Category: News

AzerTag, Azerbaijan
Jan 28 2005
OSCE FACT-FINDING MISSION ARRIVES IN BAKU
[January 28, 2005, 17:36:52]
The OSCE fact-finding mission has arrived in Baku to carry out
investigations on illegal settlement of the Armenians in Nagorny
Karabakh and other regions of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenia. On
January 28, the OSCE co-chairs and head of the mission met with the
foreign minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammadyarov.
After the meeting, the Russian co-chair Yuri Merzlyakov disclosed
that the Azerbaijan side has presented detailed information on
illegal settlement of the Armenians. The meeting with Mr. Elmar
Mammadyarov was useful, the Russian co-chair said.
Yuri Merzlyakov said, as agreed earlier, the mission would carry out
investigations in all the occupied seven regions of Azerbaijan around
the Nagorny Karabakh region of Azerbaijan.
The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs and the OSCE Acting Chairman’s
personal envoy, ambassador Andzey Kaspshik will accompany the
fact-finding mission comprising representatives of Italy, Germany,
Sweden and Finland. The mission to carry out a weeklong investigation
on January 29 will go to Yerevan, and then to the occupied Khankendi.

OSCE MISSION WILL NOT VISIT OCCUPIED SHAHUMIAN, GETASHEN AND NORTHERN
MARTAKERT
Azg/arm
29 Jan 05
The OSCE co-chairs and the Minsk group monitoring mission arrived in
Baku yesterday. They will visit Yerevan on January 29 and Stepanakert
on 30.
Armenia gave consent to OSCE monitoring mission when Azerbaijan agreed
to take the formula on “situation in Azerbaijani occupied territories”
back from the UN General Assembly.
Official Yerevan, foreign and defense ministers in particular, even
expressed satisfaction on the coming mission in Nagorno Karabakh’s
contiguous territories. Oskanian said that it is Azerbaijan that
should fret as they carried out inhabitation of Shahumian and Getashen
regions on state level. “The monitoring group will arrive to assess
the situation with inhabiting. Azerbaijan will get puzzled when it
appears that most of the inhabitants are refugees from Shahumian,
Getashen and Northern Martakert” he said.
“Firstly, our state implements no policy of inhabitation, secondly,
the world knows that there is a safety zone. And, at least, that will
be a chance to see if, say, Shahumian or other regions are inhabited
with Azeris or not, if Azerbaijan is really inhabiting the territories
or not”, Serge Sargsian said.
The OSCE monitoring group is reportedly not going to visit the regions
of Shahumian, Getashen and Northern Martakert – territories under
Azerbaijan’s occupation.
Vahram Atanesian heading the Commission on Foreign Affairs of Nagorno
Karabakh said that Karabakh is open for any kind of monitoring but was
concerned that the mission will visit only territories under Karabakh
forces’ supervision passing by the territories occupied by Azerbaijan
and inhabited by Azeris, according to official Baku.
“We would like the monitoring mission to learn the situation in
Shahumian, Getashen and in the north of Martakert too. The
inhabitation there started in 1991. Ayaz Mutalibof, the Azeri
president of the time, participated at the inhabitation of Getashen
region with Meskhet-Turks”, Atanesian said.
Authorities in Karabakh expressed readiness to create favorable
conditions for the mission work. Seyran Ohanian, minister of defense
of Karabakh, noted at the new conference that “those territories are
under Karabakh’s total control” but “we cannot forbid our citizens to
farm in this regions”. “There is a long talk process ahead to decide
the fate of these territories and any decision concerning the
territories should be taken in the framework of this process”.
The Shahumian-Getashen Union turned to the European Court of Human
Rights to institute an action against Azerbaijan. “The court took
cases of 4 families but the proceeding is not under way yet”,
president of the Union, Edik Balayan, said. Balayan said that those
families’ property was taken away. The population of the 26 villages
under Azeris’ supervision left without property. “Our right of
property was violated, and the sate has to compensate for this”,
Balayan said.
