Category: 2022

Balat is an architecturally mesmerizing Istanbul district that takes you on a historical journey with its colorful buildings, synagogues, churches and mosques between the Ayvansaray and Fener neighborhoods on the shore of the Golden Horn. The district is named after the word “palation,” which means “palace” in Greek, due to its proximity to the Palace of Blachernae, located near the city walls.

When you visit Balat, a historical building awaits you at every corner. With its long slopes and structures in a range of architectural styles, it provides you with the opportunity to capture spectacular photographs while embarking on a mystical historical journey. Down one of the slopes of the district, the Bulgarian Orthodox Church of Sveti Stefan, also known as Iron Church, welcomes you.

Historical buildings are important not only for the sake of architecture but also for social and historical events. Witnessing many incidents throughout history, they may even become the protagonists of some events. The Church of Sveti Stefan is one of those important historical buildings. Let’s take a look at the social events that took place up until the church was built.

The Ottoman Empire ruled the non-Muslims in its territory with a system called the “millet system.” According to this system, non-Muslims in the Ottoman lands were divided into three nations as Greek, Jewish and Armenian. Namely, they were classified according to their religion, not their ethnicity. Christians were also divided into two groups: Greek and Armenian. The religious and administrative responsibility of all Orthodox were in the hands of the Greek Patriarchate (Ecumenical Patriarchate). The patriarchate was the authority to which the Orthodox would apply in case of any problem. Since the Bulgarians living in the Ottoman lands had no religious and political representatives, their representative against the state was the Greek Patriarchate, as well. However, Bulgarian subjects complained about the Greek Patriarchate, which was in control of the religious administration. The Bulgarians were writing complaints to the Sublime Porte, the central government of the Ottoman Empire, about the forced assimilation and oppression under the Greek Patriarchate. The use of the Greek language for lessons and rites in schools and churches was one of their main complaints. They also wanted the Ottoman Empire to protect them in their complaint petitions and conducted various studies on this issue until they got results.

Bulgarian-born state official Stefan Bogoridi (Stefanaki Bey) was among the citizens of Bulgarian descent who carried out important works to escape from the oppression of the Greek Patriarchate. The Ottoman Empire allowed him to establish a place of worship for the people of Bulgarian origin. For this place, Stefan Bogoridi donated his house, which was reorganized as a wooden church for Bulgarians, and the foundation of the Bulgarian Exarchate was thus laid. In 1858, with an edict, the Bulgarians were allowed to build a new church in place of the wooden church but its construction could not be realized because the ground was not solid. Therefore, the construction of the new church was shelved until the building of the Iron Church.

On March 11, 1870, Sultan Abdülaziz issued the Exarchate Edict, which accepted the Bulgarians’ desire to establish an independent church. According to the edict, the Bulgarian Exarchate was recognized as an independent institution. After the wooden church suffered from a fire, it became necessary to build a new structure in its place despite the weak ground conditions. Therefore, an iron frame was preferred over concrete reinforcement.

The Iron Church, which cost 4 million levs at that time, was actually completed in 1896. However, it was blessed and launched for worship by Exarch Joseph I in 1898 after the redesign of the iconostasis. The bust of Stefanaki Bey, who made great efforts to open the church, was also placed in the garden of the church.

The most important feature of the Church of Sveti Stefan is that it is completely made of iron. A total of 500 tons of iron was cast for the parts of the church. The casted parts were brought from Vienna by ships via the Danube and the straits.

The architect of the church was Hovsep Aznavour and the manufacturer and construction company was Rudolf van Wagner, operating in Austria. The church, which features neo-Gothic and neo-Baroque architectural elements, also carries traces of the modern Renaissance style.

The bell tower of the church, whose altar faces the Golden Horn, is above the entrance door. All of the six bells in this tower, which is 40 meters (130 feet) high, were cast in Yaroslavl, Russia. Two of six bells are used today. The exterior decorations of the three-domed and cross-shaped church are fascinating. Just above the entrance door, you can see a sign representing the Trinity – Father, Son and the Holy Spirit – universe and sun.

Inside the church, the wooden iconostasis, which was also made in Russia, Moscow, also attracts attention with its standout icons. The icons depict many figures from Virgin Mary to Jesus, from Archangel Gabriel to saints Cyril and Methodius. The painted windows of the church also make great ambiance by the sun.

In present days, the iron church stands out as a testament to the architecture of Bulgaria and Turkey. Following seven years of restoration, the church was reopened in 2018. With a capacity of 300 people, the church has stood like a pearl on the Golden Horn with its fascinating beauty for 124 years. Of the three iron churches in the world, the only surviving church is Sveti Stefan. If you happen to be in Balat, you should definitely visit the church by descending the hill between the historical houses.

