the founder and director of
Agos, was the victim of an assassination whose perpetrators have yet
to be brought to justice. Armenian private Sevag Å~^ahin Balıkcı
was shot dead in 2011 by another soldier in Batman, where he was on
military duty, specifically on the day of April 24, the universal
commemoration day marking the beginning of the Armenian Genocide.

Court proceedings have met with significant public distrust, while the
press has indicated that commanders pressured privates to testify that
the incident was “an accident.” Furthermore, the “Hodjali Protests”
of February 27, 2012, which took place in the central Taksim square
and featured as a speaker the Minister of Internal Affairs, displayed
banners proclaiming “You Are All Armenians, You Are All Bastards.”

Within the span of two months from 2012 to 2013, the Samatya district
of Istanbul, which is densely populated by Armenians, saw similar
and successive attacks on elderly Armenian women–among them the
murder victim Maritsa Kucuk, whose bones were smashed and entire
body relentlessly stabbed. And on February 23, 2014, banners saying
“Long Live Ogun Samasts, Damned be Hrant Dinks” were displayed,
unprohibited, in front of the newspaper Agos.

In sum, genocide denial is the chief, most fundamental basis for the
state-sanctioned threat to existence under which Armenians continue
to live in Turkey.

As two human rights associations that have witnessed first-hand and
up close the provocation of ethnic hatred by anti-Armenian acts and
declarations, we, the Human Rights Association and the Center for
Truth Justice Memory, consider it our natural duty, as per our raison
d’être and field of operation, to present our observations to the
European Court of Human Rights in order to contribute to the making
of a fair and just decision.

Finally, we insist yet again: Denial causes hatred and hatred kills.

We defend the inalienability of the right to live in safety, unafraid
of tomorrow, and hope that the European Court of Human Rights will,
in the name of the universal law of human rights, obstruct discourses
that incite acts in violation of this inalienable right.

Amal Clooney Takes on Armenian Case

Kamo Mailyan, Toronto, 14 January 2015

Amal Clooney, a prominent international and human rights expert,
George Clooney’s wife, has taken on the protection of the Armenian
side in the “case of Dogu Perincek,” The Telegraph reports.

Dogu Perincek, a representative of the Left-wing Turkish Workers’
Party, was found guilty by the Swiss court during a visit to
Switzerland in 2008 for denying the fact of the Armenian Genocide
1915, perpetrated by the government of Ottoman Empire with a plan
of exterminating the whole Armenian race (as it was later described
by New York Times). During his visit to Switzerland, Dogu Perincek
called the Armenian Genocide 1915 “an international lie” and was
fined by the Swiss court for denial.

Dogu Perincek appealed the Swiss court’s decision to the European
Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which ruled that the Swiss court had
violated the right of free expression.

The ECHR’s ruling is challenged by the Armenian party. The case will
be heard in Strasbourg by ECHR. The first hearing is scheduled on
January 28.

Amal Clooney will work in a team with Geoffrey Robertson, who
wrote a book called “An Inconvenient Genocide: Who Now Remembers
the Armenians?” Amal Clooney has been involved in high profile
international cases, some of which include representation of the
Wikileaks’ founder Julian Assange, as well as Yulia Timoshenko
of Ukraine.

Among questions to be asked to the ECHR should be whether its decision
is not a dual standard. If the ECHR determines and reaffirms that the
Swiss Courts’ decisions have limited the right of free expression,
this will result in a strong case law and precedent that can be
used to combat strict limitation on freedom of expression by the
Turkish government through its Article 301, which limits not only
recognition of the Armenian genocide by individuals inside Turkey but
has even strictly controlled public opinion in relation to this matter
(however, it cannot stop future criminalization and punishment for
genocide denial).

In fact, Dogu Perincek can be found guilty for perpetrating/an attempt
of genocide through denial. The Genocide Watch establishes that
the 8 stages of genocide, commonly adopted and used by scholars and
historians, include: 1. Classification (of culture as “them and us”);
2. Symbolization (giving names to a national group such as the “Jews”
or “Gypsies”); 3. Dehumanization (when one group denies the humanity
of another); 4. Organization (planned by a party such as a state); 5.

Polarization (extremists drive the groups apart); 6. Preparation
(victims are identified based on their religious or ethnic identity);
7. Extermination (massacres start and turn into a mass killing legally
called a “genocide”); and 8. DENIAL (which is a stage that always
follows a genocide).

According to the classification above, Dogu Perincek committed a
genocide / genocidal act through denial.

Another precedent the ECHR shall take into account is the fact that
negating the Holocaust, a horrible crime against humanity and a
genocide that followed the first genocide of the 20th century (the
Armenian Genocide 1915) and took the lives of six million Jews, is a
punishable offense in many countries. The ECHR should be prepared to
answer the question what makes the Armenian case different. Is there
any step out of the eight steps of genocide described above that does
not exist in the Armenian case? Or, maybe because we are “ARMENIANS”?