Is not that likely that the Azeris will follow Armenia’s example and
demand compensation? Balayan said that most of the Azeris who left
Armenia managedto change their flats. He had no information whether
Azerbaijan turned to the European Court or not. But according to Trend
agency of Azerbaijan, 10 Azeri refugees appealed to the court in
Strasburg demanding compensation.
By Tatoul Hakobian

ARTUR BAGHDASARIAN:FIGHT AGAINST UNLAWFULNESS WILL BE CONSISTENT BUT NOT EASY

YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). As a result of the examination of
the documents that were compiled in the process of the control
activities of the RA NA Control Chamber in 2004 and afterwards sent to
the RA Prosecutor General Office, officials of 34 organizations were
presented solicitations by the Prosecutor Office, over 50 persons
responsible were warned, a total of tens of millions of drams was
returned to the state budget, as well as administrative punitive
measures were applied to 15 officials. A number of criminal cases were
started, carges with respect to some of these cases have already been
sent to court. The RA National Assembly Chairman Artur Baghdasarian
told this in a television statement. “Our objective is that those who
committed violations discovered by the Control Chamber should bear
rsponsibility,” he stated. According to A. Baghdasarian, the Control
Chamber will continue its examination activities in 2005 in accordance
with the program approved by the National Assembly since “the Control
Chamber is the instrument that should be used to fight illegality and
unlawfulness that unfortunately are rife in Armenia.” According to the
NA Chairman, the examinations reveal that very often unlawful actions
are done on behalf of the law. He brought as an example the notorious
case of the Institute of Nonorganic Chemistry when “the land plots
belonging to the employees were sold in an illegal way” without
informing them. Pledging to continue the fight against unlawfulness in
the future, Artur Baghdasarian at the same time noted that “this is
not an easy thing since, unfortunately, economic and political
interests and groups have formed in many spheres.”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

VARTAN OSKANIAN: I DON’T THINK THAT RUSSIA’S MEDIATION WILLFOSTER
ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS
Azg/arm
29 Jan 05
European Union’s decision of December 17 to start accession talks with
Turkey gave a new momentum to the talks around Armenian-Turkish
relations. Turkey, which was drawing forward preconditions for
relations’ improvement and Armenian-Turkish border-gate opening, began
condemning Armenia of not recognizing the Kars Treaty, of refusing to
draw Armenian forces out of the so-called Azeri occupied territories
and of manipulating Turkey with “groundless” claims of “alleged”
genocide.
Vartan Oskanian, foreign affairs minister of Armenia, refuted
Turkey=80=99s condemnations in an interview to Turkish Zaman daily on
January 25. Oskanian’s irrefragable answers rendered Turkey’s
condemnations ineffective.
– Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan explaining that Armenia
does not recognize the Kars Treaty said: “If they say ‘I don’t
recognize it,’ then, in that case, don’t get upset, we won’t recognize
it, either.” Those are the expressions he used. Why don’t you
recognize the Treaty of Kars?
– The PM’s statement about the Kars Treaty really surprised
me. Government of Armenia has made no statements saying we don’t
recognize it. We are the successor states of the Soviet Union. All of
the agreements, which the Soviet Union signed, continue to be in force
unless new agreements have been signed to replace them, or unless
statements have been made about not recognizing those agreements.
– What’s your approach to Turkey’s preconditions concerningwithdrawal
of Armenian forces from Azerbaijan’s occupied territories?
– Turkey cannot equate the Karabakh issue with a territorial issue. It
is a many-sided issue. Though its status is the vital one. There was
no territory under Armenians’ control before the confrontation. We
took the control after the issue emerged. Turkish side seems to be
mixing the cause and effect relation. To remove the effect it should
be viewed separately from the cause. Turkey cannot put the issue of
territories as a precondition because of Baku=80=99s evasive
stance. We want a versatile approach to the issue.
– What do you think of Turkey’s strivings to mediate in Karabakh
issue?
– Turkey cannot midiate because it is partial. Russia, for instance,
has no preconditions and is neutral. Turkey frequently offers its help
as a mediator, and we hold bilateral meetings. We are not against
meetings but don=80=99t accept its mediation
– How will the Russian-Turkish cooperation influence the conflict as
regards Armenia?
