Author: Ara Felekian

What the Turkish election means for Armenia-Turkey relations

Ara Felekian
London School of Economics, UK

Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu will challenge incumbent President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in the second round of the Turkish presidential election on 28 May. Armine Avetisyan and Kübra Zeynep Sarıaslan examine what the outcome of the vote could mean for Armenia-Turkey relations.

The parliamentary election held in Turkey on 14 May produced an overwhelming majority for nationalist parties in the country’s parliament. Nevertheless, the presidential election, which was held simultaneously, will now go to a second round of voting. Although Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, the leader of the main Turkish opposition, finished behind incumbent President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in the first round, he remains in the race for the presidency.

Kılıçdaroğlu had promised to pursue a radical break from Erdoğan’s approach in a variety of policy areas, including foreign policy. His inclusive rhetoric and commitment to reconciling with marginalised groups had raised hopes among those who support closer relations between Turkey and Armenia.

The traumatic history of antagonism between the two countries and the Armenian genocide dispute continue to complicate Armenia-Turkey relations. However, while the Turkish and Armenian governments have failed to establish diplomatic ties, civil society actors on both sides have done a great deal of work to foster closer cooperation across the realms of arts and culture, the media, education, business, and tourism, among others.

But these initiatives have suffered greatly from the unpredictable and unstable foreign policies of Erdoğan’s governments over the last two decades, underlined by Turkey’s military support for Azerbaijan during the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020. They have also been undermined by the ultranationalist tone of one of Erdoğan’s key allies, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP).

Turkey was one of the first nations to recognise the independent Republic of Armenia following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Yet the mutual trust and commitment to dialogue needed to restore full diplomatic relations between the two countries has never materialised. Initial normalisation efforts were derailed by the First Nagorno-Karabakh War, which took place between 1992 and 1994. The so-called Zurich Protocols, which were signed by Armenia and Turkey in 2009 as a step toward normalising relations, failed to be ratified in the two parliaments, under pressure from Azerbaijan.

In 2020, after the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia signed a statement which also mentioned opening all trade routes in the region. In 2021, Turkey and Armenia started a new normalisation process by appointing diplomatic representatives. As part of this process, it was announced in 2022 that the land border between Turkey and Armenia would be opened to third-country nationals, however no concrete steps have yet been taken to open the border.

One week before the 2023 Turkish elections, Kılıçdaroğlu announced proposals for a new Silk Road project connecting Europe to China without mentioning Azerbaijan, which signalled distance from the long-lasting ‘one nation two states’ motto that encapsulates the close relationship between Ankara and Baku.

Although Kılıçdaroğlu and his team have not said anything about favouring relations with Armenia over Azerbaijan, and made no comment over the recent closure of Turkish air space for Armenian flights, they have at least signalled they would not establish the same kind of relationship with Azerbaijan’s President, Ilham Aliyev, that Erdoğan has had.

It is not clear to what extent this approach to Aliyev, a popular figure among Turkish nationalists, influenced the results of the first round of the presidential election, but the unexpectedly high votes for the third candidate with Azerbaijani descent, Sinan Oğan, along with the weight of representatives from nationalist political parties in parliament perhaps give some indication.

Kılıçdaroğlu had said he will work to improve Turkey’s poor human rights record and release political prisoners. Turkey’s civil society has suffered through difficult times ever since the failed coup attempt in 2016 and the two-year period of emergency that followed. The subsequent government crackdown on civil society organisations in Turkey, according to both Turkish and Armenian civil society actors, set back some of the progress made in the preceding decades.

This is underlined by the arrest of Osman Kavala in October 2017 during the state of emergency. Kavala was a key figure in programmes promoting civil dialogue and normalisation with Armenia. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2022 for allegedly organising the 2013 Gezi Park protests and the failed coup attempt. Six activists, including Çiğdem Mater, another key figure in the Armenia-Turkey dialogue working for the NGO Anadolu Kültür, were sentenced to 18 years in prison for participating in the Gezi Park protests and supporting Kavala.

