Author: Andres-Papazian

ANC-AUSTRALIA GETS UNANIMOUS PRAISE FROM NSW LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

November 23, 2012 – 12:43 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – In a formal motion adopted by the New South Wales
Legislative Council, the Armenian National Committee of Australia
received the unanimous praise of the House for its ongoing and
dedicated work.

The motion was moved the Hon. Marie Ficarra MLC as part of the formal
business of the day.

Upon hearing of the motion, ANC Australia Executive Director Vache
Kahramanian remarked: “This is a great surprise for the Armenian
National Committee of Australia. We are deeply humbled and honoured
for this recognition by New South Wales.”

This motion comes after the conclusion of the 2012 Advocacy Week
which yielded significant results to the Armenian-Australian community.

From: A. Papazian

THE CNN TURK IS FINED BECAUSE OF ARMENIAN JOURNALIST’S STATEMENT

12:57, 23 November, 2012

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 23, ARMENPRESS: The CNN Turk TV was punished because
of Armenian philologist living in Turkey, the journalist of “Taraf”
review Sevan Nshanyan’s statements on air. This is announced by
“Armenpress”, which cited the Turkish review “Zaman”.

Turkish Radio and Television Supervisory Authority has decided
to punish the Turkish TV because the Armenian journalist who was
invited to one program, spoke about the film “Innocence of Muslims”,
which recently extracting a great noise, the journalist criticized
prophet Mohammad, while the announcer did not interrupt him and
allowed to continue.

According to Turkish review a lot of viewers sent a letter of their
complaint to Radio and Television Supervisory Authority after
the program, who decided to punish the TV after watching video
transmission.

From: A. Papazian

NAGORNO KARABAKH AIRPORT OPERATION TO RESULT IN PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OF KARABAKH CONFLICT, MP SAYS

tert.am
23.11.12

The opening of Stepanakert airport will bring the Karabakh conflict
settlement to a peaceful end, Artak Zakaryan, chairman of NA’s Foreign
Relations Standing Committee, told the reporters on Friday.

Speaking about yesterday’s visit of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs to
Stepanakert and their refusal be the first passengers of the airport,
Zakaryan described it as “signs of balance”. “But all realize that
people have right to move freely and it is one of the fundamental
rights of a person. No one can say that the people of Nagorno Karabakh
Republic must be in blockade,” he said.

Zakaryan expressed conviction that if the civil jets start operating
in Stepanakert airport Azerbaijan will not shoot them down.

“It will be viewed as openly launching war and be criticized by the
international community. Minsk Group would not like the talks enter the
deadlock. Today Azerbaijan is trying to make the negotiation process
fail thinking it will give an opportunity to choose new format,”
the MP said.

The MP also said that though Azerbaijan continues making statements
on different platforms, but the experience shows that as compared
with the previous years the circle of aware people expands.

“Many parliaments avoid falling into Azerbaijan’s anti-propaganda
trap. It particularly happened after Safarov’s glorification.

Azerbaijan’s policy starts having zero result,” he said.

From: A. Papazian

SIFTING THROUGH ANATOLIA’S DARK SINS AND BRIGHT CULTURES
By SUSANNE GUSTEN

Published: November 21, 2012

ISTANBUL – Before emerging into the bright colors of Ahmet Gunestekin’s
celebration of the diversity of Anatolian cultures, visitors to his
exhibition step into the darkness of mourning for its victims.

Enlarge This Image [22iht-turkey-painter22a-articleInline.jpg]

Ahmet Gunestekin

Ahmet Gunestekin at work.

In a darkened front room of the exhibition, a video installation
flashes up the dates of dozens of massacres committed on Turkish
soil over the past century, one after another, each accompanied by
historical recordings of dirges and laments from the victims’ own
period and culture.

Armenian voices are heard wailing when the dates 1909 and 1915 are
visible followed by Alevi, Kurdish, Turkish, Greek and other laments.

The last date to flash up is 2012, as mothers wail in Kurdish and
Turkish for their sons killed on both sides in Turkey’s ongoing war
with Kurdish rebels.

“People are a little freaked out by it,” Mr. Gunestekin said in an
interview last week in Istanbul. “But I want visitors to pay their
respects to the peoples who have inspired my art before they tour
the exhibition.”

“This is Turkey’s reality, many sins have been committed here,”
he said. “We must face up to it.”

The show called “Yuzlesme” – best translated as “Facing Up” but blandly
rendered as “Encounters” by the catalog – opened in the Antrepo gallery
in Istanbul this month under the patronage of Yasar Kemal, the grand
old man of Turkish literature and Mr. Gunestekin’s longtime mentor.

It will be there until Dec. 30, before moving on to the Kurdish city
of Erbil in northern Iraq next year, followed by Venice, Berlin and
several stops in France.

Though Mr. Gunestekin’s work is not included in any Turkish museum
collection of contemporary artists, the opening night of his exhibition
drew a mix of prominent politicians, business leaders and respected
artists that was highly unusual for Turkey. The group included Kurdish
nationalist deputies and leading members of the conservative ruling
party as well as the Kemalist opposition.

“Turks and Kurds Come Together Over Art,” the Sabah newspaper declared
the next day.

“Only art can bring these people together,” said Mr. Gunestekin, who
is Kurdish and was raised by an Armenian step-grandmother orphaned
in the 1915 expulsions.

Born in the southeastern province of Batman in 1966, he can remember
a time when that region was not almost exclusively Kurdish with a
smattering of Turkish oil men and administrators – as it is now.

“In my childhood, my neighbors and friends in Batman were Armenian,
Syriac, Turkish, Arab – there were people from different cultures
and beliefs,” he said. “These people are a part of my art, because
I grew up with them.”

