Ruben Melkonyan: Ankara should open archives before discussing history
September 29, 2010 - 18:07 AMT 13:07 GMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - Before expressing readiness to discuss historic issues, Turkish government should open archives that even local experts were kept away from, according to Armenian expert Ruben Melkonyan.
“Armenia has nothing to hide; however no historian in Armenia will discuss the issue of Genocide, the latter being unquestionable. On the other hand, Turkish history contains many dark pages, which induce the country to keep its archives closed,” the expert told PanARMENIAN.Net
Speaking on Turkish foreign policy's priorities at John F. Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University, Boston, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Turkish party is ready to share and discuss history. "But doors should not be closed," he stressed.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Menendez Explains Bryza Hold in Letter
2010 Published in News Email Print
Menendez Explains Bryza Hold in Letter
By: Weekly Staff
WASHINGTON–The Washington Post at the weekend published a letter to the editor from Senator Robert Manendez explaining his “hold” on the Matthew Bryza nomination for the position of US ambassador to Azerbaijan.
“At the core of my opposition to Mr. Bryza’s nomination is respect for the Armenian people,” the Senator says in his letter, explaining that the U.S. should not send a diplomat to the region that does not recognize the Armenian Genocide.
Below is the letter:
Why I oppose Matthew Bryza’s nomination as ambassador to AzerbaijanSunday, October 3, 2010
The Sept. 24 editorial “A toxic hold,” in criticizing Sen. Barbara Boxer’s and my opposition to the nomination of Matthew Bryza as ambassador to Azerbaijan, cited an unsubstantiated comment from a junior member of my staff as my position. This was despite the fact that a Post editorial writer had a full conversation with my foreign policy adviser and an official written statement regarding my position, which was entirely consistent with my statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The suggestion that my office “backpedaled” is incorrect. The Post is entitled to its own opinion, but not to its own facts.
For the record, I stand by my position that Mr. Bryza is the wrong person for the job and have made public my hold in the U.S. Senate on his nomination. That position has absolutely nothing to do with the ethnic origin of his wife. It is based on information that I believe raises concerns about Mr. Bryza’s ability to remain impartial toward Azerbaijan and Turkey, including his opposition to the recognition of the Armenian genocide by Turkey and his close ties to individuals in both governments. Perhaps it is not so unusual for a U.S. ambassador to have acquaintances in regional governments, but when those relationships affect the ability of the individual to represent the interests of the United States, it is my prerogative to withhold support of the nomination.
Finally, at the core of my opposition to Mr. Bryza’s nomination is respect for the Armenian people. The Armenian genocide was one of the great atrocities of modern history. We should not be sending a top diplomat to the region who does not support recognition of what is considered among historians to be the first modern genocide. Nor should The Post label the Armenian National Committee of America as “noxious” simply for demanding recognition of this historical fact.
Robert Menendez, WashingtonThe writer, a Democrat, represents New Jersey in the U.S. Senate.
Menendez Explains Bryza Hold in Letter
By: Weekly Staff
WASHINGTON–The Washington Post at the weekend published a letter to the editor from Senator Robert Manendez explaining his “hold” on the Matthew Bryza nomination for the position of US ambassador to Azerbaijan.
“At the core of my opposition to Mr. Bryza’s nomination is respect for the Armenian people,” the Senator says in his letter, explaining that the U.S. should not send a diplomat to the region that does not recognize the Armenian Genocide.
Below is the letter:
Why I oppose Matthew Bryza’s nomination as ambassador to AzerbaijanSunday, October 3, 2010
The Sept. 24 editorial “A toxic hold,” in criticizing Sen. Barbara Boxer’s and my opposition to the nomination of Matthew Bryza as ambassador to Azerbaijan, cited an unsubstantiated comment from a junior member of my staff as my position. This was despite the fact that a Post editorial writer had a full conversation with my foreign policy adviser and an official written statement regarding my position, which was entirely consistent with my statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The suggestion that my office “backpedaled” is incorrect. The Post is entitled to its own opinion, but not to its own facts.
For the record, I stand by my position that Mr. Bryza is the wrong person for the job and have made public my hold in the U.S. Senate on his nomination. That position has absolutely nothing to do with the ethnic origin of his wife. It is based on information that I believe raises concerns about Mr. Bryza’s ability to remain impartial toward Azerbaijan and Turkey, including his opposition to the recognition of the Armenian genocide by Turkey and his close ties to individuals in both governments. Perhaps it is not so unusual for a U.S. ambassador to have acquaintances in regional governments, but when those relationships affect the ability of the individual to represent the interests of the United States, it is my prerogative to withhold support of the nomination.
