Author: Baghdasarian Karlen

TURKEY INSPECTS SYRIA-BOUND PLANE

Angola Press
Nov 8 2012
Angola

Istanbul – Turkish media reports say a Syria-bound plane from Armenia
has landed in eastern Turkey so that its cargo can be inspected to
make sure it is not carrying military equipment.

Anadolu news agency says the plane landed Thursday morning in the
city of Erzurum. Other reports say it is believed to be carrying
humanitarian aid.

Last month, another Syria-bound plane from Armenia landed in Turkey
under an agreement with Turkish authorities, who said the cargo
consisted of aid and could continue to Syria.

Also in October, Turkey forced a Syrian passenger plane traveling from
Moscow to Damascus to land in Ankara on suspicion that equipment it was
carrying was military gear. Russia, a backer of Syrian President Bashar
Assad, said the equipment consisted of spare parts for radar systems.

,b1583c25-081f-4526-937d-c7e0fc1f8248.html

From: Baghdasarian

INTERCEPTED SYRIA-BOUND PLANE DEPARTS AFTER CARGO INSPECTION IN TURKEY

Global Times
Nov 8 2012
China

By Agencies

The Syria-bound Armenian plane intercepted by Turkey earlier Thursday
has been allowed to continue its journey after a cargo inspection,
the semi-official Anatolia news agency reported.

The Antonov AN 12 cargo plane, which took off in Armenia, was forced
to land at an airport in Turkish eastern Erzurum province at 6:12 a.m.

local time (0412 GMT), because the Turkish authorities suspected the
plane was carrying arms, Today’s Zaman newspaper reported.

The aircraft was declared to be carrying humanitarian aid to Syria,
but Turkish security forces launched a search for arms on the plane,
according to the report.

Last month, Turkey gave an all-clear for an Armenian plane to continue
on its journey to the Syrian city of Aleppo after ordering it to land
in eastern Turkey for a cargo search.

Turkey is trying to prevent its air space from being used for the
supply to the Syrian military and forced down a Syrian airliner
travelling from Moscow last month.

From: Baghdasarian

TURKEY SEARCHES ARMENIAN PLANE EN ROUTE TO SYRIA, REPORT

Ya Libnan
Nov 8 2012
Lebanon

Turkey ordered a Syria-bound Armenian plane to land and searched
its cargo on Thursday, airport officials said, in the second such
action in a month to prevent the use of Turkish airspace to supply
the Syrian military.

The cargo aircraft was searched in the eastern Turkish city of Erzurum
in a previously agreed step, as in mid-October when another Armenian
plane was allowed to continue its journey after confirmation it was
carrying humanitarian aid as stated.

Officials at Erzurum airport said Turkey had allowed the plane to
leave after a search of around four hours and that none of the Air
Armenia plane’s cargo had been seized.

Turkey has become increasingly assertive in challenging Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad amid growing tensions along the border.

It banned Syrian aircraft from its airspace in October after saying
it had found Russian munitions believed to be destined for Syria’s
armed forces on board a Syrian plane.

Reuters

From: Baghdasarian

TURKEY FORCES ARMENIAN PLANE BOUND FOR SYRIA TO LAND

AlArabiya.net
November 7, 2012 Wednesday
UAE

An Armenian plane carrying humanitarian aid for Syria was forced
to land in Turkey on Thursday for an inspection of its cargo, the
Anatolia news agency reported.

The cargo plane landed at Erzurum airport in eastern Turkey where
teams of police and troops with sniffer dogs began a search, it said.

It was the second time in a month that the Turkish authorities have
ordered an Armenian plane heading for Syria to land for security
checks.

On October 15, another Armenian plane carrying humanitarian aid to
Syria’s battered second city of Aleppo was forced to land at Erzurum
airport but the plane was allowed to resume journey after officials
said no suspect cargo turned up during searches.

Last month, Turkish jets forced a Syrian plane flying from Russia to
land at Ankara airport because of what it called suspect cargo.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the cargo contained
military equipment for the Syrian defense ministry, but Russia said it
was dual-purpose radar equipment which was not banned by international
conventions.

Former allies Turkey and Syria have seen their relations deteriorate
as fighting between regime troops and rebels has intensified in Syria
and the two countries have closed their airspaces to each other.

Syria has a small Armenian community of between 60,000 and 100,000
people, according to estimates, most of who live in Aleppo.

Armenia also has close ties with Syria’s major ally Russia while its
relations with Turkey have long been strained.

Turkey and Armenia have no diplomatic ties and their border has been
closed for more than a decade.

Turkey-Syria relations plunged further after shells fired from Syria
killed five Turkish civilians inside a Turkish village on October 3.

