Армения-Турция

[Pascal]

Вот именно, что по-твоему.

Я считаю, что последовательность, и требовательность в вопросе Геноцида гарантирует нам лучшее будушее.

[Pascal]

А глобально - будушее - в ЕС и НАТО

[neMarina]

И какие предложения?

[neMarina]

А я думаю, что это ни нам надо, а им... в первую очередь им. :yes:

[Barabek]

...благодаря активному ПРу последних лет...

[Pascal]

Если не тратить енергию на признание геноцида - то не будет у нас ни туризма ни образования, Сер!

[mazd]

'Shut up and Accept It' as an Armenian attitude

Wednesday, April 27 2005 @ 10:56 PM Central Daylight Time

http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=20050427225601209

Opinions By Baris Sanli

Last week was a busy and a challenging week for me and my nerves. Some

Armenians sent emails to us or complained about our behavior. As usual

we answered most of the emails in a polite way.

But the more polite we answer them, the ruder they become. At one point

I was fed up. Among the staff of Journal of Turkish Weekly, I am the

least informed one about the issue. This is sometimes a chance,

sometimes a misery…

A Stereotyped behavior hidden in the Emails

After answering to the emails for sometime, I suddenly found a

correlation among the Armenians. Whether they are from France or US or

Germany, the mails were following the same pattern. From the end of the

first line some “Murderers”, “You Turks” or “Accept it” words are

decorated with a roaring hate. Same patterns, same psychology, same

enthusiasm (!) against Turks…

“Shut up and Accept It”

For Armenians it may be some kind of psychological ‘self satisfaction’

to send letters to Turkish Newspapers before 24th April. This

‘psychological thing’ always has the same background melody of “Shut up

and Accept it”. “Everything is proven”, “Nothing to be talked”, “You,

Turks don’t know anything” were also common among the mails. But every

time, I heard the same old melody of “Shut up and Accept it”.

Afterwards I realized Kocharyan’s and other Tashnak members’ attitudes

were the same. As you know Turkish PM wrote a letter to Armenia for

mutual investigation of the issue. The answer was simple “Nothing to

investigate, everything is proven”.

Why?

But why? Humans have this unfortunate(!) ability to investigate the

matters. Only dogs obey the orders like “Shut up, Sit down, Eat it”. The

better your dog responds to your orders, the more you bound to it. While

dogs bark, humans ask “Why?”. Have you ever asked why questions on

Armenian claims? Have you ever dared doing this simple humanly exercise?

Why Armenia and Armenian diasporas is behaving like a single person? Why

I must “Shut up and Accept it”? Why Ottomans with their Armenian

bureaucrats suddenly got bored, instead of Serbians and Greeks,

relocated Armenians? Why Armenians just want everyone to accept it

without a discussion? Why the numbers are growing year by year?

My Scientific Way: Removing the tags

As a starter, I believe in neutrality. So I will write scenarios, try to

do some basic reasoning, that you can perform at home. Let’s start by

removing the nationalist tags from the event, for example one party is X

the other is Y.

Case : X says “Shut up” , Y seems cooperative

An incident happened between Xs and Ys. Afterward both parties accuse

each other. X says “Shut up and Accept it”, Y says “Let’s investigate

the matter together, I have recordings and you open your recordings, we

can look at them”, but whatever Y’s answer is, X says “Accept it” and

does not even show a sign of slightest desire to investigate the matter.

If you are Z, which party is more suspicious to you? Why?

Why X behaves such a way?

X and other Xs always reject discussing the matter. Let’s try to analyze

X’s behavior. Why X rejects the discussion of the matter which he claims

is “a reality”. Do we ever reject the discussion of gravity? Gravity is

a reality, but in primary school no one told you “Shut up and Accept the

gravity”. People discusses about this scientific fact. People ask “Why?”

questions about this fact. They make experiments, looks to records.

Important thing is to ask questions to even scientific facts.

What was the last thing you were told to accept merely? Was it a dogma?

Catholic Church rejected and even insulted the discussions of Galileo

and other scientists. Instead they said “Shut up and Accept it”. Church

rejected the discussion altogether, because according to them the

reality they presented was the absolute truth. After years and years of

struggle, who was right?

Why X never has the slightest desire to discuss “the incident”?