– Russia’s dialogue with Turkey is not a problem for us. But I don’t
think that these countries’ cooperation will foster conflict’s
settlement.
– Armenia occupied 1/5 of Azerbaijan’s territory. When are you going
to put an end to the occupation?
– Nagorno Karabakh always was an Armenian territory. The issue of
other regions is to be dealt by Karabakh and Azerbaijan. Karabakh was
in Azerbaijan’s structure during the USSR indeed but when the war
between Karabakh and Azerbaijan broke out Armenia supported
Karabakh. The other issues (of the other regions) are discussed by
Armenia and Azerbaijan because the Azeris avoid to seat at the table
with Karabakh side.
– Years ago, you put Genocide assertions on the agenda. In that
regard, you are also trying to receive the assistance of the West, led
by the US. What is your intent? Are you trying to grab territory from
Turkey, or to receive compensation?
– Take a look at the map please. Turkey’s geography, economy, and
population are obvious. Armenia on the other hand is a small and poor
country. On the Armenian foreign policy agenda, there is no reference
to territories or compensation. Our foreign policy goal is
international recognition of the Armenian Genocide, together with
recognition by Turkey. What happened in 1915 is quite obviously
Genocide. Turks have differing opinions about that. Let’s let people
openly discuss this issue. We are democratic societies. There is no
need to become concerned that Armenia is trying to place this issue on
other countries’ agendas. Turks, too, can lobby in different
countries, work with them. However, Armenia absolutely does not view
this as a precondition for the improvementof relations with Turkey. We
have never said that Turkey first acknowledges the Genocide. We could
have resolved the matter through dialogue, had there been diplomatic
relations between the two countries. How are we to resolve this issue?
Since we’re not able to resolve it at the governmental level, then
there are efforts to seek solutions at other levels, through other
channels.
– According to you, will Turkey’s entry into the EU facilitate this
claim?
– Today, there are two important problems between Armenia and Turkey:
opening the border, and Genocide. For the improvement of relations,
Genocide recognition is not a precondition but open borders
automatically are. No one can insist that there can be normal
relations between two countries if the border between them is
closed. However, even without Genocide recognition, it is possible to
normalize relations. The Genocide is a moral, broader issue. The EU,
too, would like for Turkey to recognize the Genocide at some stage in
the process. We hope that these matters will be included in the
agenda for negotiations between Turkey and the EU to begin later this
year. But on the border issue, we can’t wait 10-15 years or longer,
for Turkey to be accepted into the EU, for there to be some positive
movement. We hope that very soon, Turkey will open the border.
– Armenians living in Turkey accuse the Armenians of the Diaspora for
insisting on Genocide recognition. Where does Armenia take place in
this discussion?
– It is natural that the Armenians of the Diaspora would more
frequently raise the issue. They are the descendants of the Genocide
survivors. Their grandfathers were pushed to the Syrian deserts, to
the Arab countries, and from there, they moved on to Europe and the
US. They grew up listening to the elders telling stories of the
Genocide. But, this isn’t just their issue; it’s also Armenia’s
issue. There is no difference between them.
There is nothing left for historians to discuss about.
– If the issue is first discussed by historians and specialists, and
they find some common ground, wouldn’t that ease the process?
– There is nothing new to say on this. There are countless studies on
the subject and the events of 1915 have very clearly emerged. If the
historianswere to gather again, no one’s point of view would
change. The specialists have been working. They’re done with their
work. Now, it is essential that the Turkish government enter into this
discussion. Why are we afraid of these discussions? Today, around the
world, there are many countries with similarproblems. Japan and South
Korea, South Korea and China, Japan and the US, the US and Mexico, and
others. These countries continue to have relations with each other,
even as they continue to discuss these events. And they have fine
relations.