For nearly two decades, Mr. Gunestekin has been crisscrossing Turkey
with sketchbook and camera, visiting every one of its 81 provinces,
more than 700 districts and close to 4,000 towns and villages, by
his own count, to explore and document its plethora of cultures.

“This has become the foundation of my art, it is where I found my
colors,” he said.

The colors overwhelm the visitor from the moment he steps out of the
darkness of the video installation, in the feathers of the peacock
angel of the Yezidi religion, the light falling through stained-glass
church windows, and the carpets in Anatolian mosques.

In addition to the bold coloring, most of Mr. Gunestekin’s work also
bursts out of the canvas in other ways, with elements of sculpture
adding a third dimension to paintings.

Many of his paintings feature a technique in which dark patches
of irregular shape obscure some of the colors and figures beneath,
evoking the decayed frescoes and mosaics covered by peeling layers
of plaster in the many churches that have been turned into mosques
around Anatolia, as well as symbolizing the coercive assimilation of
other cultures into the prevailing Turkish identity.

Religious motifs abound, especially those common to several faiths,
like the legend of the seven sleepers, who slumbered for centuries in
an Anatolian cave, or the story of Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice
his son.

The Yezidi peacock angel meets with a snake in the Garden of Eden. In
Mr. Gunestekin’s work, beliefs mix and mingle as they have for
centuries in Anatolia, where Muslims still pray at the tombs of
Christian saints today.

Greek and Mesopotamian mythology provide other recurring themes in
the artist’s work, as does the sun, which was worshiped in Anatolia
long before monotheism.

“The culture of this region is 6,000 years old,” Mr. Gunestekin
said. “It is my purpose as an artist to bring it into the 21st
century.”

But in his obeisance to Anatolia and its cultural heritage, the
artist has long been at odds with the mainstream of contemporary art
in Turkey, which since the founding of the Turkish Republic has looked
to the West for inspiration.

“That is the reason why they would never look at me next door,” Mr.

Gunestekin said, pointing a thumb over his shoulder at the neighboring
Istanbul Modern Museum, one of several museums of contemporary art
in Istanbul that prominent industrialist families have endowed in
the last decade.

“They never recognized me as an artist. They said, ‘He is a villager,
not an artist,”‘ he said of the Turkish art establishment.

“Only now is this attitude beginning to crack,” he said.

Mr. Gunestekin says this exhibition, the largest single artist show
ever staged for a Turkish painter, is the turning point in his career.

The change in the tastes of Turkish society comes at a time when
Turkey itself has begun to shift away from its founding policy of
assimilation in the name of national unity.

In a country where it was considered a crime to acknowledge ethnic
or religious differences just a decade ago, Kurdish is now spoken on
state television, restored Armenian churches are being reopened by
government officials, and Syriac Christians are returning from exile
in Europe to rebuild their villages in Anatolia.

“Turkey is living through its most democratic and freest period ever,”
said Mr. Gunestekin. “I know some Kurdish politicians do not agree,
but I think today’s Turkey is a miracle.”

Still, the turning point may have come too late to save the mosaic
of cultures in Anatolia.

“Unfortunately, I am witnessing the end,” Mr. Gunestekin said. “A
generation ago, many Yezidis lived in Batman or in Mardin, but
todayyou won’t find a hundred in the whole region.”

“The Syriacs have gone, too, after being robbed of their property
and their land and their rights. Peoples who have lived together for
hundreds of years have been driven away by intolerance.”

The thought does not stop him from working night and day to
churn out prolific quantities of work, sleeping only four hours
a night to do so. “If you come from a people that is oppressed
and marginalized, you try that much harder to make yourself heard
and understood, tobe recognized,” Mr. Gunestekin said. “You work
harder, you struggle, you produce more, simply to express yourself,
to be heard and tobe seen.”

A version of this article appeared in print on November 22, 2012,
in The International Herald Tribune.

From: A. Papazian

GAGUIK TSAROUKIAN PRET A ASSUMER SES AMBITIONS PRESIDENTIELLES
Gari

armenews.com
vendredi 23 novembre 2012

L’homme d’affaires Gaguik Tsarukian, leader du Parti Armenie prospère
(BHK), la deuxième formation du Parlement armenien, a confirme a demis
mots mercredi 21 novembre son intention de se presenter aux prochaines
presidentielles face au president sortant Serge Sarkissian, mais en
evitant de donner plus de precisions les modalites de sa candidature.

M. Tsarukian a indique qu’il avait deja decide comment le BHK, qui est
la principale force d’opposition depuis qu’eil a refuse de renouveler
son contrat avec le Parti republicain (HHK) du president Sarkissian
en vue d’un gouvernement de coalition au lendemain des legislatives
de mai, allait participer au scrutin prevu en fevrier 2013. “J’ai
personellement pris ma decision”, a-t-il fait savoir dans un entretien
accorde a Zham.am publication en ajoutant : “mais dans la mesure où
notre legislation electorale m’autorise a ne pas la rendre publique
[pour le moment], je tiens a profiter de cette opportunite”.

L’oligarque a ajoute qu’il n’y avait aucune urgence a preciser sa
position, d’autant qu’il prenait son temps pour “ecouter les points
de vue et propositions des autres formations politiques partenaires”.

