Author: Kanayan Tamar

WHOM TIGRAN SARGSYAN WILL ANSWER

On July 4 Tigran Sargsyan sent a congratulatory message to the U.S.
vice-president on the occasion of Independence Day and assured that
the government will do its best to improve the Armenian-American
relations. Tigran Sargsyan stated during the session of government
that it is time to answer and instructed the minister of finance
to send to the prosecutor general office the material on breaches
revealed by the control department of the ministry. A couple of days
ago, Tigran Sargsyan awarded the prosecutor general with a medal on
the occasion of the 95th anniversary of the prosecutor’s office.

Whom will Tigran Sargsyan answer since he says it is time to answer?

Does he mean U.S. vice-president whom he met last December during
his visit to the U.S.? During the visit the U.S. presented all its
expectations. Perhaps, it is time for Tigran Sargsyan to answer
for those expectations because Americans are not going to wait and
hear excuses.

Besides, Tigran Sargsyan probably means that others need to answer,
those who rendered him a target strengthening the pressure on him.

Prime Minister received a serious support from Serzh Sargsyan so he
is making brave statements at the session of the government perhaps
openly threatening to those who pressure him.

By the way, in this sense, his order to send materials on breaches
to the prosecutor’s office is interesting. Probably, he was preparing
those materials when awarding prosecutor general Aghvan Hovsepyan.

Sargsyan wants Hovsepyan to have a positive approach to the materials
that he will reach from the ministry of finance.

It is especially interesting that the control department of the
ministry of finance paid much attention to the effectiveness of the
diesel fuel subsidized by the state. The control department found out
the process of distribution of fuel was ineffective. In this context,
it is worth mentioning the fact that in Ararat marz, not poor farmers
but Hovik Abrahamyan’s relatives, who can hardly be considered socially
vulnerable, received the cheap fuel.

So, does Tigran Sargsyan mean that Hovik Abrahamyan will answer for
using the subsidized fuel especially considering that Abrahamyan
was one of the most active figures who demanded explanations from
the government after the revelations of the Control Chamber? Though,
Abrahamyan has already answered saying that his relatives didn’t do
anything illegal because the fuel was not for farmer of a certain
status, but for everyone.

Besides, there is also the issue when Tigran Sargsyan himself will
answer not to the U.S. or Europe whose ambassador he used to be in
Armenia, but to the society. And not only for the offshore story,
about which the only answer Tigran Sargsyan gave was that he didn’t
know about the registration of the company to his name, which is
ridiculous after the explanation of the Cypriot prosecutor. It was
necessary to award not the Armenian prosecutor, but the Cypriot.

The society expects answers from Tigran Sargsyan about the economic
policy. And he needs to answer as the prime minister who has been
talking for five years about reforms, which have had the opposite
effect on ordinary citizens and businessmen. Maybe this inability has
“objective” reasons because as Vazgen Manukyan used to say Tigran
Sargsyan’s hands are tied. But if Tigran Sargsyan told it honestly
to the society, the latter could free him.

It is easy to say someone’s hands are tied without saying who ties
them and advising people to wait and hope.

If the prime minister means that it is time to answer the society,
then this time has come and passed since long.

HAKOB BADALYAN 14:04 04/07/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:

“GROOMSMEN” OF CHEAP GAS

Armenians wonder how the country will benefit if it signs the
Association Agreement with European Union or if it joins the
Customs Union. Indeed, there is no discussion and awareness within
the public. In this sense, those who see Armenia in the Customs or
Eurasian Union are more active.

Probably the reason is that the Association with EU does not need
advertisement since it is senseless to compare the development
and achievements of the European Union and Eurasian territory. The
supporters of the Eurasian Union have nothing else to do but to paint
the EU success of “blue” color, and present the Eurasian Union as
the only economic lifebelt which may save Armenia.

Along with all this, there is the reality: according to the data
of the Russian central bank, in the first quarter, 25 billion USD
left Russia. What does this mean? This means that it turned out
inexpedient to invest this capital in Russia, in case this country
needs investments to get up from the oil and gas needle. Russia,
in fact, does not trust itself if in one quarter such a huge capital
leaves the country. According to the same data, in April-May period,
another 10 billion left the country.

The movement of capital is one of the indexes of the vitality and
attraction of the economy, and Russia is supposed to be the axis of
the Eurasian economic union.

Under these conditions, it is dilettantism to say that Russia will
provide cheap gas to the members of the Customs or Eurasian Union. The
myth on cheap gas vanished in 2006-2008 when Armenia sold the Hrazdan
State District Power Plant in order to subsidize the gas price for
companies. Then-president Robert Kocharyan said that buying cheaper
gas, our country will become more competitive.

But, it didn’t happen because the guarantee for a competitive state
is not the cheap gas but competitive, legal field and independent
judiciary system, when businessmen are not the friends of the
governmental clan but people who have an innate characteristic,
knowledge and ability of doing business.

Consequently, rendering the cheap gas price topic the main argument
of joining the Eurasian or Customs Union means once again blowing a
balloon and wait to see it exploding.

At the same time, in the meantime capital is flowing out of Russia,
U.S. and Europe are trying to agree on a free trade zone. This may lead
to huge results in the world economy. The negotiations won’t be easy,
especially in case of the Snowden scandal which caused Europeans’
dissatisfaction from Washington. But the formation of a common free
trade zone is an important strategic and security issue for both,
so they will surely come to terms on it.

Anyway, in terms of prospects, it is evident where the processes are
more beneficial for Armenia. Going somewhere from where the capital
escapes, means at least short-sightedness, as much as it is not trying
to get closer to a process formed by the most powerful world segment.

In terms of economic criteria, association with the European Union is
evidently beneficial both in present and future terms since Armenia
just needs to enter the system in order to ensure changes.

This does not mean that in a short period after signing the Association
agreement, we will witness changes because they supposes for more
serious steps inside the country. The point is that association with
Europe creates the preconditions for such changes. It is a different
question if Armenia will or won’t use them. As to the Customs and
Eurasian Union, they are guarantees for the preservation of the current
system and conditions, because the members of these unions are those,
who are Armenia’s “groomsmen” in systemic terms.

JAMES HAKOBYAN 12:37 04/07/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:

COLONEL WOUNDED IN GORIS SHOOTOUT TO BE DISCHARGED FROM HOSPITAL ON THURSDAY

July 04, 2013 | 12:09

YEREVAN. – Colonel Artak Budaghyan, who was wounded in a shootout
near the house of Armenia’s former Syunik regional governor, will be
discharged from hospital on Thursday.

MOD Central Garrison Military Hospital Director Aram Asaturyan told
the aforesaid to Armenian News-NEWS.am.

He noted that Budaghyan’s health condition is normal. Incidentally,
the Central Military Medical Commission issued a 20-day post-treatment
leave of absence to the officer.

Budaghyan will spend his leave of absence in Goris city, his relatives
told Armenian News-NEWS.am; they are heading back to Goris on Thursday.

