Armenia Fund Chairman Receives Armenian Citizenship

On Friday, January 27, 2012, Armenia Fund U.S. Western Region Chairman Ara Aghishian, Esq. became a citizen of Armenia within the context of the dual citizenship law. Aghishian had applied for citizenship and was recently approved. On January 27, 2012, Minister of Diaspora of the Republic of Armenia, Hranush Hakobyan handed Aghishian his Armenian passport. Aghishian joins a growing number of Diaspora Armenians who are becoming dual citizens of Armenia, while maintaining citizenship of their home countries. The passport was given to Aghishian prior to the start of the Ministry of Diaspora's Advisory Board meeting at the presence of its members. The citizenship was granted by President Serzh Sargsyan in accordance with the dual citizenship law. Minister of Diaspora Hranush Hakobyan presented Aghishian's biography and personally commended him for his efforts and involvement with Armenia Fund and its nation building mission. Since 2009, Aghishian has served as the organization's chairman in a volunteer capacity. "I have always considered myself a citizen of Armenia, but I am overjoyed and full of emotions on receiving the citizenship of my Homeland," stated Aghishian.

Turkey needs to devise a 2015 strategy

by Mehmet Fatih Öztarsu*

3

1

Turkish citizens in France and other European countries demonstrate in Paris on Jan. 21, 2012 to protest against a French law that would make it a crime to deny the in Armenian “genocide”. (PHOTO reuters, KEVIN LAMARQUE)

31 January 2012 / ,

The recent step by France with respect to the 1915 incidents represents a great victory for the Armenians before 2015, the 100th anniversary of the incidents.

The rising image of France, which kept its promises to the Armenians, may appeal to the leaders of other countries where the Armenian diaspora has been active. Leaders who exerted efforts to attract the support of Armenians in elections have more often than not changed their attitude and stance after the elections; in most cases, they failed to keep the promises they made during their election campaigns. This situation has now been changed.
Yerevan welcomed the French move, as evidenced by joyous demonstrations held around the French Embassy by Armenians and political party representatives. In particular, old ladies hugged the French diplomats and officers there and sobbed; this sends a clear message and signal as to what sort of sensitivities should be held on the matter. Turkey, which failed to appreciate and notice the growing French investments in Armenia following an important visit by Nicolas Sarkozy to Yerevan in October, was shocked by the French move and started new discussions on French policy.
As these discussions now focus on what kind of attitude Turkey should adopt vis-à-vis France, the Armenian side refers to this ironic situation as surprising; it seems Turkey has been ignoring the main points -- that is to say, the 1915 and Armenian issues. Armenian experts note that Turkey should develop dialogue with Armenia immediately and recall that they do not understand why Turkey is focusing on potential measures against France.
The Armenian authorities last year set up an international commission for the remembrance and commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide; the commission has so far engaged in lobbying activities and carried out a number of studies as well as completed scientific research concerning 2015. Likewise, Armenia has intensified its ties with the diaspora; to this end, they held meetings where they decided to generate policies focusing on the link between Armenia, the diaspora and Nagorno-Karabakh.
In fall 2011, at the Pan-Armenian Congress, where a number of Armenians from different countries participated and which focused on the intensification of ties with the diaspora, domestic and international developments were discussed; the congress also discussed several matters on youth, language and education, preparations towards the 100th anniversary of the genocide and improvement of relations with the diaspora.
‘The diaspora should be fed by the homeland’
President Serzh Sarksyan, who said, “Our formulation is clear: We want the maximum of the homeland opportunities for the diaspora and the maximum of the diaspora opportunities for the homeland,” stated the need for the diaspora and the importance attached to it at the Pan-Armenian Congress as follows: “The diaspora and the homeland should ensure their mutual survival. The diaspora should be fed by the homeland in political, cultural, scientific, health and sports terms; and the homeland should also be fed by the diaspora as well.”
The gains of Armenia and the diaspora may of course be linked to the decision of the Jewish lobby in the West to no longer support Turkey. However, this could only have a limited impact based on the political reflex considering the intricate web of relations in the Caucasus, particularly along the Israel-Azerbaijan and Iran axis. In addition, some unexpected developments may take place with regard to the Armenian genocide up until 2015. In this case, Turkey needs to devise a short-term strategy on 2015 and drop its longstanding traditional and routine policies. This strategy should complement the normalization process with Armenia and focus on existing problems rather than imitating the steps of the diaspora. Turkey should realize that the publication of some books in response to thousands of scholarly accounts on the historical aspect of the problem will not do anything influential; instead, focusing on public diplomacy may alleviate the fever. Considering that it is not possible to train genocide experts in a very short time, it will be appropriate to rely on civilian democracy and the improvement of economic relations.
Institutions which have firsthand ties with Armenia should be supported to create a common bridge in Turkey. This should be considered in reference to additional efforts on educational, economic, cultural and political relations. As part of bilateral educational cooperation, comprehensive programs may be developed to attract students in Turkish studies departments in Armenia and Armenian youngsters who speak the Turkish language. The Yunus Emre Institute has been pursuing a similar strategy in a number of countries.
In order to improve commercial ties with Armenia, the relevant think tanks focusing on economic affairs might be supported to resolve the problems in bilateral commercial relations through joint action. Considering that 70 percent of the Armenian people support this type of action, it becomes apparent that immediate steps should be taken on this matter. In cultural terms, an approach of civilian diplomacy by which both sides would recognize each other should be advanced. The parties and people who have never seen an Armenian or a Turk in their whole life should be brought together. Political relations will represent the final stage of this process, where Turkish foreign policy will secure great achievements in this conflict-torn region.
By approaches that consider the sensitivities and demands of the Armenian side without turning a blind eye to the reality and truth, Turkey may gain a more prestigious place in the eyes of the Armenian people than the one France has gained and facilitate the resolution of common problems. An Armenia which has to buy agricultural devices from Belarus will be able to have the chance of purchasing its needs from Turkey after the resolution of its problems. If reconciliation is desired, increased attention should be paid to the process of normalization.