Selon Naira Zohrabian, une responsable du parti de M.Tsarukian, la
decision tant attendue devrait etre annoncee dans les tous prochains
jours. “Le conseil politique [du BHK] publiera sa decision dans
les jours a venir”, a indique Mme Zohrabian a l’antenne du service
armenien de RFE/RL, en ajoutant qu’il “faut comprendre que la decision
personnelle de Gaguik Tsarukian est aussi très importante”. Mme
Zohrabian comme un autre haut responsable du BHK, l’ancien minister
des affaires etrangères Vartan Oskanian, ont souligne que la majorite
des adherants du parti etait favorable a une candidature de M.

Tsarukian a la presidente. M. Oskanian, qui avait indique que
l’eventualite de sa propre candidature avait ete aussi discutee au
sein de la direction du BHK ces dernières semaines, a laisse entendre
qu’il ne porterait pas candidat, confirmant ainsi son intention
de s’effacer derrière le leader du parti. Ni M. Tsaroukian, ni ses
proches collaborateurs, n’avaient pourtant voulu affirmer que les
debats en cours fermaient definitivement la porte au soutien par le
BHK de la candidature de M. Sarkissian a sa reelection et ouvraient la
voie a une candidature du parti au scrutin de fevrier 2013. Le parti
de M.Tsarukian avait un moment laisse circuler les ruleurs selon
lesquelles il soutiendrait une candidature de l’ancien president
Robert Kotcharian si celui-ci decidait de briguer un autre mandate.

Mais ce soutien ne semble plus a l’ordre du jour d’autant que M.

Kotcharian s’est desolidarise des positions du BHK concernant la mise
en place d’un regime parlementaire en Armenie.

vendredi 23 novembre 2012, Gari ©armenews.com

From: A. Papazian

PR Newswire
November 23, 2012 Friday 5:45 AM EST

Spain and Azerbaijan Committed to Building Trust and Increase
Cooperation While Raising Awareness About Frozen Conflict in
Nagorno-Karabakh

MADRID, November 23, 2012

The importance of building mutual trust between Spain and Azerbaijan
in the areas of peace and security, energy and trade was highlighted
at a conference entitled “Azerbaijan in Today’s Europe” on Thursday in
Madrid, Spain. It was further announced that a new resolution on the
situation in Nagorno-Karabakh would be tabled soon in the Spanish
Senate to raise awareness of the long-lasting conflict.

The conference was the initiative of Elkhan Suleymanov, the Head of
the Azerbaijani delegation to EURONEST Parliamentary Assembly, who
brought a delegation comprising of seven MPs, three of them
representing the opposition in Azerbaijan.

Welcoming the Azerbaijani delegation, the President of the Commission
of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of the Senate, Alejandro
Munoz-Alonso, said that Azerbaijan was a vital part of the European
Union’s Neighbourhood Policy and reiterated the EU’s commitment to
deepen economic and political integration with Azerbaijan, while
anchoring the country further to EU values.

During a meeting with Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Garcia
Margallo and the Vice-President of the Spanish Senate, Juan Jose
Lucas, on the sidelines of the conference, Suleymanov extended an
invitation for them to visit Azerbaijan, stressing that “Azerbaijan
and Spain are both multicultural countries, which are situated in
regions of great geo-political significance.”

The Azerbaijani MP further added that the level of relations could be
enhanced not only in trade and energy cooperation but also in other
areas, such as agriculture and tourism. Referring to Azerbaijan’s long
parliamentary tradition – despite the rupture during the Soviet era –
Suleymanov said that both countries could benefit from one another’s
experience in civil society development.

The conference, which was hosted by Spanish Senator Jose Maria
Chiquillo, brought together over 180 distinguished participants
including 80 senators and their deputies as well as prominent
academics, business people and NGO representatives.

In his keynote address, Suleymanov pointed out that the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict inflicted material damage in excess of 431
billion dollars on Azerbaijan and decried the fact that none of the
resolutions adopted by the United Nations, European Parliament,
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), OSCE and other
international organisations calling for the settlement of the conflict
within the principles of territorial integrity, have been fulfilled.

The conference witnessed a lively debate on legal considerations of UN
resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh, which were further discussed by
Senator Jose Maria Chiquillo and the Azerbaijani Vice-Prime Minister
and Chairman of the State Committee dealing with refugees and
internally displaced persons (IDP), Ali Hasanov.

“There are serious concerns in Azerbaijani society about the
indifference of the international community, especially the passive
attitude of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe,” said
Suleymanov, arguing that discriminatory policies and double standards
were applied by PACE which, for instance, has remained silent about
the Armenian boycott of the Subcommittee on Nagorno-Karabakh since
2005. He also drew attention to the Monitoring Committee report of the
Council of Europe on Azerbaijan under preparation and said that the
rapporteur “should demand the restoration of rights of hundreds of
thousands of Azerbaijani IDPs for more than 20 years and the use of
sanctions against Armenia.”

Mexican parliamentarian and Member of the Foreign Affairs Commission,
Jesus Ramirez Renge, explained that a resolution on Nagorno-Karabakh
was recently adopted in the Mexican parliament, condemning the
occupation of Azerbaijani territory by Armenia and the genocide
committed by Armenian armed forces in the Azerbaijani town of Khojaly.
It also called on Armenia to implement UN Security Council
resolutions, to withdraw Armenian troops from occupied territories and
to stop the violence against the civilian population in Azerbaijan,
while stressing the existence of a million refugees and internally
displaced persons in Azerbaijan.

From: A. Papazian

Sociologist: 195 cases of suicide reported in Armenia in 2011

November 24, 2012 – 19:47 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – According to official data, 195 cases of suicide
were reported in Armenia in 2011, sociologist said.
As Aharon Adibekyan told a press conference, teenagers and middle-aged
people usually take the step, adding that 8 out of 10 change their
mind after physiological assistance.
Psychologist Mihrdat Madatyan, in turn, deemed psychological
indifference as one of the reasons behind cases of suicide.
He further noted teenagers as a most vulnerable group, stressing the
need for parents to help their children in overcoming obstacles.