As Armenian News-NEWS.am informed earlier, shots were fired nearby
Syunik governor Suren Khachatryan’s home in Goris city, on June 2
at around 12:10am. As a result, one person was killed and two others
sustained gunshot wounds and were taken to Goris hospital. The person
who died was Avo Budaghyan, the former Goris mayoral candidate. The
wounded were Budaghyan’s brother Artak, and Nikolay Abrahamyan,
a relative and bodyguard of Khachatryan. Subsequently, the wounded
were transferred to capital city Yerevan.

A criminal case is launched on charges of murder and illegal carrying,
possession, and use of arms and ammunition. The Military Prosecutor’s
Office is conducting the investigation.

Two people are arrested in connection with this incident. One of
them is the Syunik regional governor’s son, Tigran Khachatryan, 19,
and the other is the governor’s bodyguard, Zarzand Nikoghosyan.

Pursuant to his petition, Suren Khachatryan was relieved of his duties
as Governor of Syunik Region.

News from Armenia – NEWS.am

FRUNZIK MKRTCHYAN WOULD HAVE BECOME 83 TODAY

09:42, 4 July, 2013

YEREVAN, JULY 4, ARMENPRESS: Today, on July 4, is the birthday
anniversary of the prominent Armenian actor, the great comedy actor of
the cinema and theater Mher Lazarian. Mher Lazarian, better known by
his stage name Frunzik, was a popular Soviet Armenian actor. Frunzik
was named a People’s Artist of the Soviet Union in 1984.

Mher Lazarian was born in Leninakan (now Gyumri), the Armenian SSR.

Frunzik studied in Leninakan Art College and Theatre Studio and then
graduated from the Acting Department of Yerevan Institute of Fine
Arts and Theatre. Beginning from 1953, the actor performed in the
Sundukyan Drama Theatre of Yerevan.

Frunzik also directed many successful productions, the best of which
was Maxim Gorky’s “The Lower Depths”. The cinema career of Mher
Lazarian began in 1955.

Frunzik’s famous roles in Rolan Bykov’s “Aybolit-66” (1966), Leonid
Gaidai’s “Kidnapping, Caucasian Style” (1966), and Georgi Daneliya’s
“Mimino” (1977) earned him a reputation as one of the Soviet Union’s
leading comedy actors. But that reputation sometimes overshadowed
his real talent and emotional depth which he put into his roles
in such classics of Armenian cinema as “Yerankyuni” (“Triangle”)
(1967), “Menq enq, mer sarere” (“We, Our Mountains”) (1969), “Hayrik”
(“Father”) (1973), “Nahapet” (1977), “Hin oreri yerge” (“Old Days’
Song”) (1982), “Mer mankutyan tangon” (“Tango of Our Childhood”)
(1985). Among his many awards was the USSR State Prize for 1978.

Mher Lazarian died in Yerevan, Armenia, on December 29 in 1993. The
house-museum of Frunzik functions currently in the second capital of
the Republic of Armenia, Gyumri, where one can find rich materials
concerning the life and the creative way of the great Armenian actor,
as well as his personal things.

Even though he was known as a comedic actor, Lazarian’s personal
life was filled with tragedy. His first wife, Donara Lazarian, became
mentally ill and was sent to a mental institution for the rest of her
life. Lazarian became a single parent of two young children. His son
inherited his mother’s mental illness. Thousands of people attended
the funeral of their beloved actor.

“LISKA STOLE MORE THAN 200 MILLION DOLLARS FROM ARMENIANS”

Mayor of Goris in 1992-94 Samvel Harutiunyan told Aravot.am more
details about the property of the former governor of Syunik Surik
Khachatryan.

Liska has stolen more than 200 million dollars from the Armenian
people. He says that when Surik Khachatryan came to Goris in 1990,
he had a small apartment and an old Lada car. With the time passing
he bought his huge villa on funds raised for the dome of St. Grigor
Illuminator church.

Upon the decision of the government, he misappropriated part of the
school and connected it to his yard where the recent crime was staged.

He privatized also the newly-built public bath of the city.

He bought for only 20,000 USD the three-storey administrative building
in Goris, and only a few months later he sold it three times more
expensively to the ministry of energy.

Now he owns for 99 years the second largest lake in Armenia which is
rich in big trout fish is used for his family, gang and governmental
elite. He also owns the Karahunj water reservoir for 99 years, as well
as huge land plots and the resort built in the 1970s near the lake.

All his property is registered in the name of his family members
and relatives.

On Yerevan-Stepanakert highway, you can find an illegal night club
which belongs to his brother.

He took almost free of charge and registered in the name of his wife
the unfinished pool in Goris. An unregistered restaurant in Goris has
been operating for already ten years which has never paid any taxes,
bills for electricity, gas and water.

Aravot.am 11:55 04/07/2013 Story from Lragir.am News:

EUROPALIA 2015 HONORE LA TURQUIE NéGATIONNISTE

Publié le : 04-07-2013

Info Collectif VAN – – “Alors que toutes les
forces démocratiques du monde se préparent déja a la commémoration
du 100e anniversaire du génocide des Arméniens, les dirigeants
néo-ottomans de la Turquie persistent toujours dans la négation
de ce crime honteux commis par l’Empire ottoman sur les terres qui
étaient la mère patrie arménienne. Sans tenir compte du fait que
l’an 2015 est le centenaire du premier génocide du 20e siècle, le
Conseil d’administration d’Europalia International a décidé le 23
mai 2013 de consacrer Europalia 2015 a la Turquie”. (…) Tout n’est
pas perdu cependant : “Comme souligné par la Libre Belgique du 28
mai 2013, Europalia avait dÔ interrompre en mars 1995 l’organisation
de l’édition 96 consacrée a la Turquie en raison du “manque de
respect de la Turquie dans le programme de la diversité culturelle,
en ce compris la dimension kurde”. Puisque de toute évidence, la
politique négationniste étatique de la Turquie n’a pas suffit a
différer le choix de ce pays pour Europalia 2015, il est a souhaiter
– au vu des récents manquements démocratiques du régime d’Ankara,
largement démontrés par la répression meurtrière a l’encontre la
contestation lanc̩e place Taksim le 31 mai dernier Рque le Conseil
d’administration d’Europalia International reviendra sur cette
décision insultante pour les millions de victimes de génocide et
leurs descendants. Le Collectif VAN vous présente cette information
mise en ligne sur le site Info-Turk le mercredi 3 juillet 2013.

© Imga Globe

Info-Turk

Europalia 2015 a la Turquie qui persiste dans la négation du
génocide 1915

Alors que toutes les forces démocratiques du monde se préparent déja
a la commémoration du 100e anniversaire du génocide des Arméniens,
les dirigeants néo-ottomans de la Turquie persistent toujours dans
la négation de ce crime honteux commis par l’Empire ottoman sur les
terres qui étaient la mère patrie arménienne.

Sans tenir compte du fait que l’an 2015 est le centenaire du premier
génocide du 20e siècle, le Conseil d’administration d’Europalia
International a décidé le 23 mai 2013 de consacrer Europalia 2015
a la Turquie.

La décision du Conseil d’administration d’Europalia International
a déja suscité des réactions comme ce fut le cas en 1995.