Human rights defenders have argued that the prosecution of Kavala and his associates is based on insufficient evidence, and in 2019 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Turkey had violated Kavala’s fundamental rights and demanded his immediate release. Referring to this decision, Kılıçdaroğlu indicated that “no one should be imprisoned for their thoughts.” The outcome of the second round of the election could therefore have major significance for wider efforts to establish cooperation with Armenia.

The opposition in Turkey was confident that it could revive EU accession negotiations very quickly if it won the elections. The EU has played and is expected to play an important role in the reconciliation efforts between Armenia and Turkey. EU financial support for civil society has been particularly important in ensuring the sustainability of activities in this field during turbulent times.

However, there is a chronological mismatch in Turkey and Armenia’s engagement with Europe. On the one hand, Armenia, as a former Soviet state that cares about maintaining close ties with Russia, aspires to adopt western values, while Turkey, as a NATO member, has almost entirely abandoned the goal of joining the EU, especially in the last few years under Erdoğan. In addition, civil society has secured more freedom in Armenia since the Velvet Revolution in 2018, though it remains a target for the political opposition. In contrast, Erdoğan’s governments have remained distant from civil society and in some cases even hostile towards it.

Erdoğan currently holds the upper hand ahead of the second round of the presidential election, but supporters of Kılıçdaroğlu concerned with Turkey’s relations with Armenia remain hopeful about his prospects and about the potential to develop future cooperation with Armenia on the basis of shared democratic values. In this scenario, Turkey would undoubtedly gain more credibility in efforts to reach stability in Armenia’s relations with Azerbaijan.

Note: This article gives the views of the authors, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. Featured image credit: © 2023 The Office to the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia (CC BY-ND 3.0)

Armine Avetisyan is a peacebuilding practitioner and researcher. She holds a dual MA in Conflict Studies from the Heller School of Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University (USA) and Cultural Management from Istanbul Bilgi University (Turkey).

Kübra Zeynep Sarıaslan is a Visiting Fellow at LSE’s Chair of Contemporary Turkish Studies and at the University of Cambridge. She holds a PhD in Social Anthropology from the University of Zurich (Switzerland).

Armenia, Azerbaijan leaders meet in Brussels as tensions simmer

Ara Felekian
Egypt –
AFP , Sunday

Armenia and Azerbaijan’s leaders met Sunday for talks in Brussels amid heightened tensions on the tense border between the two countries over control of a contested enclave.

The talks between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev are being hosted by European Council President Charles Michel.

The meeting, the fifth of its kind under European mediation, began shortly after 1:00 pm (1100 GMT), Michel’s spokesman said.

Michel held bilateral talks with Pashinyan on Saturday evening and with Aliyev on Sunday morning.

The talks come a day after fresh clashes erupted on the border between the two Caucasus countries.

On Friday, the Armenian government announced that one Armenian soldier had been killed and two others wounded by Azerbaijani forces.

On Thursday, an Azerbaijani soldier was killed and four Armenian soldiers wounded in other clashes.

Pashinyan accused Azerbaijan of seeking to “undermine the talks” in Brussels and said there was “very little” chance of signing a peace accord with Aliyev during the meeting.

The neighbours fought two wars in the early 1990s and 2020 over control of Nagorno-Karabakh, a mountainous region mostly populated by Armenians that seceded from Azerbaijan more than three decades ago.

After a brief war that saw Azerbaijan retake territory in the separatist region in the autumn of 2020, Baku and Yerevan agreed to a ceasefire brokered by Russia.

Russian peacekeepers have since been deployed in Nagorno-Karabakh, but Armenia has complained for several months that they are ineffective.

Tensions flared recently when Baku announced on April 23 that it had set up a first road checkpoint at the entrance to the Lachin corridor, the only route linking Armenia to the separatist enclave.

It is already under a blockade that has caused shortages and power cuts.


Madrid Principles: Interpretation of Pashinyan, Former Armenian Foreign Minister and Expert

Ara Felekian
May 8 2023
  • Armine Martirosyan
  • Yerevan

Madrid principles and the status of NK

Each statement of the Prime Minister of Armenia regarding resolution of the Karabakh conflict causes heated discussions in society and among experts. Nikol Pashinyan questions the effectiveness of Armenian diplomacy in the negotiation process before taking office. His last statement that “Nagorno-Karabakh was recognized as a part of Azerbaijan on the basis of the Madrid principles, “it’s just that the Armenian authorities did not tell the people about it,” caused general bewilderment.