Nowadays different pro-government groups in Turkey are discussing
the possibility of granting diplomatic immunity to Dogu Perincek,
obviously understanding that this is a case that they are going to
lose, and they will have to be prepared to protect their official.

Likewise, Turkey granted diplomatic immunity to Egemen Bagis, its
EU Minister, to protect from potential liability stemming out of an
investigation by Zurich prosecutors after genocide denial comments by
Egemen Bagis at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2012,
which were found as a violation by the anti-racism legislation of
Switzerland.

The two cases are very similar, and a question the ECHR should be
asked is how many more officials are going to be “saved” by Turkey
through giving diplomatic immunity after a crime/violation is made,
and whether it can be viewed as retrospective and be applied for the
time when the real violation/crime was made.

Clooney goes to court for Armenia

Nora Koloyan-Keuhnelian, Al-Ahram, Cairo, 5 February 2015

International human rights lawyer Amal Alamuddin Clooney and UK
barrister Geoffrey Robertson appeared at the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg, France, last week. They were representing
Armenia in the century-old dispute between Armenia and Turkey over the
1915 genocide committed by the Ottoman Turks against the Armenians,
in which 1.5 million people died.

The case comes following an appeal by Switzerland to the ECHR after a
previous ruling that the right of the leader of the Turkish Workers
Party, Dogu Perincek, to express his views had been violated by a
Swiss court.

In 2007 Perincek was sentenced to four months in prison after saying
the Armenian Genocide was an “international lie” at a conference in
Lausanne in 2005. Denial of the genocide is against Swiss law.

In 2008 Perincek appealed to the ECHR, citing his right to freedom of
expression, and in December 2013 the ECHR found in Perincek’s favour.

Turkey and Armenia then became parties to the case, and the appeal
against the 2013 decision began last week.

In her opening statement, Clooney said the judge’s decision in the
2013 case was “simply wrong,” but added that in bringing the appeal
Armenia did not want to prohibit free speech. “Armenia is not here
to argue against freedom of expression any more than Turkey is here
to defend it. This court knows very well how disgraceful Turkey’s
record on freedom of expression is,” she said.

As many observers have noted, Turkey’s claim to defend free speech is
ironic at best. In December, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
arrested opposition journalists and accused them of “forming a
terrorist organisation” and “trying to seize control of the state.”

Only last week, Turkish authorities arrested a former Miss Turkey
for “insulting” Erdogan by quoting him in a poem published on social
media. In September 2014, the US-based Human Rights Watch also said
that Erdogan and the ruling Turkish Justice and Development Party
were taking far-reaching steps to weaken the rule of law, control the
media and clamp down on critics and protesters, stating that these
“changes are really worrying.”

Paparazzi who filled the courtroom for the appeal appeared to be
more interested in the fact that one of the two lawyers is the wife
of actor George Clooney than the case being heard.

Lawyers Robertson and Clooney atthe European Court of Human Rights
in Strasbourg, France

Aram Hamparian, executive director of the Armenian National Committee
of America (ANCA), told Al-Ahram Weekly that the media storm in no
way distracted from the importance of the case. “Armenians worldwide
welcome Amal Clooney and Geoffrey Robertson’s compelling presentation
of the facts, the law and the morality of Armenia’s case against the
denial of the Armenian Genocide,” he said.

Their stature as international human rights lawyers will help focus
the world’s attention on this still unpunished genocide, he said,
brining Turkey’s denial campaign into the light of day and contributing
to the growing international consensus that there must be resolution
of the crime, Hamparian added.

Some observers say that the case may be understood to be about freedom
of expression and that the judges may again decide against Switzerland,
though this should in no way be seen as endorsing Turkey’s views on
the genocide.

Others say that denying the genocide should be understood as a hate
crime under Swiss law in the same way that denying the Holocaust is
a punishable offence in many countries. One judge at the court said
that Perincek’s case remains strong because it turns on freedom of
speech and not the genocide.

In his remarks to the court, Robertson described Perincek as a
“vexatious litigant pest” and he questioned why the court was “giving
comfort to genocide deniers.”

“What is really worrying are the vast errors of Chamber 2, which we
urge the Grand Chamber to correct, in the fact that they promote
the idea that the Holocaust is the only real genocide … it is
wrong to excuse or to minimise other mass murders on the grounds of
racist religions because they had fewer victims or different methods
of killing.

“What matters to Armenians, to Jews, to Bosnians and Cambodians, to
Rwandan Tutsis and today to Yazidis is not the manner of their death
or whether an international court has convicted the perpetrators,
but the fact that they were targeted as unfit to live because they
were Jews or Armenians or Yazidis.