From: Baghdasarian

SOCAR GAS GAINED HOLD OF ALL GEORGIA
by Maka Kharazishvili

Rezonansi, Tbilisi, Georgia
Nov 2 2012

[Translated from Georgian]

SOCAR [State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic] Gas has become a
monster of the energy sector. The SOCAR Gas company has finally took
over the assets of the [natural gas retailer] Itera Georgia. The
agreement has resulted in a further increase in the gas sector
monopoly. Except for Tbilisi (Kaztransgas) and Telavi (Wissol),
entire Georgia is being supplied by SOCAR-owned gas distributors,
although even these companies purchase gas from SOCAR.

In Georgia, SOCAR imports, distributes and sets prices of gas. In
addition, the company manages preferential natural gas secured from
the Shah-Deniz gas pipeline for Georgia.

To ensure that we received cheap gas from Azerbaijan for five years,
SOCAR became an absolute monopoly in Georgia. While the population
did not benefit from cheap gas, politicians and experts say government
officials did.

In an interview to Rezonansi, Itera Georgia General Director Davit
Beradze said that as a result of the deal, 10 gas distributing
companies had been handed over to SOCAR.

SOCAR “in full control” of gas supplies in Georgia

“I am not aware of the details of the deal. This is shareholders’
competence,” Beradze said. At the moment, SOCAR owns 38 gas
distributing companies throughout Georgia and is in full control of
gas supplies in the country.

Experts say after such an increase in the degree of monopoly, the
Ministry of Energy should review the previous minister’s decision
and freshly regulate tariffs of gas supplies to the population. At
the moment, the tariffs are deregulated and are unanimously set by
appropriate companies.

Head of the Azerbaijani state-owned oil company (SOCAR), Rovnaq
Abdullayev, officially confirmed that SOCAR had purchased the Itera
Georgia gas distributing company. Abdullayev, at the request of the
second party, declined to release details of the cost of the agreement,
but said that SOCAR did not have to pay much to obtain the assets. “The
negotiations had been under way for a long time and the agreement
was signed after all risks had been assessed,” said Abdullayev.

According to the Azerbaijani news agency Trend, SOCAR became the only
gas distributor in all of Georgia, except Tbilisi.

In 2009, Georgia handed over 30 regional gas distributors to SOCAR. At
that time, SOCAR only paid 10m dollars for the entire network.

As we have already noted, due to the fact that the country needed
uninterrupted gas supplies, the previous government made significant
concessions to the gas exporter. In exchange for the five-year
agreement and 167-dollar gas, SOCAR became an energy giant in Georgia.

This was the first time the Azerbaijani side expressed the willingness
to sign a long-term contract. Before that, the SOCAR leadership would
have the Georgian government beg for an even one-year contract. Often
Azerbaijan would promise a one-month contract to Georgia.

Specific individuals, not people benefited from gas deal

It appeared that the Georgian government, faced with Russia, accepted
all of Azerbaijan’s terms. However, this was not the sole reason –
specific individuals also benefited from this contract. Therefore,
it is interesting to analyse these contracts, to look into whether or
not Georgia could engage in energy cooperation with Azerbaijan without
SOCAR becoming the energy giant in the country. It is noteworthy
that to transport its energy resources, Azerbaijan needs Georgia as
a transit country as much as Georgia needs Azerbaijan’s oil and petrol.

Today, Azerbaijan fulfils all necessary functions on the natural gas
market: it imports, distributes and sets prices for gas. According
to Rezonansi, SOCAR also ensures supplies of gas received from the
Shah-Deniz consortium and Russia in exchange for the Armenia transit.

SOCAR controls Georgia’s oil business

Apart from this, SOCAR controls Georgia’s oil business. SOCAR holds
the exclusive right to import petrol and diesel from Azerbaijan to
Georgia. SOCAR also owns the Qulevi oil terminal. SOCAR obtained all
these assets as a result of the five-year gas agreement four years ago.

Moreover, in August 2008, it was announced specifically for SOCAR that
gas tariffs for the population had been deregulated. Before that,
the Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission
would set the maximum tariff of supplies. Specifically, within the
frameworks of the previous government’s programme called “Gas for
Every Village”, SOCAR started the construction of gas distributing
networks. Consequently, under the pretext of implementing additional
investments, it raised the issue of raising gas tariff before the
government. Therefore, on the basis of a relevant order by former
Energy Minister, Aleko [Aleksandre] Khetaguri, the tariff was declared
partially deregulated. Consequently, SOCAR was granted the right
to impose higher tariffs on its new customers, which is why the gas
tariff for new customers is 59 tetri, instead of 51. However, when
SOCAR purchased gas distributing companies at a low cost in 2009, it
pledged to place a 50-million-dollar investment in the construction of
new networks. At that time, there were no talks about the deregulation
of the gas tariff.

In an official statement, the ministry said that removing regulatory
frames from the tariff had been prompted by rising competition. How
the three companies – Itera Georgia, Kaztransgas Tbilisi and SOCAR –
would create a climate of competitiveness is another matter. However,
given that even these scales of competitiveness were eliminated,
the new energy minister will hopefully reconsider his predecessor’s
decision and regulate the gas tariff, which is now determined by a
monopoly company.