The so-called Madrid principles are a concept of the resolution of the Karabakh conflict proposed to the parties to the conflict by the OSCE Minsk Group in November 2007. The text of the document can be found here.

This is not the first such statement by the Prime Minister. Earlier he said that his predecessors, having adopted the Madrid principles as the basis for negotiations, delegitimized the procedures by which Nagorno-Karabakh declared its independence. You can read more about this in the article

The prime minister made a statement about the failed negotiation process on the Karabakh settlement by his predecessors. Experts called him “manipulative”

Ex-Foreign Minister of Armenia Vardan Oskanyan, who personally participated in the negotiations with Azerbaijan on the Madrid principles, said that the statement of the Armenian Prime Minister is not true. According to him, this document is not at all about recognizing NK as a part of Azerbaijan, but “speaks of the opposite.” Moreover, Oskanyan believes that in 2018 there was an opportunity to peacefully resolve the Karabakh issue precisely under the leadership of Nikol Pashinyan, who came to power on the wave of the Velvet Revolution. In response to the prime minister’s call to announce “what advice Vardan Oskanyan was going to give him in 2018-19,” the former minister made a video message:

“I would say, Mr. Prime Minister, you have high legitimacy, you were elected with the support of 80 percent. There is such a document on the negotiating table. Don’t ignore it. Don’t start [negotiations] from scratch. There are dangers along the way. I know the red lines of Azerbaijan, I know what is acceptable for Azerbaijan. I was going to advise him to take the third path, to agree in case of signing the document [Madrid principles] for the return to Azerbaijan of five regions [around Nagorno-Karabakh, which were under the control of the Armenian side following the war in the early ’90s].

I would advise negotiation with Azerbaijan on the return of Kelbajar and the non-corridor part of Lachin within three to five years. But first, Azerbaijan has to prove that it was capable of coexisting peacefully with its neighbor. All other guarantees that were enshrined in this document — the security council, the presence of peacekeeping forces, temporary status – they all had to go into effect.”

To understand the situation, JAMnews turned to political scientist Manvel Sargsyan, who is familiar with the negotiation process in detail. In the ’90s, he was an advisor to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the unrecognized NKR, and in 2000-2005 advisor to the President on international affairs.

The political scientist said that Pashinyan “forms false narratives in order to absolve himself of responsibility for the war in Karabakh and find other culprits.”

  • The Madrid Principles. Delights and risks
  • Geopolitical project: How Armenia lost the war and wound up between world powers
  • Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan disagree in Washington, but US Secretary of State optimistic

“Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the formation of fifteen independent states in Europe as a result, the question has arisen about the principles for their recognition. On December 16, 1991, in Brussels, the European Council adopted a joint decision on the approach — how to recognize these new states, what criteria they must meet.

On December 21 of the same year, the Alma-Ata Declaration was adopted; at the end of December, the Soviet Union was dissolved.

The CSCE [Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, since 1995 the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, or OSCE] declared to post-Soviet states, notably Armenia and Azerbaijan, that it could recognize their sovereignty provided they, in turn, they recognize the fact of disagreements over the ownership of Nagorno-Karabakh and delegate the solution of this controversial issue to the CSCE. It was January 30, 1992.

That is, Azerbaijan agreed that the status of Nagorno-Karabakh has not been resolved, that Karabakh is not Azerbaijan. It is noteworthy that in Armenia itself they are silent about this.

A day after the recognition of the sovereignty of Armenia and Azerbaijan, on January 31, 1992, the CSCE decided to send a delegation to the region, primarily to Nagorno-Karabakh. The delegation arrived on February 6-7. And right on the spot, Azerbaijan took upon itself the obligation, together with Armenia, to resolve the issue of the status of NK by peaceful means. This was a very important principle.

On March 24, 1992, the Minsk Conference received a mandate to resolve the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. There was no other item on the agenda.”