En effet, comme souligné par la Libre Belgique du 28 mai 2013,
Europalia avait dÔ interrompre en mars 1995 l’organisation de
l’édition 96* consacrée a la Turquie en raison du “manque de respect
de la Turquie dans le programme de la diversité culturelle, en ce
compris la dimension kurde”.

Premières réactions arméniennes

Après la nouvelle attribution d’Europalia a la Turquie, le président
de la Communauté arménienne de Belgique, Me Michel Mahmourian,
a lancé l’appel suivant:

“Il est évident que le choix de l’année 2015 n’est dÔ ni au hasard
ni a l’initiative de la partie belge.

Si inviter la Turquie est déja en soi discutable – rappelons qu’en
1995 le gouvernement fédéral s’est opposé a l’invitation de la
Turquie pour des raisons politiques – nous ne pouvons pas ne pas
réagir au choix de l’année 2015. Réagissons donc, mais pas seuls.

2015 sera le centenaire du génocide des Arméniens mais aussi du
commencement de l’anéantissement de tous les chrétiens de l’Empire
ottoman. L’occasion nous est ainsi donnée de réunir a nous les
Grecs et les Assyro-chaldéens, et même de solliciter le soutien
d’autres minorités ex-ottomanes soucieuses de se démarquer de la
position officielle turque.”

**********************************************************************

Par ailleurs, Nouvelles d’Arménie Magazine a réagi avec l’article
suivant :

Le Festival Europalia invite la Turquie en 2015 !

“Alors même que le processus d’adhésion de la Turquie a l’Union
européenne reste dans l’impasse en raison du refus d’Ankara de remplir
ses obligations, le Conseil d’administration d’Europalia International
(1) a choisi ce 23 mai 2013 la Turquie comme pays invité en 2015-2016.

Après la Russie, la Chine, le Brésil et l’Inde -qui présentera
ses trésors du 4 octobre 2013 au 26 janvier 2014- c’est la Turquie
qui sera mise a l’honneur pendant plusieurs mois dès l’automne
2015. 2015 sera également une année anniversaire pour Europalia,
qui proposera son 25ème festival au public européen et fêtera ses
45 ans d’existence. Dans son histoire, Europalia s’est largement
consacrée a la présentation de la culture des pays d’Europe, et
plus récemment a celle des pays asiatiques.

Devant un tel affront envers la communauté arménienne qui
commémorera en 2015 le centième anniversaire du génocide des
Arméniens perpétré sur ordre du gouvernement turc ottoman,
c’est l’incompréhension qui prévaut, pour ne pas dire plus. S’il
y avait bien une date a éviter, c’était bien celle-ci. Mais a
n’en pas douter, les organisateurs doivent avoir la mémoire courte,
puisqu’il y a déja 15 ans, le Sénat belge invitait le gouvernement
turc a reconnaître la réalité du génocide perpétré en 1915 par
le dernier gouvernement de l’empire ottoman”.

En cette circonstance inqualifiable dont on ne peut que s’indigner
vis-a-vis de la communauté arménienne de Belgique, rappelons les
paroles de l’ancien sénateur Belge Francois Roelants du Vivier,
qui écrivait en 2007 :

Belgique et Génocide Arménien, l’honneur perdu d’une certaine
classe politique

“Voici plusieurs années que la Belgique vit au rythme de déclarations
négationnistes au sujet du génocide arménien. Tout cela a commencé
en 2005 par une interview d’un Secrétaire d’Etat socialiste de la
Région de Bruxelles, Emir Kir, au cours de laquelle ce dernier, Belge
d’origine turque, mettait en doute le génocide arménien que le Sénat
belge avait pourtant reconnu en 1998. Signataire de la résolution
du Parlement européen en 1987, je ne pouvais laisser passer de tels
propos et, de fil en aiguille, cela m’a amené a prendre une position
en pointe sur le sujet, notamment en déposant une proposition de loi
visant a pénaliser la négation et la minimisation du génocide. La
Belgique n’est pas la France : les Belges d’origine turque y sont 130
000, tandis que la diaspora arménienne compte quelque 7 000 personnes.

De bas calculs électoralistes ont conduit la même famille politique
qui, en France, mène le combat le plus ardent pour la sanction
du négationnisme a épouser la cause du régime d’Ankara afin de
s’attirer les bonnes grâces de l’électorat d’origine turque qui,
singulièrement dans certains quartiers de Bruxelles, pèse lourd
en termes de conseillers municipaux.” […] J’ai subi un certain
nombre de manÅ”uvres d’intimidation visant a me faire taire. Il n’y a
qu’une issue a cette situation : rétablir la paix civile en Belgique
par une législation qui punisse pénalement ceux qui par leurs
paroles, leurs écrits ou leurs comportements nient ou minimisent
le génocide arménien. Car, bien plus qu’en France, la communauté
d’origine arménienne subit presque quotidiennement cette terrible
et éprouvante continuation du génocide de 1915 : et cela, en 2007″.

” Pays candidat en négociation d’adhésion a l’UE et pays de
croisement des cultures, la Turquie est un choix idéal pour ces
anniversaires, expliquent les organisateurs d’Europalia. Une belle
opportunité également de nouer des liens avec la communauté turque
de Belgique et des autres pays européens en proposant au public de
découvrir l’inouïe richesse culturelle de ce pays. ” “Ce sera aussi
le dernier festival dirigé par Kristine De Mulder [élevée au rang
de baronne en 2012 ndlr], qui en est la directrice depuis dix ans”
écrit Francois Janne d’Othée dans Le Vif.be du 28 mai.

Doté d’un budget de 7 millions d’euros, le festival Europalia est
soutenu par de grands sponsors privés mais aussi par les différents
niveaux de pouvoir en Belgique. Sont notamment administrateurs la
Banque Nationale de Belgique, mais surtout le Parlement Européen et
le Conseil de l’Europe qui, respectivement, ont reconnu le génocide
arménien : en 1987 pour l’un, et 1998 pour l’autre…

L’Ambassade de Turquie en Belgique a déja choisi 2015 pour fêter
le cinquantenaire de l’immigration turque et ainsi faire de l’ombre
aux commémorations du centenaire du Génocide des Arméniens.

Il faut donc espérer que les différents niveaux de pouvoir en
Belgique qui soutiennent “Europalia-Turquie” en 2015 n’empêcheront
pas la mise en place de manifestations commémorant le centenaire
du Génocide des Arméniens qui aura lieu la même année, que la
présence de la culture arménienne dans “l’inouïe richesse culturelle
de ce pays” sera aussi représentée lors de cette manifestation
et que l’Ã~Itat turc n’en profitera pas pour exporter sa politique
négationniste sur le sol belge.

(…)

(1) Lancé a Bruxelles en 1969, Europalia est un festival international
qui présente tous les deux ans l’essentiel du patrimoine culturel
d’un pays. D’octobre a février, a Bruxelles et dans de nombreuses
villes belges et limitrophes, le festival met en scène toutes les
pratiques artistiques : musique, arts plastiques, cinéma, théâtre,
danse, littérature, architecture, design, mode, gastronomie…

Europalia International ; Galerie Ravenstein, 4 – B 1000 Bruxelles
Bureau : Marie Eve Tesch [email protected]

**********************************************************************

Retour sur un article contre Europalia 96 qui était également
prévue pour la Turquie, avant d’être annulée :

Europalia 96: festivités de la honte?