From: A. Papazian

A More Actionable Road Map Towards a Resolution of the Armenian Genocide
Issue

*

*
12:33, November 24, 2012

By* Shahe Yeni-Komshian, M.D.*

This is a paper/article that describes the components of Armenian national
challenges, with a particular focus on a roadmap for a comprehensive
resolution to the Armenian Genocide.

Overall this is a piece of synthesis, bringing together different but
viable strands of thought and approach, aiming to generate larger coherence
in our political thinking.

There is a definite effort to prioritize our challenges; there is emphasis
on the necessity to focus on the judicial angle in our fight, and some
attempt to identify action plans.

My aim is to initiate public discussion about the topic and also bring
these ideas to the widest possible audience. It may hopefully spark and
initiate a discussion by thoughtful minds to possibly start a new, serious
effort to develop and pursue a realistic road map for the ultimate
realization of our National goals.

**********

*INTRODUCTION*

Most Armenians in the Republic of Armenia and the Diaspora have a
reasonable understanding of the political landscape that our nation is
facing today and are cognizant of the realities that are challenges to our
national interests. Unlike in the past, almost all Armenians expect
realistic solutions to those challenges.

*The inherently acknowledged national aspiration is to achieve Long Term
Viability for the Armenian Nation, with the following OBJECTIVES:*

**

The above objectives represent aspirations and not necessarily strategies.
Do Armenians have acommon understanding of how to set the agenda to
undertake solutions to our aspiration? Do we have an *ARMENIAN NATIONAL
RIGHTS’ ADVOCACY GUIDE*, a sense of what challenge has the greatest urgency
and significance to the nation? Do we have *a ROAD MAP* in how to achieve
our goals?

The answers to the above questions are beginning to take shape.**

*PAN-ARMENIAN COMMON AGENDA***

The agenda for the Armenian nation is simple yet complex at the same time.
It is simple, because it seeks the viability of the entire Armenian nation.
Complex, because the entire Armenian nation is comprised of two different
and yet complementary entities; the Republic of Armenia which represents
the state and the Diaspora which comprises people settled far from their
ancestral homelands, each with different immediate priorities.

For a while this duality created confusion which led to a non-coherent and
non- homogeneous political course. In the past we did not have a vision of
how to organically, practically and strategically link them together. Our
efforts to rectify the above challenges remained static for a long time;
the inertia hurt our cause.

The good news is that in the past 3 years a louder quest for justice has
evolved on all levels, thereby in some cases transforming our demands from
a vague and unclear strategy into a more distinct one.

We now realize that:

a) All three objectives for the Armenian nation’s viability, i.e.
strong and healthy Armenian state, solutions to the unresolved injustices
(Genocide, Karabagh and Javakhk), and the strengthening of the viability of
an organized Armenian Diaspora, are intuitive links to the same chain and
are intertwined with the ultimate fate of the Armenian nation*. *There is
now conviction about the need to create a coordinated policy between the
three.

b) The anchor of a viable Armenian Nation is the first aspiration –
namely a healthier/stronger state i.e. Republic of Armenia. There is now
ample realization by all, that the socioeconomic deterioration of current
day Armenia, the present day injustice, is a national security threat, and
is rapidly becoming a dire challenge hence requiring imminent short term as
well as long term strategic prioritization. There is also an undisputed
realization by leaders, scholars and the public at large, that on the
geopolitical level the claim to the Karabagh (NKR) liberated territories,
the territories referred to by some as the `security zone’, and the case
for *de jure *recognition are an imminent national political priority. The
strengthening of the Armenian state is hence the most important Armenian
agenda and that is why today’s pan- Armenian political view is clear about
the fact that the viability of the Republic of Armenia is the core priority
of our national challenges. Issues of the political inertia, the vast
emigration and the emptying out of villages nearby the borders and the
socio-economic injustices are big challenges for a modern country to
survive, and yet have not been fully appreciated. Hopefully the social and
economic injustices within the Republic of Armenia, the necessary changes
in the foreign policy of the state of Armenia and in its strategic approach
to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict would take a more actionable priority
soon. This must be addressed in a separate paper.

Prioritizing the core component is not of course the same as excluding the
others.

Because of the centennial, the national injustice of the Genocide has
become a parallel political priority and a succinct transformation is
occurring with the quest for Genocide justice. A realization has emerged
that although the universe of the Armenian nation contains more than
genocide recognition, this historic injustice cannot be irrelevant and not
only does it have a very strong psychological component for more than half
of the Armenian nation, but the restitution of this historic injustice may
have important contemporary dimensions as it relates to state-to-state
Armeno-Turkish relations.

This paper makes an attempt to explain the current status and, at the end,
offers some actionable suggestions.**

*DEMAND FOR JUSTICE FOR THE GENOCIDE AND ARMENIAN RIGHTS*

The next three years preceding the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide are
going to be the time for the Armenian nation to redouble its efforts toward
the pursuit of justice for the Armenian Genocide. Until recently most of
our efforts for the Genocide Resolution have had a psychological basis,
with an emotional and subjective focus. We have had commemorative programs,
requiem services and speeches every year on the day of April 24th all
throughout the globe. We have organized demonstrations. We have received
repetitive proclamations from state Governments in favor of the Armenian
Genocide recognition and all that made us feel better. During the last
decade more concrete efforts were taken in our quest to obtain Recognition.
Lately there has been some rhetoric and discussion about Reparations,
without much clarification of action plans. And sadly, the geopolitics of
Anatolia and the Middle East has prevented the Armenian side from creating
common interests between the needs of any superpower and the Right for
Justice to the Armenians.