The OSCE Minsk Group was established in 1992. This is a group of OSCE member states that led the peace settlement, carried out a mediating role in the negotiations on the Karabakh conflict until the start of the 2020 war. The Minsk Group includes Germany, Italy, Finland, Sweden, Belarus, Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Russia, the USA and France co-chair.

“Baku understood that, in this way, it would recognize Nagorno-Karabakh outside of Azerbaijan — and started a war.

On April 13, Azerbaijanis set up “Grads” around the NK capital and began shelling the city.

How this war ended is known to all. Azerbaijan lost, giving away huge territories around NK.

And when the war went beyond the framework of the NKAR, the problem of these territories was added to the problem of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. Various proposals were put forward, but they all concerned the conditions for determining the status of NK. And to resolve the status issue, a condition was put forward for the return of the territories around the NKAR. The UN Security Council set a clear division of the NKAO from other territories around the autonomous region.”

“The OSCE Minsk Group received a mandate to solve the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh, not Azerbaijan. The conflict that it must resolve is the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, not the Azerbaijani one.

The Azerbaijani authorities were told: we recognize the sovereignty of the country if you recognize the problem of disagreements on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. And Azerbaijan recognized.

In 2007, for the first time, the idea that the status would be decided by the people of NKAR within the framework of the Madrid principles appeared.

The Madrid principles annulled the 1991 referendum, as Pashinyan now claims, and said that there should be a new referendum under specific conditions. But this does not mean that Nagorno-Karabakh was recognized as part of Azerbaijan. Pashinyan interprets the second part of the phrase incorrectly.”

“Nikol Pashinyan just wants to justify himself. The prime minister wants to say that the Karabakh issue was closed even before him, and he cannot do anything.

First, he took Levon Ter-Petrosyan and said: “The position of the first president on the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh was to give Karabakh to Azerbaijan and consider the issue closed.” But Ter-Petrosyan, in his defense, published a document called “Special Opinion”, which Armenia presented when joining the CIS.

The Armenian authorities have always hidden this document from prying eyes. It does not mention Nagorno-Karabakh, but it hints that “autonomies can also be part of the CIS.”

Armenia wanted to go for it, but stumbled upon the veto of Boris Yeltsin in Moscow, who directly forbade Levon Ter-Petrosyan from any actions in the Karabakh issue. Yeltsin said that for him “the concept of Karabakh does not exist.”

At that time, it was planned that the Armenian parliament would recognize Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan. But after returning from Moscow, Levon Ter-Petrosyan, at the direction of Russia, canceled everything and closed the topic. He understood what he had done, so he warned that there would be war.

Pashinyan decided to strengthen his narrative and went on to look for the culprits. He reached the Madrid principles and added on his own behalf that Armenia recognized Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan by these principles. To alleviate his guilt for dooming the country to chaos, for thousands of dead, Pashinyan decided to shift the blame on the previous authorities and prove that the war was inevitable.”

“War was not inevitable. The situation could have been changed by recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh. We heard reproaches about this from Putin, and from Medvedev, and from Lavrov, even Aliyev said this.

Azerbaijan has never agreed to any compromises. It was preparing for war. The only thing we had to do was to deprive it of the right to this war.

By recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia would put Azerbaijan’s right to a war against Karabakh in doubt. But instead, Armenia closed the topic. And Azerbaijan, having received recognition from the CSCE, immediately, after thirteen days, started a war, referring to Article 51 of the UN Charter, which in fact gives the right to sovereign countries to resolve the issue by military means.

In 1994 Azerbaijan was defeated in the war. But Armenia continued to be inactive, did not recognize Karabakh, did not put any conditions on Azerbaijan. Today, having won, Azerbaijan demands that Armenia abandon the Karabakh problem and declare that there is simply no such issue.”

“We need to understand the essence of the issue. Aliyev recalls January 1992, when a condition was set for his country to recognize the independence of his country. The need to determine the status of Nagorno-Karabakh today, as before, is being discussed by many in the US, Russia, France and other countries.

By and large, the OSCE Minsk Group, of which Azerbaijan is still a member, has not disappeared. It was not disbanded, and it continues to exist on the principle of determining the status of Karabakh through negotiations. And it is dangerous to forget about the status of Nagorno-Karabakh now.