“The reasoning in this judgement [in 2013] damages the vital human
rights cause of genocide prevention … That there is any doubt
about the truth of the Armenian Genocide should not feature in its
[the court’s] reasoning. It was not, as genocide deniers pretend,
a tragedy. It was a crime, an international crime of genocide.”

In the past many observers, including British prime minister Winston
Churchill, described the events as the “Armenian Holocaust.” Robertson
recently published a book titled An Inconvenient Genocide: Who
Now Remembers the Armenians? The book argues that the 1915 events
constituted a crime against humanity, known today as genocide.

Robertson will also be a speaker at an international conference
marking the centenary of the Armenian Genocide in New York in March.

Diaspora Armenians are organizing events across the world to mark the
centenary of the genocide in April. However, in what is being seen as
a cynical move, Erdogan last month sent invitations to more than 100
international figures, including Armenian President Serj Sarkissian,
asking them to participate in the centenary of the Battle of Gallipoli
which will be marked in Turkey on the same day as the genocide
centenary. The move is seen as an attempt to distract attention from
the centenary of the genocide, which Turkey continues to deny.

Amal Alamuddin Clooney, 37, is the daughter of a Lebanese family. Her
father is a Druze businessman who moved to London when Amal was a
child, after the outbreak of the Lebanese Civil War. She has previously
acted in other high-profile cases, including those involving former
Libyan intelligence chief Abdallah Al-Senussi and WikiLeaks founder
Julian Assange.

“The case of Dogu Perincek shows that Turkey’s walls of denial are
crumbling and Ankara’s obstruction of justice will be the next to
fall,” Hamparian told the Weekly.

From: Baghdasarian

ASTARJIAN: A QUADRUPLE HISTORIC BYPASS

By Dr. Henry Astarjian on February 2, 2015

Special for the Armenian Weekly

Major occurrences have studded the globe and civilizations– events,
some good (such as the three monotheistic religions, though some argue
to the contrary), and some evil (like the Great Flood which engulfed
land, sparing the peaks, thus creating the Mediterranean islands like
Santorini). These events have impacted mankind, and stored them in
its collective memory.

History has not bypassed them; they are embedded there and will stay
there till time immemorial.

In the past century, four distinct events have also impacted peoples
and nations. They have extended in time to the present, and therefore
become subjects of scrutiny.

A glance would show that despite their initial impact, they are
transient, they could not endure. History is in the process of
bypassing them as we speak.

It is imperative to look back in order to ascertain the present,
and anticipate the future.

Map of the Sykes-Picot Agreement between the British and the French.

(Royal Geographical Society, 1910-15. Signed by Mark Sykes and Francois
Georges-Picot, 8 May 1916.)

To do that one is to start from the end of World War I, when Paris of
1919 was the epicenter of political activity. Together with Great
Britain and the victorious Allies, the defeated Ottoman Empire
(“The Sick Man of Europe”) was on the dissection table, and the
sections were defined by Mark Sykes of Britain and George Picot of
France, two bureaucrats of their foreign ministries. They had begun
their work some two years before, apportioning what did not belong
to France to France, and what did not belong to Britain to Britain,
thus mandating Syria to France, and Palestine, Mesopotamia, and Cyprus
to Great Britain. Lebanon, which administratively was part of Syria,
became a separate entity under France.

A treaty signed on Aug. 10, 1920 in Sèvres, France, was labeled the
“Treaty of Peace with Turkey.” It legitimized the Sykes-Picot plan.

The thrust of this treaty was to divide the eastern Mediterranean land,
and so it happened.

This division of land created more problems than anticipated. Borders
between Syria and Iraq were arbitrarily drawn with an ordinary ruler
into straight lines, thus dividing Shammar (a major Arab tribe; Syrians
call them Muhjimms) into Syrian and Iraqi portions. The Hashimite King
Faisal, who was crowned King of Syria, was victimized in a power and
land duel between Britain and France; he was deposed by the French
after six months of monarchy. In lieu of his family’s contribution
(with Lawrence of Arabia) to the war on the side of the Allies,
the British had to find a throne for him. After lengthy bargaining
and arm twisting, they found a throne for him in newly formed Iraq,
which included the disputed oil rich Mosul. He was crowned as King
Faisal I of Iraq. His brother Emir Abdullah, later King of Jordan,
was enthroned in East Jordan while Israel was being created to realize
the Sykes-Picot treaty and the Balfour Declaration.

Through some British arrangements, Abdullah Bin Hussein Al-Hashimi
became King of Jordan, which was carved out of Palestine.