Dogan Ozguden Rédacteur en chef d’Info-Turk

La condamnation de huit députés kurdes par la Cour de sÔreté
de l’Ã~Itat d’Ankara a suscité, dans toutes les parties du monde,
une avalanche de critiques et la réprobation qu’elle mérite. Il
s’agit d’un camouflet aux organisations humanitaires et a plusieurs
leaders européens choqués par l’arrestation des élus d’une nation.

Ce jugement scandaleux suit la dévastation, juste a la veille du
sommet de la CSCE, des bureaux du quotidien ”Ozgur Ulke” que les
autorités turques n’ont pas réussi a museler par l’arrestation,
la condamnation et l’assassinat de ses journalistes.

Déja, depuis des mois, l’armée turque mettait le feu a des villages
kurdes sous prétexte d’anéantir les sources logistiques de la
guérilla kurde.

Depuis des années, la Turquie est le seul pays membre du Conseil
de l’Europe où plus d’une centaine de journalistes, écrivains,
académiciens et artistes paient dans les prisons le prix de leur
courage et de leur résistance a l’oppression d’un tiers de la
population de leur pays.

Après huit ans de laxisme et de tolérance, le Parlement européen
a suspendu carrément toutes ses relations avec le Parlement turc en
signe de protestation contre l’arrestation des députés kurdes. Et
le Conseil de l’Europe a averti la Turquie qu’elle pourrait être
exclue si ces députés kurdes n’étaient pas relâchés. (…)
Après la condamnation des députés kurdes, le ministre belge des
Affaires étrangères, Frank Vandenbroeck, comme plusieurs de ses
collègues européens, n’a pas tardé a qualifier d’inadmissibles
les pratiques répressives en Turquie.

De plus, la discussion d’un accord d’union douanière avec la Turquie,
considérée par Ankara comme étape décisive vers l’intégration a
l’Union européenne, a fait l’objet de contestations et de restrictions
de la part du Parlement européen: les ministres des Affaires
étrangères ont mis le dossier au frigo, au moins jusqu’au printemps.

Il est réjouissant que des milieux européens aient ainsi réagi a
la dictature militaro-parlementaire du Premier ministre Tansu Ciller
qui avait personnellement provoqué l’arrestation des députés kurdes
et la levée de leur immunité parlementaire. Toutefois, l’Europe et,
particulièrement, la Belgique se trouvent maintenant confrontées a
un autre test pour prouver leur sincérité vis-a-vis de l’hypocrisie
d’Ankara.

La Turquie est, depuis le 1er février 1994, le pays choisi pour
l’Europalia 96. Malgré plusieurs appels lancés par des organisations
démocratiques et humanitaires, la Fondation Europalia a, avec la
signature du pré-accord le 31 janvier 1994, a Ankara, invité ce plus
mauvais élève de la démocratie européenne a l’Europalia prochain.

(…)

Comment la Belgique accueillera-t-elle les dirigeants d’un tel
pays aux festivités de 1996 alors que des hommes de culture et de
science, kurdes ou turcs, sont toujours la cible principale de la
terreur d’Ã~Itat?

Alors que le sociologue Ismail Besikci, qui est turc, purge des
peines de prison totalisant plus de soixante ans et risque encore
une centaine d’années supplémentaires aux procès pendants pour
ses écrits défendant l’identité et la culture kurdes, comment la
Belgique recevra-t-elle ses geôliers?

Qui plus est, alors que l’Anatolie est le berceau de plusieurs
civilisations, comment l’Europalia 96 pourra-t-il faire la propagande
d’un régime qui détruit systématiquement tous les vestiges de
ces civilisations?

Car, avant l’arrivée des Turcs en Anatolie, en 1071, les Kurdes,
les Grecs, les Arméniens et les Assyriens étaient déja la. Si l’on
parle de la splendeur et de la richesse des valeurs culturelles et
artistiques de l’Anatolie, il faut admettre qu’elles sont également
l’Å”uvre de tous ces peuples autochtones.

Or, ces peuples et leurs valeurs artistiques, culturelles et
religieuses sont systématiquement anéantis par le régime
d’Ankara. Il ne reste, a l’heure actuelle, que quelques dizaines
de milliers d’Arméniens, Assyriens et Grecs en Turquie. Leurs
derniers refuges culturels et religieux ne sont-ils pas menacés de
destruction? Quant aux Kurdes, leurs villages, leurs terres natales
sont en flammes sous l’assaut du chauvinisme déchaîné de l’armée
turque et de l’extrême droite.

Comment le roi des Belges et les dirigeants fédéraux, communautaires
ou régionaux pourront-ils ”embrasser” les représentants d’un tel
régime sous prétexte de faire connaître la richesse culturelle
d’Anatolie?

”C’est la Belgique qui nous fera connaître a l’Europe”, ”Une
occasion historique”, ”Les drapeaux turcs a Bruxelles”, ”Une
chance européenne pour la Turquie!” C’est avec ces titres-la que
les journaux turcs pro-gouvernementaux annoncaient la décision
controversée pour l’Europalia 96.

Avant et après la signature de l’accord, le ministère turc des
Affaires étrangères a rassemblé maintes fois des hommes d’affaires
turcs et les a appelés a apporter le plus large financement possible
afin de séduire l’Europe en 1996 a Bruxelles. Europalia 96 est déja
un cheval de bataille pour une diplomatie a la solde du terrorisme
d’Ã~Itat.

La Belgique ne le savait-elle pas ou ne le prévoyait-elle pas? (…)

Toutefois, malgré cette décision maladroite, surtout après la
condamnation des députés kurdes, n’est-il pas pensable de renoncer
tout simplement a l’Europalia-Turquie, de le reporter a une date
ultérieure – celle où la Turquie fera la preuve de sa maturité
démocratique et n’emprisonnera plus ses hommes et femmes de culture
et de science, celle où tous les peuples créateurs de la splendeur
culturelle d’Anatolie, Arméniens, Assyriens, Grecs et Kurdes, ainsi
que les Turcs attachés aux valeurs démocratiques européennes,
ne subiront plus la terreur d’Ã~Itat.

Cela nous paraît indispensable pour que l’Europalia 96 ne risque pas
de se transformer en festivités de la honte pour l’Europe. (Le Soir,
23 décembre 1994).

* Article de Dogan Ozguden intitulé “Europalia ’96: festivités de
la honte?”, Le Soir, 23 décembre 1994

Retour a la rubrique

Source/Lien : Info-Turk

PARIS AUSSI COMMEMORE LA MEMOIRE DE VAHE AVEDYAN – PHOTOS

Une messe de requiem a eu lieu le dimanche 30 juin 2013 en l’eglise
apostolique armenienne de Paris a l’occasion du 1er anniversaire de
l’assassinat de Vahe Avedyan, medecin-officier de l’armee armenienne.

L’assassinat avait eu lieu aux alentours du restaurant ” Harsnakar
” propriete de l’oligarque Roupen Hayrabedian le 29 jun2012.