Azerbaijan, having received the support of other countries, initially set itself the task of annexing the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh through the ethnic cleansing of Armenians. And it is doing it.

We must understand one thing: whether Armenia recognizes Artsakh or not, there is a population there that has declared its independence. This fact is taken into account by many countries. The French Senate raised this issue twice.”

“Armenia has made a strong move. Realizing that it is unable to solve the problem, Armenia does not raise the issue of independence, but raises the issue of security and rights of the population of NK. And for Azerbaijan it is like death. It would be easier for Azerbaijan if Armenia demanded Karabakh. Then Baku would raise everyone to their feet, declaring to the whole world that Armenia has territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

Armenia says it has no claims, but these people should live in Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan does not intend to ensure the safe life of Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh. It wants to get rid of the Armenians, which puts it in a difficult situation.

Many people began to support this position of Armenia — the USA, France, Germany and other European countries. They have repeatedly stated that the status of Nagorno-Karabakh must be settled, and without a solution to this issue it is impossible to achieve a lasting resolution of the conflict.

Azerbaijan is at an impasse; now all its hope is for Russia, for the Russians to again create conditions for the ethnic cleansing of Armenians, similar to Operation Ring.

Operation “Ring” were actions taken by the Soviet leadership in 1991 to resolve the Karabakh conflict by force. They led to the deportation of Armenians from 19 villages.

But here the Russians must make a decision: are they leaving Karabakh or not? If the Armenians are deported, the Russians must leave. If they don’t want to leave, they should leave the Armenians there as well. For this purpose Nagorno-Karabakh was subjected to a blockade. It was the Russians who closed it. They took Armenians as hostages so that no one would leave. By serving Azerbaijan, Russia has brought people to the brink of starvation but delivering food by peacekeepers’ vehicles, thus emphasizing its role.

We do not know exactly what the Russians have in mind, with whom they have what agreements. Perhaps they will leave, transferring their place to another country — France, for example. No wonder France talks about defense support.”

Serbia launches major manhunt for gunman after second mass shooting in two days – UPDATED

Ara Felekian

Save

Share

 10:05, 5 May 2023

YEREVAN, MAY 5, ARMENPRESS. Hundreds of Serbian special forces operatives are hunting down a gunman who killed at least eight people and wounded 13 others in the country’s second mass shooting in as many days.

The massacre took place 11 p.m. Thursday night, CNN reported citing the country’s Interior Ministry.

The attacker was in a vehicle with two other people, and got out before opening fire with an automatic firearm in the village of Dubona, about 60 kilometers southeast of the Serbian capital Belgrade, CNN reported citing its affiliate N1 and public broadcaster RTS.

The suspect then fled the scene, before later shooting in the villages of Mali Orašje and Šepšin.

The shooter remains at large and a warrant has been issued for the suspect, a 21-year-old male identified as Uros B. by Interior Minister Bratislav Gasic.

More than 600 members of Serbian Special Forces are involved in the manhunt.

This comes a day after the Serbia was rocked by news of a 13-year-old boy opening fire on classmates at a school in the capital Belgrade. That shooting left at least eight children dead, along with a security guard.

Until this week, mass shootings were rare in Serbia, despite the country’s high rate of gun ownership, according to CNN.

Updates:

12:16 – Serbian law enforcement agencies announce arrest of suspected gunman




Film: House on the Volcano review – silent classic of Soviet Armenia glories in machine age

Ara Felekian
The Guardian, UK
May 1 2023

Amo Bek-Nazaryan’s black and white film, a tale of betrayal in an oilfield, has a plaintive beauty and operatic intensity

Machinery itself has star quality – of the most monumental and anti-heroic sort – in this fascinating 1928 silent movie from the Armenian film-maker Amo Bek-Nazaryan. It’s such a vivid, dynamic, engaged piece of work, whose energies blaze forth afresh in this restoration, having apart from anything else wonderful archival value.

Bek-Nazaryan vehemently juxtaposes the strange statuary of vast industrial architecture and the faces of the people who live and work in its shadow. The framing device is that a veteran worker in present-day Soviet Armenia is asked by his son – or someone we are led to believe is his son – to sign his application to join the Communist party. Thoughtfully, the older man tells him this is not simply a matter of bits of paper, but hard-won experience in solidarity and sacrifice; he then tells him (and us) about a workers’ action during “the reactionary years” of 1907.