More specifically, until 2010 our approach to pressuring Turkey into
accepting culpability of the Genocide followed a rather narrow strategy:
First, the focus on the injustice has been solely that of Recognition;
second, the efforts to pressure Turkey have been indirect, namely by
creating international awareness of the committed injustice with the hope
that the World’s acknowledgement of the Genocide would inevitably lead to
Turkey’s acceptance.

In reality, the Armenian Genocide Right and the quest for the Injustice is
an elaborate process. Its components can be summarized as
follows[1]
:

1. Fight against Turkey’s denial and obstruction of justice

2. Recognition: To obtain a formal apology

3. Reparations: property restitution and financial compensation

4. Territorial issues: Delineation of frontiers and borders

5. Right to return to ancestral lands

We should emphasize that the customary `sequential’ approach – recognition,
then reparations, then restitution – is a fairy tale approach. It is not
suitable for current-day politics. The above compartmentalization is simply
for explaining the complexity of our quest. The solution to the injustice
may be achieved by a proactive attack on all levels, simultaneously if
necessary. The point is that recognition is no longer viewed as the end
goal .There are certain strategic configurations, whereby reparations
activities, by appearing even more radical, could actually *enhance* the
drive for genocide recognition. This issue potentially may become a true
diplomatic setback for Turkey.

Also, we need to highlight that territorial issues and the Right to return
are processes much more convoluted than Recognition and Reparation.
Although primarily linked to the act of Genocide, solutions to territorial
issues are more complex on the legal front. This is because of
international legalities created from the Treaty of Kars, the land given to
Turkey that included the ancient city of Ani and Mount Ararat, and the
present political reality of the independent Republic of Armenia as a
sovereign state. From the perspective of international law, Armenians have
many valid rights but the territorial component of the injustice may need a
different legal strategy, albeit complementary to that of Genocide
recognition/reparation.

The quest for Reparation, or the journey towards that goal, is in itself
multidimensional:

– Restitution of property, national and personal: Given the Deportation
and Liquidation legislation passed by the Turkish Government (see below),
Armenians have been robbed from their assets. The assets lost comprise
Church and national properties/that of the Millet, as well as personal
properties.
– Financial or monetary compensation that have not been adequately
appraised yet.
– The effect of the Genocide on our cultural heritage and the continuous
threat to our viability as a nation, in view of our dispersion in western
countries, with ongoing risk to our language, culture and identity. This is
what we call the `White Genocide’.

Given the current legal status of Armenian properties in Turkey, Armenians
realize that the issue of reparation is a tall task. Legislation in 1929
gave the right to title and deed to the new Turkish possessors of any
vacant land such as fields, orchards, and farmland held for 15 years since
1914, and any buildings or other real estate held for 10 years since 1919,
thereby legally Turkifying all seized Armenian assets and properties linked
to the Genocide[2].
But that is exactly the focus our legal fight.

The Armenian side also well understands the legal difference between
Armenian properties seized after 1937 from those linked to the Genocide,
because several more Armenian properties, many of them belonging to
Armenian Charitable Foundations the patriarchate included, were
`nationalized’ by the Turkish government in later years. The legal status
of the latter is therefore different.

*Road Map towards a More Comprehensive Approach*

The quest for Reparations for a positive conclusion of the Genocide
Injustice can be fought on the International level as well as in Turkey.
The strategy has 3 different vehicles: Awareness building, political
pressure, and legal action. Since the 1970’s we have gradually built up the
first two vehicles of our fight. We are now building a cohesive strategy
for the third vehicle, that of legal action.

*Awareness Building:* The target has been Armenian constituencies in the
Diaspora and to a lesser extent in the Republic of Armenia. We continue to
work in mobilizing the media, civil society and more and more the NGOs of
international communities.

*Political Pressure:* Political pressure and lobbying is essential to our
success, but we should assert and emphasize that all countries base their
decisions upon their own national interests and not Armenian interests. We
should be careful with their motives. Yet, the political will of
governments and geopolitical changes in and around Turkey is pivotal for
our success. The US House Resolution 306 and the French Genocide Bill are
some examples of political pressure (mostly lobbying) in 2011, by which
Armenians capitalized and managed to score partial successes. As for
Turkey’s involvement in the rapidly evolving Syrian crisis, it is an
example of a geopolitical change that may potentially be a stalemate for
Turkey, to which we Armenians should be well prepared and take advantage.

*Judicial Demands*: This is the cornerstone of the new strategy. *The
roadmap* to resolving the injustice via the judicial route is based on a 2
pronged approach: International pressure on Turkey and exploitation of
Turkey’s internal political vulnerabilities.

*International pressure on Turkey*:

The ultimate outcome of political awareness and political pressure will be
in the form of a judicial claim, bringing a lawsuit against the Government
of Turkey*.* In order to bring a lawsuit, the following clarifications are
being made:

– *Clear characterization of the Injustice. Does the Injustice have a
legal principle? *The historic and moral validity is not even a question.
– *Clarification of the Judicial Forum: International vs. Turkish forum?* Is
it the International Court of Justice (UN) or the International Criminal
Court? European Court of Human Rights or UN General Assembly (for an
advisory opinion)? Turkish courts or Turkish domestic legislation? Note
that Individual claims may be brought to the European Court of Human
Rights, whereas claims of land between states are ultimately settled
between states through the International Court of Justice.
– *Who is the plaintiff? *A Diasporan Committee, the Istanbul
Patriarchate, the Catholicosate of Cilicia? The Republic of Armenia? Also
note that simultaneously, different plaintiffs may present different
complaints.
– *Is there adequate engagement of the political will of the Governments
(superpowers included), and is there mobilization of civil society?*
– *Does the lawsuit require mediation, and if so by whom?*