For this part, I phoned our security expert Dr. Ihsan Bal. Without

giving him any details of my aims, I asked him about X and Y.

He said “Think this way Baris, if you put all your money on to a single

horse, and someone tells you that this horse is the worst horse and you

will lose all your money, you will definitely not show the slightest

affinity to discuss matter. For example, you heard that the man whom you

so loved, bounded and called “father” for so many years, was not

actually your father. Will you really discuss this thing publicly? Will

you ready to accept the reality as it is? Won’t it be harsh for you?”

He continued : “If opposite happens, all the X’s claims turn to be a

hoax, the whole identity, charisma and character he portrayed to the

public will be altered. If X knows it, he will reject the discussion of

this incident. Because X is playing all his money, all his belongings on

that single horse. Even the slightest chance of the nullification of his

claims makes him nervous. This nervousness will drive him crazy about Y.

Because Y is a threat to the reality X is living in. So X will

definitely be an enemy to the Y, and will want to destroy Y sooner or

later.”

No national tags, just a brief analyze on the personality of X. What do

you think?

An identity based on “the incident” and hatred of Y

Have you seen any Armenians in Diasporas who like Turks? Is it a

collective behavior? Why the newly born Turks are such a threat to

Armenians? Can the newly born Turks be a threat to the Armenians? What

is the first word comes up to your mind when I told you the word

“Armenia”. What will be the importance of Armenians to your news

sources, if there were no Turks on earth?

In controlled experiment, you always change one parameter while the

other parameters remain constant. Let’s erase Turks from history, what

will you hear about Armenians? Let’s erase Armenians from history, what

will you hear about Turks?

Conclusion

My intention was to make a deeper judgment of this issue, because I saw

an amazing repetitive and stereotyped behavior with Armenians. I could

have not achieved it. The questions are yours.

Whatever the others think, I believe the Armenian issue will not be

solved as long as Armenians abroad suffer from cultural assimilation.

Even Turks accept “the incident”, it will not be solved, because “the

incident” and the hatred is part of a cultural identity. If the incident

has lost his importance, Armenian Diaspora will suddenly drop to

nothing. Nothing to see on the newspapers…

My own theory is that, they want Turks to get hurt. It is not a problem

which Turk, but anything Turkish must be punished; even those do not

have a relation with the “incident”. Even those in favor of Armenians

(As Murat Belge insulted by an Armenian who poured a glass of wine above

his head in Yerevan). The historical facts and why questions are not

important. There is no point in discussion.

How about you and me and others? Can we ask questions? Can we still have

some dignity? Are we dogs or are we humans?

[mazd]

Если б все эту энергию, уже потраченую на Геноцид-ПР и ту, что еще потратят к чему-нибудь действительно перспективному приложить, было бы куда серьезней.

Не геноцид рекламировать, а туристические маршруты, настроить гостиниц, дорог: Джермук, Арзни, Севан + исторические памятники + возможности для зимнего туризма, для экстремалов всех сортов= куча денег и работы для граждан Армении. Во сколько обходится ежегодно "празднование" геноцида? Может эти деньги в системе образования нужны больше?

[Гость Funky]

По поводу Shut up. - демагогия. Непрофессиональный анализ и переворачирвание с ног на голову. поменяй местами X и Y, все будет выглядеть так же, если не хуже.

[Злодиюка]

Я немного не согласен...вот с чем... Тот же ПР геноцида, как сказал барабек, можно прекрасно сопроводить и рекламой страны.. Мол вот что с нами сделали, и всё таки так то и так то... Грубо и коротко, но смысл такой...

[Pascal]

Мазд, а чего ето ты собственную точку зрения подтверждаешь турецкими измышлизмами? :cry:

[mazd]

Мазд, а чего ето ты собственную точку зрения подтверждаешь турецкими измышлизмами? :cry:

[Kornelij Glas]

Мазд, бойся тунгузов, опинионы приносящих

[Pascal]

Мазд, вот ето и настораживает.

Что совпадает с любой, кроме обшепринятой.

Кстати - ты так и не сказал, какоы именно момент тебе не понравился в тех сочинениях, что ты процитировал......

[Semetoja]

A promising start?

Tatoul Markarian, SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

884 words

15 May 2005

The Washington Times

B04

English

Copyright © 2005 Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved.