La messe de requiem a ete celebree a l’initiative du mouvement
Renaissance Armenienne, la branche de Paris. Pendant la messe, fut
evoquee, outre le nom de Vahe Avedyan, ceux egalement de nombreux
militants martyrs decedes durant ces dernières decennies.

JPEG – 99.1 ko Des tracts en francais et en armenien ont ete distribues
a la sortie de l’eglise de la rue Jean Goujon par les militants de
ce mouvement.

Après la messe, une gerbe de fleurs a ete deposee devant le khatchkar
situe dans la cour de l’archeveche en hommage a Vahe Avedyan. Schant
Vosgueritchian, porte-parole du mouvement, a lu en presence du
public un communique publie par la branche allemande de Renaissance
Armenienne et qui condamnait l’impunite des crimes perpetres en
Armenie et executes par des chefs mafieux proches du regime. Citons
quelques-uns parmi tant d’autres :

– Boghos Boghossian, assassine le 24 septembre 2001 au cafe ” Arakatz
” a Erevan par les gardes du corps du president R. Kotcharian.

– Hratch Mouradian, maire du village Brochian, membre du Parti Dashnag,
dans la province de Kotayk, assassine le 2 avril 2013.

– Avedik Poutaghian, ancien garde du corps du maire de Koris, assassine
dans la cour de la maison de Souren Khatchatrian, ex prefet de la
region denomme ” Litska ” le 1er juin 2013.

JPEG – 117.5 ko Le mouvement Renaissance Armenienne declarait a
travers cette communication son soutien a la famille et aux proches
de Vahe Avedyan mettant en garde les commanditaires du crime et
leurs complices. Le message rajoutait que les compatriotes n’etaient
pas seuls et lancait un appel a tous les Armeniens pour lutter aux
côtes du mouvement au nom de la democratie et de la justice afin de
neutraliser les assassins perfides et leurs proteges.

Annie Pechdimaldjian

JPEG – 148.5 ko jeudi 4 juillet 2013, Ara ©armenews.com

Rustamyan Warns Against `Strangling’ Control Chamber’s Independence

July 3, 2013

President Serj Sargsyan and ARF-D Parliamentary Faction Leader, Armen
Rustamyan (photo azatutyun.am 19/04/2013)

President Serj Sargsyan and ARF-D Parliamentary Faction Leader, Armen
Rustamyan (photo azatutyun.am 19/04/2013) (azatutyun.am RFE/RL)
Dashnak Leader Deplores Sarkisian Criticism Of Parliament Body

A leader of the opposition Armenian Revolutionary Federation
(Dashnaktsutyun) on Wednesday rejected President Serzh Sarkisian’s
harsh criticism of a parliamentary oversight body that has alleged
serious misuse of public funds by his government.

Armen Rustamian warned the executive branch against `strangling’ the
supposedly independent Audit Chamber [Control Chamber].

`We must keep in mind that the Audit Chamber is an independent body,’
he told RFE/RL’s Armenian service (Azatutyun.am). `We probably don’t
understand what being an independent body means. It is illegal to
issue orders to independent bodies from one or another side.’

Rustamian was commenting on a weekend meeting of top state officials
that was chaired by Sarkisian. The meeting discussed a recent Audit
Chamber report that alleged millions of dollars worth of financial
losses in the administration of procurement contracts by various
government agencies. The Armenian government accused the chamber of
grossly inflating possible financial abuses for political purposes.

Sarkisian sided with the government during the meeting, saying that
the head of the chamber, Ishkhan Zakarian, overstepped his legal
powers by drawing far-reaching conclusions from the report. The
president was particularly enraged by Zakarian’s claims that as much
as 70 percent of budgetary expenditure in Armenia may be misused or
wasted.

Rustamian, who leads Dashnaktsutyun’s parliamentary faction, said
Sarkisian’s remarks ran counter to a constitutional provision that
guarantees the chamber’s independence from the executive branch. He
said they could discourage the parliamentary body from scrutinizing
the government’s activities in the future.

`Today we have a serious problem with creating a mechanism of checks
and balances in the government system’ said opposition leader. `We
must not strangle the Audit Chamber in a way that would keep people
from openly speaking about some things’.

This stalemate should lead to something deeper
Thursday, 13 June 2013

Interview with Serge Avedikian

Serge Avedikian
French actor and director

French actor and director Serge Avedikian is one of the first artists
from the Armenian Diaspora to advocate the necessity of talking with
Turks. He has observed that, today, the process of dialogue is
stagnant, and the various initiatives have had mitigated results. In
order to move ahead, the director is counting on a renewed expression
from a new generation of Turkish intellectuals and artists.

How did you meet Hrant Dink?

Our first meeting took place in the Agos offices. When I was passing
through Istanbul, in 1998, on my way to the Bodrum Festival, a first
article about me had appeared in Agos. However, Hrant was not in town
so we missed each other. When I came back in 2003 for the Bursa
Festival and to scout locations for Nous avons bu la même eau (We
Drank the Same Water, 2008), I was asked for an interview. I recall
his first words very vividly. Standing up and embracing me, he said to
me in Armenian: `You had become a myth for me, but here you are, for
real.’ Of course, it shook me a little and I wondered: `What does he
think of me to say that?’ I had an interview with him about the Bursa
Festival and, in particular, about rediscovering, for the second time
in 13 years, the village of Sölöz [editor’s note: the village of Serge
Avedikian’s grandfather, near Bursa, where he shot his documentary
film, `We Drank the Same Water’.] He was very surprised, which
surprised me too, because although he was knowledgeable about the
Armenian community and its history, he hadn’t heard of Sölöz. It means
there are many stories, some close to Istanbul, that even Armenians
don’t know about – which is understandable, since all this was hidden.
And he went on: `It’s incredible, the story of that village. You’ve
got to tell me more about it.’ We remained connected. I met him before
going to film in Sölöz, then after shooting, and when the film was
edited. Once we went to the restaurant with Hrant, Cengiz Aktar, Ali
Bayramoglu and Taner Akçam, who was passing through Istanbul. He
introduced them to me.

So, you got to meet these Istanbul intellectuals through Hrant Dink?

That’s right. Because, in Istanbul, apart from a few people of
Armenian ancestry, I didn’t know many people in the film or
intellectual circles. Hrant is the one who introduced me to these
people who surrounded him over a dinner at Boncuk’s, on the upper
floor of the restaurant, as is customary.

And you watched one of the first versions of `Nous avons bu la même
eau’ with Hrant, in Istanbul, didn’t you?

Yes, it was six months before his death. I had come to the Short films
festival in Istanbul. Meanwhile we had edited a first version of the
film. Valérie Terranova, one of Jacques Chirac’s advisors, was
visiting and asked me to introduce her to Hrant. Since I also wanted
to show him my first edited version of the film, we held that
screening which enabled to do both things at once. It was very moving.
And this bond is very special since it was Valérie Terranova who
called me with the news of Hrant’s death.

Hrant had said: `This is the film that should be shown to the
Diaspora. It shows that you have to go to Turkey to talk to people’.