Taking into consideration the present political landscape and geopolitical
interests, this is not an easy task. In designing the roadmap towards a
resolution, it is essential that the Armenian side coordinates the actions
of its different stakeholders, groups that can present a legal claim for
the injustice and reclaim assets. The following entities have historic
rights to their assets:

– The Patriarchate of Istanbul assets
– The Catholicosate of Cilicia assets
– The Catholicosate of Echmiadzin assets
– A Diaspora Body representing the collective asset demands (Group
Reparation) for lost personal assets.
– And of course the Government of Armenia and its demands

It is to be stressed again that when it comes to international law, the
strategy to demand Armenian properties lost due to the Genocide is
different from that of comprehensive land and borders’ discussion between
Turkey and present-day Republic of Armenia.

There is also the realization that there are 2 types of lawsuits and two
judicial approaches: *Group Reparation approach and Individual compensation
approach.*

Here are examples of some current and potential lawsuits through plaintiffs
representing the Rights of the Armenian Nation against the Republic of
Turkey.

– *Examples of Individual Compensation Lawsuit: Genocide Related
Insurance Claims class action suit: *The CA 9th Circuit case Movsesian
v. Versicherung AG. Also, many individual Armenians have *cadastral
copies* of their old properties and some are making individual requests
to the Government of Turkey.
– *Examples of Group Reparation Lawsuits: Lawsuits by the Patriarchate
of Constantinople related to Genocide confiscated properties*; *Potential
lawsuit by the Catholicosate of Cilicia related to the return of Armenian
assets seized in 1915; Potential Legal Demands from the Republic of Armenia
*

The following should be emphasized: Individual reparations through lawsuits
do not satisfy our national quest for justice for the Genocide. Only Group
reparation lawsuits would be considered to include a reparative dimension.
None of the above lawsuits have been filed within a comprehensive Genocide
Resolution context. The Armenian side realizes well that in the larger
picture, Turkey may utilize minor concessions to individuals to the
detriment of the larger Armenian Right.

*Alternative but Complementary Strategic Approach- More Focus on Turkish
Politics and Society:*

It is also necessary to exploit the internal vulnerabilities from which
Turkey suffers today and such strategies are also being analyzed:

– *EU and Turkey*: Some European Union politicians who are politically
sensitive to the Armenian Genocide issue have pressed Turkey into formally
recognizing the Armenian Genocide as a precondition for joining the EU,
mainly for their own national interests.
– *Hrant Dink strategy*: The essence of his strategy was in the
transformation of the Turkish society from within, and the focus and target
of his strategy is the Turkish citizen. Dink was instrumental in getting
Turks to discuss the Armenian Genocide; nonetheless, Dink also reserved
some criticism for the Armenian diaspora, for its insistence on enforcing a
claim of genocide without engaging the modern Turkish people. Working to
further those changes presently going on inside Turkey and to capitalize on
them deserves greater strategic attention.
– *Turkish Domestic Legislation strategy*: There are at least some
100,000 Muslim Armenians in the body of the Hamshen, close to a million
Armenians who were forcibly converted to Islam to save their necks, some 20
million Kurds, and many of the disenchanted in Turkey, who present a
political peril to the Turkish government. Exploiting the internal
vulnerabilities from which Turkey continues to suffer today is essential
and deserves full consideration. We should aim to create a sentiment in
Turkey positive enough to engage the Turkish Parliament to pass
pro-Armenian Turkish laws. A tall order indeed, but in due time, perhaps
better relations are needed with the Hamshen and Muslim Armenians within
Turkey, as well as the Kurds and the Alevites. Turkey’s involvement in
Syria may perhaps open a door.

We should emphasize again how important is for us to reshape our political
thinking, and realize that for us Armenians, Turkey’s internal challenges
and contradictions have to become much more actively sought strategies.

*SUMMARY: PAN ARMENIAN RIGHTS’ ADVOCACY and its REVIVED ACTIONABLE
STRATEGY*

The most appropriate Armenian Rights Advocacy roadmap for the next 10 years
is a multipronged approach with strategic prioritization:

A. There is consensus to view the long term viability of the Armenian
nation from a pan-Armenian angle, whereby there is a coordinated policy
between the emphasis to resolve the immediate needs of today’s Republic of
Armenia, the injustices of the past, and the future viability needs of both
the Diaspora and the homeland, realizing well of the strategic necessity of
a strong Republic of Armenia. The establishment of modern reshaped
governance in the Republic of Armenia with less feudal tendencies and the
enhancement ofsocio-economic benefits to assist all sectors of Armenian
society would be a most natural positive requirement. Most Armenians also
believe that change in the Armenian state’s foreign policy and strategic
approach to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict beyond the “Madrid Principles”
and the OSCE Minsk Group would create a new basis toward a lasting
settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic’s status and security.

B. As for the Genocide, the100th anniversary is a one-time opportunity that
cannot and will not become a replay of what has gone on countless times
before, i.e. be limited to demonstrations and solidarity declarations for
its recognition. The Genocide injustice is multifaceted and the quest for
its solution is complex and multidimensional .It needs a sophisticated
approach:

1. These past few years there has been some commotion in our political
discourse, and reparations are now being proposed as a course to run in
coordination with the usual focus on genocide recognition. We argue that
Genocide recognition is no longer viewed as the end goal, that reparations
activities could actually enhance the drive for genocide recognition and
that this historic injustice has important contemporary dimensions for
state-to-state Armeno-Turkish relations. Notwithstanding the complex issue
of borders, how would Armeno-Turkish relations (state-to-state) be affected
if Turkey were no longer an unrepentant aggressor but actually `on
the
hook’ for genocide?