---

*Mehmet Fatih Öztarsu is a strategic outlook expert with the Yerevan European Regional Academy.

Azerbaijan denounces France vote on Armenia 'genocide

By 

• AFP

Published Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Turkey's ally Azerbaijan denounced as anti-democratic the French Senate's approval of a bill making it illegal to deny that the mass killings of Armenians during World War I were genocide.

"The Republic of Azerbaijan deplores the law adopted by the French Senate to criminalise the denial of the 'Armenian genocide' and expresses strong protest over this," the foreign ministry in Baku said in a statement.

The move was "against the principles of democracy, human rights, freedom of speech and expression", it said.

An official from the governing party said it had also undermined France's credibility as one of the members of the OSCE's Minsk Group, which is trying to help negotiate a solution to Azerbaijan's conflict with enemy Armenia over the disputed territory of Nagorny Karabakh.

"France's known actions have negated the remaining confidence in this group," said governing party executive secretary Ali Akhmedov, the Interfax news agency reported.

"In such a situation, the most honourable route would be if France removed itself from mediation as it has lost the moral right to fulfill this mission," he said.

Years of OSCE-mediated talks have so far failed to deliver a final peace deal in the conflict over Nagorny Karabakh, which was seized from Azerbaijan by Armenian separatists backed by Yerevan during a war in the 1990s.

Turkic-speaking, mainly Muslim Azerbaijan has the backing of Turkey in the conflict and has threatened to use force to reassert control if talks do not deliver results.

Like Ankara, Baku rejects the Armenian genocide allegations as false.

French Constitutional Council Asked To Examine Armenia Genocide Bill

• Print
• Email
• Comment (19)
• Share:

People wearing the Turkish flag take part in a rally next to the French National Assembly in Paris in mid-December.

Related Articles

• Turkey: French Genocide Bill 'Racist'
• French Genocide Vote Angers Turkey
• Armenians Name Baby 'Sarkozy'
• Explainer: France's New Genocide Law Is About More Than Ottoman Armenians

TEXT SIZE 

January 31, 2012

More than 140 French deputies and senators have asked the Constitutional Council to examine the legality of the new bill that makes it a criminal offense in France to deny that a genocide of Armenians by Ottoman Turks occurred a century ago.

Both houses of the French parliament passed the bill in recent weeks -- triggering a furious reaction from Turkey and threats of Turkish sanctions against France.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has pledged to sign the measure into law in early February.

Turkish officials welcomed the referral to the Constitutional Council, with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan saying, "I hope the Constitutional Council will do what is necessary."

France formally recognized the Ottoman-era acts as genocide in 2001.

The modern-day Turkish government denies that any genocide of Armenians occurred.