As the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide approached last month, Turkish Prime Minister Receip Tayyip Erdogan came up with an initiative in a letter to Armenian President Robert Kocharian, proposing creation of a joint commission to address the history. In response, Mr. Kocharian called on Turkey to establish diplomatic relations and open its border with Armenia without preconditions, and to form an intergovernmental commission to address all bilateral concerns.

No matter how unconventional this type of public communication may be between leaders of two neighboring nations, it is tempting to see Turkey may really open up for serious dialog.

Mr. Erdogan's initiative, assuming its sincere aim is normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations, still raises many questions. A genuine effort by the Turkish government to allow the Turkish scholars to investigate the dark chapters of Turkish history would be worthy, though much belated. Such a move by the Turkish government would undoubtedly be applauded by our nations' true friends, as it would indeed begin a process of alleviating the burden of history in our region.

Armenia would be the first to welcome such a move by the Turkish government. This would allow Turkish scholars to reveal the truth and help its political leadership accept and condemn it. Let us hope, however, that Prime Minister Erdogan's call to concentrate on addressing the past will not deflect from addressing pressing issues of the present and the future and that this will not deepen still further the division on both sides about what happened in 1915.

Yet, as long as there are political taboos and legal obstacles to the free discussion and comprehension of this issue in Turkey, including criminal penalties in the new Turkish Penal Code for mere assertion of the term genocide, any investigation mandated by the Turkish government will have a pre-determined outcome. A Turkish newspaper, Zaman, noted on April 23 that the Turkish Government should "lift all legal and other obstacles to the free investigation, discussion, and comprehension of 'What happened in 1915?' "

Also, we witness the dangerous temptation of modern-day Turkish officials to present the extermination of the Ottoman Empire's Armenian population as a result of World War I. We want to remind all that it was the exact hope, argument and calculation of the perpetrators that the massacres and deportations of Armenians would pass unnoticed under the cover of World War I. Neither war nor anything else can explain or justify the murder of 1.5 million innocent Armenian children, women, and men in the Ottoman Turkey.

Turkish officials claim Armenians alone define the history of those days. First, the historical record is both rich and well- documented. The process for establishing the truth started in the wake of World War I, as the Turkish military tribunal sentenced the perpetrators of the massacres and deportation of Armenians to the death penalty in 1919. That fact is deliberately bypassed by governments in modern-day Turkey.

This process has progressed very far, especially in the last decade, with a growing number of countries properly recognizing and strongly condemning the events of 90 years ago. Turkey coming to terms with its past has become a test of its willingness to embrace human rights and fundamental values. And it is Turkey that is "missing the bus," at a cost of credibility and time.

Second, we should not be blamed for defining the history alone: Ever since its independence, Armenia has consistently proposed, without preconditions, establishing diplomatic relations, opening the border and allowing the people to interact freely, thus helping create the proper environment for a discussion of all issues of bilateral importance. However, Turkey's denial of history has not been the only problem. Turkey has persistently refused to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, imposed a blockade on the Turkish- Armenian border and prioritized ethnic solidarity with Azerbaijan over Turkey's international obligations, instead of helping settle the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Thus, Turkey's rejection of not only the past but also the present left Armenians with no choice but to pursue its quest for justice - both historical and contemporary - within the international framework.

Armenia is firm on its intent to seize on the opportunity presented by the exchange between our two countries' leaders. However, caution is also inspired by the fact Prime Minister Erdogan's letter was hurriedly circulated to European capitals and the United States Congress prior to the April 24 Commemoration Day and even before Armenian President Kocharian had an opportunity to respond formally. This left an impression the initiative may not have been mainly directed at Armenia. Could it have been a tactical maneuver intended to upstage the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, or to sidetrack European and other inquiries?

We are interested in concrete steps and results, never in a vague process for the sake of process. That is why we proposed and are proposing again the establishment without preconditions of normal relations between Armenia and Turkey. As President Kocharian mentioned in his reply, that will allow an intergovernmental commission to meet and discuss any and all outstanding issues between our nations, with the aim of resolving them and reaching an understanding.

Tatoul Markarian is the ambassador of Armenia to the United States.

Document WATI000020050516e15f0005v

© 2005 Dow Jones Reuters Business Interactive LLC (trading as Factiva). All rights reserved.