All this mess created by the Sykes-Picot treaty lasted for about a
century, and the wars being waged now in the eastern Mediterranean,
in one form or another, indicate the dismantling of what the
Sèvres Treaty had proscribed. It is the death of the Sykes-Picot
arrangements. History has bypassed Sykes-Picot.

***

The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire also dismantled the caliphate
system of governance. The Arab Islamic world, which was an unwilling
part of the Ottoman Caliphate, felt liberated of the oppression the
system had brought. They had participated in the war against the
Ottomans, with the help of Lawrence of Arabia.

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

In Turkey, events gave birth to an army officer named Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk. He launched a military campaign (some say instigated
by European powers) to establish a modern, secular republic. He
was successful in conqueringvilayet after vilayet, through mass
executions, beheadingMullahs, and subjugating the peoples of Turkey
to his regime. The most memorable are his massacres of the people of
Dersim (now Tunceli), and setting fire to the city of Smyrna with its
majority Greek population. Eyewitnesses have told the story of Smyrna
in horrific terms. According to them, the people jumped en masse into
the sea to escape being burned alive. That was their only choice,
since the city was being besieged from the east, the north, and the
south by Mustafa Kemal’s forces. There were no routes of escape,
but the hope of being rescued by the British Navy which was moored
at harbor. They got no help, since it was 4 o’clock tea time for the
officers, who were being serenaded by the British Navy violinists.

Thousands of men, women, and children drowned. The British Navy could
have helped, but did not.

Kurds also bore the brunt of the massacres, since they were not
considered a “minority” to be protected by the Lausanne Treaty of
1923-24. This treaty, coined by Ismet Inonu, representing Kemal and
the newly established Turkish Republic, and Lord George Curzon of
Britain, countered the Sèvres Treaty, and did not recognize Kurds
as a minority akin to the Christians and the Jews whose protection
became mandatory by the same treaty.

Mustafa Kemal changed the Arabic letters, including that of the Koran,
to the Latin alphabet. He passed revolutionary laws, some cosmetic, the
most laughable being “Shapka Kanunu” (The Law of Hats), which mandated
the change of the traditional Turkish fez with a European-style fedora
hat, or a cap with a visor.

Mustafa Kemal established some degree of democracy by instituting
a one-man, one-vote system for the first time. He established the
Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (CHP; the Republican People’s Party) which
dominated the political life of the country for over a half century.

Ulus, the official party organ, advanced their revolution by advocating
the ideals of the new republic.

Two decades or so later, in an inner struggle, the CHP managed to
convict the president of the country, Calal Bayar, and the prime
minister, Adnan Menderes, to death; the life of the first was spared
because of age, but the second was hanged in public. They were
convicted for corruption. Additionally, they character-assassinated
Prime Minister Menderes by claiming to have found a female garment
in his safe.

The Republic of Turkey was part of the Baghdad Pact, an alliance
between Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Pakistan. The U.S. participated as an
observer. The strategy was to contain the southern border of the Soviet
Union. The pact had followed the Portsmouth Treaty of 1948, which
had had the same gall and which had dissolved after a short existence.

Turkey then joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The
senior partners of NATO accepted it into their organization because
of its geographical location.

Turkey could now boast of being a secular, democratic, and sovereign
country. Sovereign it was; democratic it was, up to a point; but
secular it was not. Its democracy extended to one-man, one-vote
elections; however, it was terribly short on human rights, women’s
rights, freedom of speech rights, and civil rights. Journalists were
incarcerated for allegedly defaming Turkey, or some such excuse,
as were novelists and writers. Carrying all this baggage, they had
the chutzpah to apply for membership of the European Union. All these
shortcomings and brutality continues as we speak.

Shapka Kanunu changed the headgear of the Turks, but could not change
what was underneath it–the mentality.

Time, events, and fanatic religiosity gave birth to the most recent
political setup, which in an attempt to institute a modern-era
reactionary Islamic Caliphate, propelled fanatic political fervor into
the overwhelming Turkish majority of the country. Turkish President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan did not have to push hard. People were ready.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan greeted Azeri President Ilham
Aliyev on Jan. 15, in the presence of 16 soldiers dressed in ceremonial
costumes representing various Turkic people in history.

(Photo: Official website of the President of Turkey)

The newly formed Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi (AKP; Justice and
Development Party) was briefly headed by Abdullah Gul, who became
president of Turkey. He was followed by a shrewder politician, Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, who served as prime minister, and now president,
elected by democratic, transparent elections. This election–with its
impressive majority, and of a person who has the Islamic Caliphate as
his raison d’etre–reflects the reactionary mentality, orientation,
and psychology of the electorate.