Finally, at the core of my opposition to Mr. Bryza’s nomination is respect for the Armenian people. The Armenian genocide was one of the great atrocities of modern history. We should not be sending a top diplomat to the region who does not support recognition of what is considered among historians to be the first modern genocide. Nor should The Post label the Armenian National Committee of America as “noxious” simply for demanding recognition of this historical fact.
Robert Menendez, WashingtonThe writer, a Democrat, represents New Jersey in the U.S. Senate.
Sassounian: Apology for Vilifying One Man, Yet no Apology for Killing 1.5 Million
Sassounian: Apology for Vilifying One Man, Yet no Apology for Killing 1.5 Million
By: Harut Sassounian
In 2008, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an Alabama-based non-profit civil rights organization, published an article titled, “State of Denial: Turkey Spends Millions to Cover Up Armenian Genocide.” It was a hard-hitting exposé of the Turkish government’s elaborate and sinister efforts to pressure U.S. politicians and entice academics to deny the facts of the Armenian Genocide.
According to the SPLC article, “Turkey exerts political leverage and spends millions of dollars in the United States to obfuscate the Armenian genocide…. Revisionist historians who conjure doubt about the Armenian genocide…are paid by the Turkish government.”
Going beyond such general statements, SPLC specifically referred to Guenter Lewy as “one of the most active members of a network of American scholars, influence peddlers and website operators, financed by hundreds of thousands of dollars each year from the government of Turkey, who promote the denial of the Armenian genocide….”
Lewy, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts, had qualified the Armenian Genocide in his lectures and writings as a “bungling misrule” rather than a deliberately planned and executed mass murder. He had made similar claims in his controversial book published by the University of Utah Press in 2005: “The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide.”
Shortly after publication of SPLC’s article, an $8 million defamation lawsuit was filed against the civil rights group on behalf of Prof. Lewy by attorneys David Saltzman and Bruce Fein from the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund (TALDF), which is “generously supported by the Turkish Coalition of America,” according to TALDF’s website.
Before a jury could judge the merits of the charges in court, however, SPLC agreed to settle the case by issuing “a retraction and apology” and promising to pay an undisclosed sum to Prof. Lewy. Had SPLC not settled the case, TALDF would have had a difficult task proving in court that Prof. Lewy was actually libeled. In order to win the lawsuit, TALDF had to prove that SPLC had made those accusations “with malicious intent” and “reckless disregard for the truth.” Furthermore, TALDF lawyers would have to show that the long-retired 87-year-old professor had suffered actual financial loss, such as getting fired from his job or having a contract canceled as a direct result of the article.
Some SPLC supporters have wondered why it chose to settle the lawsuit when its chances of losing in court were minimal. A knowledgeable source told this writer that SPLC may have settled the case in order to reduce its exposure to mounting attorney fees, combined with the likelihood that Prof. Lewy may have agreed to settle for far less than the $8 million he had originally demanded. With the lawsuit behind it, SPLC could once again dedicate itself to its actual mission of defending civil rights.
In its retraction, SPLC stated: “We now realize that we misunderstood Prof. Lewy’s scholarship, were wrong to assert that he was part of a network financed by the Turkish Government, and were wrong to assume that any scholar who challenges the Armenian genocide narrative necessarily has been financially compromised by the Government of Turkey. We hereby retract the assertion that Prof. Lewy was or is on the Government of Turkey’s payroll…. We deeply regret our errors and offer our sincerest apologies to Professor Lewy.”
In response to complaints from SPLC supporters opposing the settlement, however, Penny Weaver, a public affairs spokesman, stated: “Our settlement of this matter does not mean we are endorsing Mr. Lewy’s views or taking his side. But we are acknowledging that we mischaracterized his views and wrongly said that he was taking money from the Turkish government. It was an error, and we apologize for that.” The original article which precipitated the lawsuit is still posted on the SPLC’s website.
Needless to say, no one should be defamed because of his or her views on the Armenian Genocide, no matter how wrong or offensive they are. Unless one possesses evidence to the contrary, one cannot simply assume that those making distorted statements on the Armenian Genocide are motivated by greed or are paid agents of the Turkish government.