Compiled from agency reports

France's Armenia genocide law put on hold

French MPs from across party lines petition against bill outlawing denial of mass killings by Ottoman Turks as genocide. Last Modified: 31 Jan 2012 14:58 inShare6 Email Print Share Feedback

Franco-Turkish activists have protested agianst the bill near the French Senate [Reuters] A new French law punishing denial of the "Armenian genocide" has been put on hold after politicians from across party lines opposed to the legislation demanded that its constitutionality be examined. Turkey reacted furiously last week when the Senate approved the law which threatens with jail anyone in France who denies that the 1915 to 1916 mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turk forces amounted to genocide. President Nicolas Sarkozy's office brushed off angry threats of retaliation by Turkey and vowed to enforce the law within a fortnight. However, on Tuesday two separate groups of French politicians who oppose the legislation - from both the Senate and the lower house of parliament - said they had formally requested the constitutional council to examine the law. "This is an atomic bomb for the Elysee [the presidential office] which didn't see it coming," Lionel Tardy, a deputy from Sarkozy’s own party, said. The groups said they each had gathered 72 signatures, more than the minimum 60 signatures required to ask the council to test the law's constitutionality. The petition drew support from several parties, with many from both the governing UMP party and from the opposition Socialists signing. Jacques Mezard, leader of the Radical Party of the Left, initiated one of the petitions, drawing support from most MPs from his party. The council is obliged to deliver its judgement within a month, but this can be reduced to eight days if the government deems the matter urgent. Abdullah Gul, the Turkish president, and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, prime minister, immediately welcomed the development. "I hope the constitutional council will do what is necessary," Erdogan was quoted as saying by NTV a private Turkish television company. Gul said he was "not expecting the French from the very beginning to let their country be overshadowed" by the genocide law. Retaliation threatened France has already officially recognised the killings as genocide, but the new law would go further by punishing anyone who denies this with up to a year in jail and a fine of $57,000. Armenians say up to 1.5 million of their forebears were killed in 1915 and 1916 by the forces of Turkey's former Ottoman Empire. Turkey disputes the figure, arguing that 500,000 died, and denies this was genocide, ascribing the toll to fighting and starvation during World War I, and accusing the Armenians of siding with Russian invaders. Erdogan last week denounced the law as "tantamount to discrimination and racism" and warned that his government would punish Paris with unspecified retaliatory measures if Sarkozy signed it into law. Ankara has already halted political and military co-operation with France and was threatening to cut off economic and cultural ties. Trade between the two states was worth $15.5bn in 2010, with several hundred French businesses operating in Turkey. Armenia hailed the passage of the bill through the French senate, with President Serzh Sarkisian writing in a letter to Sarkozy that "France has reaffirmed its greatness and power, its devotion to universal human values". About 20 countries have officially recognised the killings as genocide. Amnesty International, the UK-based rights group, has criticised the French law, saying it would violate freedom of expression.

French Lawmakers Seek Rejection of Armenian Genocide Law

VOA News

• 
• 

Photo: AP

Turkish citizens from France demonstrate in front of the Senate in Paris, Jan. 23, 2012, to protest against a law that would make it a crime to deny "genocide" in Armenia.

French lawmakers are calling on the country's constitutional court to examine and overturn a new law punishing denial of the Armenian genocide.

Lawmakers from both the Senate and the lower house of parliament who oppose the law made the appeal to the court Tuesday, saying they had gathered the more than 60 signatures needed to request the review.

The court is expected to make its decision within a month. If it finds the law unconstitutional, the legislation will be rejected. 

Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, welcomed the development.

The bill, which the French Senate approved last week, makes it a crime to deny that the mass killings of Armenians by Turks nearly 100 years ago were genocide. 

Under the bill, anyone who says the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks is not genocide faces a $60,000 fine and up to one year in jail.

Armenia says 1.5 million Armenians were killed during World War I by troops of Turkey's Ottoman Empire. Turkey says Armenians were killed as part of a civil war and says the death toll is exaggerated. It says the deaths do not constitute genocide.

Prime Minister Erdogan last week denounced the law as "discriminatory and racist" and said Turkey would punish France with unspecified measures.  

Turkey briefly recalled its ambassador to France when the lower house passed the bill in December. It also banned the French navy from using its territorial waters and restricted French military jets from using its airspace. The French Foreign Ministry called on Turkey not to overreact, saying France considers Turkey a "very important ally." 

Relations between France and Turkey, both members of NATO, have been frozen due to French opposition to Turkey's bid to join the European Union.

