All eyes will be on Turkey and Armenia this weekend, when the foreign ministers of the two countries are expected to sign two protocols on Saturday in Switzerland, which foresee the establishment of diplomatic ties, and the normalization of relations in every sphere possible.
After the noisy, and in some cases violent, demonstrations by members of the Armenian diaspora in Paris, Los Angeles and Beirut, there are those who maintain that President Serge Sarkisian has no choice but to back down on this issue. Put another way, the argument is that Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu may sign the protocols, but his Armenian counterpart Eduard Nalbandian will not be there to do so.
It is clear, however, that if the Armenian side produces a "no show" on this occasion, after so much international support for this process, then it will end up in the same situation as the Greek Cypriots, following their resounding refusal in a referendum in 2004 of a U.N. brokered settlement plan, which was also supported by the international community.
Most sensible Greek Cypriots today are aware that despite all the efforts of their successive administrations, "Turkey's caravan" has moved on. The proof is the overwhelming support Ankara got for its Security Council membership last year from members of the General Assembly.
If we return to the Turkish-Armenian story, it is clear that a refusal to sign the two protocols in question by Yerevan will not rebound on Turkey but on Armenia at this stage when the international community is so enthusiastic about this attempt at rapprochement. While those in the diaspora who are rabidly opposed to this rapprochement will have won, it is clear that Armenia will have lost - as we suggested in this column last week.
In other words it will have gained nothing diplomatically, economically or politically. All it will have gained will be an international reputation for unreliability. Fortunately there are those in the diaspora who see this as well, thus showing that not all members of the international Armenian community are at the beck and call of hard-line Dashnak's.
As a matter of fact, a group of Armenian-American organizations, including the Armenian General Benevolent Union, the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Western), the Knights of Vartan, and the Armenian Assembly of America made this very clear in a joint statement on Oct. 1.
The statement issued prior to the arrival of President Sarkisian in the United States, "welcomes the initiative of the president of the Republic of Armenia in taking a positive approach to the process of normalizing relations with Armenia's neighbor, the Republic of Turkey. "
It also had the following harsh words for the members of the diaspora who are trying to prevent this process:
"(The) ongoing mischaracterizations of the general principles and guidelines of the protocols as potential concessions, and then attacking the protocols and the best intentions of the president of the Republic of Armenia based on these mischaracterizations, misguides public opinion and does not serve the best interests of the Armenian people. The path ahead will not be easy and will undoubtedly involve new twists and turns along the way. That makes it all the more important to understand that this is not the time to advance other agendas at the expense of Armenia's future."
There are also individual members of the diaspora who are capable of rising above feelings of vengeance, and are looking to the future positively. One of these is Greg G. Boiadjian whose commentary in the Glendale News Press a few days ago has some striking remarks.
Indicating that his great-grandparents were survivors of 1915, and that some of his family was saved and raised by a Turkish family, Boiadjian says he is "appalled at the ignorance of my fellow Armenian Americans." We find his remarks important and therefore will give extended quotes from him. This is what he has to say:
"Living in this country, with all these amenities, we find it a breeze to go and protest. But what are you actually protesting? To sever ties with Turkey and keep its borders closed? To further isolate a landlocked country in the center of Islamic-run governments and regimes? A country with almost no natural resources, barely any commercial trade?"
He adds the following striking remarks:
"If people want to protest, I urge them to go to the villages of Armenia and do it there. I have seen with my eyes the level of desperation and poverty of the Armenian people, living in temporary huts, still waiting for housing from the 1988 earthquake. Women forced into prostitution to feed their children."
These are wise but chilling words, which are welcome because they also help break deep rooted Turkish prejudices against the Armenians. There are also people in Turkey who demonstrate that not every Turk is a "denialist." The proof is the apology petition (to be found at www.ozurdiliyoruz.com) whose signatories have reached 30,188 people.
"A drop in the ocean in a country of over 70 million" some may say. But most of the signatories are members of the intelligentsia - and even include former ambassadors. The intelligentsia is never a majority in a country - even in Armenia - but it is still influential in shaping public opinion, and in representing the conscience of a nation.
Put another way, the fact that many Turks want to look to the future does not mean they want to belittle the pain felt by Armenians or to white-wash the events of 1915. As for the independent "history commission" proposed by the Ankara and Yerevan governments, this carries more risks for Turkish ultra-nationalists, then if does for the Armenian side.
After all, more light will be shed on 1915 in this way - and little is known in Turkey about the full extent of those events, except for the official history line that has been promoted to date.
The protocols in question also recognize the present border between the two countries, and this is another thing the Dashnak's despise, According to them this recognition will undermine possibilities for demanding land from Turkey in the future.
But which government in the world, in its right mind, would want to question this border today - which is recognized by the international community - without considering the consequences, let alone the problems this would cause in a volatile part of the world? This is a question that Dashnak-agitated Armenians with "revanchist" claims will have to ask themselves and answer honestly.
When one considers such pipe-dreams on the Armenian side, and looks at the economic and social difficulties Armenia has been facing since its independence, one can not but help wonder if Yerevan is really hostage to Turkey, or to the hard-line elements of the diaspora?
Source Hurriyet Daily
By Semih Idiz