Regarding the monopoly of SOCAR Gas, Minister Kakhi Kaladze so far
has only said that he would study the market and would not permit
monopoly in the energy sector.

[Translated from Georgian]

From: Baghdasarian

ALBANIAN ARMS SAID EXPORTED TO SYRIA VIA MONTENEGRO IN 2009 DESPITE US BAN

Dan website, Podgorica, Montenegro
Nov 6 2012

Report by “M.V.”: “Selling Arms to Al-Asad’s Regime”
[Translated from Serbian]

Albanian armament exported by Montenegro Defence Industry and
Belgrade’s CPR by way of Montenegro ended up in Syria, a country
that the US State Department had a year earlier named as a sponsor
of international terrorism.

A combined customs form and a bill of lading for dangerous cargoes,
dated September 2009 and obtained by Dan, show that 2.5 tons of 7.62
mm caliber munitions and 154,520 antitank grenades left Montenegro’s
Port of Bar on board the Barbet Arrow on 30 September 2009 bound for
Syria’s Port of Latakia. These were M79 OSA [Wasp] antitank grenades.

Although at that time the United Nations and the European Union had
not formally clamped an embargo on the sale of arms to Syria, there
was a decision of the US State Department, quoted in a 2008 report
on terrorism, to the effect that Syria was sponsoring international
terrorism, so that the US foreign ministry had blacklisted that
country along with Sudan, Cuba, and Iran.

That there was something not quite right about these deals was
established by examining annual reports on trade in externally
controlled commodities for 2009 and 2010, which made no mention of
the arms shipment listed in the bill of lading and the customs form.

Deliveries to other countries, on the other hand, were meticulously
recorded. The Montenegrin Government did not report the existence of
an arms transfer such as mentioned on the customs form and the bill
of lading for the cargo outbound for Syria.

According to the bill of lading, the cargo was inspected by
Podgorica-based Montinspekt Company, while MM Friendship was named as
the shipping agent. The combined customs form named DG Arms Corporation
in Armenia as the end client. Listed as the final destination of
the ship Barbet Arrow was the port in Syria, which at the time was
not effected by the country’s bloody civil war. However, an uprising
flared up in Syria in the spring of 2011 against the regime of Bashar
al-Asad, which has long been targeted by the Western powers, which
insist that it is undemocratic and use every opportunity to call for
its ouster from office.

Despite all this, Albanian journalist Gjergj Thanasi, who has been
investigating suspect arms deals in Montenegro, Serbia, Albania,
and Macedonia for years, says in a statement to Dan that this is
another case of international arms smuggling by way of Montenegro,
which, he insists, has been going on for years.

“What is especially interesting is that the port in Syria was chosen as
the final destination, although it would have been much more practical
to have gone to Armenia by way of Georgia, to which there is a direct
maritime connection from Bar. All this clearly points to the conclusion
that the weaponry went into the hands of Al-Asad’s regime,” Thanasi,
who has been publishing articles on illegal arms trade in Albanian
press for years, insists.

He says that an incident in 2007, when Turkish authorities confiscated
an arms shipment from Albania in the Bosporus, has forced the smugglers
to cast about for alternative routes.

Albania’s opposition Socialist Party official Erion Brace recently said
that the Albanian Defence Ministry was involved in the smuggling of
about 200,000 artillery shells by way of Bar to countries in Africa
and the Middle East. Brace told media in Albania that the sale of
arms to Montenegro, specifically to Montenegro Defence Ministry (MDI),
was in violation of the Albanian national security strategy.

Journalist Thanasi explains that the Albanian state-owned company
that sells armament and military equipment, MEIKO, has been involved
for years in suspect deals with Montenegro Defence Industry, which
is represented by Zoran Damjanovic.

“There is extensive documentation on deals between MDI and MEIKO and
there have been numerous debates on this subject in Albania. Zoran
Damjanovic was the person that signed contracts on behalf of Montenegro
for the sale of arms from Albania to Montenegro,” Thanasi tells Dan.

It may be remembered that the Albanian Government’s data show that
in 2008 and 2009, Montenegro imported obsolete armament from Albania,
overhauled it, and then sold it on to “third countries.”

According to the Albanian Defence Ministry’s report, submitted
to that country’s parliament last year, Montenegro imported about
170,000 grenades, which were probably subsequently sold on, although
data show that, on gaining independence in 2006, thousands of tons of
military materiel were inherited in the military depots in Montenegro
and should be destroyed. After Montenegro gained independence, about
12,000 tons of military materiel remained in the military depots
on Montenegrin territory, nearly 9,800 tons of which is believed to
be surplus to requirements. Therefore, it is not easy to understand
how it was possible for the state-owned arms trading company, MDI,
to import armament from Albania, overhaul it, and sell it on to a
third country. On the other hand, the north of Montenegro has been
chosen as a suitable location for destroying our own surplus armament,
which is supposedly obsolete and needs to be disposed of. Research
has confirmed that this action contaminated both air and ground.