MEMBER OF “CLUB OF POLITICAL DISPUTE” NEGATIVELY ESTIMATES AMENDMENTS
TO LAW “ON PARTIES”
YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). The law “On Parties,” in essence,
froze the desperate situation formed in this sphere and closes the way
to formation of new political forces. Vigen Khachatrian, a member of
the “Club of Political Dispute,” declared this during the discussion
of the amendments to the law “On Parties” organized on January 27 in
the club. According to him, under the formed conditions when really
the parliament and parties don’t form the executive power and aren’t
able to control it effectively the amendment introduced to the law
gives new levers for control over the parties to the executive power.
Khachatrian also said that this “innovation” will contribute to
strengthening of monopoly positions of pro-governmental parties.
According to him, the amendments introduced to the law are really
aimed at limitation of political competition as the most important
condition of modern democracy. “Not encouraging but hampering
principles are the basis of the amendments.” In Khachatrian’s opinion,
the main provision of the Constitution, according to which the parties
are free to be formed and contribute to formation of political life of
the country, should be fixed and developed in the law. According to
another proposal of the speaker, they should introduce additions to
the law taking into consideration the demand of Article 7 of the
Constitution, according to which the structure and work of the parties
can’t contradict the democratic principles. According to Vigen
Khachatrian, the law badly reflects the mechanisms that will provide
fulfilment of the constitutional demand regarding publicity of
financial activity of parties. Samvel Nikoyan, an MP, a member of the
“Republican Party of Armenia” faction, and Stepan Zakarian, an MP, a
member of the “Ardarutiun” (“Justice”) faction, made reports during
the discussion.

ARTUR BAGHDASARIAN AWARDS MEDAL OF HONOR TO DEFENCE MINISTER AND NA
DIPLOMAS TO A NUMBER OF HIGH-RANKING SERVICEMEN
YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). On January 28, on the occasion of
the 13 anniversary of the formation of the Armenian Army, the RA
National Assembly Chairman Artur Baghdasarian awarded the Medal of
Honor to the RA Defence Minister Serge Sargsian, as well as NA
diplomas the RA President Advisor, Chief Military Inspector of the RA
Armed Forces Colonel General Gurgen Dalibaltayan, the Deputy Minister
of Defence Lieutenant General Alik Mirzabekian, the Deputy Minister of
Defence on Rear, Chief of the RA Armed Forces Rear Lieutenant General
Gurgen Melkonian, Head of the Defence Ministry’s Military Police
Department Major General Vladimir Gasparian, as well as a miltary unit
commander Major General Garegin Gabrielian. Noting that a new
tradition was initiated at the National Assembly, Artur Baghdasarian
congratulated, on behalf of the parliament, the servicemen awarded and
wished them good health, will and determination in implementing
reforms in the army and ensuring defence potential. The NA Chairman
expressed satisfaction with the efforts put by the Armenian people,
officers and soldiers into the establishment of the Armenian army, and
expressed hope that they will not spare effort and energy for further
strengthening of the Armenian army. According to the National
Assembly’s PR Department, the RA Defence Minister Serge Sargsian
expressed gratitude to Chairman of the National Assembly and the
parliament for showing a warm and considerate attitude to the army. He
pointed out that the 28 of January has started to enter the public
life as a holiday and it will become a national holiday in 3-4
years. The Defence Minister also expressed gratitude for the attention
to army-related laws and assured the Armenian Army is efficient and
ready to honorably defend the borders of the country.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TURKEY IN VIEW OF ITS BILIOUSNESS CAN’T BE A MEDIATOR IN KARABAKH ISSUE

YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). “Nagorno Karabakh was always the
Armenian territory. Other regions remain the problems of Nagorno
Karabakh and Azerbaijan,” said RA Minister of Foreign Affairs Vartan
Oskanian in his interview to the Turkish “Zaman” newspaper of January