It is both commendable and ironic that lawyers for a Turkish interest group are eager to file a multi-million dollar lawsuit in the United States ostensibly to defend the civil rights of a client. In Turkey, however, anyone who dares to talk about the Armenian Genocide risks being charged for telling the truth and thrown into prison for years under the infamous Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code which bans “insulting Turkishness!”
If TALDF were truly interested in protecting civil rights, it would allocate its considerable resources to abolish Article 301, which would considerably lessen financial support from generous donors and bring its operations to an end.
By: Harut Sassounian
In 2008, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an Alabama-based non-profit civil rights organization, published an article titled, “State of Denial: Turkey Spends Millions to Cover Up Armenian Genocide.” It was a hard-hitting exposé of the Turkish government’s elaborate and sinister efforts to pressure U.S. politicians and entice academics to deny the facts of the Armenian Genocide.
According to the SPLC article, “Turkey exerts political leverage and spends millions of dollars in the United States to obfuscate the Armenian genocide…. Revisionist historians who conjure doubt about the Armenian genocide…are paid by the Turkish government.”
Going beyond such general statements, SPLC specifically referred to Guenter Lewy as “one of the most active members of a network of American scholars, influence peddlers and website operators, financed by hundreds of thousands of dollars each year from the government of Turkey, who promote the denial of the Armenian genocide….”
Lewy, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts, had qualified the Armenian Genocide in his lectures and writings as a “bungling misrule” rather than a deliberately planned and executed mass murder. He had made similar claims in his controversial book published by the University of Utah Press in 2005: “The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide.”
Shortly after publication of SPLC’s article, an $8 million defamation lawsuit was filed against the civil rights group on behalf of Prof. Lewy by attorneys David Saltzman and Bruce Fein from the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund (TALDF), which is “generously supported by the Turkish Coalition of America,” according to TALDF’s website.
Before a jury could judge the merits of the charges in court, however, SPLC agreed to settle the case by issuing “a retraction and apology” and promising to pay an undisclosed sum to Prof. Lewy. Had SPLC not settled the case, TALDF would have had a difficult task proving in court that Prof. Lewy was actually libeled. In order to win the lawsuit, TALDF had to prove that SPLC had made those accusations “with malicious intent” and “reckless disregard for the truth.” Furthermore, TALDF lawyers would have to show that the long-retired 87-year-old professor had suffered actual financial loss, such as getting fired from his job or having a contract canceled as a direct result of the article.
Some SPLC supporters have wondered why it chose to settle the lawsuit when its chances of losing in court were minimal. A knowledgeable source told this writer that SPLC may have settled the case in order to reduce its exposure to mounting attorney fees, combined with the likelihood that Prof. Lewy may have agreed to settle for far less than the $8 million he had originally demanded. With the lawsuit behind it, SPLC could once again dedicate itself to its actual mission of defending civil rights.
In its retraction, SPLC stated: “We now realize that we misunderstood Prof. Lewy’s scholarship, were wrong to assert that he was part of a network financed by the Turkish Government, and were wrong to assume that any scholar who challenges the Armenian genocide narrative necessarily has been financially compromised by the Government of Turkey. We hereby retract the assertion that Prof. Lewy was or is on the Government of Turkey’s payroll…. We deeply regret our errors and offer our sincerest apologies to Professor Lewy.”
In response to complaints from SPLC supporters opposing the settlement, however, Penny Weaver, a public affairs spokesman, stated: “Our settlement of this matter does not mean we are endorsing Mr. Lewy’s views or taking his side. But we are acknowledging that we mischaracterized his views and wrongly said that he was taking money from the Turkish government. It was an error, and we apologize for that.” The original article which precipitated the lawsuit is still posted on the SPLC’s website.
Needless to say, no one should be defamed because of his or her views on the Armenian Genocide, no matter how wrong or offensive they are. Unless one possesses evidence to the contrary, one cannot simply assume that those making distorted statements on the Armenian Genocide are motivated by greed or are paid agents of the Turkish government.
It is both commendable and ironic that lawyers for a Turkish interest group are eager to file a multi-million dollar lawsuit in the United States ostensibly to defend the civil rights of a client. In Turkey, however, anyone who dares to talk about the Armenian Genocide risks being charged for telling the truth and thrown into prison for years under the infamous Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code which bans “insulting Turkishness!”
If TALDF were truly interested in protecting civil rights, it would allocate its considerable resources to abolish Article 301, which would considerably lessen financial support from generous donors and bring its operations to an end.