Erion Brace argued that the Albanian Defence Ministry sold almost
all of the weaponry, munitions, explosives, and army vehicles to two
firms – Montenegro Defence Industry and UNIMESCO.

Brace said that in 2010 and 2011, the Albanian state-owned arms trading
company, MEIKO, sold 15,987 kg of amatol, 93,880 kg of TNT trotyl,
9,990 units of 37 mm caliber grenades, 100 units of 12.7 mm caliber
POMs, 100 units of 60 mm mortars, 50,000 units of 82 mm mortar shells,
182,000 mortar shells, and 24,000 units of 120 mm grenades.

[Box 1] Tirana Denies Smuggling Took Place

In response to increasingly frequent public allegations, the Albanian
Defence Ministry insisted that every transaction involving munitions
and weaponry was made in conformity with national and international
law.

“This process involves a number of domestic and foreign institutions
that constantly check all activities concerning the export of armament
and military equipment,” the Albanian Defence Ministry said in its
response to Erion Brace’s allegations.

It insisted that the allegations were being made by people that want
to block Albania’s European integration, to create a problem for
Albania with NATO, and to hurt the image of the armed forces.

[Box 2] Damjanovic Rejects Allegations

When press started reporting last year about arms trafficking across
Montenegro, MDI representative Zoran Damjanovic told Podgorica media
that this firm had in fact imported weaponry from Albania, but that
there was nothing problematic about that, and that the weaponry was
not subsequently exported to countries under an international embargo.

The transcript from a session of the Albanian Parliament’s Internal
Security Commission of May of last year quotes Member of Parliament
Arben Cuka as asking Defence Minister Arben Imami whether he had any
information about an export of 174,000 artillery shells to Montenegro.

Quoting an arms trade report that the department headed by Imami had
submitted to the Commission earlier, Cuka asked about an export of
300 units of 12.7 mm machineguns for buyers in Montenegro.

Arben Imami confirmed that the weaponry had gone to Montenegro,
but added that the Albanian Government did not know for what purpose.

“Montenegro does not have the capacity to store such a large quantity
of armament and your evaluation is valid,” Imami said.

[Box 3] Investigation in Italy

The Guardia di Finanza, Italy’s law enforcement service, was alerted
by a report that weaponry was sold to north African regimes through
Montenegro and the Prosecution Department in Bari is investigating
the matter, La Repubblica newspaper reported last year.

The Italian newspaper said that “a foreign mafia controls Montenegro’s
Port of Bar for the export of armament.”

“The route used today is the same one used for drugs and cigarettes.

Armament travels from former Yugoslav countries by way of the Puglia
region to Greece, Turkey, and on to north African countries. This has
been alleged also by the chief prosecutor in Bari, Antonio Laudati,
who says that the smuggling has increased especially over the past
two years. This has also been confirmed by a series of ongoing
investigations,” La Repubblica wrote.

[Translated from Serbian]

From: Baghdasarian

11 CASES OF BOTULISM REGISTERED IN ARMENIA

NEWS.AM
November 07, 2012 | 21:57

YEREVAN. – Total of 11 cases of botulism were registered during the
11 months of this year with 17 poisoned people out of which two ended
fatally, Sanitary-Epidemiological Service at the Armenian Healthcare
Ministry informed Armenian News-NEWS.am.

Two of the poisoned persons were children. The poisoning cases were
registered in Yerevan, as well as in Shirak, Ararat, Armavir, Lori and
Tavush regions of Armenia. As a matter of fact, 19 cases of botulism
were registered last year with 30 poisoned people, 3 of whom died.

To avoid the poisoning, the Ministry warns again not to prepare
canned food at home, or at least to boil it for up to 30 minutes
before consumption.

From: Baghdasarian

EXPERT: ARMENIA WILL HAVE GREATER STRATEGIC ROLE FOR U.S.

November 7, 2012 – 20:28 AMT

PanARMENIAN.Net – The U.S. and Armenia will continue deepening of
bilateral relations after Barack Obama’s re-election, director of
Regional Studies Center (RSC) said.

According to Richard Giragosian, Armenia will henceforth boast
greater strategic role for the U.S., depending on Russian-American
relations also.

The expert further noted that Armenian Americans’ decision to back
none of the candidates will affect the community itself, rather than
relations with Obama.

“The move will unite, politically mobilize and further strengthen U.S.

Armenian lobby,” he told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

U.S. President Barack Obama has been re-elected to a second term,
defeating Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

With results in from most states, America’s first black president has
secured the 270 votes in the electoral college needed to win the race.