We were totally in synch with Hrant on the need to show an open mind
and an ability to reach out to today’s Turkey, across the political
board with the exception of fascists, to talk to people, and tell them
we existed; and also, on the need to share our own discovery of the
progress that was being made concerning Turkey within the Diaspora.
It’s exactly what Hrant was working on with Agos, with his articles on
Anatolian villages, on Armenian authors, on life before the Genocide,
and also on Turkey’s ignorance of all this after the Genocide. We
Drank the Same Water was doing the same work – i.e. to go and meet
Turkish citizens who were unaware, at least in part, of the history of
a particular village. Indeed, it was symbolically powerful that the
space where Armenians used to live should now be occupied by Pomaks,
telling what they felt as immigrants themselves in this story of a
people substituted to another, and commenting on what Armenians had
built and the traces they had left. It was one of the strong points
which allowed a different dialogue to develop. I believe that Hrant
was not only supportive of this approach but was, in his way and with
his own team, fully involved in this type of work. There has been a
genuine encounter between Hrant’s work at Agos and our own.

It was a time when most Armenians from the Diaspora never contemplated
coming to Turkey or even talking to Turks.

In any case, those who did would do it on the sly. For instance, they
came to look for memorabilia. In Sölöz, we learnt that some Armenians
had come to collect an object or a tombstone. But this was done
covertly because it was unmentionable. I think that our approach
managed to break that taboo. When there was no recognition of his
history, how could an Armenian talk with Turks, in Turkey itself,
right where deportations and the genocide had taken place? This taboo
was toppled by the film and by Hrant’s work.

There have been many criticisms of the film because of that.

A segment of the French Diaspora was very sceptical and said: `You’re
just being taken in, you can’t have a dialogue with people who don’t
admit to anything.’ I think that it was a transition period for many,
particularly for the young.

It appeared that, after this film and several other projects,
Armenians from the Diaspora started to go to Turkey. In a way, you
opened the way. What did that process change, both with Armenians and
Turks?

First of all, people started to really talk, to ask true questions.
How to get out of the deadlock of non-dialogue? How to get out of
taboos on either side? In fact, both parties are cornered by their
extremes. On the Turkish side, from the government and nationalists,
you hear: `How can you talk with Armenians who force you to recognize
a genocide that doesn’t exist?’ And on the Armenian side: `How can you
talk to people who don’t even admit that it was genocide? It’s like
talking to a brick wall.’ I think it is this stumbling block that was
forced through, but not for everyone. To my mind, the result is quite
mitigated. We shouldn’t forget that when collecting signatures for the
Forgiveness plea launched by Turkish intellectuals – which also
toppled some taboos – the result didn’t turn out to be as good as the
organizers expected. They imagined – or at least hoped for – that they
would get a tsunami of signatures, and so did I. It could have
empowered those who had previously remained silent to speak out
democratically. They thought that they would get a million signatures.
I believe that there finally were no more than 30,000, which wasn’t so
bad, but still way down what was hoped for. I’d say that the process
opened up a breach, which enabled many young Armenians to travel to
Anatolia. A few had done it before, but now it was in the open.
Connections were initiated and debates organized, particularly in
France, with Turkish intellectuals such as Ali Bayramoglu, Cengiz
Aktar, Ahmet Insel and Taner Akçam. I attended most of them. There
were also books published featuring dialogues between Armenians and
Turks. I feel that this initial ebullience has somewhat abated because
more far-reaching and long-standing initiatives are now building in
its wake. And films too, I’m sure of that. When you unwittingly are a
pioneer, you keep your finger on the pulse of things and can see them
coming. It may not happen right away. There are lulls, and returns to
scepticism. Let’s not forget that Hrant’s death happened, with
double-edged results.

When these initiatives started to multiply, Hrant became dangerous in
Turkey. Why is that, do you think? What was he changing in Turkey?

I think that it was the audacity of his speaking frankly. As long as
an intellectual remains intellectually demonstrative, he isn’t
dangerous. He only becomes so when he stops being intellectual, when
he wages a real battle with deeply felt words, with words that
everybody can hear and that can be heard by many. I think it’s at this
stage that the authorities saw that man as a threat. He took up too
much space and, above all, with his charisma, he enthralled Turkish
intellectuals. Instead of confronting him, they followed him. To me,
it’s what is so painful in this murder because, again, it’s an
Armenian who was killed, and not a Turkish opponent. It changed many
things and angered most of those who were listening to him. Hundreds
of thousands of people took to the streets for his funeral.

Did you expect such a response in Turkey?

No. I thought that it would be a solemn time, and recaptured by the
government, which was partly the case, but I never thought there would
be so many people down in the street. No-one had anticipated such an
outcry coming from crowds holding protest signs. This demonstration
will never be forgotten, it even is perpetuated to a certain extent
upon each anniversary. It became a sort of symbol. On the other hand,
Hrank is gone. There’s no leader anymore. It caused the movement to
atomize. Everyone remains in his corner, disorganized. There is the
Foundation, there are initiatives, and all this quite positive, but
still it’s a beheaded battlefront.

Maybe this time, a `head’ should be found among Turkish intellectuals…

Certainly. At the head of a protest movement, asking for a wider
democracy, for certain things to be recognized in Turkey, you
shouldn’t have an Armenian. Hrant was a Turkish citizen, granted, but
the leader should be a citizen who cannot be blamed for being
`Armenian sperm’ or Kurdish. That’s also what is difficult in Turkey
because you’re immediately accused, old time reflexes and exclusions
spring up again, so if it’s a Turk, at least it will be less acute.

It will also have another meaning.

Yes. It will show the maturing of the Turkish civil society, which
dares unveil itself. It definitely exists among journalists,
intellectuals and artists. I’m convinced of that. Osman Kavala makes
things happen in his own way, as a cultural entrepreneur – huge and
unbelievable things. And he’ll go on doing it. But others are needed.

Six years later, how do you view the general and political situation
in Turkey? Has public awareness concerning these issues progressed?

I think we don’t have enough perspective on this yet. But there are
halts, times for maturing, understanding and digesting. I also think
that we’re currently living the time it takes to prepare a response.
Which forms will it take? I know a few, but not all of them. Artists
will express themselves in the coming months. There is a new
generation of intellectuals, younger, more mature, who are not
university professors, journalists or stars, and who have freer hands.
Because I have reached a certain age, I know what it means to put
one’s fame at stake, to fear losing one’s place. There is
self-censorship. You need people who are not into self-censorship
because they have nothing to lose. That’s why I’m implementing a new
project to let very young filmmakers from very different countries
talk, for instance, about the idea of Diaspora.

At some point, you were quite critical of the fact that the dialogue
in Turkey was not moving ahead. What do you think of it today?