Erdogan has pursued policies that are designed to bury Kemalism, and
establish an Ottoman-style Caliphate. Now, he has invited presidents of
all countries, including the Armenian president, to attend celebrations
of the Turkish military victory over Great Britain in the Battle of
Gallipoli (Canakkale) on April 24, 2015, the very day that Armenians
commemorate the start of the Armenian Genocide. This is more proof
of his desire to advance the ideas of an Ottoman Caliphate. He has
succeeded. Kemalism is dead. History has bypassed it.

Erdogan has pursued policies that are designed to bury Kemalism, and
establish an Ottoman-style Caliphate…. He has succeeded. Kemalism
is dead. History has bypassed it.

***

While this is going on in Turkey, other events are disrupting the
region. Characterized as the Arab Spring, the events started with
revolutionary fervor from Tunis, when an ordinary man, a street
vendor, set himself on fire and died in protest of the corrupt and
oppressive government of Tunis. This was the kindling that started an
uncontainable fire which engulfed the super-flammable Arab countries.

Sparks soon started major fires in Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Yemen.

Iraq was in a state of disarray since Saddam Hussein’s demise in 2003.

Sunni-Shia enmity and armed conflicts continue. These two sects have
not been able to solve their differences since Hussein’s (Prophet
Muhammad’s grandson) murder around one and a half millennia ago. War
between them was waged by proxy, Iran promoting its geopolitical
interests in the Arab countries through the Shia communities in
Lebanon, Syria, and of course Iraq; and Saudi Arabia financing
Sunni causes.

The ever-opportunist Erdogan, advancing his plans for a misogynist
caliphate, acted as the champion of the Arab world by promoting his
stance as the defender of Palestine. He accused Israel of killing
civilians in Gaza, and pointed out their inhumane treatment of the
Palestinians, while continuing to deny the Armenian Genocide, which
his predecessors had committed. He unconditionally supported the
Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and their leader, now deposed Mohamed
Morsi. Egypt, with its newest administration, retaliated by bringing
up the Armenian Genocide as proof of Turkey’s criminality, and inhuman
treatment of its minorities.

Erdogan dashed out of an international conference in Davos in 2009,
protesting the unequal allotment of his time in favor of Israel. In an
attempt to provoke Israel by breaking its embargo of Gaza, he sent the
Mavi Marmara ship loaded with so-far-unknown cargo, which was blocked
by the Israeli Navy, resulting in the deaths of nine Turkish sailors.

Looking at the Arab world today, it is certain that the Arab Spring
is dead. History has bypassed it.

***

In my study hangs a framed, full-paged interview conducted by a
journalist for the newspaper Ozgur Politica, dated April 30, 1996. He
had titled it, “The Armenian and Kurdish Causes Are Interrelated.” He
was echoing my speech in the Kurdish Parliament in Exile, in Brussels,
where I had emphasized our rights to Western Armenia according to
the provisions of Section VI, Article 88-93 of the Sèvres Treaty and
President Woodrow Wilson’s map.

The speech was timely because of the behind-the-scenes political
activities advanced by Germany, Turkish President Turgut Ozal, and
Professor Dogu Ergil to formulate some sort of autonomy within the
boundaries of Turkey, for the Kurds. That meant incorporating Western
Armenia–the sixvilayets as specified by the Sèvres Treaty–into the
proposed Kurdish territories. This was unacceptable, and I was there
to say so.

Abdullah Ocalan

The Kurdish cause had turned into a liberation struggle through
military operations in 1984, headed by Abdullah Ocalan. His party, a
Marxist-oriented party, was called the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

The war had claimed some 35,000 casualties from both sides, and
was a major destabilizing situation for Turkey as a country, and
its chauvinist Turkic regime. After all, Mustafa Kemal and his new
republic had denied the national identity of the Kurds, labeling them
“Mountain Turks.”

The Kurdish struggle for self-rule had started in the mid-19th
century by Prince Badrkhan, who had waged a war against the central
Ottoman Caliphate by recruiting some 40,000 Armenians and Kurds. He
had failed. Successive rebellions by some sheikhs and chieftains like
Sheikh Sa’id and Sheikh Obeidullah were crushed. In the first decades
of the 20th century, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk committed genocide against
the Kurds, especially the people of Dersim. He literally snatched
children from the bosom of their mothers, and placed them in remote
places to be raised as Turks. His regime made it illegal to speak
or sing in Kurdish. He made it illegal to celebrate the most popular
celebrations of Newroz.

Some 3,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed. Three million Kurds were
displaced and became refugees, most settling in shanty towns around
Istanbul.

Failing in the battlefield, Turkey brought the fight to the villages
and communities. The government formed the Village Guards (Korucu)
from loyal Kurdish tribes, to brutalize their fellow Kurds. They
killed and raped, and brutalized the men, women, and children. In
one incident they snatched a bride, made her strip bare, and raped
her in front of her parents and the villagers.