From: Baghdasarian

THE TURKISH-MADE ‘GREAT CALAMITY’: HOW ‘MEDZ YEGHERN’ BECAME ‘BUYUK FELAKET’

Posted by Vartan Matiossian on November 7, 2012

The “Metz Yeghern,” which means “Great Evil” in Armenian, is the name
we Armenians use for the genocide.

-Robert Attarian (2006)1

The quote comes from a lecture in Italian by the spokesperson for
the Consiglio per la comunita armena di Roma (Council of the Armenian
Community of Rome) on April 28, 2006. The use of “Medz Yeghern” and
“genocide” in the same sentence shows it to be part of a conscious
goal pursued by Italian Armenians as a way to encourage the adoption
of the phrase Medz Yeghern to identify the genocide in languages
other than Armenian.

obama yine buyuk felaket dedi 2404121200 m 300×203 The Turkish Made
‘Great Calamity’: How ‘Medz Yeghern’ Became ‘Buyuk Felâket’

Obama said “Buyuk Felaket” again. (Source: Odatv)

As one example among many, young Italian writer Paolo Cossi in
2007 published a graphic novel titled Medz Yeghern, il grande male
(Medz Yeghern: The Great Evil). It was clear that, in his mind, Medz
Yeghern was not a euphemism. “I made my first book Medz Yeghern to
explain and introduce the Armenian Genocide to the Italian people,”
said Cossi recently. “My motivation was a very human motivation in
the first place, and it was very important because it is the first
genocide of the 20th century. I wanted to create something that can
educate the Italian public about genocide because they know very
little about it.”2 So far, this graphic novel has been translated
into French, Spanish, Dutch, Greek, and Korean.

Medz Yeghern = Buyuk Felâket = Great Calamity

The gradual promotion of Medz Yeghern as “Great Evil” in Italy
occurred concurrently with the emergence of “Great Calamity” in the
United States, which also began to be used in Turkey under the form
of the recently developed equation Medz Yeghern =Buyuk Felâket
=Great Calamity.

The translation “Great Calamity” appears to have been facilitated by
the misplaced assumption that “yeghern” belongs to two semantic fields,
“crime” and “calamity.” In an essay on the 60th anniversary of the
genocide, a European Armenian author, Aram Terzian, wrote:

“Those mournful experiences have left a deep mark on the survivors,
amongst whom there were 300,000 orphans, and the special term of
medz yegherne is now part of their language as a consecrated word for
recalling the inhumanity of the period. Heavy sorrow has marked the
lives of the descendants of the martyrs. To the new generations, medz
yegherne carries the concept of ‘great crime’ or ‘great calamity,’
and they meditate on this subject of survival with almost mystical
sanctity.”3

The other misplaced assumption is that yeghern belongs to one semantic
field, “calamity/catastrophe,” as German Armenian sociologist Mihran
Dabag put forth in an article published in 1999: “Yegherne aradsch,
yegherne verdsch, before and after the Catastrophe; thus begins today
every Armenian storytelling and remembering.”4

In a study of the terminology on the genocide used in Armenian media,
published in 2006, scholar Khatchig Mouradian concluded that yeghern
had a double meaning, “Crime” and “Catastrophe,” whereas he translated
Medz Yeghern just as “Great Crime” and Abrilian Yeghern just as “the
April Crime.”5 In an expanded version published in 2009, he seemed to
slightly correct himself: he repeated the two meanings of yeghern and
wrote that Medz Yeghern meant “Great Crime/Catastrophe” and Abrilian
Yeghern, “the April Crime/Catastrophe.”6 In 2009, German historian
Annette Schaefgen hinted at the supposed dichotomy between yeghern
“Calamity” and Medz Yeghern “Great Crime,” but left unexplained how
“calamity” could have turned into “crime” overnight:

“The word “yeghern” has many meanings: ‘misfortune, disaster, mishap,
catastrophe.’ ‘Meds Yeghern,’ ‘great crime,’ indeed designated
the events of 1915-1916 in Armenian parlance, because the term
‘Tzeghaspanutium’ [sic], ‘race murder,’ however, was used for the
linguistic discussion of ‘genocide.'”7

A regular contributor to The Armenian Weekly, C. K. Garabed,
confessed in 2010 that he was “not familiar with the term Medz
Yeghern, and subsequently consulted various dictionaries to ascertain
its meaning.” He discovered that the definitions found in these
Armenian-English dictionaries revolved around the semantic field
of “crime”: “The older ones define it as Great Crime, misdemeanor,
offense, rascality; the more modern ones as Great Crime, atrocity,
murder.” But, nevertheless, he seemed inclined towards the “literary
translation” suggested by historian Dennis Papazian in a personal
communication: “Great Armenian Cataclysm.”8

Meanwhile, in 2009, Armenian-Turkish journalist Rober KoptaÅ~_,
citing Mouradian’s 2006 study, had written that Medz Yeghern meant
both Buyuk Felâket (Great Calamity) and Buyuk Suc (Great Crime).9 The
Turkish translation of President Barack Obama’s April 2012 message,
published by the Armenian Turkish weekly Agos, of which KoptaÅ~_ is the
current editor, followed this assumption: Medz Yeghern was awkwardly
translated as Buyuk Felâket in the first sentence and as Buyuk Kıyım
[Great Slaughter] in the last one,10 as if both words were synonyms.