2. The Genocide has two outstanding issues, two different levels of
injustices, namely the fight for the injustice of the Genocide and that of
the lost Armenian lands. Although complementary, the objectives and the
strategy to address the two issues are different.

3. The first of the outstanding issues remains the Turkish state’s
obstruction of the truth. It consists of the Armenian nation’s fight for
Recognition of the Armenian Genocide and the fight for Reparations for the
Armenian institutional properties as well as to the descendants of
Armenians who lost their lives and properties during the 1915-1923 Armenian
Genocide. In this regard, the judicial front should take a much more
imminent strategic relevance.

4. The second issue is the satisfactory legal resolution with regard to the
lost Armenian lands from the Genocide and also from the Treaty of Kars, in
other words the delineation of Turkish-Armenian borders. The latter is a
more complex process and the preparation of its legal basis will take
longer. We have historic rights but the success of this step is inherently
linked to a politically strong Republic of Armenia. This reemphasizes and
validates our aforementioned theory that all 3 objectives for the Armenian
nation’s viability are intuitively linked to the same chain, and yet the
most important of those is clearly the sustainability of a strong Armenian
state.

5. The judicial agenda of the Genocide resolution has begun. The
Patriarchate of Istanbul and the Catholicosate of
Cilicia[3]
have
already initiated this process.

6. Alternative and complementary strategic approaches that seek to exploit
the internal vulnerabilities, from which Turkey suffers today, have come to
be appreciated as part of our political discourse. They should be pursued
with more effort and conviction.

7. We have also realized that in addition to the resources and manpower of
Diasporan organizations, we must engage the expertise of Armenian and
non-Armenian professional experts in the field, who can assist in
formulating as well as implementing the initiatives necessary to achieve
our objectives. The preparation of a relevant cadre of Armenians in public
policy and international law has begun, but there is further need for such
committed Armenians, citizens of a variety of nations, to get engaged in
public policy matters and others to become experts in international law.

*THE AGENDA FOR THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE*

Since the 1970s much progress has been achieved by the Armenian nation, but
Turkey’s denialist Genocide efforts and its aggressive diplomatic influence
are a formidable challenge for us. We need to be more focused and creative
in our quest to resolve our injustice.

In order to have a potentially successful agenda, two preconditions must be
met:

*1. The Armenian government’s critical role and involvement in the
pursuit
of our National Goals’ agenda:* In our efforts to create a more actionable
roadmap, it is critical for the leadership of the Armenian government to
take an ownership role of the aforementioned National Armenian goals, far
beyond symbolic measures. This once again emphasizes how important is the
viability and sustainably of the Republic, something that is a challenge
today. A clear position about the Genocide and the Armenian nation’s Rights
and a new strategy that is in sync with its foreign policy is soon to be
expected from the government of the Republic of Armenia. Closer
coordination between more engaging strategies of the government of Armenia
and those of the Diaspora is a necessity. The creation of a Genocide
Centennial Committee does not satisfy such a requirement.

*2. Clarification of the legitimate body representing the interests of the
Diaspora and that of the Armenian Nation: *The idea is not new, but is
politically and strategically essential. To obtain Reparations, the
Armenian Nation has to either negotiate with the Republic of Turkey or
submit a claim(s) to an International or Turkish court. In either case, the
Armenian side has to have clear and explicit negotiation positions,
strategy, and a legitimate representative body. In order to begin the
implementation phase of the road map, we need to develop a pan-Armenian
structure in the Diaspora that represents the aspirations of all Armenians
with one voice. We also need to develop the human and financial resources
necessary to pursue the realization of the stated goals of the road map. As
a starter, a revised, open mindset is necessary from all political,
religious and other national institutions, and it is the imminent task of
our leadership to make such a structure a reality. This Diasporan structure
will be later followed by the formation of a legitimate body representing
the entire Armenian nation (Diaspora and the Republic).

The above two preconditions will immensely help the implementation of a
more legally oriented actionable road map. In this regard, the following
points need to be emphasized*
*

*1. The entire judicial portfolio of the Armenian Genocide, if it is to be
presented in front of international judicial courts, requires professional
preparation. What is important is to do our homework, and before officially
presenting our case, to first assess the internationally acceptable **legal
validity **of the Genocide claim. *In parallel, a separate analysis about
the legality of the current Turkish-Armenian borders is to be addressed.
These legal consulting opinions have to be presented to the representatives
of the Armenian nation by a *group of respectable international law jurists
and top of the line, reputable expert lawyers, who would be commissioned by
the Armenian nation specifically for this task.* Most of the jurists’ team
is presumed to be non-Armenian, but some have to be Armenian and some
should be representatives of the Republic of Armenia.**

*2. The next priority is the selection of the international court that is
considered most advantageous to rule in favor of our claim. *Consultation
with the above team of jurists and lawyers is essential to select the most
proper international court of justice, and begin the process of requesting
a legal opinion in the matter of our Genocide.

*3. *The mere addition of Reparations as part of the Genocide injustice is
not a game changer.* Detailed chronicling of seized Armenian properties and
a solid appraisal of all Genocide losses is a necessity.* To properly
compensate the victims of the Genocide (or their heirs) it is essential to
have solid documentation and actuarial analysis. Scholars have begun this
work and in fact Professor Kevorkian has initiated the task of developing
detailed and meticulous records of the genocidal process. However,
International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law experts have to be
consulted and retained for this purpose. With respect to right to financial
compensation, legal professional accounting input, beyond and above
scholarly research, is essential.