The Erdogan regime, having failed to defeat the PKK, turned to the
“Ver Kurtul” (Pay and be free) policy. They negotiated with Ocalan,
who was captured in Kenya, and imprisoned in the Island of Imrali.

They allowed the celebration of Newroz last year, and gave the Kurds
a radio station. They allowed the formation of a legal political
party, the Halkin Democratic Partisi (HDP; Peoples’ Democratic Party),
which opened offices in Washington. The head of the party, Selahattin
Demirtas, ran for the office of Turkey’s presidency against Erdogan.

He scored 10 percent of the vote. Kurds did not vote for him, and
Erdogan won with the help of the Kurdish politician Masoud Barzani,
who had shared the podium with him in Diyarbakir.

Abdullah Ocalan is praising Kurdish participation in the Battle of
Gallipoli as proof of Kurdish loyalty to the very government that has
caused his people so much death and destruction. From all indications,
it is evident that the Kurdish Revolution is dead…

Meanwhile Abdullah Ocalan is praising Kurdish participation in the
Battle of Gallipoli as proof of Kurdish loyalty to the very government
that has caused his people so much death and destruction.

>From all indications, it is evident that the Kurdish Revolution is
dead, and may be replaced by evolution. It becomes the fourth bypass
in the history of the past century.

Are the Armenian and Kurdish causes tied together? That is for the
future to tell!

DAGDIGIAN EXPOSES ARMENIA’S SELDOM SEEN PHOTOGRAPHY

By Tom Vartabedian on February 9, 2015

LOWELL, Mass.–In his quest to unveil Armenia’s hidden treasures with
his camera and text, Joe Dagdigian is his very own GPS guide.

More than once or twice, he has passed the village of Bash Aparan
en route to another destination. He’ll often stop and pay tribute to
General Dro Kanayan, who is buried there. A huge memorial is visible
from the highway, catching your eye.

Armenians gather on May 28 to celebrate Independence Day at the Bash
Aparan memorial where General Dro Kanayan directed Armenia’s defense
forces. (Joe Dagdigian Photo)

There’s something very intimate here, especially with General Kanayan’s
son Mardik. The two spent their younger days as AYF members, attended
conventions together, and gathered at many a social interlude. The
respect they had for one another goes without saying.

Last May 28, Dagdigian had his camera in overdrive as he captured
reflective scenes of an Independence Day celebration taking place at
the monument, marking the site when General Kanayan led the defense
of Bash Aparan.

“The celebration started in the town of Aparan with a parade to the
memorial,” reflected Dagdigian. “The music, dancing, and homage paid
that day left an indelible imprint.”

Dagdigian will share his images and commentary in a program on Sat.,
Feb. 21, titled “Seldom Visited Armenia,” beginning at 6 p.m. at the
Armenian Relief Society (ARS) Community Center, at 142 Liberty St.,
Lowell.

The program is being sponsored by the Lowell “Aharonian” Gomideh in
conjunction with the 94th anniversary of the Feb. 18 Revolt against
the Soviets in 1921.

In this illustrated presentation, Dagdigian will take viewers along
the remote areas of Armenia, including ancient Bronze Age ruins and
monasteries–places quite difficult to access.

You will visit the gravesite of “Khent,” the character of Raffi’s
famous novel by the same name, who happens to be buried near
Etchmiadzin.

“Although Khent was fiction, the character was not,” Dagdigian
explains. “The country is full of amazing places that only have to
be seen to be appreciated. Not a year goes by when I don’t embark
upon a new trail to be shared through pictures and stories.”

Included in his talk are interactions with visitors and encounters
in the homes of total strangers ready to serve up their hospitality
for a smile. Accompanying him on many of these junkets is his wife
Lisa. The two share a home in Yerevan.

Much of it also has to do with their charity work with orphanages
and hospitals. Dagdigian’s work with the Cosmic Ray Division over
the years remains exemplary, resulting in thousands of dollars raised
for that cause.

He’s been honored for his work as a 50-year member of the ARF
and served as past chairman of the Armenian National Committee of
Merrimack Valley.

Dinner begins at 6 p.m., followed by the program. Admission is $20
for adults and $10 for students.

IRAN AND SOUTH CAUCASUS: THE IMPLICATIONS OF “FREEZING”

09.02.2015

Sevak Sarukhanyan
Head of the Centre for the Political Studies of the Noravank Foundation

Although Iran and the six powers were unable to reach an agreement on
the nuclear issue in 2014, the negotiations will continue in 2015 and
there is a theoretical chance that if not full, then at least some
partial settlement will be reached in the relations between Tehran
and Washington. The article presents the potential corollaries that
such arrangement may bring for South Caucasus.

Rouhani’s policy of “freezing”

After Hassan Rouhani’s election as president, handling relations with
the West has become one of the cornerstones of Iran’s foreign policy.