Buyuk Felâket, the literal Turkish translation of “Great Calamity,”
has currently been shaped as the “permissible” term used to discuss
the genocide. Its use can be traced back to the New Year message
delivered by the Armenian patriarch of Turkey, Mesrob Mutafian,
in Armenian, English, and Turkish on the eve of 2005, in which he
referred to the genocide as “Medz Yeghern” in Armenian, “the Great
Disaster” in English, and “Buyuk Felâket” in Turkish. The first
paragraph of the English version read: “One of the painful historical
events…has become known in Armenian literature as Medz Yeghern (The
Great Disaster).” This paragraph was quoted and endorsed by Armenian
American columnist Harut Sassounian, who wrote: “For the benefit of
non-Armenian speaking readers, we should point out that Medz Yeghern
was used by Armenians to describe the Armenian Genocide before the word
genocide existed. Medz Yeghern could be translated alternatively as
‘Great Disaster,’ ‘Great Calamity,’ or ‘Great Cataclysm.’ Armenians
sometimes still refer to the Armenian Genocide as ‘Medz Yeghern,’
just as the Jews use the Hebrew word Shoah for the Holocaust.” He
also praised the patriarch’s “bold statement” on the “repressive
conditions” of Turkey: “We should point out that the patriarch, in
his statement, uses the term ‘annihilation,’ meaning extermination
or total destruction, which is another way of saying genocide.”11

The Italians have an expression: Si non è vero, è bel trovato
(Even if it is not true, it was beautifully researched). Turkish
writers had a variety of sources at their disposal (the BBC, the
New York Times, Mesrob Patriarch, and Harut Sassounian, for example)
to find the translation of Medz Yeghern as “Great Calamity” and use
their own Buyuk Felâket with some justification. Whatever its origin,
the translation appeared in the well-known online statement of apology
for the denial of the genocide issued by four Turkish intellectuals
in December 2008. Its first sentence in the English version read: “My
conscience does not accept the insensitivity showed to and the denial
of the Great Catastrophe [Buyuk Felâket, in the Turkish version]
that the Ottoman-Armenians were subjected to in 1915.” On Dec. 12,
2008, one of the four signatories, Baskın Oran, gave the following
exegesis to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: “You see, ‘Great
Catastrophe,’ in Armenian ‘Medz Yeghern,’ was the only definition,
the only expression, used until the Armenian Diaspora discovered the PR
value of ‘Armenian Genocide.’ Therefore, we use ‘Great Catastrophe.'”12

Another signatory, Cengiz Aktan, on Dec. 19 declared in a debate on
the Turkish TV channel Kanal D that “Metz Yeghern is a word from the
time of 1915. The term genocide and its basis in international law is
[sic] from 1948. From 1915 until 1948, the Armenian people who were
subjected to this were of course going to give a name to it. We used
the name that they themselves used.”13 The assumption was that Medz
Yeghern, with the purported translation “Great Catastrophe,” was a
“neutral” term used before genocide and thus more palatable to those
“moderates” on both sides who were willing to engage in a process of
“reconciliation.”

In a lecture in October 2009, Oran justified the use of Medz Yeghern
by arguing that the term was used in the Republic of Armenia; that it
was used in the name of the martyrs monument in Yerevan; that it was
used by Pope John Paul II in 2001 and there were no protests; that it
was used by Catholicos of All Armenians Karekin II in his address in
Armenian (translated as “genocide” in the English version) in 2001;
and that it was the main term used by Armenians before (and after)
“genocide.”14

Sassounian commented on the inaccuracies of the text: “Armenian critics
pointed out several shortcomings in the Turkish statement: First,
the apology avoided the term ‘Armenian Genocide’ by referring to it
as the ‘Great Catastrophe.’ Second, it alluded to the year 1915 only,
rather than 1915-23. Third, the apology was issued by individual Turks
rather than the Turkish state.”15 Scholar Marc Mamigonian remarked that
“the expression Medz Yeghern/Great Catastrophe has been appropriated
and superimposed onto the discussion as if those doing so–those
who have themselves only lately discovered the term–possess either
the moral or the scholarly authority to assert what terms should or
should not be used.”16