25, whose translation was published in the “Azg” (“Nation”)
newspaper. According to the RA Foreign Minister, in the USSR times
Karabakh was included into the territory of Azerbaijan, but when the
war between Karabakh and Azerbaijan started, Armenian, naturally,
supported Karabakh. The issue of other regions, according to Oskanian,
is discussed between Armenia and Azerbaijan by the simple reason that
the Azeris avoid negotiations with Karabakh. Minister Oskanian
stressed that the statement of Prime Minister of Turkey Erdogan that
Armenia doesn’t recognize the Kars agreement was a surprise for
him. According to the Minister, none of the leaders of Armenia has
made statements on the occasion of this agreement up to day. “We are
among the countries-legal successors of the USSR. All the agreements
signed between the USSR and third countries remain valid until new
agreements are signed and the statement on the recognition of the
previous agreements as invalid is made,” he said. Presenting the
approach of the Armenian side to the condition on going out from the
“occupied territories” of Azerbaijan suggested by Turkey, Oskanian
mentioned that Turkey can’t reduce the Nagorno Karabakh problem
exclusively to the territorial argument, as the essence of the problem
is in status. “There were no Azeri territories controlled by the
Armenians before the Karabakh conflict. Control was set after the
raising of the Karabakh problem. The Turkish side is mistaken in the
issue of the cause-effect relation. It should be separated from the
reason for the elimination of consequence.” Hence, Turkey can’t raise
the issue of territories as a condition. “We want the problem to be
resolved, but we also want the universal approach to be shown.” Turkey
can’t be a mediator in the Karabakh problem because of its
biliousness, stressed the RA Minister of Foreign Affairs. For example,
Russia, according to Oskanian, doesn’t lay down conditions from the
viewpoint of the settlement of the problem and shows neutrality:
“Turkey constantly makes a suggestion on mediation, and we hold
bilateral meetings. From the viewpoint of these meetings we have no
problems, but mediation is another thing.” As for the recognition of
the Genocide, Minister Oskanian mentioned that there are no
territorial pretensions or the issue on compensation in the foreign
political agenda of Armenia: “We only long for the Genocide to be
recognized by the international community and Turkey. The 1915 events
are the evident Genocide. In spite of it Armenia has never demanded
that Turkey should recognize the Genocide with the purpose of the
regulation of relations. The issue may be resolved through a dialog,
but how to do it, if the diplomatic relations are absent?” Answering
the question: “Will Turkey recognize this statement (Genocide) for
joining the European Union?” Minister Oskanian mentioned: “We and
Turkey have two important problems: the Genocide and the opening of
the borders. The recognition of the Genocide is not a condition, but
the opening of the borders is a condition for the regulation of our
relations. Nobody can speak about the normal relations, when the
borders are closed. An on the contrary, without the recognition of the
Genocide it is possible to adjust the relations. We put the issue of
the borders to the EU agenda. It has already become an issue of the
agenda for the EU, and the Genocide is a common and moral issue. The
EU demands that Turkey should resign itself with this issue someway,”
said Oskanian. He also expressed hope hat these issues will be put
before Turkey at the end of this year, when the negotiations with the
European Union start. Nevertheless, according to him, “we can’t expect
progress during 10-15 years till Turkey joins the EU. We hope that
Turkey will open the border with Armenia soon.” According to Oskanian,
there is nothing more to be said on the issue of the Genocide. This
theme is studies, the great work is carried out, the real essence of
the 1915 events is shown. “Even if the scientists sit down at the one
table, the approved opinion will not change in any case. The
scientists have already done their part and completed it. At this
moment it is demanded that the Turkish government should get down to
business. Why are you afraid to discuss the issue of the Genocide?”