Letter: Danny Tarkanian Thanks Armenian Community
Letter: Danny Tarkanian Thanks Armenian Community
By: Weekly Staff
The Armenian Weekly received the letter below from Danny Tarkanian, who campaigned to win the Republican Primary for U.S. Senate in Nevada.
I want to thank everyone in the Armenian community who followed and supported my campaign for United States Senator from Nevada. Since my college days, I have wanted to get into public service. I believe it is the noblest profession to which a person can aspire. Governor Deukmejian, the first Armenian governor in our country’s history, has been my inspiration. He was a statesman in every sense of the world and gave hope to Armenians all over America
By: Weekly Staff
The Armenian Weekly received the letter below from Danny Tarkanian, who campaigned to win the Republican Primary for U.S. Senate in Nevada.
I want to thank everyone in the Armenian community who followed and supported my campaign for United States Senator from Nevada. Since my college days, I have wanted to get into public service. I believe it is the noblest profession to which a person can aspire. Governor Deukmejian, the first Armenian governor in our country’s history, has been my inspiration. He was a statesman in every sense of the world and gave hope to Armenians all over America
Monday, October 4, 2010
Armenian Church Outraged By Turkish Nationalist Prayer
Armenian Church Outraged By Turkish Nationalist Prayer
Armenia -- Catholicos Garegin II, supreme head of the Armenian Apostolic Church.
02.10.2010
The Armenian Apostolic Church on Saturday expressed outrage at a Muslim religious service held in an Armenian holy site in eastern Turkey, calling it a serious blow to efforts to improve Turkish-Armenian relations.
In a written statement, the church’s Mother See in the Armenian town of Echmiadzin strongly condemned the Turkish government for allowing the country’s leading ultranationalist party to hold a Friday prayer at the 11th century Holly Virgin Cathedral in Ani, the ruined capital of a medieval Armenian kingdom.“This action is a political provocation that has nothing to do with spiritual-virtuous feelings and religious freedom and rights,” read the statement. “At the same time it is an attempt to negate the Armenian origin of the Ani cathedral, which was deprived of prayer as a consequence of the [1915] Armenian Genocide.”“It is also absolutely unacceptable to make a Christian shrine available for ‘namaz’ (Muslim prayer) while consistently forbidding legal heirs to the Christian heritage [in Turkey] to perform worship in their own temples,” it said. “Thus, the Turkish authorities are continuing their steps aimed at destroying Armenian monuments and misappropriating historical Armenian holy sites and cultural treasures.”“It is also evident that with this step Turkey is once again scuttling efforts by Armenia and the international community to establish Turkish-Armenian dialogue and normalize Turkish-Armenian relations,” added the statement.The Armenian Church and its supreme head, Catholicos Garegin II, similarly condemned Ankara for failing to restore a cross atop another medieval Armenian church located in the same region in time for a landmark mass held there on September 19. Garegin abandoned his earlier plans to send two high-ranking clerics to the ceremony, in protest against the delay. The cross was reportedly placed on the dome of the 10th century Holy Cross church on Akhtamar island in Lake Van on Thursday.The Ani and Akhtamar churches are among few surviving examples of the ancient Armenian civilization in what is now eastern Turkey. Hundreds of Armenian churches built there since the early Middle Ages were destroyed, ransacked or turned into mosques during and after 1915 slaughter of more than one million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.The Armenian government has not yet officially reacted to the Ani prayer.
Armenia -- Catholicos Garegin II, supreme head of the Armenian Apostolic Church.
02.10.2010
The Armenian Apostolic Church on Saturday expressed outrage at a Muslim religious service held in an Armenian holy site in eastern Turkey, calling it a serious blow to efforts to improve Turkish-Armenian relations.