It’s easy to criticize or note what is. But you must above all try and
understand the reasons, particularly the underlying reasons. When
great things are born, it takes some time before they are assimilated
and a new language is found. To eternally repeat themselves it tiring
to people and doesn’t bring them much. This is why I mentioned new
generations. Those who express themselves at the moment are over 50.
They have lived through pivotal, politically crucial eras – of
opening, of murder, and other events. But today, the new generation
views this in its own way. Naturally, older intellectuals should keep
on expressing themselves, but I think that their real role (and the
role I give myself too) it to pass on the torch. It’s to encourage the
young – i.e. those between 25 and 35, with a real conscience and who
study the situation, to reach a new way of voicing change.
Intellectuals should stop taking up all the space. We never stop
repeating the same things. Discovery comes from fresh, innocent
wording. The current stalemate should lead to more reflection. People
should be encouraged to write and speak up on deeper issues.

On the eve of 2015, which trend will carry more weight: that of
thousands of people remembering Hrant Dink six years later, or
demonstrations brandishing placards that read: `You’re all Armenians,
you’re all bastards’? What is your feeling?

I feel that it will be an important time. But I’m worried that it
might be a façade battle and that in-depth thinking will be lost.
Turning a cause into slogans can also reveal things to people who
don’t hear anything else. But the battle will probably get interesting
when young Turkish directors from Turkey or Germany reveal their
feature or documentary films to the face of the world. It’s their
expression that will make a difference, not that of Armenians. It’s
the voice of Turkey in the global sense of the term – that is of Turks
living here and there – who will reveal their position in relation to
this story in a more powerful way than usual. It may be through
painting, filmmaking, literature, through a political or philosophical
work, or some form of political public speaking. There are many
projects throughout Armenia and the Diaspora, but it’s not what will
be interesting. What would be unexpected is a film by a renowned young
film director or the book of a young writer – in both cases someone
living in Istanbul. That’s what would make a difference. And maybe
also events in Turkey that would be slightly different than those on
24th April, with clear positioning, with colloquiums – although let’s
not forget that there were some already, but they should have more
visibility, involve the larger public.

One of Hrant’s dreams was to see Armenian and Turkish artists sing
together on the same stage. Will that dream come true if we get to see
Anush, the opera you’re working on in Istanbul?

It will be one of the elements. Anush is a dream project to show
certain things. It was written originally by an Armenian as a poem,
and taken up by an Armenian composer living between Yerevan, Tbilisi,
Gyumri (Alexandropol) and Istanbul, and it has already been performed
in Turkish. I haven’t located the Turkish text yet, but we’ll
certainly manage to do so. It’s a dream project to say: this show
happened before the Genocide, it happened after the Genocide, and it
is happening now, in a more open way, for everyone to see. Because a
guy who doesn’t live either in Yerevan or Istanbul anymore, but in
Paris, decided to revive and dust off a popular work, which speaks to
absolutely everyone. It speaks to Turkey as well as to Armenia. The
opera Anush tells stories of honour crimes which could happen in
Anatolia or the Caucasus, and takes place in unnamed mountains. I
deeply wish that in 2014, Anush comes to Istanbul and other cities,
such as Diyarbakir. It will also speak to Kurds. The opera will be
staged at the end of April in Yerevan. I do hope that it can be
programmed afterwards in Istanbul and elsewhere.

Istanbul is now part of nearly all your projects.

Absolutely. The film on Parajanov is almost ready and we’ll be in
Istanbul next spring or autumn for festivals. Parajanov will also be
heard of in Istanbul. He is someone who made a film in Armenian about
a Georgian-Azeri man during the Azerbaijani-Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh
war. Artists must be cross-boundary, they must transcend divisions. It
doesn’t mean that the problem doesn’t exist, but these works point to
the problems. The film on Parajanov will also be political, even if it
is expressed through art, through cinema and collage. The Anush opera
will also be political in its own way. As for The Last Round in
Istanbul, I hope we’ll be ready in 2015. So 2013, 2014, and 2015 will
bring three large projects towards Istanbul. Anyway, it’s one of my
places of spiritual birth. My grandfather was born a few kilometres
from Istanbul and it’s through the port of Istanbul that his ship left
back to Armenia, and through Istanbul again that we came back.
Istanbul lies at the centre.

It is required to create the language which helps people understand

Thursday, 13 June 2013

Interview with Robert Koptas

Robert Koptas the Chief Editor of Agos

We talked with Rober Koptas, the Chief Editor of Agos, about what the
newspaper transformed in Turkey, the adventure of its progress after
Hrant Dink and points to which Turkey reaches in taboo questions in
the last six years. According to Koptas; even if `it knocks its head
against a brick wall’, the newspaper, which has great contributions in
making those questions talkable in Turkey, reminds what system causes
to forget and tries to create a new language for making those
questions understandable by more people.

Could you mention your story about how you met with Agos? Were you
aware of this initiative before it was published? What did you feel
when you first held it in your hands?

I was informed about the newspaper before it was published. I was
working part-time in Aras Publishing at those times. The graphic
designer Vartan Paçacı and Brother Hrant made one of those meetings in
the Office of Aras. Vartan Paçacı shared graphic drafts of Agos which
he drew-up, with Brother Hrant. Brother Hrant also asked me `Which one
is beautiful? Which one is better? There were some designs with blue
logo, I did not like them. I smart mouth them and said `The blue one
is like a tourism guide. The re done is more like a newspaper.’ Then
when the newspaper was first published, I was happy when I saw it was
red and I took the credit for this. I remembered that I was very
excited. I remembered that I thought as `At last, we have a newspaper
which I could read in ship, train and which I could open without any
fear because it is Turkish’.

Did you know each other with Hrant Dink before?

We met firstly at that time. We did not have any intense cooperation.
I made a presentation in the conference in Bilgi University in 2005.
He took me aside and said `I follow what you did. You make good
things’. And I was very proud. He called us, the team of Aras
Publishing, for a conversation in May 2006. He said that he made the
book called `Armenians in Ottoman Empire’, which is now published by
Aras, translated and wanted to publish but he did not prefer to do so
because of the pressure on him. And he gave the book to us. I saw
Brother Hrant very nervous and exhausted at that meeting. The weight
of the pressure on him could be felt. As far as I met, he was
vivacious and lively. That time, he was not like that. This made me
sad, shocked me. I thought `How could I support him?’ I said `Let’s
write in Agos’ to myself. I request an appointment from him and he
gave me that appointment. I went and told. And he immediately said:
`Ok. Let’s start from this week but do not delay or make a limp then’.
I started to write in Agos in every week in the last days of August
2006. He was murdered 5-6 months after that.

How a point did the generality of Turkey and Armenian society placed
before Agos according to your observations?

Before Agos was published, Armenians lived introvertedly and
conservatively. There was a structure in which the Patriarchate was in
the centre, two newspapers stated the Agenda, people came together by
means of some cultural activities but the voice of the community could
not heard in any way, the community lives as does not exist, but in
which there were some officers and authorized people who was called
from the state when they are needed. But Turkey was changing.
Accordingly the structure of the Armenian society is not so
sustainable. Agos is the result of this.

When we look for Turkey, before and after Agos, it is like black and
white, especially in the context of Armenian question. Today, of
course we could not reach to the ideal point. But when we compare with
the situation before 20-30 years, there are so many people who are
aware of the fact that who Armenians are in Turkey, what sort of
problems they are faced with and what happened in the past and who
study on this point. If Agos does not exist, those were lesser, if
brother Hrant does not exist, those were the least. Agos, worked
nearly like a non-governmental organization, even sometimes like a
university assembly. An in this sense, it became one of the most
important centres of an intellectual transformation. If there is a
ground in Turkey where we could breathe, talk and communicate, of
course Agos and Hrant Dink has an important role here.