3 POLITICAL FIGURES MAKE JOINT STATEMENT CONDEMNING ARMENIA’S FOREIGN
POLICY
YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). Armenia has no strategy (national
ideas and goals) in the sphere of foreign policy and it “plays
complementarism.” The January 28 joint statement of Vazgen Manukian,
Chairman of the National-Democratic Union, Ashot Manucharian,
Political Secretary of the Union of Socialist Forces, and Paruyr
Hayrikian, Chairman of the National Self-Determination Union, said
this. The statement was publicized by Paruyr Hayrikian at the press
conference held the same day. According to the statement, “yielding to
the provocation of one of the numerous levers of systematized foreign
policy of Turkey, representative of Turkish press (correspondent of
the Zaman newspaper: NT), Vardan Oskanian, RA Foreign Minister,
declared that the Republic of Armenia has nothing against the Kars
treaty.” According to P.Hayrikian, Turkish Prime Minister Erdoghan is
sure that no sensible Armenian should accept the Kars treaty of 1921
legalizing the Armenian Genocide but “instead of accepting and
continuing the thought of the Turkish Prime Minister our Minister
commits mistakes, which are difficult to understand.” In Hayrikian’s
opinion, today’s Armenia may be considered as Armenia of “outpost”
period, and the statesmen as “little members of Komsomol” looking
towards Moscow who only strive for preserving their power. According
to him, the pan-Armenian interests are ignored on the international
arena and everything is moved to the Karabakh (“not Artsakh”) plane,
as a result of which Artsakh itself will gain nothing. Hayrikian
declared that the Turkish diplomacy managed to lead the
Armenian-Turkish relations to Turkey’s demanding lands from
Armenia. In his estimation, today the state committing a Genocide and
seizing the historical lands of Armenia puts forward a condition to
Armenia, again to surrender the territories if not in favor of Turkey
by the example of the Moscow-Kars treaty of 1921 then in favor nof
Azerbaijan as it was done in case of Nakhichevan. According to
Hayrikian, today they also demand Artsakh and Armenia has no power
resisting this. “We only defend ourselves.” According to the
statement, “not only every pupil” but the President of Armenia and his
supporters should know that “the Genocide was summed up and fixed by
the Moscow treaty of 1921 and its copy, Kars treaty.”

ARDARUTIUN BLOC CONSIDERS PACE RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON THE BASIS OF
DAVID ATKINSON’S REPORT TO BE VERY DANGEROUS FOR ARMENIA
YEREVAN, January 28 (Noyan Tapan). The Ardarutiun (Justice) bloc
considers that the PACE Resolution adopted lately on the basis of
David Atkinson’s report is very dangerous for Armenia. Ruzan
Khachatrian, Spokeswoman of the bloc, informed a Noyan Tapan
correspondent that the issue was discussed during the joint session of
the bloc and NA Ardarutiun faction held the same day. It was
established that though the high-ranking officials and political
statesmen continue insisting that the Resolution has no legal force
one shouldn’t underestimate the political importance of the Resolution
and its further influence on the legal settlement of Karabakh
problem. The members of the Ardarutiun faction agreed to the
estimation, according to which the adoption of the Resolution not
favorable for Armenians is the result of foreign and home policy
carried on by the Armenian authorities during the previous years. On
the eve of the NA spring session the bloc confirmed its intention to
continue boycotting the work of the parliament. At the same time its
was mentioned that the Ardarutiun faction will participate in the
discussion of issues of political importance. In particular, a
decision to participate in the discussion of the bill “On Return of
Deposits” submitted by the bloc and included into the NA agenda was
pronounced. According to Ruzan Khachatrian, the members of the bloc
condemned the conduct of Arshak Sadoyan, Chairman of the Union of
National Democrats. Touching upon the statements made by the latter
during the previous week, the participants of the session said that
according to the regulations of the Ardarutiun faction, each member of
the faction having a special opinion may express it but he has no
right to undertake activity or propaganda contradicting the decision
made by the faction, which is done by Sadoyan venturing insulting
statements. Sadoyan accused one of his colleagues in press saying
that the latter “sold himself” to the People’s Party of Armenia.
During the session of the bloc it was mentioned that one may speak so
only about his opponents and a question was raised if Arshak Sadoyan
perceives PPA as his opponent. Answering this Sadoyan declared that
his thought was represented out of any context in press and some mass
media (in particualr, the Aravot and Haykakan Zhamanak newspapers)
just spread a slander he never said. He assured that he didn’t want to
insult anybody or oppose the bloc and he treats the members of the
bloc with great respect. He said he regretted that everything was
interpreted this way. The Spokeswoman said that as according to the NA
regulations there are no mechanisms permitting to dismiss from a
faction Arshak Sadoyan may only himself pronounce a decision to leave
the faction. But the latter declared that he won’t leave the faction
and will continue working.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

PRESS RELEASE
Department of Armenian Studies, Haigazian University
Beirut, Lebanon
Contact: Ara Sanjian
Tel: 961-1-353011
Email: [email protected]
Web:
HAGOP CHOLAKIAN LECTURES AT HAIGAZIAN UNIVERSITY ON THE HISTORY OF
ARMENIANS IN THE ORONTES RIVER MIDDLE VALLEY
BEIRUT, LEBANON, Friday, 28 January 2005 (Haigazian University
Department of Armenian Studies Press Release) – Hagop Cholakian, a
seasoned Armenian educator and author based in Aleppo, Syria, was the
guest of Haigazian University on the evening of Friday, 5 November 2004.