The Turkish press was flooded with the newly found Armenian phrase and
its “translations,” both in Turkish and in English (variously “Great
Calamity,” “Great Catastrophe,” or “Great Tragedy”). Even Archbishop
Aram Ateshyan, the current general vicar of the Patriarchate of
Constantinople, used “Great Catastrophe” as the translation of Medz
Yeghern in an interview to the German magazine Der Spiegel in April
2009.17 It appears that Buyuk Felaket was already available and just
needed to be equalized to Medz Yeghern to become an item of mass
consumption in the ongoing war of words. According to Yavuz Baydar,
his great-grandfather had described the Bulgarian invasion in Western
Thrace (during the Balkan War of 1912) as Buyuk Felaket. The take of
this Turkish columnist of Today’s Zaman was that Medz Yeghern was the
Armenian equivalent, “a popular term used in many similar contexts in
the storm of tragedies that, to a great extent, wiped out the soul
of Asia Minor; Greek deportations, Gallipoli, the Russian Front,
the Balkans and, of course, Armenians.”18

The Armenian press seems to have just gone along with the “translation”
without any background check. For instance, an unsigned commentary
in the Asbarez newspaper (probably written by the editor) quoted the
text of the apology and added: “Then we have this ‘Great Catastrophe’
stuff. Maybe they’re just using a translation of our own, older,
usage of Medz Yeghern. Regardless, it’s not ‘genocide.’ So, it’s at
best sub-standard, more likely intentionally evasive for political and
personal safety reasons, or possibly intentionally duplicitous.”19
Three days later, the English translation of the above-mentioned
debate in Kanal D was posted on the internet. It featured several
retired ambassadors, including veteran denialist M. Å~ukru Elekdag,
a former ambassador to the United States and a parliament member
at the time, who made a harsh criticism of the apology that went
unnoticed by Armenian commentators: “Firstly, they are referring
to Great Catastrophe; this is Metz Yeghern in Armenian. This word
is a synonym for genocide. The difference between the two words is
as little as the difference between mass slaughter and mass killing
(kitle katliamı and kitlesel öldurme). There is no difference between
them. When Metz Yeghern is used, Armenians understand genocide. When
some official person goes to Armenia, visits the Monument, and wishes
to condemn genocide as well as not to offend the Turkish Republic
they use Metz Yeghern; and Armenians accept this. This statement
is tantamount to supporting the genocide campaign of the Armenian
Diaspora. It would have been alright to use terms like great tragedy
or pain. The concept of Great Catastrophe is an established term;
it has a loaded meaning which is very difficult to change. Therefore,
it naturally causes reactions. … Today, Metz Yeghern is a totally
established term. And it is synonymous with genocide. It is not
possible to understand this statement any differently.”20

Indeed, Elekdag ignored, intentionally or not, that there is a literal
Armenian translation of “genocide” and that Medz Yeghern does not mean
“Great Catastrophe.” But, otherwise, he seemed to have learned his
lessons remarkably well. He knew that whenever Medz Yeghern is used,
Armenians understand genocide.

Medz Yeghern = Buyuk Felâket?

If not a non-Turkish source, it might be assumed that the source of
the Turkish translation as “Great Calamity” or “Great Catastrophe”
could have been an Armenian-Turkish dictionary or wordlist. Our
investigation into an array of available bibliography yielded the
following results:21

yeghern11 584×1024 The Turkish Made ‘Great Calamity’: How ‘Medz
Yeghern’ Became ‘Buyuk Felâket’

The evidence from the dictionaries yields the conclusions that before
and after 1915:

1) Yeghern meant cinayet, suÄ~M or kabahat;

2) Aghed meant felâket or bela

Therefore, the translation of Medz Yeghern as Buyuk Felâket, which
would imply the meaning Great Calamity/Great Catastrophe/Great
Disaster, is unwarranted.

Notes

1 See

2 The Armenian Weekly, May 17, 2012 (emphasis added).

3 Aram Terzian, “1915: The Darkest Year,” Armenian Review, Summer 1975,
p. 158.

4 Mihran Dabag, “Feien des Gedenkens,” in Bernhard Scheneider and
Richard Jochum (eds.), Erinnerungen an das Töten: Genozid reflexiv,
Vienna, Cologne and Weimar: Böhlau, 1999, p. 49.

5 The Armenian Weekly, Sept. 23, 2006.

6 Khatchig Mouradian, “From Yeghern to Genocide: Armenian Newspapers,
Raphael Lemkin, and the Road to the UN Genocide Convention,” Haigazian
Armenological Review, vol. 29, 2009, p.

128.

7 Annette Schaefgen, “Von der treuen millet zum Sundenbock oder
Die Legende vom armenische DolschtoÃ~_,” in Wolfgang Benz (ed.),
Vorurteil und Genozid: Ideologische Prämische der Völkermords,
Vienna, Cologne and Weimar: Böhlau, 2010, p. 59.

8 The Armenian Weekly, June 3, 2010.

9 Radikal, May 3, 2009.

10 Agos, April 25, 2012.

11 California Courier, Jan. 5, 2005.

12 Quoted in Marc Mamigonian, “Commentary on the Turkish Apology
Campaign,” Armenian Weekly/Hairenik Weekly magazine, April 2009,
p. 19, 21.