How were reactions when Agos was first published?

There were two different types of reaction in Armenians: the
predominant one was a huge support and excitement. People, whom we
could say commons/populace embraced. There was another reaction in
Armenians given by a little segment as coming out against and
refusing. There were some people who thought that it was a revilement
to Armenian culture since it was published in Turkish. Beyond this,
there were some others who protested Agos since it disturbs their
position in their own relationship based on self-interest. Because
Agos never be hypocritical for not to want this democratization and
transparency for Armenians, which it desires for Turkey.

How is it perceived in Diaspora?

It a newspaper which was followed closely by people who immigrated
from Turkey in the recent past. It does not mean so many things for
generations who immigrated many years before and who forgot Turkish.
There is such a segment for which Agos is the most important mean for
receiving news about the hometown and being fed by the hometown.

The personality of Hrant Dink has a direct affect on the way of
existence of Agos, hasn’t it?

I think it is 100%. May be at the beginning it was imperceptible, but
after a while, when Hrant Dink assumed the job on his own, he started
to manage the newspaper with his own personality and spirit. He
dominated and directed his newspaper by means of what he saw up to
day, his intellectual knowledge and his intuitions at most, in my
opinion and he was not wrong so much actually. He did this by coming
out the society more. In fact, he both strengthened his own
personality and he formed Agos by this way.

Hrant Dink believed that it is required to negotiate the ignorance and
unawareness as calling out to consciences in order to open the path
for Turkey to face with 1915. I guess Agos maintains this mission
today.

Above all, it is about to know the system which you face with. We know
how the system indoctrinates people. We know with which books students
are taught in schools by National Education system. Under these
circumstances, we think that it doesn’t make sense to blame people or
society. Here it makes sense to ensure the transformation which could
change the system. Of course we are aware of the fact that this won’t
be easy and this could only ensured by a long range challenge. It is
required both to give information in other words to remind people what
they forgot and to call them to the conscience. It exists that there
is a goal to surprise people with an Armenian approach and presence
that is not nationalist and rough and to go beyond the ordinary.

Was there any discussion on terminology concerning 1915 in Agos? For
example; `Do not say genocide, let’s use this term or let’s say such’

I do not know what was talked or discussed about this before 19th
January but before the `genocide’ was not a common word used in the
newspaper, it was used very rarely, when others quoted, I don’t
remember any other. After 19th January, there was no serious
discussion or debate about this issue, some authors used this, and
some others only quoted in news. Both Hrant Dink and Agos have no
doubt that is genocide. But on the other hand, it is not so important
for us that this is not determined as genocide. It matters for us that
this must be perceived, understood, known by Turkey society and must
be condemned in the consciences of people. For example, I used this
word especially in my columns. Of course this was the result of anger.
It was like `If they take the one who is the most peaceful one among
us, it doesn’t make sense to be peaceful’. But recently, to create a
language which shall help people who read to understand something is
important for me. May be Brother Hrant looked for this during his
entire life; his Agos adventure was passing with looking for that
language, that style. He could create naturally by means of his
personal characteristic.

Today Agos becomes a newspaper as Hrant Dink dreamed of, became a more
professional newspaper.

It is definitely more corporate, but not more professional. Subjects
became diversified; the number of pages increased and this required a
serious organization. Beforehand, it maintained as a family newspaper,
more. It became more corporate, but it has amateur spirit. It has a
desire to be Professional. This is for standing and bearing more
strongly and to be carried to the future, never to gain any profit.
The diversity of subjects increased. We do not have interest and
concern on every issue not only on Armenian question. We try to
mention developments in the World as much as we can.

Do you have any study on reader profile?

I could not give exact data but approximately 5000 Agos are sold.
Nearly 500 of those 5000 are subscribers from abroad. Nearly half of
the readers are Armenians. Those who are not Armenians gradually
increase. Our distribution network is not very wide but we go to some
other cities. For example we go to two bookstores in Diyarbakır.

In what point do you see Turkey when you look at the last 6 years passed?

One segment of the society knew Hrant Dink with his murder and
Armenian quest dominated its several dimensions by means of his death.
It became information which obtained roots that some injustices,
discriminations are a part of lives of Armenians, non-Muslims in
Turkey according to a wide range segment of the society.

In other words; people received the information of `A skilled Armenian
journalist was murdered.’ Such questions and answers that `Why this is
happened? Why was this man murdered? Because he is an Armenian’
probably influenced people deeply. There haven’t been such many people
walking in commemoration of anyone after 6 years from the murder until
today. The murder of Hrant Dink is on a critical point for cleaning
the Government. The desire for a government that does not commit an
illegal act and does not carry out such operations requires demanding
justice in this case. Of course there are some people who think that
he was murdered because he deserved it by the point of nationalist and
racist view but I believe that those are in the minority.

Where we are or not in 6 years concerning facing with 1915 or
relationships with Armenia?

I think we are in a better point for all these subjects. It is obvious
and undoubtful that we progress in terms of the preparation of society
and public. But all of those are waiting as problems to be solved. In
other words, we are passing through a process in which the challenge
continues the social ground expands and the civil area expands but
since the government does not change its attitude generally, since
school books are not changes and official propaganda is continuously
regenerated; we could not cover a distance. Although daily tides drive
us to desperation, when I look over the long run, each time I can see
that Turkey society changes for the better.

Will this process progress slowly, like knocking heads against a brick wall

I think like that because I know Turkey, the government. Even if
hardly or by brutal force; it created a society for itself and placed
some opinions in it and it is not so easy to change those opinions.
Unfortunately, Armenians throughout the World and Armenia have no
patience to wait. I could understand them so much. They are already
suffering from a pain in their hearts for 98 years. The refusal is
added and it enlarges the anger. The rhythm of them and the rhythm of
Turkey in this sense are very different from each other. But the
truth is that what is decisive shall be the rhythm of Turkey.

In Turkey, the attitude in some issues could be changed immediately
when the government decides. Shall it be optimism to expect such a
thing in this issue?

May be this could be happened about relationships with Armenia, the
international conjuncture could require this. We could pass to a
period when the border is opened and the relationship starts
immediately. It shall be salutary and advantageous. But with the
approval of genocide, I don’t think there shall be an intense external
pressure. Turkey is always an ally which is very important and
required not to be lost in the last instance. It is the last example
of that the French Constitutional Court refused the Law on Armenian
Genocide Denial. I don’t think that attitude shall change more. But, I
don’t think that this shall be `knocking our heads against a brick
wall’. I do not think this shall never be approved. May be Turkey will
never approve the genocide. But it is the witness of an important
stage that this is being talked in the society, and more people are
aware of this issue and it is written or drawn independently and
freely today. If that stage shall bring the social approval in the
future, the policy/politics shall be obliged to approve it. Especially
if the international conjuncture will coincide, approval shall be
inevitable.