In an oilfield, workers are regularly sacrificed to poor safety standards, exhausted by the long journey from their barracks. Their Armenian owner, whose thin, pinched face is seen in a stylised closeup, agrees to build housing closer to the oilfield, but this is on the site of dangerous subterranean gases (hence the title) and his frosty arrogance and cruelty is to lead to a cataclysmic horror as his employees’ housing is literally swallowed into hellish flames. For the union, the complicating factor had been that Armenian workers should not question the views of an Armenian boss: it is this kind of bourgeois nationalism that appears to be deprecated in the film.

Finally, a union worker is tricked into attacking the owner, thrown into prison and separated from his wife and child – a final twist which leads us back to the present day. One of the treats of this film is the outstanding new score from Juliet Merchant, which brings out the film’s operatic intensity, and its plaintive beauty.

 House on the Volcano is available on Klassiki.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/may/01/house-on-the-volcano-review-silent-classic-of-soviet-armenia-glories-in-machine-age

One ceasefire violation recorded in Karabakh

Ara Felekian
MEHR News Agency, Iran

TEHRAN, Apr. 30 (MNA) – One ceasefire violation has been recorded in the Askeran areas of Nagorno-Karabakh; there were no casualties, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Saturday.

“The command of the Russian peacekeeping group alongside the Azerbaijani and Armenian sides are looking into the incident,” it added, TASS reported.

The Russian Defense Ministry added that it maintained continuous interaction with the General Staffs of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan and Armenia in order to ensure the security of Russian peacekeepers and to avoid any potential incidents.

AMK/PR

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/200058/One-ceasefire-violation-recorded-in-Karabakh

Will Armenia-Russia Bromance Ignite West? – Expert Comments On Pahinyan’s Phone Talk With Putin [Azeri source]

Ara Felekian
(MENAFN– AzerNews)
Rena Murshud

It is not surprising that the installation of the checkpoint at the entrance to the Lachin-Khankendi road in the territory of Azerbaijan was not welcomed unambiguously by the West. Having been alarmed by the event, Pashinyan turned to European Council as usual, and oddly enough he then searched for Putin in the help list.

Although Pashinyan tries to look naive, in fact, he wants to play for time as he faces a blow by Azerbaijan.

“Pashinyan always opts for a diverse policy with EU, US and Russia to manipulate between the sides. So I think that’s why he negotiated with Putin. In other words, I don’t think Pashinyan will turn his face directly to Russia. Because in this case there might be rifts between Armenia and the West, the consequence of which may put it in awkward position in front of Russia. For this reason, I think it would be appropriate to evaluate this meeting based on the discussions,” the Turkish political analyst Göktuğ Çalışkan told Azernews as he commented on the matter.

The analyst also touched on the western support to Armenia no matter if Azerbaijan is rightful.

“Western countries, especially the European Union and the United States, stand by Armenia against Azerbaijan, and this has been for 30 years up until now. In addition, the reaction of the West to the checkpoint that Azerbaijan has established on its sovereign territory shows that it is totally useless to rely on Western mediation. I think Azerbaijan’s calling the West for mediation in future would be a wrong choice,” he added.

As regards Pashinyan’s recent bromance on the phone with both Michel and Putin, the expert said that the sides have discussed the current situation related to the checkpoint. However, Çalışkan said the meeting is not expected to turn into a trilateral meeting or anything.

The panicking Prime Minister, who hangs on the phone in hard times, on his recent telephone conversation again with Michel whined about the eviction of Armenians living in Azerbaijan’s Karabakh… According to the Turkish political analyst, the claims from both Armenia the West are baseless and it is more for making a useless drama.

“Although Armenia and the West use the word expelling Armenians in Karabakh as a cliche, the istallation of a checkpoint on the Lachin road has been on the agenda since December 2022,” he opined.

Göktuğ Çalışkan also believed that Azerbaijan was right in establishing the checkpoint. He noted that up to that time, Armenian provocations and smuggling have been encountered many times.