The common problems that simultaneously constitute threats and matters
of interest for both Tehran and Washington are used for this process.

These include the nuclear issue, Iraq and Syria. In almost all these
three directions the two sides try to avoid clashes and consider
establishment of partial cooperation as a major component in their
policies.

Washington’s airstrikes in Syria were mainly limited to territories
controlled by the “Islamic State”, which caused no opposition from
Iran, as the ruling government of Syria did not suffer any damage
from those.

In Iraq, the fight against the “Islamic State” still proceeds without
clashes between Iran and the USA. In fact, quite the opposite, the
actions of the two are aimed at the same short-term goals, the results
of which should be maximal impairment of the Islamists. However,
in future both the US and Iran will have to agree on who should
control Iraq after it is “liberated from the Islamists.” This issue
is potentially fraught with serious conflicts, but it is a matter of
future: given the combat-readiness and agility of the “Islamic State”,
that future is not coming too soon.

The nuclear issue is not less important and requires a special
discussion, but both Tehran and the White House are interested in
finding a common denominator.

As for Rouhani’s strategy of handling the relations with the West,
it has to be noted that for Iran it requires tremendous human and
expert resources. In the last 1.5 years Iran’s Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and Ministry of Petroleum have both made the normalization
of the relations with West a cornerstone of their activities. This
has indirectly resulted in “freezing” the other directions in Iran’s
foreign policy, which is immediately felt both in South Caucasus and
Central Asia. In the recent period Iran has adopted a strategy of
passive policy in these two regions critically important for Iran,
aiming to prevent new developments and focusing only on existing
issues, the resolution of which pursues a single primary objective of
making sure they do not interfere with the Iranian-American dialogue.

Such policy of Iran results in some quite different consequences in
South Caucasus. They can be divided in two main parts: policies for
Armenia and Georgia, and policies for Azerbaijan. Such separation
is based on the fact that there are no serious problems in Tehran’s
relation with Yerevan and Tbilisi, whereas in the last 20 years some
serious controversies have accumulated in the relations with Baku.

Because of this very reason during the last 1.5 years there has been
no progress in Tehran’s relations with Yerevan and Tbilisi, while
some serious steps have been made in relations with Baku, which are
aimed at not so much eliminating the conflicts, but more towards
“freezing” those.

The implications of “freezing” for Armenia and Georgia

Though frequent as it is talked in Armenia about active development of
Armenian-Iranian relations, there had been no positive news in this
direction during the last two years. Not only the two parties have
reached no agreement on any new projects (e.g. Iran-Armenia railroad),
but also no steps have been undertaken towards implementation of the
already agreed ones. This concerns Armenia-Iran high-voltage power
transmission line and the Meghri Hydropower Plant. Both projects
depend on Iran’s financing, because Armenia does not have funds
available for construction of these facilities, at least not in the
public sector. The construction of the high-voltage transmission
line would perhaps be more realistic, if it was handed over to the
only organization interested in it, which is Gazprom Armenia, since
Unit 5 of Hrazdan TPS that belongs to it is the only facility with
free capacity to export electricity to Iran. However, there is no
such decision and the project relies mainly on financing from Iran,
which is unlikely to happen under the circumstances of “freezing.”

Rouhani’s policy in Georgian direction has actually had some serious
regress compared to that during the years Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s rule.

The latter at least twice had talks with Georgia’s then-president
Mikheil Saakashvili and achieved favorable terms for Iranian
businessmen in Georgia, while during the last two years the Iranian
economic and financial presence in Tbilisi has plummeted dramatically.

Furthermore, under conditions of “freezing” and inattention, Tehran
missed Georgia’s decision in 2014 regarding residence of foreigners in
Georgia, which in fact eliminated the Iranians’ right and opportunity
to visit Georgia without entry visa requirement.

The implications of “freezing” for Azerbaijan

Unlike the case with Armenia and Georgia, Tehran has made significant
steps towards Baku, aiming not so much at development of new
projects, but rather, “freezing” the existing problems. Rouhani-Aliyev
negotiations in Tehran and Baku resulted in substantial reduction of
strain in relations. The Azerbaijani authorities have stopped their
“games” with respect to Southern Azerbaijan and even terminated the
authorization for State Committee on Affairs with the Diaspora to
work with local residents. In turn Tehran minimized support to Shia
anti-government Islamists. This is especially noticeable in Nardaran
suburb of Baku, where in the past anti-government protests took place
directly supported by the Iran.

It has to be noted that, unfortunately, the “Armenian card” is played
in the policy of “freezing” the disputes with Baku. During the visit of
Hassan Rouhani to Baku in autumn of 2014 the Iranian president first
time ever put his signature under an Azeri-Iranian declaration, which
contained a statement regarding territorial integrity of Azerbaijan
with respect to the NKR and criticized “aggression” against Azerbaijan.