13
See
y-on.html

14 Baskın Oran, “Denialism and Civil Society in Turkey,” Clark
University, Strassler Family Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies
(baskinoran.com/konferans/ClarkUniversity.pdf).

15 The Huffington Post, Dec. 18, 2008.

16 Mamigonian, “Commentary,” p. 22.

17 The Armenian Weekly, May 7, 2009.

18 Today’s Zaman, April 27, 2009.

19 Asbarez, Dec. 24, 2008 (emphasis added).

20
y-on.html (emphasis added).

21 Bargirk haykazian lezvi (Dictionary of the Classical Armenian
Language), vol. 2, Venice: Antoni Bortoli, 1769, p. 9, 113; Rev.

Emmanuele Ciakciak, Nuovo dizionario italiano-armeno-turco, Venecia:
Tipografia Armena di San Lazzaro, 1829, p. 83, 174, 436; Nor bargirk
Haykazian lezvi (New Dictionary of the Classical Armenian Language),
vol. 1, Venice: S. Lazarus Press, 1836, p. 654; [Rev. Sukias Somalian],
A Pocket Dictionary of the Armenian, English and Turkish languages,
Venice: Press of the Armenian College of St. Lazarus, 1843, p. 20,
127, 316; [Idem], A Pocket Dictionary of the English, Armenian
and Turkish languages, Venice: Press of the Armenian College of
St. Lazarus, 1843, p. 76, 145; Krikor Peshdimaldjian, Bargirk
haykazian lezvi (Dictionary of the Classical Armenian Language),
Constantinople: Boghos Arabian, 1844, p. 17, 325; [Rev. Pilibbos
Chamchian], Nuovo dizionario Italiano-Francese-Armeno-Turco, Vienna:
PP. Mechitaristi, 1856, p. 143, 166, 581; Djanig Aram, Dictionnaire
abrégé Arménien-Turc-Francais, Paris: Typographie Arménienne, 1860,
p. 2, 17; Rev. Srabion Eminian, Baragirk gagghieren-hayeren-tajkeren
(Dictionary French-Armenian-Turkish), Vienna: Mekhitarist Press,
1871, p. 155, 254, 743 (first edition, 1851); M. K. Minassian, A
Dictionary, English, Armenian and Armeno-Turkish, Constantinople:
V. and H. Der Nersessian, 1908, p.

155, 246; Bedros Zeki Garabedian, Metz bararan osmanerene hayeren
(Great Dictionary Ottoman-Armenian), Constantinople: Arshag Garoyan,
1912, p. 270, 594; Rev. Aristakes Bohjalian, Trkerene hayeren ardzern
bararan (Turkish-Armenian Practical Dictionary), Istanbul: Armenian
Turkish Teachers’ Organization, 1981, p. (first edition, 1974), p. 60,
138, 432; R. H. Baghramyan and I. H. Khalilov, Hay-adrbejaneren
bararan (Armenian-Azerbaijani Dictionary), Yerevan: Luys, 1978,
p. 16, 124; Rev. Aristakes Bohjalian, Hayerene hayeren batsadrakan
ardzern bararan (Armenian-Armenian Practical Explanatory Dictionary),
Istanbul: Armenian Turkish Teachers’ Organization, 1991, p. 12, 142
(first edition, 1974); Katarine Kondakjian, Turkeren-hayeren bararan
(Turkish-Armenian Dictionary), Yerevan: Antares, 2003, p. 109, 137,
292; R. S. Ghazaryan, Turkeren-hayeren bararan, Yerevan: Mitk, 2003,
p. 82, 164, 432; Birsen Karaca, Dogu Ermenice-Turkce sözluk, second
edition, Ankara: Ankara University, 2007, p. 76.

From: Baghdasarian

PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSYAN SENT A CONGRATULATORY LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA BARACK OBAMA

07.11.2012

651x582px – 291 Kb Today, President Serzh Sargsyan sent a
congratulatory letter to the President of the United States of America
Barack Obama on the occasion of his re-election as the President of
the USA.

The letter states,

“Your Excellency,

I cordially congratulate you on your reelection as President of the
United States of America.

Your impressive victory has proven that the course taken by you for
moving the United States forward, your domestic and international
policy meet the expectations of the overwhelming majority of the
American people.

We are grateful for the continuing assistance provided to Armenia by
the United States. I am also greatly pleased that with your reelection
we will be able to continue to develop and deepen the Armenian-American
relations which currently enjoy the highest level in the history
of our bilateral contacts. I remain confident that during the four
years of your second term our multifaceted cooperation will yield
new impressive results for the mutual benefit of our peoples.

Mr. President, please accept once again my warmest congratulations
and best wishes.”

From: Baghdasarian