He delivered a public lecture entitled ‘The History of the Armenians in
the Orontes River Middle Valley’. The talk was organized by the
university’s Department of Armenian Studies.
Alongside his distinguished career as a teacher and author of a number
of textbooks of the Armenian language, Cholakian is a poet and has a
number of academic publications in the field of Armenian Studies. He
received his university education in Yerevan. His lecture was the
summary of his doctoral dissertation defended at the Institute of
Archeology and Ethnography in the Armenian National Academy of Sciences
in 2002.
Cholakian told the audience, at the beginning of his lecture, that
classical sources attest that Armenians lived in the city of Antioch, as
well as in nearby villages scattered throughout the Orontes River
Valley, as early as late Roman times. Armenians continued to live in the
area in the Byzantine era, and the Armenian population of the area
actually increased during the period of Arab domination. When the
Byzantine Empire recovered the area as a consequence of decline of Arab
military might, it transferred there new waves of Armenians. Some
governors of Antioch were Armenians in the 10-11th centuries. Philaretus
Varazhnuni, a former Armenian commander in the Byzantine army, briefly
captured Antioch in 1078, before the city passed on to the Seljuks.
Citing mostly contemporary Arab sources, Cholakian spoke in detail about
the assistance rendered to the Crusaders in 1097-98 by the Armenian
population of Antioch and the neighboring villages and fortresses. The
lecturer surmised that these Armenians were probably hoping to establish
an Armenian state with the help of the Crusaders, for, once they
witnessed the confiscation of their fortresses by the Crusaders and
realized that the latter had come to Antioch to stay, the Armenians of
Artah rebelled and got in touch with the Rawan, the Muslim ruler of
Aleppo, as early as 1103, seeking on this occasion the latter’s
assistance against the Crusaders. During the ensuing decades, some
Armenians fought as mercenaries for the Crusader Principality of
Antioch, and when Saladin advanced into the area in 1188, the fortresses
of Kifr Tebbin (modern Hamameh) in the Shughr area, which was controlled
by an Armenian, surrendered without a fight. Some scholars believe that
the present Muslim inhabitants of Hamameh are the descendants of
Islamized Armenians. Armenian sources refer to three separate dioceses
of the Armenian Church in this area in the twelfth century, based
respectively in Laodicea (modern Lattakia), Apamea and Antioch.
Cholakian outlined how the Armenians of the region suffered during the
period of Mamluk and Ottoman dominion. Many villages vanished and their
inhabitants migrated. All Armenian monasteries disappeared during this
period. By the mid-nineteenth century, Armenians of the area had
retreated into five relatively small enclaves: around the town of Beilan
near the Bay of Alexandretta; the region of Musa Dagh; around the
village of Kessab; on the Nusayri mountains east of the town of Lattakia
(including the villages of Aramo and Ghnaymiyyah); and along the Orontes
Valley (including the villages of Qnay and Yaqubiyyah). Armenians in
these clusters shared a common dialect and many similar customs.
Although the Armenians of the Orontes River Middle Valley had adopted
Arabic as their mother tongue by the mid-nineteenth century, they still
used a number of Armenian words in their vocabulary and children’s play
songs.
In the second half of the nineteenth century, said Cholakian, the apathy
of the Armenian Church leaders in Cilicia, Jerusalem and Aleppo made it
relatively easy for Protestant and Catholic missionaries to convert a
significant number of Armenians in the area. The lecturer cited a number
of instances where individuals manipulated the opportunities for
conversion to push for their material interests. Cholakian argued that
these conversions also caused assimilation among many Armenians living
in the area.