In a written statement, the church’s Mother See in the Armenian town of Echmiadzin strongly condemned the Turkish government for allowing the country’s leading ultranationalist party to hold a Friday prayer at the 11th century Holly Virgin Cathedral in Ani, the ruined capital of a medieval Armenian kingdom.“This action is a political provocation that has nothing to do with spiritual-virtuous feelings and religious freedom and rights,” read the statement. “At the same time it is an attempt to negate the Armenian origin of the Ani cathedral, which was deprived of prayer as a consequence of the [1915] Armenian Genocide.”“It is also absolutely unacceptable to make a Christian shrine available for ‘namaz’ (Muslim prayer) while consistently forbidding legal heirs to the Christian heritage [in Turkey] to perform worship in their own temples,” it said. “Thus, the Turkish authorities are continuing their steps aimed at destroying Armenian monuments and misappropriating historical Armenian holy sites and cultural treasures.”“It is also evident that with this step Turkey is once again scuttling efforts by Armenia and the international community to establish Turkish-Armenian dialogue and normalize Turkish-Armenian relations,” added the statement.The Armenian Church and its supreme head, Catholicos Garegin II, similarly condemned Ankara for failing to restore a cross atop another medieval Armenian church located in the same region in time for a landmark mass held there on September 19. Garegin abandoned his earlier plans to send two high-ranking clerics to the ceremony, in protest against the delay. The cross was reportedly placed on the dome of the 10th century Holy Cross church on Akhtamar island in Lake Van on Thursday.The Ani and Akhtamar churches are among few surviving examples of the ancient Armenian civilization in what is now eastern Turkey. Hundreds of Armenian churches built there since the early Middle Ages were destroyed, ransacked or turned into mosques during and after 1915 slaughter of more than one million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.The Armenian government has not yet officially reacted to the Ani prayer.
Namaz in Ani church: eye for eye, tooth for tooth
Namaz in Ani church: eye for eye, tooth for tooth
October 04, 2010 12:12
Mutlu Tombekci, an analyst for the Turkey-based Vatan newspaper, severely criticized Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), who, together with his supporters, performed a namaz at Ani church in protest at the liturgy in Surb Khach church on Akhtamar Island.
“Some asked why the ‘liberals’, who attended the liturgy at the Armenian church on Akhtamar Island, did not take part in the namaz in Ani chuch. My answer to them is:
“1. The permission for a liturgy at the Sümela Monastery in Trabzon was granted in December 2009, eight months before the 2010 liturgy.
“The permission for annual liturgies on Akhtamar Island was granted on March 25, 2010, seven months before the September 19 liturgy.
“As regards the unsanctioned namaz at Ani, I knew about it two days before. They got permission within 12 hours and performed namaz the following day. I did not understand the reason for their haste as well. Days run out? Only Bahçeli and his mob knew about the namaz just three days before?
“2. There is a great difference between the namaz at Ani and the liturgy in Surb Khach on Akhtamar Island.
“Ani Church is not a Muslim sacred place. Did Armenians hold a liturgy at a mosque that had been turned into a church? It is an Armenian church. Armenians built this church 1,000 years ago, and it served as an office of the patriarchate. They wished to hold a liturgy at a renovated church and had been waiting for it for three years. They got a permission and, as normal people, informed everybody of that. Everybody made their plans accordingly, and we went to observe the liturgy. One more thing: in what place of your country you cannot perform namaz? How many Muslims have to this day known about Ani? I tell you. None!
“3. Why was I to act like a child? Why Ani? Why in an Armenian city? Why a church turned into a mosque? Even to this day no sign in Ani contains the word ‘Armenian’, but it is another topic. But Bahçeli’s gang knew it was Armenian.
“The namaz performed by the Turkish nationalists did not look sincere at all. It followed the ‘eye for eye, tooth for tooth’ principle. It was full of hate and smacked of revenge.
“So what you say. If you perform namaz not in Ani, but in the Voyvoda mosque, which was turned into a museum of Greek folk art in Athens. You will say: we have permission, let us go. You should know, I would be happy to come with you. We will perform namaz in the Greek capital and have kebab at an Armenian restaurant thereby giving them an answer.
“Come on, turn to the Athens Mayor for permission to perform namaz. Kebab at my expense, and do not be afraid – I will not treat you pork,” Mutlu Tömbekçi writes in her article.
The article evoked a wide response throughout Turkey. A number of journalists were highly critical of it in their articles.
News from Armenia - NEWS.am
October 04, 2010 12:12
Mutlu Tombekci, an analyst for the Turkey-based Vatan newspaper, severely criticized Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), who, together with his supporters, performed a namaz at Ani church in protest at the liturgy in Surb Khach church on Akhtamar Island.
“Some asked why the ‘liberals’, who attended the liturgy at the Armenian church on Akhtamar Island, did not take part in the namaz in Ani chuch. My answer to them is:
“1. The permission for a liturgy at the Sümela Monastery in Trabzon was granted in December 2009, eight months before the 2010 liturgy.
“The permission for annual liturgies on Akhtamar Island was granted on March 25, 2010, seven months before the September 19 liturgy.