It is a separate question what will happen to Iran’s policy toward
South Caucasus if the relations with the West normalize. Today it can
be argued that although the negotiation process itself has drastically
reduced the possibility of a military conflict between Iran and
the USA, its current results are rather negative for Iran-Armenia
relations, which entered a deep stagnation phase. This phase will
last as long as Tehran is focused on the problem of arranging its
relations with the West.

“Globus” analytical bulletin, No. 1, 2015

Return ________________________________ Another materials of author

WHAT MAKES US DIPLOMATS TALK OF CAUCASUS CRISIS-2014?[04.07.2014]
NEW TRANSPORT PROJECTS IN THE REGION[26.05.2014] GAS TRANSIT
PIPELINE IRAN-ARMENIA: A CHANGE OF DISCOURSE[18.03.2014]
AN OUTLOOK FOR IRANIAN GAS IN ARMENIA [06.02.2014] JOINING OF
ARMENIA TO THE CUSTOMS UNION WILL ALLOW PROVIDING LOW GAS RATES –
EXPERT[13.09.2013] CSTO AND COMMUNICATION SECURITY[01.08.2013]
IRAN AFTER THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS[01.07.2013] “IRANIAN GAS
CAN REPLACE RUSSIAN BUT IT IS MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE”[10.06.2013]
KARS-AKHLKALAKI-TBILISI RAILWAY AND ITS REGIONAL PROSPECTS
[25.04.2013] QAZVIN-RASHT-ASTARA OR IRAN-ARMENIA? [21.02.2013]

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

DUBAI COMMUNITY DONATES BLOOD FOR MEMORY

By Tamar Hacoyan on February 9, 2015

Friday is treated like a Sunday in the United Arab Emirates (UAE),
but nine days into 2015, which marks the Centennial of the Armenian
Genocide, the Dubai Blood Donation Center warmly opened its doors
for a private donation event by the Armenian community there.

The event was in support of the “Blood for Memory” (BFM) initiative
that aims to collect 1.5 million blood donations across the globe to
honor the 1.5 million victims of the Armenian Genocide.

Members of the Armenian community of Dubai donate “Blood for Memory”

In a country where the majority of residents are expatriates, this
gathering was special, for most participants did not know each other.

The event was organized via a public Facebook page. Yet, in no time
the blood donation center was transformed into some sort of community
center, with parents socializing while donating blood and kids playing
cheerfully in the hall.

Donating blood

None of the donors present had ever donated before. Until the BFM
initiative reached us, we hadn’t even realized how important blood
donations are. A car accident victim, for example, might need as
many as 45 donations to survive. Blood donations are free, they are
healthy. A donation takes only 20 minutes.

A global cause

A significant number of Armenians arrived in the United Arab Emirates
back in the 1950’s. Today, there are about 5,000 Armenians in the
UAE with 2 churches, community centers, and Sunday Schools. It was
a privilege to give “drops of life” to this country that has warmly
been hosting the Armenian community on its soil, while dedicating
the donations symbolically to the innocent victims of the Armenian
Genocide.

Among the donors was Tate Bakalian, a UAE resident with roots going
back to Moussa Ler and to Anjar in Lebanon. He reflected on the many
tragedies the Armenian people have gone through–the massacres, the
genocide, the World Wars, the Lebanese Civil War, the Artsakh War,
the Earthquake of 1988, and most recently the crisis in Syria. “We
often were in need for blood, a drop of life,” he told me. “100
years have passed since the Armenian Genocide, but we are still here
because they failed, and we are proud to share life.” Another donor
reminded us that how foreign nationals and nations saved and hosted
the Armenian survivors of the genocide. “It’s a noble gesture to give
back some life!”

But “Blood for Memory” aims to reach out to people of all origins. And
so the organizers were very touched to see an Indian family walk in,
saying they had come to “donate ‘Blood for Memory.'” The mother had
randomly come across the event page on Facebook. They had never heard
of Armenians and their story before. Now they have.

In addition to the many cheerful and intellectual events taking place
among the Armenian community in Dubai, the BFM donation event was a
particularly meaningful experience for everyone present.

Is it possible to get 1.5 million donations in 2015? We can do it,
if you join us now.

About BloodforMemory.org

“Blood for Memory” was launched in Geneva under the aegis of the
Swiss Committee for Armenian Organizations in commemoration of the
2015 Centennial. A growing number of celebrities, as well as some
Turkish intellectuals, are supporting the initiative. The website is
built on a volunteer basis and has been translated into 12 languages
to help achieve maximum international exposure. The project is looking
for satellite teams to be established across the globe to help reach
the goal of 1.5 million donations during 2015. For more information,
visit

From: A. Papazian