“The argument that the Armenians were illegally smuggling weapons and ammunition in Azerbaijani territory is a very important and necessary issue. The very existence of this requirement (Armenia’s pretension to the checkpoint) in itself contradicts Azerbaijan. According to the agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia, only the passage of civilians is allowed to this region, but the transfer of weapons, ammunition and illegal manpower by Armenia can lead to fueling separatist groups in the region and further escalating the tensions there. For this reason, it is quite appropriate for Azerbaijan to establish a checkpoint on its territory,” he concluded.

Defense Minister meets new Commander of Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno Karabakh, calls for efforts to lift blockade

Ara Felekian

Save

Share

 13:55,

YEREVAN, APRIL 28, ARMENPRESS. Minister of Defense of Armenia Suren Papikyan held a meeting on April 28 with Colonel-general Alexander Lentsov, the new Commander of the Russian peacekeeping forces in Nagorno Karabakh.

“I welcomed Colonel-general Alexander Lentsov on assuming his new position and wished him successes during the peacekeeping mission. We discussed the operative situation and existing problems around Nagorno Karabakh and in the area of responsibility of the peacekeeping contingent and a number of issues aimed at increasing the effectiveness of the Russian peacekeeping mission in Nagorno Karabakh. I emphasized the need for steady implementation of all terms of the 9 November 2020 trilateral statement and attached importance to efforts aimed at swiftly lifting the blockade of the Lachin Corridor,” Papikyan said on social media.

The Russian Ambassador to Armenia Sergey Kopyrkin, military attaché Colonel Igor Shcherbakov, and the former Commander of the Russian peacekeeping forces in Nagorno Karabakh Major-general Andrei Volkov attended the meeting.

[see video]

Armenian Genocide Education Act Introduced in U.S. House of Representatives

Ara Felekian

Save

Share

 11:34,

YEREVAN, APRIL 25, ARMENPRESS. U.S. Representatives Anna Eshoo (D-CA), David Valadao (R-CA), Ted Lieu (D-CA), and Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) re-introduced the Armenian Genocide Education Act on April 24 – a bipartisan measure, backed by the ANCA, which would allocate $10 million over 5 years to help educate American students about Ottoman Turkey’s 1915-1923 Genocide of Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Syriac, Arameans, and Maronite Christians, the ANCA reported.

“The ANCA thanks Reps. Eshoo, Bilirakis, Lieu, and Valadao, welcoming their introduction of this timely bill, brought forward in the wake of official U.S. recognition of the 1915 Genocide and amid renewed efforts by Azerbaijan and Turkey to complete this crime against the Armenian nation,” remarked ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian. “This federal legislation represents a necessary next step, building upon U.S. remembrance, alerting Americans to the ongoing threat of genocide, and ensuring that future generations benefit from the terrible lessons of this still unpunished crime. We will do all we can to support this bill and look forward to it being passed by Congress and signed into law by the President,” added Hamparian.

“By ensuring students have access to the resources necessary to understand why and how the Armenian Genocide occurred, the Armenian Genocide Education Act preserves the legacies of the victims, combats genocide denial, and ensures that future generations learn the lessons of this dark chapter of history,” said Rep. Eshoo, who is the lead author of the measure. “This legislation honors the memories of my ancestors and all those who perished at the hands of the Ottoman Empire.”

Representatives Eshoo, Valadao, Lieu, and Bilirakis were joined by 38 of their House colleagues as original cosponsors of the Armenian Genocide Education Act, including: Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Tony Cardenas (D-CA), Judy Chu (D-CA), David Cicilline (D-RI), Jim Costa (D-CA), Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), Nanette Diaz Barragan (D-CA), Jimmy Gomez (D-CA), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Sara Jacobs (D-CA), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA), William Keating (D-MA), Rick Larsen (D-WA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Susie Lee (D-NV), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), James McGovern (D-MA), Grace Meng (D-NY), Joseph Morelle (D-NY), Kevin Mullin (D-CA), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Katie Porter (D-CA), Linda Sanchez (D-CA), John Sarbanes (D-MD), Janice Schakowsky (D-IL), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ), Abigail Spanberger (D-VA), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Dina Titus (D-NV), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Lori Trahan (D-MA).