“As regards the unsanctioned namaz at Ani, I knew about it two days before. They got permission within 12 hours and performed namaz the following day. I did not understand the reason for their haste as well. Days run out? Only Bahçeli and his mob knew about the namaz just three days before?
“2. There is a great difference between the namaz at Ani and the liturgy in Surb Khach on Akhtamar Island.
“Ani Church is not a Muslim sacred place. Did Armenians hold a liturgy at a mosque that had been turned into a church? It is an Armenian church. Armenians built this church 1,000 years ago, and it served as an office of the patriarchate. They wished to hold a liturgy at a renovated church and had been waiting for it for three years. They got a permission and, as normal people, informed everybody of that. Everybody made their plans accordingly, and we went to observe the liturgy. One more thing: in what place of your country you cannot perform namaz? How many Muslims have to this day known about Ani? I tell you. None!
“3. Why was I to act like a child? Why Ani? Why in an Armenian city? Why a church turned into a mosque? Even to this day no sign in Ani contains the word ‘Armenian’, but it is another topic. But Bahçeli’s gang knew it was Armenian.
“The namaz performed by the Turkish nationalists did not look sincere at all. It followed the ‘eye for eye, tooth for tooth’ principle. It was full of hate and smacked of revenge.
“So what you say. If you perform namaz not in Ani, but in the Voyvoda mosque, which was turned into a museum of Greek folk art in Athens. You will say: we have permission, let us go. You should know, I would be happy to come with you. We will perform namaz in the Greek capital and have kebab at an Armenian restaurant thereby giving them an answer.
“Come on, turn to the Athens Mayor for permission to perform namaz. Kebab at my expense, and do not be afraid – I will not treat you pork,” Mutlu Tömbekçi writes in her article.
The article evoked a wide response throughout Turkey. A number of journalists were highly critical of it in their articles.
News from Armenia - NEWS.am
Euronews gives first reaction to demand on return of Ararat to Armenians
Photo:
http://www.panoramio.com/
Euronews gives first reaction to demand on return of Ararat to Armenians
October 4, 2010 - 20:30 AMT 15:30 GMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - The Presidency of the Forum of Armenian Association of Europe (FAAE) sent a letter of appreciation to the management of Euronews TV channel, hailing its true information with respect to praying namaz by Turkish nationalists on the ruins of Ani.
Head of the FAAE Ashot Grigoryan said that the TV channel noted that Turkey organizes new provocations instead of lifting its blockade of Armenia. Besides, the TV channel made a clear hint, showing the territories around Ararat, including Surmalu province, in Armenia’s colors.
According to Grigoryan, it is the first reaction of Euronews to the speech of Slovakian politician Frantisek Miklosko at the European economic forum, in which he demanded to return Ararat mountain to Armenians.
FAAE noted that the more Ankara develops its nationalistic policy, the severer EU’s reaction will be. Thus, Grigoryan advised the Turkish authorities to study the EU policy towards nationalistic parties of those countries, which became members of the European family during the past 10 years.
“As a response to Turkish nationalists, we state that the Armenian lobby of Europe is going to intensify its struggle for the return of Armenian lands, which were transferred by Bolsheviks to Turkey without any grounds and explanations,” reads the FAAE statement.
http://www.panoramio.com/
Euronews gives first reaction to demand on return of Ararat to Armenians
October 4, 2010 - 20:30 AMT 15:30 GMT
PanARMENIAN.Net - The Presidency of the Forum of Armenian Association of Europe (FAAE) sent a letter of appreciation to the management of Euronews TV channel, hailing its true information with respect to praying namaz by Turkish nationalists on the ruins of Ani.
Head of the FAAE Ashot Grigoryan said that the TV channel noted that Turkey organizes new provocations instead of lifting its blockade of Armenia. Besides, the TV channel made a clear hint, showing the territories around Ararat, including Surmalu province, in Armenia’s colors.
According to Grigoryan, it is the first reaction of Euronews to the speech of Slovakian politician Frantisek Miklosko at the European economic forum, in which he demanded to return Ararat mountain to Armenians.
FAAE noted that the more Ankara develops its nationalistic policy, the severer EU’s reaction will be. Thus, Grigoryan advised the Turkish authorities to study the EU policy towards nationalistic parties of those countries, which became members of the European family during the past 10 years.
“As a response to Turkish nationalists, we state that the Armenian lobby of Europe is going to intensify its struggle for the return of Armenian lands, which were transferred by Bolsheviks to Turkey without any grounds and explanations,” reads the FAAE statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