4. *Prioritization of funding: *In order to achieve the desired outcome,
our funding priorities and efforts, as the Armenian nation and people, are
to be directed towards judicial priorities of the Genocide. This effort
should be pan-Armenian and must begin soon.

5. *Ongoing Political Pressure:* Legal opinions alone, even from
international courts, are not enough for Turkey to abide by them. A
positive verdict is necessary but insufficient for implementation; and
judicial laws should be accepted and ratified by legislative powers. That
is why political pressure on Turkey is essential not only by Armenians but
also by superpower nations. In such key countries, continuous efforts to
create a national interest and a foreign policy that is synchronous to
those of Armenian national interests should go hand in hand with our
judicial agenda.

*[1]* Professor Stephan Astourian (Moderator): The webcast of the ASP
conference on “The Presence of the Past: Legal Dimensions of
Armenian-Turkish Relations” (U.C. Berkeley, Sunday, October 2, 2011. The
videos can be accessed at
(morningsession) and at
(afternoon session).
*[2]* UÄ=9Fur Ã=9Cmit Ã=9Cngör, `Confiscation & Colonization: The Young Turk Seizure
of Armenian Property,’ posted in the Armenian Weekly magazine, April 2011:
6-13.
*[3]* His Holiness Aram I, Catholicos of Cilicia `The Armenian Genocide:
>From Recognition to Compensation,’ Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia,
Antelias, Lebanon, Feb. 23-25, 2012, on Feb. 25.

From: A. Papazian

Azerbaijan tries to recompense the absence of the main characteristics
of the fighting efficiency of its army by means of the exaggerated
military budget

12:33, 24 November, 2012

YEREVAN, NOVEMBER 23, ARMENPRESS. The presence of unbearable social
and psychological conditions in the Azerbaijan army, alongside with
the high level of the acts of violence among the servicemen, the
increasing number of rapes, victims, and accidents cause doubts
regarding the ability of the authorities of this country to assess the
present situation.

As reports “Armenpress” in accordance with the information of
“Doctrine” Journalists’ Military Research Center only in the course of
the 11 months of 2012 Azerbaijani army has lost 87 servicemen, of
which 62 lost their lives not in the course of military actions. The
number of the victims of the Azerbaijani armed forces for 2012 rose
for 45 percent if compared with the average rates for 2003-2011.

Azerbaijan appears in an n awkward situation each time its authorities
make announcements about conquering Artsakh by means of the military
power and spreading illusions about the strength and might of their
armed forces, which they turned into an “incubator for Safarovs”.

Being deprived of the main characteristics of the fighting efficiency
of its army Azerbaijan has nothing to do, but to draw a parallel
between the strength of the army and the enormous sizes of the
military budget.

From: A. Papazian

Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Nov 21 2012

Can Germany be a model for Turkey in confrontation with past atrocities?

ORHAN KEMAL CENGÝZ
[email protected]

I have been in Berlin, Germany for the last few days. We, some
journalists and human rights activists from Turkey, have been invited
here by the European Academy Berlin, with the financial support of the
Germany’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for a conference titled
“Difficult Heritage of the Past.”

We are here to observe how Germany faced its problematic past
including the atrocities committed by Nazis.

Before attending the conference I had a few prejudices about Germany’s
progress in facing its Nazi past. Firstly, I thought, this was an
involuntary confrontation, Germans were forced to look at their
troubled past by external powers who had them on their knees after
World War II. So how could they be a model for any country that will
face its past voluntarily?

I was also quite prejudiced about whether they really did confront
their past. If they confronted their past how was it possible then
that many neo-Nazis still live in the country? Did we not witness the
collaboration between members of Germany’s intelligence agency and
neo-Nazis who committed serial murders of Muslims, and have been
dubbed the “kebab murders” since most of the immigrant victims were
running kebab houses?

For the question of involuntary confrontation with the past, I came to
the conclusion that I was doing a little bit of injustice to Germany
in this regard. They may have started this process after a devastating
defeat, but it is clear that Germans created a new world, which is
basically based on an endless process of remembering, commemorating
and confronting the past. I was extremely impressed and touched when I
saw a particular wall in one of the kindergarten classrooms in Berlin.
The school is in the Bavyera region. The wall is based on a very
innovative idea of remembering the past. Every year teachers wants
their students to look at an album of the Jews who once lived in this
neighborhood and were taken out of their homes by Nazis. Students are
requested to draw parallels between their own lives and with one of
these Jews who were exiled from there. The students then identify
themselves with one of these Jews and write their name on a brick,
later on they put these bricks, one on top of the other. There is
already quite a high wall there. This school alone showed how
“remembering” has become a part of daily life in Germany.

As soon as I saw it I really wished that one day our children would do
a similar thing. I imagined children in Ýstanbul building a wall by
writing on bricks the names of Armenian intellectuals who were taken
from their homes on April 24, 1915 and never came back again. I really
wish that we can do a similar thing in Turkey in the near future.

I still could not find answers to the second question, namely
neo-Nazis and their connection with the intelligence agency; however,
I observed that confronting the past is a clear state policy here in
Germany. Museums, exhibitions and the school curriculum all show how
the state apparatus invested in this endeavor. So little by little I
started to realize that Turkey can significantly benefit from the
German experience on this difficult terrain of confrontation with the
past. While I was attending the program I also developed some ideas
for a new framework that I think might by quite useful for Turkey. I
will continue sharing my observations on this learning tour with you.

From: A. Papazian