The region was heavily affected during the massacres of Armenians in
Cilicia in 1909, said the lecturer. However, the Roman Catholic
missionaries in Yaqubiyyah and Qnay managed to prevent massacres in
those villages by arranging for the arrival of Ottoman troops from
Antioch, an event which encouraged a new wave of Latinization among the
local Armenians.
Cholakian stated that all Armenians in the region were deported during
the genocide of 1915, except a few villages in Musa Dagh, which resisted
until their rescue by Allied ships. The Armenians of Yaqubiyyah and Qnay
were not deported. The exact reason behind their avoiding the sad fate
of their ethnic kin in the region is not known. The local Roman Catholic
priests claim that these Armenians escaped deportation because they were
registered as Christians of the Latin rite. Other Armenians of Latin
rite from Kessab and Beilan were deported, however. The deportees, who
survived the ordeal, returned to their villages after the armistice
signed in late 1918, only to clash with the local Muslims, who made them
scatter into the neighboring Christian villages until 1923.
The last part of Cholakian’s lecture dealt with the attempts of the
Armenian Church to reassert its presence in the area. In 1923, for
example, Catholicos Sahak II of Cilicia, now based in the new state of
Syria, tried to revive the activity of the Armenian Church in Kessab. In
1928, the Armenian Prelacy of Aleppo sent an Arabic-speaking priest to
Yaqubiyyah. He reopened the old Armenian church in the village and
helped the majority of the local Armenians return to the fold of their
old Church. Yaqubiyyah soon got an Armenian school as well, and, in
1954, a new church was built. A number of Armenian students from
Yaqubiyyah studied in Soviet Armenia from the mid-1950s and played an
important role in reviving Armenian cultural life in the village after
their return. Today, speaking the Armenian language has again become the
norm for the Armenians living in Yaqubiyyah. Some Armenian villagers of
Latin rite in Qnay, too, are now sending their children to an Armenian
school nearby, and the speaking of the Armenian language is also on the
increase in Qnay. Past Armenian migrants of Latin rite from these two
villages have not undergone similar re-Armenization, however. Finally,
the Armenians of Beilan and Musa Dagh (except the village of Vakif) all
migrated when the French mandatory authorities ceded the sanjak of
Alexandretta to Turkey in 1939.
During the question-and-answer session that followed, Cholakian surveyed
a number of suggested etymologies regarding the place names Ghnaymiyyah,
Qnay and Yaqubiyyah that are in circulation today. He also pointed out
that Armenians from Yaqubiyyah are active in the cultural life of Syria.
Cholakian commended the role played by Cardinal Gregory Peter Agagianian
in 1946 when he arranged that the Armenians of Latin rite living in
Kessab should join the Armenian Catholic Church, which uses the Armenian
language in its church services. Since the Armenian language is now
taught in Syria as a language of religious rites, Latin rite schools
cannot teach the Armenian language, because the Latin Church does not
use Armenian in church services. Moreover, all Armenians of Latin rite
from Kessab and Musa Dagh who had migrated to South America before 1946,
have not maintained links with the Armenian Catholic churches on that
continent. Cholakian also praised the work of Sister Marie Jeanne
Topalian, an Armenian Catholic nun, who teaches Armenian songs to
children among the Arabic-speaking Armenians in Qnay and encourages
parents to send their children to the nearest Armenian school. He
concluded that the Armenian Church should learn lessons from the fate of
the Armenians of the Orontes River Valley and become more active among
its flock so as to preserve Armenian national unity. Finally, a member
of the audience pointed out that the first ever Armenian Diasporan
student to study in a Soviet Armenian institution of higher learning in
the post-Stalin period was from Yaqubiyyah.
Haigazian University is a liberal arts institution of higher learning,
established in Beirut in 1955. For more information about its activities
you are welcome to visit its web-site at <;. For additional information on the activities of its Department of Armenian Studies, contact Ara Sanjian at