Armenia’s Defense Minister Suren Papikyan (left) meets with his Russian counterpart Sergey Shoigu in Moscow on Feb. 24

Armenia’s Defense Minister Suren Papikyan, on his first trip to Moscow in his role as minister, met with his Russian counterpart Serigey Shoigu on Friday and discussed issues related to the defense cooperation between the two countries.

Papikyan, who became defense minister in November, visited Moscow two days after President Vladimir Putin of Russia ordered military operations in Ukraine. No mention of that conflict was made in official press statements.

According to Armenia’s defense ministry, Shoigu and Paplikian discussed international and regional security issues. A number of issues related to bilateral and multilateral military cooperation between Armenia and Russia were also discussed.

“The parties praised the dynamics of the Armenian-Russian allied cooperation and the political dialogue, the role and efforts of the Russian Federation aimed at stabilizing the military-political situation in the region, as well as the effectiveness of the Russian peacekeeping mission in Artsakh,” said the defense ministry press statement.

During the discussions, reference was made to the modernization of the Armenian Armed Forces and the process of reforms.

In August, during a meeting with Papikyan’s predecessor, Shoigu pledged Russia’s readiness to assist Armenia in modernizing its armed forces. This angered Aliyev who protested Moscow’s posturing on Armenia’s military capabilities. In the end, Moscow said that it was Russia’s right as a sovereign nation to develop military cooperation with Armenia.

A military post along the Armenia-Azerbaijan border

The recent acceleration of processes around the normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey, coupled with the momentum in opening transport links with Azerbaijan and the delimitation and demarcation process pose significant threats to Armenia’s sovereignty and independence.

Armenia’s government seems to be embracing these processes that have been forced upon it as a result of the defeat suffered in the 2020 war. What we are not hearing from Yerevan, however, is any guarantees that Armenia’s sovereignty will not take a hit as these discussions move forward.

The Turkey-Armenia normalization process is fraught with dangers. Yerevan has voiced its desire to open borders with Turkey and establish diplomatic relations with Ankara, without holding that country accountable for its direct interference and aggression during the 2020 war. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and his government also do not seem to have a blueprint in place that will guide Armenia’s economic, strategic and security interests aside from their stated commitment and much-touted policy of “peace in the region.”

As Azerbaijan continues to threaten Armenia and Artsakh—including calling for the arrests and prosecution of current and former leaders and the appropriation of Armenian cultural heritage—Yerevan is signaling its readiness to engage in the opening of transportation routes and border demarcation processes.

Despite Moscow’s assurances, one may consider that by signing an “allied cooperation” agreement earlier this week, Putin was giving Aliyev the keys to Artsakh in return for Baku’s support for Russia’s military actions in the Ukraine—Azerbaijan’s long-time ally.

Other factors and machinations at play, which have received wider attention recently, as regional developments—the crisis in Kazakhstan earlier this year, and the more current developing situation unfolding in Ukraine—are certain to impact Armenia.

One such scheme is the Russia-Belarus Union State, which has gained momentum in the past the past several weeks, especially following the intervention by the Collective Security Treaty Organization—the CSTO—in Kazakhstan, which was approved by Pashinyan as the group’s current president. The Union State envisions the economic, security and defense integration in the hopes of forming what is being dubbed a “supranational” entity.

Earlier this month, Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko said during an interview that “Armenia has nowhere [else] to go,” but to join this integrated group. “Do you think anyone needs them?” While Yerevan’s reaction was tempered, Lukashenko’s remarks certainly angered the people.

This didn’t deter former president and current leader of the opposition Armenia Alliance Robert Kocharian to advocate, once again, for Armenia to join a Russia-led integrated alliance. During a press conference last week, Kocharian said that given what he thought was a pro-Turkey and Azerbaijan posturing by Yerevan, Armenia’s integration in a Russia-led union would be preferable.

Kocharian is pro-Russian. He demonstrated that during his presidency and certainly has advocated more Russian involvement/intervention in Armenia. But as someone who is leading the main opposition force in parliament, his constant advocacy for Armenia’s integration into any foreign-led alliance seems to signal that he has given up on the viability of Armenia’s independence.

Despite Armenia’s losses in the war or its current predicament, the main responsibility of the political forces actively involved in Armenia’s daily policy making must be the protection of the country’s sovereignty.

Armenia’s and Artsakh’s independence were hard won. In preserving the concept of Armenia’s independence and in establishing Artsakh’s sovereignty, thousands gave their lives for the right to a homeland and the principle of a freedoms that we are seeing tested across the world.

Independence and our homeland’s sovereignty cannot be squandered or negotiated away for expediency. They are of paramount importance and must be protected, defended and preserved at all cost.