Turkey’s challenge to French co-chairmanship

ZAUR SHIRIYEV z.shiriyev@todayszaman.com Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmet Davutoğlu has spoken out once again in opposition of France remaining part of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group, following its adoption of a law criminalizing the denial of the 1915 Armenian ‘genocide.’ On CNN Türk’s Eğrisi Doğrusu program, Davutoğlu declared that either France should resign its co-chairmanship or Turkey should be made a co-chair. This follows President Abdullah Gül’s proposal that France end its involvement in the mediation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, given that through this bill, it has renounced its neutrality. During the program, leading journalist Taha Akyol asked whether Azerbaijanis will call upon France to leave the Minsk Group. In fact, Azerbaijan has on multiple occasions questioned the Minsk Group’s efforts on the resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict; there has already been discussion of France’s position in the Minsk Group, as well as the possibility of bringing in Turkey as co-chair. In the recent protest against the French bill, Azerbaijani youth demanded France leave the Minsk Group. There is a strong belief among the Azerbaijani public that France is not neutral and that any future promises of objectivity are tempered by this new law. The key question today, in my opinion, is not simply the neutrality of the group’s co-chairs. There is a complex matrix of demands and alliances at play, including the suggested exclusion of France, challenges to the Minsk Group’s role in the resolution process and the possible inclusion of Turkey. The Minsk Group since its inception has almost exclusively focused on peacemaking -- i.e. efforts toward achieving an agreement rather than a comprehensive solution. Following the 2004 Prague Process, more space was given to direct talks between the conflict parties. Disappointed that the Minsk Group had not achieved even a basic outline of a conflict resolution strategy, the Azerbaijani public was and remains skeptical of the three OSCE Minsk Group co-chair countries’ objectivity. The Kazan meeting in June 2011, held before the official meeting with the OSCE Minsk Group, was the most promising meeting to date. It seems perhaps the OSCE Minsk Group never really served as an effective mediator. It lacks the necessary carrot-and-stick policies to actually persuade the parties to make concessions. During the negotiation process, both sides on occasion accused the OSCE of being biased. Under these circumstances, anyone might question the effectiveness of the current framework for negotiations. Questioning the neutrality of France or other Minsk Group co-chairs is in fact coming very late in the game -- the world’s largest and most influential Armenian communities are concentrated in the three co-chair countries of the current OSCE Minsk Group. The US, despite initial opposition from the State Department, provides direct financial aid to the separatist authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia is Armenia’s main military and political ally, and France, with its traditional strong cultural and social relations with Armenia, is its main lobbyist in the European arena. Russia was and still is something of an unknown quantity with regard to this conflict; in some situations, it has acted in support of Armenia, while in other cases, it has strongly advocated for peaceful conflict resolution. The US policy towards the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has always been pulled in opposing directions, with its domestic politics (the influence of the Armenian diaspora) in conflict with its economic and strategic interests in the Caspian region. France has never had much incentive to act as an honest broker in terms of eliciting Armenian concessions, which would dissatisfy French-Armenians. In this regard, i.e. if the current negotiations under the Minsk Group format do not seem to be geared towards genuine conflict resolution, is it time to be discussing Turkey’s inclusion? Even if Azerbaijan were to propose such a plan, there are a number of obstacles that preclude it. Firstly, none of the current mediators can afford to withdraw or terminate the mediation efforts under the current format. Their national interests are at stake, and they are not keen to initiate another mediator. Secondly, Armenia as direct party to the conflict has always opposed Turkey’s involvement in the resolution process and strongly objects to the possibility of Turkey taking on the role of co-chair. I asked this question to Gerard Libaridian, former senior adviser to Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrossian and current professor in the history department at the University of Michigan, who said: “Ahmet Davutoğlu has always struck me as a most intelligent and visionary statesman. It is unfortunate that he is increasingly grounding that vision in failed experiments in history, for example the late Ottoman Empire with its failed reforms and the consequences of those willful failures, as well as the more recent Minsk Group process, which can best be characterized as still-born mediation.” Thirdly, current negotiations under the auspices of the Minsk Group are not doing enough to change the perceptions of the warring parties, to transform their “zero-sum game” mentalities to visions of a win-win solution, a shift that is essential to the solution of the conflict. In this respect, it is also important to bear in mind that Turkey’s inclusion in the Minsk Group could be good opportunity to reinvigorate the negotiations, but it is almost certain that not only would Armenia directly oppose such a proposal, the other Minsk Group countries would say -- diplomatically -- there is “no need to change the existing format.” For these reasons, opening the debate on France’s exclusion or Turkey’s inclusion will not be productive and is not something that Azerbaijan can do. It would be naïve to believe Azerbaijan could present a considerable challenge to France’s co-chair position; the co-chairs were specially appointed by the OSCE at the Budapest Summit in December 1994 to lead the Minsk group. To return to the question of the new French law, Turkey has tried to recruit 60 French MPs to ask the constitutional council to examine the bill to determine whether it is constitutional. If Turkey succeeds in blocking the bill, will Ankara still push for France’s abdication of its Minsk Group seat? I think Ankara’s energy could be best directed towards challenging the Minsk Group’s role in the resolution process; in any case, due to the forthcoming elections in all three Minsk Group co-chair countries as well as Armenia, most of us have already accepted that 2012 is a lost year.