The lead Congressional advocates of the measure cited the key role that education plays in genocide prevention.

“Our darkest moments as a human race have come during times when those who knew better stood silently, making excuses for passivity and allowing injustice and persecution to reign. We must acknowledge the atrocities of the past so that we might hopefully prevent them in the future,” said Rep. Bilirakis. “One of the best ways to achieve this goal is through education and awareness, which is why I am proud to co-lead the Armenian Genocide Education Act again in the 118th Congress.”

Rep. Lieu concurred, noting: “The Armenian Genocide was one of the most horrific losses of human life in modern history. It resulted in the deaths of roughly 1.5 million Armenians, and even more were displaced and forced to start new lives from scratch. Remembering atrocities like the Armenian Genocide is crucial to ensuring they never happen again. A key part of that is education, which is why I’m proud to co-lead the Armenian Genocide Education Act with Representatives Anna Eshoo, Gus Bilirakis, and David Valadao. This bill honors the legacies of those who perished by helping to ensure future generations learn about, and never forget, the Armenian Genocide.”

Rep. Valadao stressed that, “people who fail to understand history are bound to repeat it, and education is one of the best tools we have to prevent repeating some of our darkest days. The Armenian Genocide Education Act preserves the memories of the 1.5 million Armenians who were killed at the hands of the Ottoman Empire, and ensures Americans have accurate information on why and how this horrific event happened.”

Congressional Armenian Caucus founding co-Chair Frank Pallone welcomed the introduction of the measure, stating, “education is one of the best ways we can honor the memory of the victims of the Armenian Genocide and ensure it never happens again. This bill will help keep the memory of this horrific genocide alive by ensuring future generations have access to historically accurate resources. Expanding access to educational tools moves us one step closer to fulfilling our obligation to speak candidly about the past that is directly tied to our moral responsibilities of the present.”

Congressional Armenian Caucus Vice-Chair Adam Schiff (D-CA) explained, “when we remain silent in the face of injustice, we dishonor the victims and make further tragedy inevitable. Through education, we can combat genocide denial and ensure that future generations learn the lessons of history. The Armenian Genocide claimed 1.5 million lives. It must never be forgotten. And it must never happen again. Not to the Armenians. Not to anyone.”

The Armenian Genocide Education Act was introduced on April 24th, the international day of Armenian Genocide commemoration. Building upon the 2019 passage of H.Res.296 and S.Res.150 – which specifically rejected any official U.S. association with Armenian Genocide denial – the Armenian Genocide Education Act seeks to counter discourse and propaganda that claims that Ottoman Turkey’s systematic and deliberate state-sponsored mass murder, national dispossession, cultural erasure, and exile of millions of Christians between 1915 and 1923 did not take place. A similar measure was introduced in the last session of Congress.

AW: Literary Lights to feature American Wildflowers by Susan Barba

Ara Felekian
 International Armenian Literary Alliance Literary Corner, Announcements 0

The International Armenian Literary Alliance (IALA), the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR) and the Krikor and Clara Zohrab Information Center are happy to announce their next Literary Lights event, featuring Susan Barba, editor of American Wildflowers: A Literary Field Guide. The event will take place on May 17, 2023 at 7:30 p.m. at the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR) in Belmont, Massachusetts. Barba will be joined by Dr. Jesse S. Arlen, the inaugural postdoctoral research fellow in Armenian Christian Studies and director of the Krikor and Clara Zohrab Information Center.

American Wildflowers, edited by Barba and illustrated by Leanne Shapton, is a literary anthology filled with classic and contemporary poems, essays and letters inspired by wildflowers—perfect for writers, artists and botanists alike.

Literary Lights is a monthly reading series, held from February to November in a mixed online and in-person format, featuring new works of literature by Armenian authors. Audience members are invited to read along with the series.

  •  Bio
  •  Twitter
  •  Latest Posts
The International Armenian Literary Alliance is a nonprofit organization launched in 2021 that supports and celebrates writers by fostering the development and distribution of Armenian literature in the English language. A network of Armenian writers and their champions, IALA gives Armenian writers a voice in the literary world through creative, professional, and scholarly advocacy.